Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
G5 PowerMacs Shipping?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Re: Re: Re: the future
True. False. False.
Yes, it is true you can get PC mobos with SATA, my latest Shuttle has it, for instance. In fact the AlienWare mentioned also supports SATA. (I'd dispute the "most" comment as only 2003 designed chipsets have support of SATA, the rest require a PCI card.)
Though there is no inherent reason PATA drives shouldn't be as fast as SATA, you can get 10,000 RPM SATA drives (from Western Digital with others to soon follow) while I suspect that PATA will stay fixed at 7200RPM. So SATA drives are faster than PATA.
Also, SATA is inherently faster without a RAID configuration. The peak is 150MB/s with up to 600MB/s in the future. Of course, this only affects a RAM buffer hit (since drives are too slow) and only applies to on-board SATA (due to PCI bus limitations of 100MB/s), but it's there.
It is faster without the need of separate controls (a two hard drive situation). SATA is a point-to-point interface. If you plug two IDE drives as a master-slave in a software RAID 0 (or otherwise), they share the same bandwidth and controller, whereas the SATA configuration will truly have double the bandwidth with no contention.
This doesn't even mention the other advantages in longer cable length, less interference, lower voltage, smaller cable width (really important in PCs where mobos are designed without any consideration of case architecture thus they interfere with cooling, including the laughable cooling innovations in the Alienware), hotpluggability, plug-n-play (no need for silly jumpers), and backward compatibility (via adapters). Think of its future use in laptops... Yummy!
In any case, this is off-topic. It's safe to say that there should be no comparison between the Alienware Area-51 and the G5--PCI-X would require a new motherboard, interleaved RAM as being is virtually non-existent outside of servers (and then, only to get around the fact that PIII's don't support DDR, there is no need to have interleaved RAM on a P4 because there are no FSB's faster than 800Mhz and you have a 4GB ceiling--the most popular chipsets have a 2GB ceiling), skipping over the 1Ghz point-to-point bus, a dual processor to a single cpu, ignoring the 8 RAM bays (yes, it'd be nice if it took more than 8GB, but if that is a need you'll have to wait for a later model... just like when the G4/Yikes came out), the lesser noise level, the case design and build quality, bluetooth/802-11 support, and finally, the G5 doesn't play Windows video games at an acceptable speed, which is a deal-killer for anyone interested in Alienware. (Okay they do make a "DV" model which is even more of a joke: 1CPU w/ 533Mhz FSB, mildly interesting gimmicky RT card which would still costs $700 more than a similarly configured G5.)
Alienware is an excellent (as you point out overpriced) game system with a low-end server mobo sold as a entertainment machine, the Mac is a computational/multimedia workstation designed to deal with the last set of complaints with their previous model (low Mhz, RAM bandwidth, lack of digital audio, and noise level)--two different solutions. The only similarity seems to be that they both have a large following among people with money burning a hole in their pockets. Unlike Alienware owners, many future G5 owners can justify the ROI. (I'll except those who make your money in videogames, of course.)
True. False. False.
Yes, it is true you can get PC mobos with SATA, my latest Shuttle has it, for instance. In fact the AlienWare mentioned also supports SATA. (I'd dispute the "most" comment as only 2003 designed chipsets have support of SATA, the rest require a PCI card.)
Though there is no inherent reason PATA drives shouldn't be as fast as SATA, you can get 10,000 RPM SATA drives (from Western Digital with others to soon follow) while I suspect that PATA will stay fixed at 7200RPM. So SATA drives are faster than PATA.
Also, SATA is inherently faster without a RAID configuration. The peak is 150MB/s with up to 600MB/s in the future. Of course, this only affects a RAM buffer hit (since drives are too slow) and only applies to on-board SATA (due to PCI bus limitations of 100MB/s), but it's there.
It is faster without the need of separate controls (a two hard drive situation). SATA is a point-to-point interface. If you plug two IDE drives as a master-slave in a software RAID 0 (or otherwise), they share the same bandwidth and controller, whereas the SATA configuration will truly have double the bandwidth with no contention.
