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

New PowerMacs Released

OK, I haven't read through this whole thread, because it would take me forever to get through 300+ replies...

What it seems Apple has done with their system architecture, is try to smooth things out, and get rid of major bottlenecks... Take the PCI bus for example, and you'll see how Apple has a direct PCI bus, whereas pee-cee's do not. Apple is eliminating the bottlenecks that hinder even the fastest p4's (can you say L3 cache?) so that Macs don't need insanely high clock speeds to perform as well as them.

This is just my thinking, and I may be wrong, but here goes...

With the DDR's 2.7gbps throughput, isn't that to the processor, or system controller? The L3 cache has something like 4gbps throughput, but it's not hindered by the 1.3gbps limit of the system bus... I'm a bit confused, and I'll admit that I don't know everything, but I do know that Apple's not dumb enough to put DDR in a computer just for the sake of saying that it has DDR... You have to remember that Apple is not as conformist as other computer companies...
 
Originally posted by topicolo


Actually RAMBUS tricked Intel into a contract that pretty much forced them to stick with RDRAM for their P4 mobos until late 2001 I believe. AMD hasn't touched Rambus because no one in their right mind would! RDRAM's price/performance ratio is so bad that people in the pc world call it rambust. Well, it's that, and the fact that rambus is trying to make money off of memory makers by suing them and trying to make them pay liscensing fees for Rambus themselves stole.
Click to expand...

Well, besides the legal problems, the other reason that AMD has not chosen to use RAMBUS is because of the differences in architectures. RAMBUS is a serial memory technology, and the main problem with it is that there is a higher latency associated with it. This is why when the 820 boards were introduced the P3 actually took a performance hit in using the new memory vs. SDRAM. Thus, the P4 was designed with RDRAM in mind, and Intel worked on countering the latency issues (that's where you get netburst, the prefetching units, the advanced BPU, etc.). If a CPU is designed with RAMBUS in mind, then it's not a bad technology, but trying to drop it in with current solutions doesn't usually yield good results.
 
Originally posted by G4scott
OK, I haven't read through this whole thread, because it would take me forever to get through 300+ replies...

What it seems Apple has done with their system architecture, is try to smooth things out, and get rid of major bottlenecks... Take the PCI bus for example, and you'll see how Apple has a direct PCI bus, whereas pee-cee's do not. Apple is eliminating the bottlenecks that hinder even the fastest p4's (can you say L3 cache?) so that Macs don't need insanely high clock speeds to perform as well as them.

This is just my thinking, and I may be wrong, but here goes...

With the DDR's 2.7gbps throughput, isn't that to the processor, or system controller? The L3 cache has something like 4gbps throughput, but it's not hindered by the 1.3gbps limit of the system bus... I'm a bit confused, and I'll admit that I don't know everything, but I do know that Apple's not dumb enough to put DDR in a computer just for the sake of saying that it has DDR... You have to remember that Apple is not as conformist as other computer companies...
Click to expand...

The L3 Cache does not use the FSB, but it is the first stop in front of it.

Once again, the DDR bus is only to the system controller, not the CPU. The CPU does not support a DDR bus afaik. DDR does help but not by as much as you and I would like it to. Only things that are done on the System Controller and are independent of the CPU will get a 100% boost, but very few things are done independent of a processor. I'll leave it up to you to contemplate the reason Apple decided to go DDR, but I can guarantee you that it will provide little advantage performance wise (due to the FSB only being half the speed of the memory bus). Take a look at the benchies when Intel released the RDRAM motherboards for the P3, or VIA came out with DDR chipsets for the P3, and you'll see what I mean. Heck, go over to Barefeats and take a look at their xserve benchmarks.
 
Originally posted by SPG
Just placed an order for the 867DP to replace my G4 450 at home. MacMall says three weeks or more wait time. Anyone know a better timeframe? I can cancel my order with them.
Mailorder preferred.
Click to expand...

