Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Releases New PowerMacs

hotwire132002 said:
Completely off topic, but does anyone know how long the longest thread has ever been on this forum? I see that the next post will be the 1000th, and that brought this up.
Click to expand...

Oops, guess I misread or something...I had the 1000th post! Yah for me! Do I get a free G5 or something? :p
 
Multimedia said:
I Was Referring To The 128 MB Video RAM In The 9600XT vs. 64 MB In The 9600 Pro. I'm gonna try to do the dual 2.5 for $670 more than the refurbished dual 2. $2914 w/AE & Combo & 8% tax educational vs $2244.25% more power for 30% more money.
Click to expand...

That 2.5 will definitely be a sweet machine...although I don't know if you (or I) would want to be Apple's guinea pigs in their foray into liquid cooling. Sure, we all say, "well it doesn't really matter since it's covered under AppleCare". That's true, but if that thing leaks, you'll basically have to replace the whole machine and deal with a lot of inconvenience. Liquid cooling is by no means new, but it is new to the mainstream market and can have untold problems when applied across a much broader user-base. If apple-x.net ever comes up again, check out the pictures they posted from the service manual along with the description of the fluid - it goes into pretty graphic detail about what the service provider should do in case the unit blows up - kinda scary.

That said, I don't blame you for lusting after that beast. Looking at those pictures of the cooling system, it looks more like under the hood of a hotrod than a computer.

I've been wanting to upgrade my graphics card in anticipation of Motion - I'd be interested to see some benchmarks of the 9600 XT - I've read here and there that the OS X doesn't make use of the VRAM like it should, making the graphics chip the important factor in graphics performance. Check out barefeats.com again for the 9800 shootout. There's very little difference between the 9800 with 128MB vs. the 9800 with 256 MB, while there's a world of difference between the 9800 and 9600, due to the different chips.

That all being said, I'd be interested to see how the 9600 Pro stacks up against the 9600 XT.
 
jakemikey said:
That 2.5 will definitely be a sweet machine...although I don't know if you (or I) would want to be Apple's guinea pigs in their foray into liquid cooling. Sure, we all say, "well it doesn't really matter since it's covered under AppleCare". That's true, but if that thing leaks, you'll basically have to replace the whole machine and deal with a lot of inconvenience. Liquid cooling is by no means new, but it is new to the mainstream market and can have untold problems when applied across a much broader user-base. If apple-x.net ever comes up again, check out the pictures they posted from the service manual along with the description of the fluid - it goes into pretty graphic detail about what the service provider should do in case the unit blows up - kinda scary.

That said, I don't blame you for lusting after that beast. Looking at those pictures of the cooling system, it looks more like under the hood of a hotrod than a computer.

I've been wanting to upgrade my graphics card in anticipation of Motion - I'd be interested to see some benchmarks of the 9600 XT - I've read here and there that the OS X doesn't make use of the VRAM like it should, making the graphics chip the important factor in graphics performance. Check out barefeats.com again for the 9800 shootout. There's very little difference between the 9800 with 128MB vs. the 9800 with 256 MB, while there's a world of difference between the 9800 and 9600, due to the different chips.

That all being said, I'd be interested to see how the 9600 Pro stacks up against the 9600 XT.
Click to expand...

BLOWS UP?

Warning: The contents within your computer enable the chance of explosion and/or fire... Apple will replace your system for free should you computer explode, if it is still under AppleCare...

Are you serious? :D
 
PowerMacMan said:
BLOWS UP?

Warning: The contents within your computer enable the chance of explosion and/or fire... Apple will replace your system for free should you computer explode, if it is still under AppleCare...

Are you serious? :D
Click to expand...

Well 3-5 years ago, water-cooling on the PC-side was for only the hardcore only and many times, people did not KNOW what they were doing. Hasty or bad installations, improper maintenance, you know the drill...

Well, once a lil water leaks out, the entire PC setup was down the drain.

Now, fast forward 5 years. There are several commercial water-cooling setups on the market now. So if the PC world has it (at a rather high cost, but a commercial option nonetheless), then I would presume Apple has done just the same. Considering the quality of Apple components, this shouldn't be an issue, but again...this IS the first revision with water-cooling so let's see how they do this year :)
 
PowerMacMan said:
BLOWS UP?