This doesn't even mention the other advantages in longer cable length, less interference, lower voltage, smaller cable width (really important in PCs where mobos are designed without any consideration of case architecture thus they interfere with cooling, including the laughable cooling innovations in the Alienware), hotpluggability, plug-n-play (no need for silly jumpers), and backward compatibility (via adapters). Think of its future use in laptops... Yummy!
In any case, this is off-topic. It's safe to say that there should be no comparison between the Alienware Area-51 and the G5--PCI-X would require a new motherboard, interleaved RAM as being is virtually non-existent outside of servers (and then, only to get around the fact that PIII's don't support DDR, there is no need to have interleaved RAM on a P4 because there are no FSB's faster than 800Mhz and you have a 4GB ceiling--the most popular chipsets have a 2GB ceiling), skipping over the 1Ghz point-to-point bus, a dual processor to a single cpu, ignoring the 8 RAM bays (yes, it'd be nice if it took more than 8GB, but if that is a need you'll have to wait for a later model... just like when the G4/Yikes came out), the lesser noise level, the case design and build quality, bluetooth/802-11 support, and finally, the G5 doesn't play Windows video games at an acceptable speed, which is a deal-killer for anyone interested in Alienware. (Okay they do make a "DV" model which is even more of a joke: 1CPU w/ 533Mhz FSB, mildly interesting gimmicky RT card which would still costs $700 more than a similarly configured G5.)
Alienware is an excellent (as you point out overpriced) game system with a low-end server mobo sold as a entertainment machine, the Mac is a computational/multimedia workstation designed to deal with the last set of complaints with their previous model (low Mhz, RAM bandwidth, lack of digital audio, and noise level)--two different solutions. The only similarity seems to be that they both have a large following among people with money burning a hole in their pockets. Unlike Alienware owners, many future G5 owners can justify the ROI. (I'll except those who make your money in videogames, of course.)
Re: Re: Re: Re: the future
Ahh, yes; I forgot about these points--especially the presense of the RAM buffer and its ability to use the faster interface. Thanks for the correction(s).
In any case, though, the initial point remains that SATA is not a "mac innovation", and certainly not "mac only" as a few folks seem to be implying.
I agree with the rest of your points re cables etc. It should be mentioned though, that round PATA cables can be had. These are quite cheap, and although they aren't quite as thin as SATA cables, they are good enough from the perspective of cleanliness and cooling. If someone doesn't care too much about HD performance and want to save a few bucks, PATA is a good solution.
There are no memory buses on the Mac side either that are faster than 800 MHz "effective". Perhaps I am missing something here--I was under the impression that both G5 and the latest PC chipsets used dual-bank PC3200 DDR (reading from both banks simultaneously at 400 MHz for an "effective bandwidth" of 800 MHz). Is interleaving something different? Does either PC or Mac use interleaving?
All agreed. As to the 1GHz bus, we will see how much it impacts app performance. If it does then good; if not, it's just a number.
This kind of stuff (and USB2, and Firewire, and audio toslinks, etc etc) you can get for cheap on the PC. I don't consider any of this periphery stuff to be anything special. For instance, you can get a 4 port FW card with Ulead software for $18. Granted the SW is probably not great and you still have to run windows, but these are separate issues. I have come across one person who <gasp> prefers some of the windows DV stuff, yet still wants to get a Mac (meaning he isn't an anti-mac zealot).
Hey, someone's gotta drive this molasses economy out of the sewer. 😀
Ahh, yes; I forgot about these points--especially the presense of the RAM buffer and its ability to use the faster interface. Thanks for the correction(s).
In any case, though, the initial point remains that SATA is not a "mac innovation", and certainly not "mac only" as a few folks seem to be implying.
