Actually, I think both of you are part wrong : if I remember it right, many consumer power conditionners are only good at avoiding low power. Some high end ones do treat both problems. (Sorry for my bad english, I can't find my words atm... tired). I think I've read that somewhere (???), I'm really not pulling that out of my ....you know what. Maybe someone can verify this claim, cause I'm hell of a lot too busy right now.
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.
Got my MDD!
- Thread starter adcx64
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Actually, I think both of you are part wrong : if I remember it right, many consumer power conditionners are only good at avoiding low power. Some high end ones do treat both problems. (Sorry for my bad english, I can't find my words atm... tired). I think I've read that somewhere (???), I'm really not pulling that out of my ....you know what. Maybe someone can verify this claim, cause I'm hell of a lot too busy right now.
My power conditioner has 900 joules of surge protection which surpasses your average surge protection. The average off the shelf surge protection bar is only 400-600 joules. As I mentioned in an earlier post I have 2100 joules of surge protection already in my wall connection and then the other 900 in the conditioner.
The only computer power I have ever heard of that has it's own built-in conditioning is the giant rack mounted power supplies for servers. If mainstream systems did then they wouldn't be directly effected by spikes and drops like they are without a conditioner/regulator.
Just played Halo on it. Maxed out all the settings and it played better than on my iBook. Im really happy with this machine. Next is a CI graphics card.
Your Geekbench score is only 28 lower than my 7448 system. Very good score. No offense to your iBook but a single 1.33GHz 7447 has no chance against a dual 1.25 7455B. As far as dual 7447 go you would need 1.6GHz or higher to compete with your MDD.
On Halo you should see a noticeable improvement even though the 9000 is a lesser GPU than the 9550 simply because of the much bigger CPU muscle in the MDD.
Edit: Although I have no faith in xbench I would be interested to know the results. My guess is 55-65 overall score which is very respectable.
On Halo you should see a noticeable improvement even though the 9000 is a lesser GPU than the 9550 simply because of the much bigger CPU muscle in the MDD.
Edit: Although I have no faith in xbench I would be interested to know the results. My guess is 55-65 overall score which is very respectable.
Last edited:
Just curious, but is it the OpenGL score that raises your suspicion? My R7000 scores higher than my R9800 in OpenGL. The disk and CPU tests seem plausible to me based on the different machines that I've tested. The disk test pretty much matches other benchmarks I've run. The CPU test, intuitively (I know, not very scientific), seems pretty much okay to me. That is, nothing has been contrary to my expectations for the CPU score.
What raises my and many other peoples suspicion is that the scores can greatly vary at times. Inconsistent results cannot be trusted.
Ah. Test-retest reliability. Yup, that's a big deal by any objective standard. It's not something that I've personally experienced (or perhaps I didn't notice), but I trust your word.
The trend I have noticed is it usually gives lower scores if you run it after a fresh reboot which makes no sense. If I launch then quit 1 or 2 apps then run it after a reboot my scores have always been higher. Sometimes as much as 8-12%.
This tells me that it somehow benefits from having bits of other apps besides the OS being in the cache and RAM and this also makes no sense yet the results are there to show it. I simply can't put much faith in something thats so sketchy and inconsistent.
Xbench Score 56.20
Also, playing halo the fans sped up and I was barely able to hear it. Glad I got a quiet one.
Also, playing halo the fans sped up and I was barely able to hear it. Glad I got a quiet one.
Last edited:
Probably you got something that is special. They are not called "wind tunnels" for nothing.
Actually the noisiest is the power supply fan.
Actually the noisiest is the power supply fan.
My PSU fans are very quiet. The CPU fan is the one that I can somewhat hear when it spins up.
Destructive surges are hundreds of thousands of joules. So 900 joules is near zero. Just enough above zero so that those others *know* it does 100%surge protection.
Demonstrated by numbers is how advertising does propaganda. That protection is just above zero. So advertising claim it is 100% protection. Then a majority *know* all power conditioners do surge protection. Propaganda works.
