Apple Releases New PowerMacs

[Little Endian]

Well at least we have gained the lead over AMD which Maxes out at 2.4Ghz with it Athlon FX-53 The new Athlon 64 3800+ also maxes out at 2.4Ghz. It is also important to point out that both of AMD's fastest Processors the FX-53 and Athlon 64 3800+ are only single Processor Capable only the Opteron can be built as a Dualie or Quad. Either way all of AMD's best processors top out at 2.4Ghz and they are all priced at over $700 a piece!!

This helps end the I can build a cheaper and faster PC argument that Windows people love pulling as the reason they hate Macs. The only PC systems than can come close to the new G5 or at least be somwhat on par to it performance wise would be the Athlon FX-53, the Athlon64 3800+ and the 3.4 Ghz P4 Extreme. All those mentioned systems can only be built as single Processor though and all of those Chips cost over $700 a piece. $700+ just for the Processor not including Case, MOBO, Drives, Graphics, PS, Gigabit Ethernet, FW 800, Toslink, etc etc To build a PC that is truly on equal Ground one would have to build a Dual Opteron or Dual Xenon system and that would cost just as much or even more to build than a New G5 Dualie!!
Today is a happy day indeed we beat AMD in both clockspeed and Price point I just can't wait to see the benchmarks!! AMD will not ship 2.6Ghz CPU's till the end of the year hopefully by then the G5 will hit 3.0Ghz so we can maintain our lead over AMD, the Pentium 4 will also only be at best @ 4Ghz at the end of the year so the future is bright indeed.

 

[jsw]

Well nice work dip****, but a lot of desktop computer gamers like RTS games and others, which don't work on a games console. A lot of us also don't like console games.

Also, for 3K you expect the best.

If you're looking to the Mac to be the best gaming platform, you're looking at the wrong vendor.

Buy a PC. Everyone will be happier. You'll always have the first and best choice of graphics cards and games.

Leave the Macs to those of us who use them to do things that aren't intended for the playground.

 

[Wonder Boy]

the thing about apple is that im disapointed with their releases as often i am impressed with them. we better see some impressive benchmark increases or we really did wait a year for ONE new model.

 

[c0n]

duh!!

did anyone happen to notice this quote on the apple site:

“it’s the fastest Mac I’ve ever used in my entire life,”

well i should hope so!

 

[Little Endian]

If you're looking to the Mac to be the best gaming platform, you're looking at the wrong vendor.

Buy a PC. Everyone will be happier. You'll always have the first and best choice of graphics cards and games.

Leave the Macs to those of us who use them to do things that aren't intended for the playground.

Do not be so Condenscending to Gamers!! It is the Gaming Arena that keeps Speed increases going in the PC world and that is one of the main Reason why the Mac's Market share is so small. Think about it this way all those college students out their who need a computer for both work and at the same time are still heavily involved in gaming, what do you think they wind up buying? That choice of PC over mac often sticks once these students become professionals, the Macs Gaming woes are much more detrimental than many would like to realize. True the Mac will never be equal to the PC for Games but having as much as possible going for the Mac platform in regards to Games does not hurt either!!

 

[FoxyKaye]

I dunno - I'm pretty happy with this new release. I confess to being somewhat disappointed with the dual 1.8 configuration using the old 1.6 motherboard, and the graphics cards could stand a little more bolstering. But, I could now actually afford a dual 2.0 with a lot of bells and whistles for under $3K with an educational discount - and it's a revision B machine. We have to remember that Apple is still kicking AMD/Intel's ass with a lot of benchmarks, OS X is infinitely better than Windows, and we can't blame Apple for IBM dropping the ball on the 90nm chips. All in all, I now think I'll be buying a new G5 this year.

 

[hayesk]

Do not be so Condenscending to Gamers!! It is the Gaming Arena that keeps Speed increases going in the PC world and that is one of the main Reason why the Mac's Market share is so small. Think about it this way all those college students out their who need a computer for both work and at the same time are still heavily involved in gaming, what do you think they wind up buying? That choice of PC over mac often sticks once these students become professionals, the Macs Gaming woes are much more detrimental than many would like to realize. True the Mac will never be equal to the PC for Games but having as much as possible going for the Mac platform in regards to Games does not hurt either!!

It's true. But seriously, if someone has to have the latest and greatest gaming technology, they shouldn't be looking at a Mac. If someone likes casual gaming and a good all-round platform, then the Mac is a better choice. Personally, I find the little games from Ambrosia, Freeverse, etc. to be more fun the the complex involved games. For big, complex, shoot 'em ups, strategy, etc. I have a GameCube and PS2 for that.