I agree with the rest of your points re cables etc. It should be mentioned though, that round PATA cables can be had. These are quite cheap, and although they aren't quite as thin as SATA cables, they are good enough from the perspective of cleanliness and cooling. If someone doesn't care too much about HD performance and want to save a few bucks, PATA is a good solution.
There are no memory buses on the Mac side either that are faster than 800 MHz "effective". Perhaps I am missing something here--I was under the impression that both G5 and the latest PC chipsets used dual-bank PC3200 DDR (reading from both banks simultaneously at 400 MHz for an "effective bandwidth" of 800 MHz). Is interleaving something different? Does either PC or Mac use interleaving?
All agreed. As to the 1GHz bus, we will see how much it impacts app performance. If it does then good; if not, it's just a number.
This kind of stuff (and USB2, and Firewire, and audio toslinks, etc etc) you can get for cheap on the PC. I don't consider any of this periphery stuff to be anything special. For instance, you can get a 4 port FW card with Ulead software for $18. Granted the SW is probably not great and you still have to run windows, but these are separate issues. I have come across one person who <gasp> prefers some of the windows DV stuff, yet still wants to get a Mac (meaning he isn't an anti-mac zealot).
Hey, someone's gotta drive this molasses economy out of the sewer. 😀
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: the future
In the world's of the immortal Mr. T, ``I pity the fools!'' 🙂
Re: Round cables. I've seen them and they are made much like the SFF PC (aka Shuttles) IDE cables, they cut open the cables and then bind them together in a round circle instead of allowing them to lay flat like a ribbon. I always wondered if they aren't prone to interference issues.
Whoa, on reading my own post, I realized that I did more to confuse the issue then help it with this snippet. Your argument is closer to the truth than my post in this section. For clarity:
True. There are no memory buses on the Mac faster than 800Mhz "effective" (see below).
Mostly True. Both G5's and (the latest) PC chipsets (notably the nVidia nForce and Intel "Springdale") use dual-bank PC3200 DDR RAM @ 400Mhz. (The false part is to assume all PCs are at 400Mhz--a lot of vendors will try to sell you cheaper PC2700 or worse because people confuse the 800FSB with implying that their RAM must be running at 400! Not true at all, In fact the MHz of a PC3200 DDR RAM is 200Mhz!).
Neither false nor true. Interleaving is the use of matched pairs of RAM to double the effective bandwidth. Dual-channel is the same as interleaving except it uses two memory controllers instead of parallel access (so I believe you aren't restricted to matched pairs which leaves those TWIN-X Corsair RAM (which I'm quite fond of*) as meaningless marketing nonsense beyond the fact that they were tested on the same mobo at the same time). Neither the Mac nor the PC use interleaving, or both of them use it depending on whether or not you have a strict definition of the word "interleaving".
So: dual-channel PC3200 DDR RAM: 200Mhz * 2 (because DDR sends data on rise and fall of every clock) * 8 (because each module has 8 bytes of data=64 bits) * 2 (because you place the RAM down in pairs, Apple marketing calls this 128 bits... hehe, ya gotta love it!) = 6.4GB as you mentioned.
I'll note that Apple forces you to buy high quality PC3200 DDR RAM in pairs in order to keep users from shooting themselves in the foot, as happens quite often in the PC world. I'll also note that dual-channel PC3200 DDR is a very new phenomenon in the PC world, so it isn't exactly "old hat"--in fact I see a lot of people with spanking new PCs with nForce or Springdale chipsets buying single 512MB PC2700 DIMMs instead of 2x256MB.
The problem was, I was confusing this with HyperTransport which is altogether uncommon in the PC world. (Note to Mac zealots, this is not an Apple-only thing and in fact, AMD is the driving force behind it. Note to PC zealots, Apple is a founding member of the HT consortium.) Since HT is a point-to-point DDR protocol, it gives the CPUs a 12.8GB bandwidth to operate (they don't contend for resources). Thus while one CPU is doing a direct memory access at full speed, the other CPU is free to access the 1GB/s PCI-X, or the hard drive, or the graphics card. The last is probably going to be pretty important given that most people are running OSX with Quartz Extreme on these boxen.
