Apple Releases New PowerMacs

[BWhaler]

I don't have anything else to add because I think it has all been said, but I've been waiting some time, and I am very disappointed.

I don't know what to do at this point. I usually would of bought the best Apple offered, but I am uninspired to spend this much money for what is being offered.

I guess I will wait until the WWDC and make a decision then. I suspect Apple will be seeing less money from me than they could of.

 

[Mac Kiwi]

Available for what, now? It's not available until the drivers exist and ATI is shipping one, or Apple bundles it into a box.



I still hope that we see the FireGL's return in a few weeks, because that would be even bigger than these processor announcements. Yes, a lot of people are upset that things didn't go as high as they could, but the reality of things is that the current cases look like Apple is positioning itself for some serious runs at new technology. I mean... Liquid cooling? I'll own up to being a naysayer on that, but it looks like Apple found a stable way to do it, and good on them for managing it.

Pro machines need pro tools (no to be confused with ProTools ), and I think Apple could seriously benefit from pushing for more support for nonconsumer parts.

I whole heartedly agree {about the cards},and I am happy for these cards to be BTO.I do know ATI were {a while back} hiring people to work on drivers for the Fire cards etc,or maybe it was the 9800 range It could be though that the companies dont want to do top end cards for the Mac because they would not sell enough of them,but then the problem is Apple will not get a lot of Pro users {3d animators/artists/heavy open GL users etc} considering switching to use a 9800 XT with no dual planes support...


I really hope youre right about that Fire GLs though as the Quadros are quite a bit dearer

 

[joco]

What were the old speeds

Hi there,

Ok how quickly I forget. But what were the speeds/models they were selling before this bump????

 

[rareflares]

Hi there,

Ok how quickly I forget. But what were the speeds/models they were selling before this bump????

single 1.6 - $1,799
dual 1.8 - $2,499
dual 2.0 - $2,999

 

[edgarj]

A long day of decisions...

I grabbed a dual 2.0 this morning, just after announcement, but then reconsidered and nixed my order in passive-aggressive protest. I've been lurking for some 6mos for the scoop on rev.2 and was doubtful about the 3Ghz vapor threads but pretty certain about a >2.0 config with hard RAID or at least 10Krpm WD drives, etc. I finally reconsidered and got a 2.5 (+ 9600XT; sans superdrive/modem @ edu discount) after deeming it the real sweet-spot, and I'm just hoping for delivery before Sept.

My big gripe is still the storage speed/cap of rev.B.

Trying to be succinct here.......I have a dual 1.8/9600 Pro/4GB-RAM at work (new box is for homework; HIV research, lots of analysis entailing multigig chunks of data moved/crunched/stated + some UT2K4 in the wee hours) and I'm thrilled with all but the drive access/storage of the old G5 boxes. My Athlon XP 3K/HTPC at home with quartet (and they are loud) of RAID-0 drives just blazes on file conversion, dups, compressions, and I am constantly annoyed by the sluggish drive performance of the G5's. Apple needs hard IDE RAID/Raptors, and it actually a pretty realistic request when compared to present PCI-extreme/^CPU clocks. Hell, it would drasticly up many everyday benchmarks with little proprietary investment and really unleash the performance of the CPU's/FSB. Anyway, thats my only real rant.

 

[jragosta]

They've gone from 2x2.0GHz to 2x2.5GHz. That's a 25% increase in chip speed. I don't think that's too bad. But... it would have been nicer to say a 50% increase...

As for the ballywho with graphics cards, I guess the problem is just choice. Perhaps Apple should offer base configurations and let people choose what they need. A true BTO system, not 'variations on a theme'. Then their pricing would be more transparent.

That's exactly what they do. The base machines have the lowest amount of RAM and the lowest end video card that would be reasonable. You then have the option to upgrade both - either at Apple's high prices or at third party prices.

 

[jragosta]

I get the feeling that the 2.5 is overclocked... why else would they liquid cool it?

I could buy THREE emacs at 1.25ghz for $2397 or i can buy ONE dual 2.0 for 2500... with no monitor. Im sorry but thats f*cking ridiculous.

You're wrong about the overclocking. Overclocking means running a chip beyond its rated speed. Since it's rated at 2.5 GHz, it's not overclocked - by definition.