Warning: The contents within your computer enable the chance of explosion and/or fire... Apple will replace your system for free should you computer explode, if it is still under AppleCare...

Are you serious? :D
Click to expand...

Alright alright...no pyrotechnics. Leaking. Steam. Stinky antifreeze.
 
Now I'm Trying To Recover My Dual 2 G5 Cancelation. BTW All New G5's Are 90nm.

jakemikey said:
That 2.5 will definitely be a sweet machine...although I don't know if you (or I) would want to be Apple's guinea pigs in their foray into liquid cooling. Sure, we all say, "well it doesn't really matter since it's covered under AppleCare". That's true, but if that thing leaks, you'll basically have to replace the whole machine and deal with a lot of inconvenience. Liquid cooling is by no means new, but it is new to the mainstream market and can have untold problems when applied across a much broader user-base. If apple-x.net ever comes up again, check out the pictures they posted from the service manual along with the description of the fluid - it goes into pretty graphic detail about what the service provider should do in case the unit blows up - kinda scary.

That said, I don't blame you for lusting after that beast. Looking at those pictures of the cooling system, it looks more like under the hood of a hotrod than a computer.

I've been wanting to upgrade my graphics card in anticipation of Motion - I'd be interested to see some benchmarks of the 9600 XT - I've read here and there that the OS X doesn't make use of the VRAM like it should, making the graphics chip the important factor in graphics performance. Check out barefeats.com again for the 9800 shootout. There's very little difference between the 9800 with 128MB vs. the 9800 with 256 MB, while there's a world of difference between the 9800 and 9600, due to the different chips.

That all being said, I'd be interested to see how the 9600 Pro stacks up against the 9600 XT.
Click to expand...
Now you've got me really scared. I called an Apple salesman I know and he thinks he can recover my canceled order tomorrow. Now I'm Trying To Recover My Dual 2 G5 Cancelation. I've decided to try and get in as cheap as I can and settle for last week's number one.

He confirmed for me that ALL NEW G5's ARE 90nm Processors. The advantage would be they consume less power so they may be a bit quieter. I guess the big question is, as you say, how much difference is there between a 64 MB 9600 Pro and a 128 MB 9600 XT?
 
hotwire132002 said:
Completely off topic, but does anyone know how long the longest thread has ever been on this forum? I see that the next post will be the 1000th, and that brought this up.
Click to expand...

I think the drunk thread beat it... like 2,500 posts
 
macsrus said:
The Power Macs got the 2.5 GHZ..... They were too hot to put the 2.5s in the Xserves so they used the 2.3s instead :)
Click to expand...

They would have done a 2.0-2.3-2.5GHz lineup though if they had the 2.3 processor (FOR THE PM'S)

I'm not talking about the Xserves...

That smiley of yours doesn't make me believe...

Gosh I'm starting to critisize a lot more... Is this a sign of ageing the MacRumors way? :eek:
 
Back to Rev. A again

jakemikey said:
That 2.5 will definitely be a sweet machine...although I don't know if you (or I) would want to be Apple's guinea pigs in their foray into liquid cooling. Sure, we all say, "well it doesn't really matter since it's covered under AppleCare". That's true, but if that thing leaks, you'll basically have to replace the whole machine and deal with a lot of inconvenience. Liquid cooling is by no means new, but it is new to the mainstream market and can have untold problems when applied across a much broader user-base. If apple-x.net ever comes up again, check out the pictures they posted from the service manual along with the description of the fluid - it goes into pretty graphic detail about what the service provider should do in case the unit blows up - kinda scary.
Click to expand...