This is not a issue with the really-overpriced, high-end 3.2Ghz P4 since it has only 1 CPU. But when we compare it to the 2x3.06Ghz P4 Xeon systems that Dell sells, the lack of hypertransport (and the relatively-slow FSB), make for a big deal. For instance, if you look at the Photoshop shootout in the WWDC, you will notice the dual-P4 Xeon system seems to stop for an unusually long time. Where? right before loading a huge graphic of a whale. That smells like a bandwidth issue to me.
(My other confusion was unreleated. ChipKill (parallel ECC by spreading access across multiple DIMM) and multi bank (to get around addressing limits in x86 explained my reference to "only found in high end P3 servers" line.)
The reason I mentioned Bluetooth and 802.11g is because of the very well thought-out antenna placement--something you don't find at all on the PC. Bluetooth driver support in Windows (heck even 802.11 driver support) is another thing, I wanted to imply.
DV? After biting the bullet and purchasing FCP and DVDSP, I bet he becomes an anti-windows zealot. 😉
I think that zealotry cuts both ways. Basically Apple is in a bind because they want to use PC standard parts so that the "competition" you mention drives down prices and allows them to pass that value down to their users and allow their computers to be competitive (and they are competitive), but then they have to distinguish their computers from the PC world in the hardware. Recently they've done that quite creatively by writing software to use the same hardware more effectively because they can demand corresponding high-quality hardware. A recent example of this is Quartz Extreme and large graphics cards, for instance. In the PC world, expensive graphics cards are essential for the 50% of computing that involves video games, and unused the rest of the time.
I agree totally. Games are serious business (they represent about 1/2 of all PC software sales by revenue). But one doesn't buy a $3000 dual process PowerMac G5 for videogames... that's what Alienware's stuff is for. Which was the general point, I guess.
*They also come with heat spreaders (which I like because they look cool). I've seen a lot of PC fanatics claim that they actually do something when you overclock. So you see, zealotry isn't limited to the Mac world.
In the world's of the immortal Mr. T, ``I pity the fools!'' 🙂
Re: Round cables. I've seen them and they are made much like the SFF PC (aka Shuttles) IDE cables, they cut open the cables and then bind them together in a round circle instead of allowing them to lay flat like a ribbon. I always wondered if they aren't prone to interference issues.
Whoa, on reading my own post, I realized that I did more to confuse the issue then help it with this snippet. Your argument is closer to the truth than my post in this section. For clarity:
True. There are no memory buses on the Mac faster than 800Mhz "effective" (see below).
Mostly True. Both G5's and (the latest) PC chipsets (notably the nVidia nForce and Intel "Springdale") use dual-bank PC3200 DDR RAM @ 400Mhz. (The false part is to assume all PCs are at 400Mhz--a lot of vendors will try to sell you cheaper PC2700 or worse because people confuse the 800FSB with implying that their RAM must be running at 400! Not true at all, In fact the MHz of a PC3200 DDR RAM is 200Mhz!).
Neither false nor true. Interleaving is the use of matched pairs of RAM to double the effective bandwidth. Dual-channel is the same as interleaving except it uses two memory controllers instead of parallel access (so I believe you aren't restricted to matched pairs which leaves those TWIN-X Corsair RAM (which I'm quite fond of*) as meaningless marketing nonsense beyond the fact that they were tested on the same mobo at the same time). Neither the Mac nor the PC use interleaving, or both of them use it depending on whether or not you have a strict definition of the word "interleaving".
So: dual-channel PC3200 DDR RAM: 200Mhz * 2 (because DDR sends data on rise and fall of every clock) * 8 (because each module has 8 bytes of data=64 bits) * 2 (because you place the RAM down in pairs, Apple marketing calls this 128 bits... hehe, ya gotta love it!) = 6.4GB as you mentioned.