 

[pjkelnhofer]

The issue with newer cards is basically this; These cards are the SUVs of video cards. They're big. They're bad. They're "cool". And they're resource hogs. They're at a point that most people really need to step back and ask themselves, "Why do I need this?" I think most people will find they don't. The 9600 is still good. It's not a Ford Explorer. It's more like a Chevy Prism. But you know what, there's plenty of people that can't reasonably justify buying more than a Prism, so they don't buy more than that. These new video cards are the same way. Can you reasonably justify buying them? I can't.

Not to mention, ATI doesn't make the cards suggested for Mac. I find it very interesting that people want Apple to ship their machines with a card that does not exist.

I can just see the Apple store:

Shipped with the fastest graphics card availible*

*GPU not compatible with G5 or Mac OS X

 

[ij3ffy]

Yeah.. this probably been said, I don't have enough time to review all 300+ posts thus far. But damn, apple really missed the mark big time on these. Not fast enough. And don't call me a whiner, last G5's were announced June 24th. 1 year later they give us 500 Mhz?!? Weak video cards.Expecially in the low end. TOO expensive. And what the hell? why is the G5 cost 2 grand? They should make a single 1.6/256/80GB/COMBO for 999.00. Thats what I'd want. Apple needs to do some "market research" on their tower machines.

 

[Hattig]

Well at least we have gained the lead over AMD which Maxes out at 2.4Ghz with it Athlon FX-53 The new Athlon 64 3800+ also maxes out at 2.4Ghz. It is also important to point out that both of AMD's fastest Processors the FX-53 and Athlon 64 3800+ are only single Processor Capable only the Opteron can be built as a Dualie or Quad. Either way all of AMD's best processors top out at 2.4Ghz and they are all priced at over $700 a piece!!

Because clock speed means everything.

Take the FX-53. 1MB L2 cache, and dual channel memory controller on-die for low-latency memory access. 1GHz HT interconnect (16/16 DDR). These things make up for 100MHz slower speed, even though the completely different architectures makes speed comparisons meaningless.

This helps end the I can build a cheaper and faster PC argument that Windows people love pulling as the reason they hate Macs.

Rubbish. Fact is you can build a cheaper and faster PC. It won't be twice as fast these days though, maybe only as fast. And Windows XP is a major minus-point, although a wide selection of games is the counterbalance.

The only PC systems than can come close to the new G5 or at least be somwhat on par to it performance wise would be the Athlon FX-53, the Athlon 3800+ and the 3.4 Ghz P4 Extreme.

Based on Apple's benchmarks? Maybe in a select few photoshop benchmarks.

Anyway, the above are desktop processors. The workstation processor is the Opteron. The PowerMacs are workstations, not desktops. Apple's consumer line is the iMac, and it is wholly mistargetted.

All those mentioned systems can only be built as single Processor though and all of those Chips cost over $700 a piece. $700+ just for the Processor not including Case, MOBO, Drives, Graphics, PS, Gigabit Ethernet, FW 800, Toslink, etc etc To build a PC that is truly on equal Ground one would have to build a Dual Opteron or Dual Xenon system and that would cost just as much or even more to build than a New G5 Dualie!!

Yes, $2,999 for a base config dual 2.5GHz system is very good. Of course, rack up the options and the price increases (i.e., 2GB memory, good graphics card, etc).

Today is a happy day indeed we beat AMD in both clockspeed and Price point I just can't wait to see the benchmarks!! AMD will not ship 2.6Ghz CPU's till the end of the year hopefully by then the G5 will hit 3.0Ghz so we can maintain our lead over AMD, the Pentium 4 will also only be at best @ 4Ghz at the end of the year so the future is bright indeed.

Clock speed means nothing, you as a Mac user should know that. The 2.5GHz system only scales 16% over the dual 2GHz system in performance according to Apple's own graphs. Opteron processors are scaling a lot better. I wonder if Apple will submit SPEC scores for the new system?

Even with this new configuration, the only reason to run a Mac still these days is the vastly superior operating system and for decent design.

 

[DMann]

2.5 Ghz announced June - 3 Ghz announced by year's end

We'll be seeing PCI Express in the PPC 975 revision
which ought to be announced sooner than you think,
as IBM has not had the delays it had with the 90nm
970 FX. Who knows? .......... WWDC is 2 1/2 weeks
away. a 3Ghz announcement then would be nice,
although would likely spur alot of disappointment
for those who ordered the 2.5s.

