Actually your statement is false. All OSX applications will take advantage of dual processors, unlike OS 8 or 9 which needed the application to be specifically written to take advantage of the extra processor.
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.
New PowerMacs and 20" LCD
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Actually your statement is false. All OSX applications will take advantage of dual processors, unlike OS 8 or 9 which needed the application to be specifically written to take advantage of the extra processor.
wumpus:
Everyone who claims the 1.42ghz G4's in these new machines are overclocked is pretty much being stupid.
Cmon, I thought you were smarter than this. First, of course these are not the 7457 chips... they have 256k of L2. No confusion there. The 7457 will not support DDR unless Hell freezes over. And finally, by now it should be clear that Apple is not some rouge computer maker overclocking it's chips... 42% is huge. Moto is obviously behind this. 42% is damn near overclocking classics like the Celery-300A and P4-1.6-512k. There is no way in Hell that Apple is just getting lucky and getting enough 1.0ghz 7455's that run at 1.42ghz.
Everyone who claims the 1.42ghz G4's in these new machines are overclocked is pretty much being stupid.
JBracy:
No, actually your statement is false. Few applications can use two processors; you are confusing the ability to run on either chip with the ability to use them both... at the same time. Very different.
eric_n_dfw
macrumors 68000
FALSE (at least partly)
Any multi-threaded application will automatically get a performance boost out of a dual G4 machine under OS X. OS 9 did not provide Symetrical Multi-Processing support so it was up to the application programmers to look for and utilize that 2nd processor. Now, if I start a 2nd thread in my code, OS X will run it on whichever processor it wants to. (That's a simplistic description, but basically accurate)
OS X can also automatically run two single threaded applications on separate processors thus giving better performance to both app's than if they were both running on one.
pyrotoaster
macrumors 65816
LCDs for the future!
First, these new Powermacs are great, with even more than just the wonderful Dual 1.42 GHz G4s (that said, I'd still hold out for the 970, if I was in the market for a PM).
This LCD news is big! A huge price drop on the 23" and the all new 20" display, both are very nice (not to mention the $300 drop on the 17").
Has anyone considered the effect this could have on the iMac line? Considering the fact that next week still looks good for the updates, we should think about the screens on the new machines. No, I don't think we'll see anything bigger than 17", but cheaper... I think it's a real possibility.
First, these new Powermacs are great, with even more than just the wonderful Dual 1.42 GHz G4s (that said, I'd still hold out for the 970, if I was in the market for a PM).
This LCD news is big! A huge price drop on the 23" and the all new 20" display, both are very nice (not to mention the $300 drop on the 17").
Has anyone considered the effect this could have on the iMac line? Considering the fact that next week still looks good for the updates, we should think about the screens on the new machines. No, I don't think we'll see anything bigger than 17", but cheaper... I think it's a real possibility.
So the next PM revision in july?
So the powermacs are now at 1.4 ghzs. If apple updates the line every 6 months we should see them updated next in July. I hope they release the 970 at macworld NY and not another speed bumbed moto chip. I'm crossing my fingers.
So the powermacs are now at 1.4 ghzs. If apple updates the line every 6 months we should see them updated next in July. I hope they release the 970 at macworld NY and not another speed bumbed moto chip. I'm crossing my fingers.
DakotaGuy
macrumors 601
I am confused...
After reading a lot of the posts on here I leave once again confused...
How slow is the 1.42GHz Dual going to be? Some on here make it sound like it will be rather slow and lag badly. I don't know I never owned a G4 yet. I use a lot of Internet, Email, MS Office, iTunes, iPhoto and find the G3's still run pretty well for me. If I had the money would I even be able to tell the difference between one of my old 400-600MHz G3's and the new Dual 1.42? I would think they should be very fast and quite competitive, but I see a lot of people not taking the bait and sticking with their old 400-600Mhz G4's so I am assuming there is not much difference between those and the new ones.
I am just waiting for new iMacs and eMacs. Oh when will we ever see them???????? I hope in a couple of weeks, but am afraid it might be longer now then we had all thought before. Do you think we might get them by at least April 1st? Later...
After reading a lot of the posts on here I leave once again confused...
How slow is the 1.42GHz Dual going to be? Some on here make it sound like it will be rather slow and lag badly. I don't know I never owned a G4 yet. I use a lot of Internet, Email, MS Office, iTunes, iPhoto and find the G3's still run pretty well for me. If I had the money would I even be able to tell the difference between one of my old 400-600MHz G3's and the new Dual 1.42? I would think they should be very fast and quite competitive, but I see a lot of people not taking the bait and sticking with their old 400-600Mhz G4's so I am assuming there is not much difference between those and the new ones.
I am just waiting for new iMacs and eMacs. Oh when will we ever see them???????? I hope in a couple of weeks, but am afraid it might be longer now then we had all thought before. Do you think we might get them by at least April 1st? Later...
eric_n_dfw
macrumors 68000
Threads
For those who don't know what "multi-threaded" means, from Apple's developer pages: (My emphisis added)
For those who don't know what "multi-threaded" means, from Apple's developer pages: (My emphisis added)
(used without permission, Apple, please don't sue me 😱 )
smackdesign:
Abercrombieboy:
My dual-800 does pretty good in 10.2 so I bet the dual 1.42 would be nice and fast.
I'm betting on one more G4 revision before the PPC-970. Those should be 7457's though, with 512k L2 and cooler running.
Abercrombieboy:
My dual-800 does pretty good in 10.2 so I bet the dual 1.42 would be nice and fast.