The OP is encouraged (by an engineer who was designing this stuff before the IBM PC existed) to define a threat before demanding a solution. Light bulb dimmed to 50% intensity means power can be harmful to a refrigerator. And is perfectly ideal power for the MDD - due to superior power conditioning even found inside the original IBM PC. Worry less about fears based only in wild speculation. Ignore solutions when even numbers define it as near zero. Worry more about an anomaly that occurs maybe once every seven years. That may overwhelm existing conditioners inside all electronics. And that is defined by numbers; not by advertising.
Are you running Temperature Monitor? CHUD nap mode? You mentioned yesterday that you wanted to extend the life of the machine for as long as possible. These are a couple of things that can help. Also, if it has never been done, some fresh thermal compound is an absolute must. I know I must sound like a broken record on this, but I've seen too many CPU failures that could have easily been prevented.
I'm planning to get another 10 years out of mine.
I thought so too. There isn't a surge protector out there that can take a direct hit to the house. The difference is the good ones will cut the passage of current to the plugged in devices once the suge goes above what it can absorb.
He is just talking in circles and not taking all things and new developments into account. Like I said earlier.. misinformation.
Congrats adcx64!
BTW, it isn't model known as "2003". That one was 1.25 single only.
I find one you got the most universal one. It natively runs OS 9 and it has 2MB L3 CPU, like 1.42 has. It should serve you well if you will clean it off the dust frequently. And OFC do what ThunderSnake has said above
BTW, it isn't model known as "2003". That one was 1.25 single only.
I find one you got the most universal one. It natively runs OS 9 and it has 2MB L3 CPU, like 1.42 has. It should serve you well if you will clean it off the dust frequently. And OFC do what ThunderSnake has said above
Sorry my PowerPC friend but that is wrong. The 2003 MDD was available in single and dual 1.25GHz. Shortly after it was discontinued they re-released the single 1.25 only to fill the small OS9 demand still out there at the time. Also, he confirmed that his CPU are the B variant (3.3) and these are only found in the 2003.
Not intended to argue, but... hmm, one you mention was introduced in second half of 2002 and discontinued in jan 2003. The real "2003 only" were this "resurrected" single CPU one and FW800s. See everymac or Apple's support site.
I base what I say on actual experience. The dual 1.42 I had was not a fw800 model. It was a dual 1.25 2003 model with underclocked 1.42GHz 7455B chips and I simply clocked it to 1.42. The system profiler listed it as a 2003 MDD also.
Mactracker verifies what I claim also. It's whole existence is accurate specs of every mac or apple device ever made. From the history pane for the 2003 model in Mactracker:
"In July 2003, with the arrival of the PowerMac G5, the PowerMac G4 (MDD) was revived as the last OS 9 Bootable PowerMac ever. This configuration included a single 1.25 GHz processor, 256 MB of RAM, an 80 GB hard drive and a Combo CD-RW/DVD-ROM drive, for $1299 U.S. Dual processor models were made available as BTO configurations."
Funny, because me too
I bought my 1st MDD brand new, from Auth. Reseller (there was no Apple Store - even online one - in Poland these days) and it was 2003 1.25 single exactly. I wanted OS 9 bootable one.I didn't know about BTO 2003 with DP d.card simply because it wasn't available here due to resellers policy (IMO this had to be a reason).
I stand corrected then
Funny, because me too
I didn't know about BTO 2003 with DP d.card simply because it wasn't available here due to resellers policy (IMO this had to be a reason).
I stand corrected then
You were never totally wrong. The PowerMac G4 pretty much did die out as a single 1.25. Are your CPU the 2.1 or 3.3 revision?
just disabled dashboard to try and squeeze a little more performance out of it!
Code:
defaults write com.apple.dashboard mcx-disabled -boolean YESHaving fun with the G4? I don't have enough space on my room that is why i gave my G4 away to my daughter. I miss it now.