 

[macabre]

Why is everyone complaining about APPLE not having the best graphics cards in the new machines? They should be complaining on some other thread about ATI or NVIDIA not having their newest cards available for the mac. Apple has nothing to do with that part. I am sure they would have put a better graphics card in the machine if it was available. What did you want them to put the 9600XT in the two low end models? Then the high end doesn't look so good, and they wouldn't put the 9800XT in there standard and screw pro users out of a PCI slot. I agree that the low end is a rip-off, but who cares, people complaining about that are the ones who wanted yesterdays high-end for todays low end cost, and that's never happened.

 

[snahabed]

"Power" Macs

I am sorry, but this revision is not a disappointment because they couldn't hit 3ghz. Oh well, crap happens.

The reason that this revision IS a disappointment is because crap happened, and Apple has done NOTHING to compensate for it.

These are supposed to be POWER Macs. They should be shipping with WAY better graphics cards, FAR better RAM, Airport and Bluetooth INCLUDED, and, if possible, a dual-layer Superdrive.

I scoff with incredulity at a "Power" Mac in 2004 shipping with 256MB RAM. Hell, I scoff at 512 standard. THAT IS CONSUMER LEVEL. I scoff at the pitiful graphics cards.

Now, if Apple is unwilling or unable to actually update ANY of these specs to compensate for the lack of GHZ increases... then at least DECREASE THE PRICES ACCORDINGLY. The audacity -- sheer audacity -- to be charging the same big POWER prices for NON-POWER specs... well, there is a reason that most of us are scratching our heads and saying "we waited a year for this.... really?"

 

[bathysphere]

If you are complaining about the video card, the nVidia is more than enough for all Pro work (video editing, audio editing, photoshop etc do NOT use the GPU that much - even Motion works quite happily). Or get the ATI (which will only become 'slow' in 5 years time!)

well, you're wrong. the nvidia is definitely not enough for all pro work, or even most pro work. the ati isn't going to become slow, but will be insufficient relatively soon, well before the life of the computer is up. the card is very outdated on the pc side, regardless that it is to of the line on macs. this is mostly apple's fault, due to the adc (even though i love having a single cord for my monitor). also, there is no way you can make the statement regarding motion, as it's not out yet. the recommended graphics card for it is the 9800 (not required, but you'll likely notice shotty performance on anything lower, though i can't say for certain, due to it not being released).

 

[VeloDrax]

Graphics specs matter.

If any of those who complain about how god-awful horrible the graphics cards are or haw terrible it is to have such a slow lineup or why it's better/cheaper to buy a PC would just (a) buy the friggin' PC and stop posting, or (b) buy one of the G5's and actually use it instead of looking at the specs, I think they would be very happy.

Good post. I understand what you're saying about buying (or building) a PC for gaming. Heck, that's exactly what I did. However, I still purchase a ton of games for my workhorse Mac, which is a Dual 1GHz Quicksilver (GeForce 4 Ti). Why? I want to support the Mac gaming community and see the Mac grow as a gaming platform (even if a little). In the end, I want to play the latest and greatest games on the platform of my choice.

If Apple doesn't keep up on the graphics card front, more Mac users will build that PC gaming box, which will end up costing the Mac game market dearly. We've got a couple of good cards at the high-end (9800 retail and now 9800 XT) but it's the low-end offering that could bolster the platform most significantly. Being able to buy a standard dual 1.8, or single 1.6, or iMac for that matter, that could run UT 2004 like a champ at high resolutions would greatly benefit the entire Mac community.

Everything you said about the specs is true, except for the graphics card. You don't care about specs so much when you're waiting for a filter effect to render in Photoshop. On the other hand, you're painfully aware of specs when that FX 5200 can't keep up with UT Onslaught, let alone Halo. Yeah, you can upgrade but you shouldn't have to when spending $2000.00 in the first place.

Gaming helps the Mac community. Support Mac gaming.

 

[Wigletbill]

July????

I think that the biggest disappointment is that I was planning on going down to the Apple Store and getting a dualie 2.5 today. No such luck since I have to wait until July... And not even a set date in July. I thought when they made these speed bumps they had the product 'in-store'.

"Sigs are dumb"

 

[lynnpye]

Chips for PB?

Okay, I'm relatively new at this rumor mongering thing, but someone mentioned that keeping the 1.8 chip on the mobo the 1.6 was on is likely to simply reduce sales of the 1.8 chip.

Note furthermore the 1.6 chip is no longer available in a PM model at all.

Now, what if that is true? Why would the Steve knowingly do something that will reduce sales overall?