Apple store says it ships in 1-3 days. You get about 100 bucks off if you know someone at a University too... :)
 
Originally posted by SPG
Just placed an order for the 867DP to replace my G4 450 at home. MacMall says three weeks or more wait time. Anyone know a better timeframe? I can cancel my order with them.
Mailorder preferred.
Click to expand...

Yea, My company can have one ship to us in one to two day. Then we would ship to you, so about a week or so. www.generalcybernetics.com/apple We are a new sponsor here and have just started selling Macs online as you can tell, but have been in business for 7 years. Let me know.
 
Originally posted by AmbitiousLemon


im sorry but no you are just being stupid. i cant refute what you said because you didnt say anything. you are a fool. no fact? no knowledge? sound like you are describing your own posts here buddy. all that you have said to refute what i have proved is say. i dont care. you refuse to look at benchmarks. you refuse to look at real world performance. you refuse to look at architecture. you are like a child covering his ears and screaming lalallala. you ignore every fact presented you for some unimaginable reason. you are a fool. and you are not worth my time.
Click to expand...

You keep saying the phrase "real world performance" but you never have any figures. I would like for you to post some numbers, some specs, something that would make me put some belief in your argument. What I've been describing to you are benchmarks. What you've given to me is a bunch of crybaby BS.

I will sit down and talk to you all day aboug architecture. Let's talk about bus speed, processor architecture, compilers, speculative execution, predication, hyperthreading, SIMD, VLIW, hell, we can even get into Sun's STC (Space Time Computing) that they get into with their MAJC processor. Hell, wouldn't that be fun.

Please, give me something with at least some reasoning. And if that's not worth your time, please don't respond.
 
errrr

RDRAM is a 16bit peace of ****, apple would not use it in there right mind.
 
keno - sigh. you are growing tiresome. ive already posted links to real world benchmarks. go read them before you insult me again. i honestly do not understand why you keep posting begging for proof. and then when presented with it you just act like no one posted it. pretty immature if you ask me.
 
Originally posted by G4scott
OK, I haven't read through this whole thread, because it would take me forever to get through 300+ replies...

What it seems Apple has done with their system architecture, is try to smooth things out, and get rid of major bottlenecks... Take the PCI bus for example, and you'll see how Apple has a direct PCI bus, whereas pee-cee's do not. Apple is eliminating the bottlenecks that hinder even the fastest p4's (can you say L3 cache?) so that Macs don't need insanely high clock speeds to perform as well as them.
Click to expand...

I think you're right and this is the way I think they should go. SGI has done the same thing with their machines and have had pretty good results with it. Seeing how the PowerPC can thoroughly spank MIPS, we should see great performance from future Macs if Apple can increase system bandwidth to the level that SGI has.

The new IBM PowerPC has 6.4GB/s of throughput which, if used, will be an incredible advancement over even what we have today.
 
GOT MY NEW POWERMAC!!! DUAL 1GHZ

So far everything running incredibly smooth. I ran my logic audio on it and it runs it effortlessly. Damn thing is a noise monster though. The fan kicked in out of nowhere for a few seconds and scared the **** out of me.
 
Originally posted by AmbitiousLemon
keno - sigh. you are growing tiresome. ive already posted links to real world benchmarks. go read them before you insult me again. i honestly do not understand why you keep posting begging for proof. and then when presented with it you just act like no one posted it. pretty immature if you ask me.
Click to expand...

I seriously hope you're kidding here. if you're talking about these benchmarks:

Originally posted by AmbitiousLemon

just some benchmarks to help with the whole single versus dual discussion.
http://www.barefeats.com/xserve2.html

http://www.barefeats.com/pentium4.html
Click to expand...

...and you are serious, then you're nuts!!! The Athlon 1.6 whoops the G4 every time. Go re-read it.
 
first post

The new powermacs have driven me to my first post here...