I'll note that Apple forces you to buy high quality PC3200 DDR RAM in pairs in order to keep users from shooting themselves in the foot, as happens quite often in the PC world. I'll also note that dual-channel PC3200 DDR is a very new phenomenon in the PC world, so it isn't exactly "old hat"--in fact I see a lot of people with spanking new PCs with nForce or Springdale chipsets buying single 512MB PC2700 DIMMs instead of 2x256MB.
The problem was, I was confusing this with HyperTransport which is altogether uncommon in the PC world. (Note to Mac zealots, this is not an Apple-only thing and in fact, AMD is the driving force behind it. Note to PC zealots, Apple is a founding member of the HT consortium.) Since HT is a point-to-point DDR protocol, it gives the CPUs a 12.8GB bandwidth to operate (they don't contend for resources). Thus while one CPU is doing a direct memory access at full speed, the other CPU is free to access the 1GB/s PCI-X, or the hard drive, or the graphics card. The last is probably going to be pretty important given that most people are running OSX with Quartz Extreme on these boxen.
This is not a issue with the really-overpriced, high-end 3.2Ghz P4 since it has only 1 CPU. But when we compare it to the 2x3.06Ghz P4 Xeon systems that Dell sells, the lack of hypertransport (and the relatively-slow FSB), make for a big deal. For instance, if you look at the Photoshop shootout in the WWDC, you will notice the dual-P4 Xeon system seems to stop for an unusually long time. Where? right before loading a huge graphic of a whale. That smells like a bandwidth issue to me.
(My other confusion was unreleated. ChipKill (parallel ECC by spreading access across multiple DIMM) and multi bank (to get around addressing limits in x86 explained my reference to "only found in high end P3 servers" line.)
The reason I mentioned Bluetooth and 802.11g is because of the very well thought-out antenna placement--something you don't find at all on the PC. Bluetooth driver support in Windows (heck even 802.11 driver support) is another thing, I wanted to imply.
DV? After biting the bullet and purchasing FCP and DVDSP, I bet he becomes an anti-windows zealot. 😉
I think that zealotry cuts both ways. Basically Apple is in a bind because they want to use PC standard parts so that the "competition" you mention drives down prices and allows them to pass that value down to their users and allow their computers to be competitive (and they are competitive), but then they have to distinguish their computers from the PC world in the hardware. Recently they've done that quite creatively by writing software to use the same hardware more effectively because they can demand corresponding high-quality hardware. A recent example of this is Quartz Extreme and large graphics cards, for instance. In the PC world, expensive graphics cards are essential for the 50% of computing that involves video games, and unused the rest of the time.
I agree totally. Games are serious business (they represent about 1/2 of all PC software sales by revenue). But one doesn't buy a $3000 dual process PowerMac G5 for videogames... that's what Alienware's stuff is for. Which was the general point, I guess.
*They also come with heat spreaders (which I like because they look cool). I've seen a lot of PC fanatics claim that they actually do something when you overclock. So you see, zealotry isn't limited to the Mac world.
http://www.forbes.com/2003/08/09/cx...yahoo&referrer=
At Forbes.com for a look at the week ahead: August 11-15 regarding the G5...the last line:
"An Apple spokeswoman says the company remains on target to ship all orders for G5 machines this month."
Keep your fingers crossed...Apple withdrew the money from my checking account on 8.5.03 after my order on 8.1.03 and I received a letter about it from Apple. They had originally told me they would put a hold on it but it is definitely withdrawn...per Apple Computer.
Estimated delivery date is 10.14.03 however.
At Forbes.com for a look at the week ahead: August 11-15 regarding the G5...the last line:
"An Apple spokeswoman says the company remains on target to ship all orders for G5 machines this month."
Keep your fingers crossed...Apple withdrew the money from my checking account on 8.5.03 after my order on 8.1.03 and I received a letter about it from Apple. They had originally told me they would put a hold on it but it is definitely withdrawn...per Apple Computer.