As for 3 eMacs vs. one Dual G5, what's so ridiculous about it? I can buy 3 Yugos for the price of one Mercedes, too. What's your point?

 

[jragosta]

Guys & Gals please dont get upset, ill still own Macs and my wife gets the 1.47 Quicksilver, but I have wanted a Powerful Game Machine for a long time. These updates are stale except the top end shipping in August? Fx5200s and 256 ram standard I dont know if if i should laugh or cry. Secret- wife owes me for buying her daughter a car so i have been waiting ever so patiently to see what happens, this kind of sucks and with powermacs where they are we all know Imac will be crippled down to who knows what. So i have most likely waited for nothing. By the way I have used Macs for over 10 Years and own 3 at the moment. Anyways Doom3,Far Cry and Halflife2 will be calling me soon and thats the only reason i need some juice. My old 333 can email and surf so its about the games! With the porting, and delays for Mac software i probably should have gotten a pc sooner.

Then buy yourself a G5 with the base video and a 9800 Pro card. If you're willing to spend $3000 for a game machine, the extra couple hundred bucks won't make a difference.

But, then, I personally think it's silly to spend that kind of money on a game machine, but that's just me.

 

[jragosta]

I guess we are all wrong and you are right then. Let me make my case then.

November 2003
Dual 1.8ghz processor G5. Maximum memory = 8 GB
Standard memory = 512 MB
Standard hard drive = 160 GB

June 2004
Dual 1.8ghz processor G5. Maximum memory = 4 GB
Standard memory = 256 MB
Standard hard drive = 80 GB

Sounds like a downgrade to me.

June 2003
Dual 2.0ghz processor G5. Standard video = ATI 9600

June 2004
Dual 2.0ghz processor G5. Standard vidoe = Nvidia fx5200

Sounds like a downgrade to me.

There. The truth has spoken.

No, it merely proves that you're clueless about market segmentation.

Old:
Low end - single 1.6 - FX5200 - 4 GB max - 256 MB - $1799
Mid - single 1.8 (later a dual 1.8) - ATI 9600 - 8 GB max - 512 MB - $2499
High - dual 2.0 - ATI 9600 - 8 GB Max- 512 MB - $2999

New:
Low end - dual 1.8 - FX5200 - 4 GB max - 256 MB - $1999
Mid - dual 2.0 - ATI 9600 - 8 GB max - 512 MB - $2499
High - dual 2.5 - ATI 9600 - 8 GB Max- 512 MB - $2999

Looks like an upgrade across the board - as long as you're doing a rational comparison.

 

[edenwaith]

Good & the Bad

Glad to see that the updates are finally here. However, these updates look to be somewhat of a yawner. Nothing overly cool or interesting.

But for the good points:
- All dual configurations. I loved it when they did that to the PM line up last time several years ago.
- Liquid cooling. If there are any problems from this, they should be resolved for future Macs and G5 processors. This is probably about the only noticable addition.
- ATI 9800 with 256 MB of VRAM. 128 MB is starting to look not quite as impressive these days.
- 8X Superdrives. Kind of embarrassing when the eMac has a better Superdrive.
- A 500 MHz jump isn't too bad. Certainly not the 2.0 to 3.0 as hoped, but 500 MHz is still quite good. Especially considering my machine is only 400 MHz with one processor. Consider that Pentium 4 chips have slowed down to a crawl since the 3 GHz mark was reached. 3.06.....3.2.....3.4...... If the Pentiums don't move much faster, then the G5 may yet be able to catch up.