Well, what if WWDC is going to introduce the G5 PB with 12" 1.6, 15" 1.8 and 17" 1.8 combos?

I mean someone had to say it.

 

[dex22]

there is no dead space at the bottom of the case, you're probably referring to the 'leaked' images from a couple of days ago, but they were either fake or scrapped designs.

There is space at the bottom of the case, if you take into account that not having two drives at the top of the case frees up space to move the motherboard up 2". Even without that, I find about 1.5" of space at the bottom of the case. I don't like the add-in option someone suggested earlier - it puts the drives right next to the grille where the noise escapes and fills the room, making fine audio work impossible for me.

and agreed about crappy graphics cards. the 9800 is the recommended card for motion for christsakes.

Indeed. Motion is a part of my future plans.

 

[fishtank22]

ORDERED...FINALLY!

ORDERED...FINALLY!

I finally don't have to look for half-backed rumors on a site filled with 16 year olds who complain about the every little thing.

See you suckers in 2-3 years when I'm replacing this puppy. Get a new machine, make some money and stop whining.

To those of you who use these posts for more positive feedback...its been a pleasure.

Fish

 

[VeloDrax]

Wrong.

Why is everyone complaining about APPLE not having the best graphics cards in the new machines? They should be complaining on some other thread about ATI or NVIDIA not having their newest cards available for the mac. Apple has nothing to do with that part. I am sure they would have put a better graphics card in the machine if it was available. What did you want them to put the 9600XT in the two low end models? Then the high end doesn't look so good, and they wouldn't put the 9800XT in there standard and screw pro users out of a PCI slot. I agree that the low end is a rip-off, but who cares, people complaining about that are the ones who wanted yesterdays high-end for todays low end cost, and that's never happened.

Apple can commission any number of third-party manufacturers to supply ATI and nVidia solutions for the Mac.

nVidia doesn't even build end-user cards, they only supply the chipsets. Most ATI-based cards are supplied by third-party board manufacturers.

 

[macabre]

Apple can commission any number of third-party manufacturers to supply ATI and nVidia solutions for the Mac.

nVidia doesn't even build end-user cards, they only supply the chipsets. Most ATI-based cards are supplied by third-party board manufacturers.

Show me an example of any one time apple has shipped with a third party graphics card.

 

[DMann]

3 Ghz by years end is not so bad

Considering the unforeseen delay of the 970 FX,
the early June release of the 2.5 Ghz is likely
a positive sign that we will be seeing the
promised 3 Ghz sooner than the routine
6 month cycle. Since IBM has not encountered
delays with the fab of the 975s, there is no reason,
other than marketing, to delay the announcement
of the 3 Ghz beyond a four month timeframe.

The new machines will likely sport PCI Express,
allowing graphics cards of X800 calibre, and
will create a new class of machine making
the 2.5 the low-end.

 

[swissmann]

The dual 2 sells for $2,499. A few weeks ago they were selling the old Dual 2 refurbished for $2,399. If I were one of the many who were waiting for Rev B I would either wait for Rev C (3 GHz) or look to get a refurb dual 2 or dual 1.8. I love my Rev A Dual 2. I am glad I bought it in October instead of wait till January which stretched till June which ended with no dazzle updates. It would really help Apple's image if they came out with some wild announcements in the next few weeks and let this G5 short-falling just kind of fall behind them.

 

[rog]

Someone brought up an interesting point about the 25% faster 2.5 G5 only being shown as 16% in Apple's benchmarks over the old 2.0. That leads me to believe that the new G5 is slower than the old G5 at the same MHz. Didn't it come out a while ago that the FX chip had more pipeline stages? Maybe that's what is causing the slowdown. 16% faster in a year is embarassing and for any other company would warrant a big price cut. Instead, they raise prices on the 2 bottom models. it also means that the new 1.8 and 2 GHz models are probably going to be a bit slower than the older models. Looks like those older ones are the sweet spots in the lineup. Pretty lame if Apple's sweet spot machines are discontinued models that are only available in limited supply as refurbs.

 

[philoye]

New dual 2.0 vs. Old dual 2.0?

Ignoring the issue of how good the new update is...

I need a machine now. Period. The question is which one? The 2.0 seems to be in the sweet spot.

Which is better? The new 2.0 or the old 2.0? They both now cost the same... But you can get a bunch of freebies with the old one (+1gb ram from macmall, etc.)

The new one has a slightly lesser video card (5200) vs. the old ones 9600.
The new one has an 8x superdrive.

What other differences are there?

Thanks!