Estimated delivery date is 10.14.03 however.
more proof of shipped units
Just found this G5 tidbit in an interview of a Lightwave artist
http://www.newtek-europe.com/uk/community/lightwave/muharraqi/2.html
"What spec machine(s) are you using it on at the moment?
Mac G4 OSX, 2.5GB Ram, 2 GHz Dual Processor, G-force 4, 100 GB IDE/70 GB SCSI hard drives."
...in Baharain, no less.
Just found this G5 tidbit in an interview of a Lightwave artist
http://www.newtek-europe.com/uk/community/lightwave/muharraqi/2.html
"What spec machine(s) are you using it on at the moment?
Mac G4 OSX, 2.5GB Ram, 2 GHz Dual Processor, G-force 4, 100 GB IDE/70 GB SCSI hard drives."
...in Baharain, no less.
Yeah, there's nothing in the PC world that can compare to going out and overpaying for a computer that was premade by someone else!
.
.
.
.
.
🙄
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: the future
Hmm...mine is different. It looks like a bundle of unshielded twisted pairs, with a shield around the whole bundle. Kind of like cat5, except for the outer shield. Should be pretty good on interference issues, I think.
Thx for the clarifications. Yeah, fairly recent. It was only maybe 6 months ago that the 875 chipset came out, I think? Still, it is also true that getting a motherboard that supports "interleaved" DDR 400 is no great challenge or expense.
LOL.
Yes, I agree--Apple has done a very good job of adding value through software. QE is a great example of that. Software is the reason to stick to the Mac.
I just hope, for the platform's sake, that they can keep up with hardware price/performance as well. Including getting products to customers in a timely manner, getting back OT. 🙂
Hmm...mine is different. It looks like a bundle of unshielded twisted pairs, with a shield around the whole bundle. Kind of like cat5, except for the outer shield. Should be pretty good on interference issues, I think.
Thx for the clarifications. Yeah, fairly recent. It was only maybe 6 months ago that the 875 chipset came out, I think? Still, it is also true that getting a motherboard that supports "interleaved" DDR 400 is no great challenge or expense.
LOL.
Yes, I agree--Apple has done a very good job of adding value through software. QE is a great example of that. Software is the reason to stick to the Mac.
I just hope, for the platform's sake, that they can keep up with hardware price/performance as well. Including getting products to customers in a timely manner, getting back OT. 🙂
yanges
macrumors newbie
G5 Demos
check out this article:
http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2003/08/15/citymac/
this Mac store is going to have G5's on August 20!! [ or so they say ]
why does my Apple store keep telling me end of month?
i just want to see and touch one......😎
check out this article:
http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2003/08/15/citymac/
this Mac store is going to have G5's on August 20!! [ or so they say ]
why does my Apple store keep telling me end of month?
i just want to see and touch one......😎
themadchemist
macrumors 68030
I don't really think it disproves anything, because I don't really think it PROVES anything.
How can we be sure? Like Arn said, where are the benchmarks?
doesn't mean their shipping
They're just going to have a demonstration, which means they'll have a pre-production machine there to show off. That same machine is probably getting carted around to a bunch of Apple Stores and distributors.
>http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2003/08/15/citymac/
>this Mac store is going to have G5's on August 20!! [ or so they say ]
Edit: I do see what you mean, though --- you just want to get your hands on one... I just today ordered mine (whee!) and I want to do more than just feel 😉 I want to feel it sitting on my desk 😉
They're just going to have a demonstration, which means they'll have a pre-production machine there to show off. That same machine is probably getting carted around to a bunch of Apple Stores and distributors.
>http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2003/08/15/citymac/
>this Mac store is going to have G5's on August 20!! [ or so they say ]
Edit: I do see what you mean, though --- you just want to get your hands on one... I just today ordered mine (whee!) and I want to do more than just feel 😉 I want to feel it sitting on my desk 😉