The bad:
- The span between the top and bottom is a little drastic. As others had mentioned, making the previous top line the new bottom line would have looked better.
- The gimped 1.8 configuration. I just don't like how some features (PCI-X, 4 GB of RAM) are used to cripple some machines. One thing I love about my current machine (Gigabit PM G4) is that it has been able to expand and work well for me. It has audio in, space for three hard drives, 4 RAM slots, PCI slots, and an AGP slot for upgradable video cards (which is good...I just tried to upgrade the video on a POS Dell, and it was a pain to get things working properly. Certainly not just plug & play!).
- Only 64 MB of Video RAM on the lower two configurations. Sure 64 MB is decent, but with some of today's greediest games, 128 MB should be the bare minimum now, especially for the professional machines.
- Airport Extreme and Bluetooth are optional components. For the price these machines ring in, it seems that Airport cards should come pre-installed. Some PowerBooks have this feature, why not the PowerMacs? (Okay, other than a PowerMac doesn't move around nearly as much as a PowerBook).
- 512 MB of RAM for the first or second options seems OK, but if I'm paying $3000 for a computer, I would like at least a Gig of RAM now. Yes, I'm going to be greedy. But I'd also like two displays. And a 40 GB hard drive. And my personal harem. But none of those are happening, now are they?! But the good news is I can buy another 512 MB relatively cheap from 3rd parties.
- Still, only space for two hard drives. Normally this should be enough for many people, but I still like the option of multiple hard drives. Especially if one wants to install multiple operating systems or even try and create their own (modified) RAID configuration within their computer.

If I had the money right now, I would probably go for the middle line since it has many of the features and expansion capabilites of the top model, has some pretty nice looking features, and isn't gimped like the 1.8 model. But at this point, I am probably going to wait for yet the next line, especially if more hard drives can be added at all.

 

[delete]

I've read in a few places how the 2.0 was "downgraded". The only things different are the video card (the original ATI had 64 megs of DDR as the new Nvidia does) and it has a faster superdrive. And for $50 you can upgrade the card to a 128 meg ATI card. So what am I not seeing? It looks like even if you go with the $50 upgrade on the card you save $450 from what it cost last week. And the faster superdrive makes the $50 kind of a wash. Not really an upgrade in the larger sense, but a downgrade?

 

[thatwendigo]

- The gimped 1.8 configuration. I just don't like how some features (PCI-X, 4 GB of RAM) are used to cripple some machines. One thing I love about my current machine (Gigabit PM G4) is that it has been able to expand and work well for me. It has audio in, space for three hard drives, 4 RAM slots, PCI slots, and an AGP slot for upgradable video cards (which is good...I just tried to upgrade the video on a POS Dell, and it was a pain to get things working properly. Certainly not just plug & play!).

I have to agree with you that dropping PCI-X from the 1.8ghz was a bit odd, though I suppose it makes sense in a differentiation sense. After all, the 1.8 and 2.0 duals were remarkably close in performance-to-cost analysis, so there might need to be a bigger step between them than the obvious one between the middle and the new top. What doesn't make sense, though, is that there aren't any other differences easily spottable on the tech specs page, aside from the RAM slots.

- Only 64 MB of Video RAM on the lower two configurations. Sure 64 MB is decent, but with some of today's greediest games, 128 MB should be the bare minimum now, especially for the professional machines.

Wait... What do games have to do with professional machines? Would you argue that an xServe was a bad computer because it didn't have an ATI X800 in it?

- 512 MB of RAM for the first or second options seems OK, but if I'm paying $3000 for a computer, I would like at least a Gig of RAM now. Yes, I'm going to be greedy. But I'd also like two displays. And a 40 GB hard drive. And my personal harem. But none of those are happening, now are they?! But the good news is I can buy another 512 MB relatively cheap from 3rd parties.

I think we can arrange a 40GB HD for you.

 

[cornfedgrowth]

graphics cards...

Hey, i wasn't able to read every post, but has anyone thought that Apple is including the fx5200 and other cards just until they update monitors and dump ADC? If they announce new displays that use DVI at WWDC, they're going to change graphics cards too... so why would they update their graphics cards now, and a) let us all know that were getting new displays at WWDC b) not have a graphic card available for thier current monitors c) put the work into creating a new graphics card with ADC when its just going to be dumped... i'm think they're gonna switch their line of video cards as soon as new displays come out. Maybe at WWDC?
-Alex

 

[zimv20]

has anyone thought that Apple is including the fx5200 and other cards just until they update monitors and dump ADC?

that would be annoying to people who wanted a new machine but wanted to keep using their current ADC monitor.