I have to say I am a bit underwhelmed by the release. As far as I can tell, and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, is that unless these are 7470chips, its not true DDR utilization. Essentially, it appears to be similar to the xserve implementation of DDR. Which is disappointing. ATA 100 is nice though. It seems that the performance boost(dual 1Ghz vs. dual 1Ghz) is coming mostly from the following: Faster IDE, slightly faster system bus, and Jaquar. Oh and slightly faster video(Radeon9000 vs. Geforce4 mx). My guess is that the DDR isn't making much of a difference. And what's with the pathetic audio?? When is Apple going to wake up and spend the nickel it would take to add 5.1 sound? Or at the very least, prologic? And before anyone starts talking about pro audio rigs, yes they are great on a mac. Great if you are creating. But considering how Apple thinks its the "pro" solution for audio and video, shouldn't I be able to watch a dvd or play a game with 5.1??

Oh, and whats with the "new" case design. Granted, I don't care too much about the case, if the hardware was radical(which it isn't). But whats with the tarted up, bitchin' camaro version of the same old b&w case?? That case has been around forever. Adding hood scoops doesn't cut it. Where's the innovation? Frankly, I'm tired of bulbous, no-angle designs. How hard would it have been to change the shape of the handles and plastic cladding on the sides? Seems like they are milking the r&d investment there...

Having said all that, I am still sucking it up(or is it bending over?) and getting one, probably the dual 1Ghz. I can't wait any longer(my b&w/450/radeon7000 is dog slow...). Add in that I finally can have DDR which will be forward compatible for awhile, jaguar(without that stupid upgrade price), I suppose it could be worse. And, yes, I know any current mac is loads faster than what I have. But anyone notice how INCREDIBLY slow window resizing is in x? I truly hope jaguar is as fast as everyone says it is.

Finally, to throw a log on the fire, pc's are faster and cheaper. Period. The pc hardware is faster(USB2, faster bus, faster cpu-athlon/pentium-both are faster, MUCH better sound options, faster drives, etc.). And on price, Apple will never undercut or be the same as a comparable pc. For one, they can't do it, with their r&d costs. For another, related reason, they can't upgrade to the latest and greatest quickly(ala Dell). For another, they don't have the volume. They are most comparable to Sony on the PC side(vice-versa really as Apple was first), offering integration and style rather than the newest and greatest. What is disappointing is that in the past, Apple consistently offered both integration/style AND performance. In the past, macs always cost more, but at least you could see where it went in innovations/high performance like SCSI, A/V, graphics, 3.5 floppy, superior printers, superior monitors, 68k chip vs. early x86 chips... Today, other than the OS and CPU, whats all that different from a pc? Except for the Apple world pricing for RAM(whats up with that anyway? do they think people are that stupid?) And before anyone starts bashing about this, I've been using Apple's since 82. Back when they were Apple's and not Macs. I dig'em. II+, IIe, IIc, FatMacs, Se/30, IIfx, LC, Quadras, Centris, performa, powerbooks, duos, old a/ux servers, the aix server, you name it and I've used or owned them. Best ones I've used? any quadra, the original powerbooks, the 540c, wallstreet, and most current macs. In fact my old b&w has been utterly reliable. Probably why I've kept it so long. And the worst ones? Anything that shipped with System 7.5.2 through System 7.6. Those OS's did more to hurt Apple than anything MS did.

Finally, sorry for the long post, its my first one, I guess I had a lot to say:D
 
one more thing

if you go to a university, or know anyone that does. The mac store give you 150 dollars of on the dual 1ghz model. I know that the website said -shipping in 1-3 days- but the apple store in my area does indeed have them in stock.
 
Price comparison... is it fair?

I've read all these posts about how to assemble your own PC and how it will be about $700 cheaper as a "comparable" Mac. However, I find these questions unanswered:

1. When I buy a fully assembled computer, I don't have to spend time to assemble it. (Or will the dealer do that for me?) I don't have to get all the different parts, or have them shipped to me (which may be costly). I don't have to review all specs and driver descriptions in order to make sure the different components don't interfere which each other.