The new "updates" leave alot to be desired. I have waited almost a year to get a Rev. B G5 with all the rough edges smoothed over and a little more speed (Dual 2.2 or 2.4 would have been fine) but instead we get a new Rev. A version of a G5 with PLUMBING for goodness sake. Rubber hoses, clamps, yucky fluids that would probably short circuit a mobo in no time at all. I am Apple loyal, have had almost every kind since the original 128k Mac (no hard drive), love Airport, iTunes, iPod, Safari and so on, but I don't want to exchange cooling fluids with them. Yet. If this is the only way that we can get to 3MHz and beyond, and Apple can show that they work year after year without "leakage," then I'll buy one or more. But the first model that Apple produces with liquid cooling? I'd rather not be their unpaid beta-tester. Looks like a Dual 2 for me after all . . . .
 
yoman said:
Sorry, Unit as in the cooling unit in these things.
Click to expand...

Well, considering that a G5 case alone is supposed to cost like $400-500, I can't imagine the cooling system costing less than $600-700. That's just a total guess though - I don't have any connections in Apple's GSX, so I don't really know. But I mean, come on - look at the thing! That's no "couple hundred dollar" part!
 
MacEyeDoc said:
Yet. If this is the only way that we can get to 3MHz and beyond, and Apple can show that they work year after year without "leakage," then I'll buy one or more. But the first model that Apple produces with liquid cooling? I'd rather not be their unpaid beta-tester. . . . .
Click to expand...

Well we just ordered 12 of these babys for our graphics department....
 
PowerMacMan said:
They would have done a 2.0-2.3-2.5GHz lineup though if they had the 2.3 processor (FOR THE PM'S)

I'm not talking about the Xserves...

That smiley of yours doesn't make me believe...
Click to expand...

Well You will believe me in less than 2 weeks when the announcment comes out.... hehe :)
 
Multimedia said:
Now you've got me really scared. I called an Apple salesman I know and he thinks he can recover my canceled order tomorrow. Now I'm Trying To Recover My Dual 2 G5 Cancelation. I've decided to try and get in as cheap as I can and settle for last week's number one.

He confirmed for me that ALL NEW G5's ARE 90nm Processors. The advantage would be they consume less power so they may be a bit quieter. I guess the big question is, as you say, how much difference is there between a 64 MB 9600 Pro and a 128 MB 9600 XT?
Click to expand...

It's quieter I.F.F. (if and only if) the water-cooling system + existing (or if updated, new) fan setup is quieter. As many others have said, however, just b/c they are 90nm and consume less power does not necessarily mean its cooler. Yes they are smaller, but because of that there is more heat output per surface area (hence the reason for water cooling in the first place). I'm guessing Apple decided that the required fan speed (probably much higher than it is now), would be too high for their standards and hence the decision to incorporate water-cooling into the new PMac line.
 
macsrus said:
Well You will believe me in less than 2 weeks when the announcment comes out.... hehe :)
Click to expand...

Well this is just for the Xserve, correct? They aren't going to update the PowerMac line-up with a 2.3GHz, seems weird that they wouldn't have put that in in the recent upgrade :confused:
 
macsrus said:
Well You will believe me in less than 2 weeks when the announcment comes out.... hehe :)
Click to expand...

If you know so much about what is going to be released at WWDC, then tell us what else will be released...

Come on, do it... :p :rolleyes:
 
PowerMacMan said:
Well this is just for the Xserve, correct? They aren't going to update the PowerMac line-up with a 2.3GHz, seems weird that they wouldn't have put that in in the recent upgrade :confused:
Click to expand...

Yes the 2.3s are xserve only.....

Now my take on why the they were not used in the Power Macs IS limited supply of the 90nm 2.3 GHZ cpus from IBM's Fishkill, NY plant....... of course that is speculation on my part, but it is the most likely reason...

My source on the 2.3 GHZ speed bump for the Xserve G5 is outstandingly strong... and Im 100% sure it is correct.
 
invaLPsion said:
If you know so much about what is going to be released at WWDC, then tell us what else will be released...

Come on, do it... :p :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

You know you want to... It's the cool thing to do... :D ;)

Seriously, do you know anything else besides this 2.3GHz in Xserves news that is posted in like 50% of all the threads in this forum from you
 
PowerMacMan said:
You know you want to... It's the cool thing to do... :D ;)

Seriously, do you know anything else besides this 2.3GHz in Xserves news that is posted in like 50% of all the threads in this forum from you
Click to expand...

Nothing else .....That I can confirm....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back