 

[adamjay]

As for 3 eMacs vs. one Dual G5, what's so ridiculous about it? I can buy 3 Yugos for the price of one Mercedes, too. What's your point?

haha, in Belgrade you could buy 9 Yugo's for the price of 1 Benz.
and yer right, the point has little validity. I think the poster is (understandably) frustrated with the price differential between the consumer and pro lines.

but when you are buying in the pro-line, you have to remember you are paying for the R&D. The G4's R&D has already been paid for. How many G4 powermac's models were there? (350/400/450/500/466/533/667/733 ... take a breath ... 800/933/1GHz/1.25GHz/1.42GHz etc. etc.) at this point , so many variations on the G4 have been sold, yea its easy to slap a 1.25ghz in a 17" monitor and ask for $799.

the G4 PM AGP was intro'd in Sept '99. "The G4 AGP started at $2499 for the 450 Mhz configuration with a 20 GB hard drive and 128 MB of RAM, and $3499 for the 500 Mhz configuration with a 27 GB hard drive and 256 MB or RAM (both included internal Zip drives)."

you are paying for the latest technology. $2999 for the first Mac with Liquid Cooling is pretty fair, granted this isn't the booming 90's and we all clutch our cash a little tighter these days. and remember that these are all DUAL CPU's. show me a retail dual opteron for $1999

 

[afields]

People will say about this update: "Stop whining, you can get Apples top of the line 2ghz for $500 less now!". What you are really saying is that after a year of having sold the 2ghz Mac, Apple has decided to bring the price down on their year old technology because they don't sell well at their $3k+ price anymore. Do you think they did this because they love to do such things? They do it cause people don't want to pay up the arse for year old technology!

So what do we have from Apple now? Year old Powermac tech except for one model that won't ship yet. Two year old Powerbook chips. 3 Year old iMac and iBook speeds, and the eMac, which is their cheapest system based on the oldest tech. Out of all of that, the only new thing in terms of technology is a chip that is 500mhz faster. What is wrong with this picture?

The only new thing Apple came out with today is a chip that is 500mhz faster than what they have had for a year. And this new product wont even come out for a month! They messed up, can't people see that? Will we forgive them, sure! But we won't let them do this to us without letting them know that this stinks.

Zing!! pretty much sums up my feelings. Wish Steve Jobs could read this.

Don't worry apple, we still love ya

 

[adamjay]

Zing!! pretty much sums up my feelings. Wish Steve Jobs could read this.

Don't worry apple, we still love ya

but this is also typical action coming from Apple.
the good side to no 3GHz is that the 2GHz is still a very much new processor, a year later.

i dont know about you guys, but i'm glad apple's dont become obsolete in 2 years like PCs. i'm trying to hear the distant sounds of existing G5 owners crying about these updates, but i just dont hear it.

 

[cmoney]

i'm trying to hear the distant sounds of existing G5 owners crying about these updates, but i just dont hear it.

in fact, i just bought my dual 2ghz 2 months ago, and this update doesn't bother me a bit. lost out on maybe saving $500, but no real new technical innovation in this one. just hope for apple's sake (and my AAPL) that it's not another 11 months for an update again! that was just sad!

 

[ts1973]

There have been numerous atempts to pin down the reason why Apple isn't offering any better graphic cards with their G5's (x600-x800 ??).
- problems with adapting to ADC ?
- problems with adapting to Apple firmware/bios ?

I would say this is (almost) completely due to ADC-conversion because Apple is top of the line when it comes to notebook graphics. The firmware/bios problems should be just the same in my opinion, however, PB and ibook use DVI... I think this is a very good reason to drop ADC and provide a cheap (yes Steve : cheap !) ADC-DVI adapter for the Apple customers.

 

[edesignuk]

Wait... What do games have to do with professional machines? Would you argue that an xServe was a bad computer because it didn't have an ATI X800 in it?

If you want to play games you have little choice than to go pro, you have seen the current state of iMacs right???

 

[aafuss1]

Australian pricing-note a Apple display of course would add more to the purchase price:
Information from Apple Australia press release
Pricing & Availability
The dual 1.8 GHz and dual 2.0 GHz Power Mac G5 models will be available this month, and the dual 2.5 GHz Power Mac G5 model is expected to be available in July through the Apple Store (www.apple.com.au) and Apple Authorised Resellers. The single 1.25 GHz Power Mac G4, with suggested retail price of A$2,299 RRP inc GST will no longer be in production and is available for purchase while supplies last through the Apple Store (www.apple.com.au) and Apple Authorised Resellers.

