Power Mac MDD vs new MDD FW800

Discussion in 'Macintosh Computers' started by giovanni, Feb 19, 2003.

  1. giovanni macrumors regular

    Jul 1, 2002
    Apart from two obvious differences (FW800 and internal bluetooth option) and a third in that the size of L3 is halved in the newer models, is there anything else that differentiates these models ? Also, reducing the L3, isn't that going backwards ? how much is that likely to reduce performance ?
    I am really not sure why I should be getting a new one: FW800 does not seem to be a big deal (well, it just is not and will not be for the foreseeable future); internal bluetooth, well one thing it does for sure is delaying shipment for weeks; and finally I bet, regardless of the impact, it is better to have a 2Mb L3 rather than 1Mb.

    Any thoughts ?
  2. Sun Baked macrumors G5

    Sun Baked

    May 19, 2002
    The L3 cache was reduce in the Quicksilver to MDD change. The MDD to FW800 MDD increases the cache back to 2MB per processor in the dual 1.42GHz model.

    So the obvious difference is the addition of Bluetooth (internal), FW800, and firmware revisions.

    The availability of 2MB L3 cache in the dual 1.42 GHz, and whacking a CPU in the MDD single 1GHz model.
  3. WannabeSQ macrumors 6502

    Oct 24, 2002
    They always put higher cache on the high end model, which is now the DP 1.42. The previous DP 1.25 was top of the line and had the maxed cache. Aside from what you mentioned, the newer ones also have airport extreme. I read that they are also much quieter. Also, it appears that there is another connection below the AGP slot, which may or may not be a port for powering the radeon 9700, or some other completely different purpose. I think that's it.
  4. Sun Baked macrumors G5

    Sun Baked

    May 19, 2002
    I thought it used to be 1MB on the low end and 2MB on the top two since the Quicksilver appeared. Which was why people were complaining about the loss of 1MB on the MDD dual 1GHz over the old Quicksilver 1GHz.

    Just like people complained about the loss of the CPU on the current low-end.


    forgot the full specs on the old 1.25, been awhile since I last looked. :(

Share This Page