2. What about the quality of the softwware provided? If I buy a superdrive for a PC for $250, will the software supplied be as good as iDVD? What about iTunes, DiskBurner, iPhoto, iMovie, and the upcoming iCal and iSync? (I know there's a lot of shareware out there. I'm talking about quality, support, and ease of use.)

3. Design. In a creative working environment, I don't want to look at an ugly machine.

4. Value. Last time I checked on Ebay, used Macs don't lose as much value as used PCs do.

Doesn't all that make up for $700? Not mentioning that it's more fun to use a Mac...

One more thing... When comparing prices, is it fair to take PC prices from the cheapest dealer, and compare them to The Apple Store who is likely to be the most expensive source available?
 
Originally posted by Hemingray


Uh.... right... like the floppy drive won't exist in a year in PCs?
Click to expand...

The floppy...that wonderful device that allows your Windows boot disks to run...

I have 2 PCs and 2 Macs at my desk. The Macs have booted from CD ROM since CD ROM was common tech. The two PCs both require FOUR Win2K boot disks, for the every six months when they need a reinstall. I own exactly FOUR floppy disks. Hmmmm...
 
it makes up the price by far, especially if you consider $20-$30 shipping seperately on parts of the PC, plus time, crappy components that don't want to talk to each other.

For the most part, PC people who claim to have the best homemade PC are underage gamers who have a great video crad and that's about it.

Also, don't believe anyone's statements about their expertise or education on this or any board, I've seen people say they do one thing, then say they do another in the same thread.

Take it lightly and go to the store to play. If you like it, buy it. Screw other peoples opinions.
:D
 
Originally posted by SPG
Just placed an order for the 867DP to replace my G4 450 at home. MacMall says three weeks or more wait time. Anyone know a better timeframe? I can cancel my order with them.
Mailorder preferred.
Click to expand...

Placed an order this afternoon for new 1GHZ DP with Mac Connection by phone - (888)213-0260. Couldn't find new models on website yet.

Free 512MB RAM w/ free installation. No tax. $30 ground shipping. Ships tomorrow (Wed) .:D
 
macidiot:

I know what you're feeling.

It's difficult to look at a PC and a Macintosh side-by-side and not think about how much the Macintosh is missing.

I like big numbers as much as the next person. I want it to all go faster, as long as it runs well. As far as overall productivity goes, if you spend the money on quality components, the PC comes out about as expensive as the Mac, sometimes more.

That leaves the slow processor. Okay, AltiVec is wonderful. How many of us use any programmes which take advantage of AltiVec. Are there any games or is it just professional programmes? Yes, the O.S. uses it...thank goodness. An awful lot of games and professional programmes use the x86's SSE2 multimedia instructions and, while they may not be as good as AltiVec, the comparison in programmes using one and not using the other, is demonstrative.

All I can say is that I've got faith that it will get better. Otherwise, I would have bought a PC, and limped along with my G3/400, instead of the dual G4/800.
 
Re: GOT MY NEW POWERMAC!!! DUAL 1GHZ

Originally posted by aromac
So far everything running incredibly smooth. I ran my logic audio on it and it runs it effortlessly. Damn thing is a noise monster though. The fan kicked in out of nowhere for a few seconds and scared the **** out of me.
Click to expand...

hah, how fast is it?
 
Originally posted by nero007


I'm assuming those prices aren't all pulled from the same site. In which case you'll have to pay seperate shipping for each item which will jack your price. I tried building a PC through Pricewatch and the trick is finding a site that has the best overall prices. Which I'm assuming, is not what you have listed there.
Click to expand...

You assume correct, the prices are from various vendors. I just tried to pull the best prices for the components, most of which include the shipping cost.
 
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