The Power Mac G5, with a suggested retail price of A$3,599 RRP inc GST, includes:

Dual 1.8 GHz 64-bit PowerPC G5;
256MB 400 MHz 128-bit DDR SDRAM (4GB maximum);
80GB Serial ATA 7200 rpm hard drive;
AGP 8X Pro graphics slot;
NVIDIA GeForceFX 5200 Ultra with 64MB DDR SDRAM;
3 PCI slots (64-bit, 33 MHz); and
8x SuperDrive™ (DVD-R/CD-RW).

The Power Mac G5, with a suggested retail price of A$4,499 RRP inc GST, includes:

Dual 2.0 GHz 64-bit PowerPC G5;
512MB 400 MHz 128-bit DDR SDRAM (8GB maximum);
160GB Serial ATA 7200 rpm hard drive;
AGP 8X Pro graphics slot;
NVIDIA GeForceFX 5200 Ultra with 64MB DDR SDRAM;
3 PCI-X slots (one 64-bit 133 MHz, two 64-bit 100 MHz); and
8x SuperDrive (DVD-R/CD-RW).

The Power Mac G5, with a suggested retail price of A$5,299 RRP inc GST, includes:

Dual 2.5 GHz 64-bit PowerPC G5;
512MB 400 MHz 128-bit DDR SDRAM (8GB maximum);
160GB Serial ATA 7200 rpm hard drive;
AGP 8X Pro graphics slot;
ATI RADEON 9600 XT with 128MB DDR SDRAM;
3 PCI-X slots (one 64-bit 133 MHz, two 64-bit 100 MHz); and
8x SuperDrive (DVD-R/CD-RW).

 

[aafuss1]

I have to agree with you that dropping PCI-X from the 1.8ghz was a bit odd, though I suppose it makes sense in a differentiation sense. After all, the 1.8 and 2.0 duals were remarkably close in performance-to-cost analysis, so there might need to be a bigger step between them than the obvious one between the middle and the new top. What doesn't make sense, though, is that there aren't any other differences easily spottable on the tech specs page, aside from the RAM slots.



Wait... What do games have to do with professional machines? Would you argue that an xServe was a bad computer because it didn't have an ATI X800 in it?



I think we can arrange a 40GB HD for you.

Agreed on the graphics card-the new dual lineup are perfect for usingFinal Cut Pro HD/DVD Studio Pro 3/Shake 3.5/Motion and I think the FX5200 is supported-64mb is enough for many creative professionals.

 

[Mac2004]

What's the big deal???

In my opinion the main reason Apple put poor video cards in their PoweMacs is because it forces the consumer to go to Apple's web site (instead of a retial store) and configure a PowerMac the way they want it. Perhaps that helps their sales.

What's the big deal if the video card isn't right or the hard drive isn't big enough? Just go to Apple's web site and configure it yourself.

Some of you come across as such drama queens! Just go to Apple.com and pick the video card or hard drive you want and be done with it! Such whiners!

In my opinion, the 2.0 is the best buy now. I will order one soon. Apple should have announced the new displays on the same day however. Thats' the only thing holding me back now.

 

[aafuss1]

I noticed that the AppleSpec page doesn't list these new G5 models and when would the developer note be published and posted to the ADC website?

 

[Mav451]

...
you are paying for the latest technology. $2999 for the first Mac with Liquid Cooling is pretty fair, granted this isn't the booming 90's and we all clutch our cash a little tighter these days. and remember that these are all DUAL CPU's. show me a retail dual opteron for $1999

On the money, my friend. Especially liquid cooling. I know, many of you don't think that its overclocked, but this is something, that I would called factory "approved" overclock. There's a difference between having a chip at the low/middle/top end of the spectrum. The fact that they require liquid cooling may indicate that "slightly" more voltage was need to power these top-of-the-line G5's. If they were "middle"-end, and middle end chips typically do not require as much vCore to function, then the 3.0G5 would undoubtedly be in the wings.

(AMD Athlon XP 1700+ @1.5vcore; 2600+ @1.65vcore, my 2100+ @1.6vcore)

Or? Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe the liquid cooling is future-proofing for the 3.0G5 and beyond. Perhaps the 2.5 is NOT overclocked, and actually does not NEED liquid cooling, but is instead, functioning as a fully capable prototype for them to test with the new 2.5 model (and to be ironed out for the 3.0).