Dont Hurt Me
macrumors 603
The new displays are great so are the powermacs but please remember there is a lot of stuff out there that wont see that 2nd cpu! this is a fact!---i think this has a little to do with the base powermac where most apps will do better at 1 gig single then they would be with 2- 867's and then they can lower the entry cost point to the powerline. Now with the FSB at 167 on the top 2 machines I would think there is no where else to go with this config hence that bus must have people hanging out the windows and the escape door on the 1.43. I think this is apple getting the absolute most out of the 7455 which is pretty amazing when you look at it. MOTOROLA needs to get off its A_ _! Maybe they still are having problems with the 7457 which was going to come in at 1.3 ghz i think. So is this all just to keep the powermac lines moving ahead untill the 7457 or is this the last stop for the g4 untill we see the 970 from IBM. Iam hoping this is the last stop for the g4 untill we see the 970 and apple has realized that moto has screwed them long enough! If you think hard about this moto should have had chips at these speeds a year ago! Thats why Apple has done all it could to get the absolute most from these chips. WAY TO GO APPLE!🙂 -MOTOROLA GO BACK TO TOASTERS AND CELL PHONES😡
And it's 21% in Belgium. I also had the impression it was about 17% in Holland, but I could be wrong about that. However bad you think you have it, there's always someone worse off 🙂
DakotaGuy
macrumors 601
Actually come to think of it you have a pretty good point. We are all hard on Moto, but if the 7455 can do what it has done considering the fab improvements, bus speed, etc. The 7457 might do some pretty amazing things. I am thinking by the end of the year we could easily see a 2Ghz G4. By then the towers will probably have moved on to the PPC 970, but this is still great news and I would think awesome performance for the iMacs and Powerbooks.
eric_n_dfw
macrumors 68000
Were do you get this?
Unless you are talking about Classic Mac OS software, you are wrong. Most major applications are multi-threaded - they WILL take advantage of a second processor under OS X. (Just like they would on Win NT/2000/XP or an SMP Linux kernel)
If you are talking about Classic app's - then oh well! These machines won't boot into OS 9 anyway and Classic mode is not a viable option for performance craved app's anyway.
Sun Baked
macrumors G5
Re: Worse and worse
The 7457 has the 512k L2 cache.
The speed these things are running at is quite amazing considering it finally looks like Motorola got the SOI copper chip with the low-k coating process right (the HiP6).
So these are going to be 7455 Rev 3.3 or newer.
---
But the 2MB of L3 cache for each processor on the high end should put the speed back in these things.
With the current FSB these things really choke with the smaller 1MB L3 cache -- even though it was DDR.
Looks like these are the 7455 again (still has the 256K on-chip L2 cache running at processor speed).
The 7457 has the 512k L2 cache.
The speed these things are running at is quite amazing considering it finally looks like Motorola got the SOI copper chip with the low-k coating process right (the HiP6).
So these are going to be 7455 Rev 3.3 or newer.
---
But the 2MB of L3 cache for each processor on the high end should put the speed back in these things.
With the current FSB these things really choke with the smaller 1MB L3 cache -- even though it was DDR.
eric_n_dfw:
Other than a few high-end graphics apps I believe that most applications are single-threaded.
iShater
macrumors 604
Since OSX is MP aware, my understanding is that it will send processing of threads/apps to different CPUs based on the load. So I can render a movie clip while still using my system, that is where the MP comes in handy and that is where the dual 867 has an advantage over the single 1GHz. That is why I called it usability performance vs. raw speed.
A $1499 Low end machine?!?!?! it is supposed to be good enough to do "real" work and then some! It is not in the same league as the iMac, they MADE it come down to that. Would you consider the previous generation Dual 867 like the iMac?
Sorry, but you're just wrong.
One of Apple's big selling points with OSX and UNIX in general is that it uses Symmetric Multiprocessing. This means that the OS assignes each task to a processor - not each application as is the case with asymmetric multiprocessing which is used in OS8-9. Yes there is some overhead, but 2x867 = 1.734gHz so even if there is 70% overhead for the OS to assign tasks (more like maybe 5-10% in reality), then you're better off with the dual 867.
You can confirm this yourself just by watching the CPU monitor while only running 1 App. the 2 charts will never be that far out of sync.
The real key to understanding this is knowing what the words mean. Lookup symmetric in the dictionary you'll find something like this:
ADJECTIVE:
1. Characterized by or displaying symmetry, especially correspondence in scale or measure: balanced, proportional, proportionate, regular, symmetric. See SAME. 2. Having components pleasingly combined: balanced, congruous, harmonious. See BEAUTIFUL.
Well, I don't know exactly whether it is the applications or OS that utilizes multi processors more, but I have a real world test. My work machine is a dual 533mhz and my home machine is a single 533mhz.
On both machines, I am typically running Photoshop, Adobe Golive, Flash MX, IE, Safari, iTunes, Entourage, Suitcase, Jrun4, MySQL server, and occasionally Illustrator or InDesign, with some pretty big files open. I can tell you for a fact, the dual processor machine has significantly better performance. I use both machines every day. Anyone who says otherwise is very very wrong. Perhaps the difference is not noticeable while just using email and browsing the web, but for running multiple, intensive applications the second processor is really put to use. I don't know how, I don't care how, I just know it helps a lot. I'm glad Apple did this and will always be willing to pay more for it.
the monitors are now competitive, but 'powermac' and 'value' still don't belong in the same sentence.
Dont Hurt Me
macrumors 603
I think this is true where maybe the consumer line will move to 7457 and the pro line to the 970 where now moto and ibm have reversed the duties they played. I wouldnt expect a 2ghz g4 in the imac but maybe a 1.3 or 1.5 by years end if we are very lucky.