PowerMac 1.6GHz Benchmarks

[job]

This is the one thing I can't understand.

Before the G5 was released, all the Mac users were screaming for SATA, AGP 8x, dual-channel DDR400, faster buses, and in a few cases, PCI-X.

Now that we have this tech to buy, people are beginning to say that they really don't need the technology that they have been waiting for years?! I don't think we could have expected that people would be more willing to buy old G4s when the G5s were made available.

Am I missing something here?

Also, lots of people complaining about performance. "compares only to mid-range current x86 hardware, yadda, yadda, yadda..."

Need I remind anyone that this is the baseline G5 which is competing with the current mid-range x86 hardware?

 

[daveg5]

Originally posted by job
This is the one thing I can't understand.

Before the G5 was released, all the Mac users were screaming for SATA, AGP 8x, dual-channel DDR400, faster buses, and in a few cases, PCI-X.

Dave G5: those people wanted it in a similar case design with 2 optical 4 harddrives 4 pci and the ability to use 5v pci cards and 4x agp cards basically they waanted all new but still wanted full expansion and capatability with all thier pci and agp stuff and the great g4 case.

Now that we have this tech to buy, people are beginning to say that they really don't need the technology that they have been waiting for years?! I don't think we could have expected that people would be more willing to buy old G4s when the G5s were made available.

Dave G5: now that we have it they dont see a major performance benefit in the g5 over the g4 at least not yet as it will take time for optimizing just like with the g4 vs the g3. performance wise in osx when multitasking the dual G4 does seem to be the best performance buy the most upgradeable and most compatable especially for those with older pro sound cards.. this will of course change as apps are optimized except while multitasking 2 is better then 1

Am I missing something here?

Dave G5: no, they want thier cake and to eat it too. they want everything thats good with the new, while still keeping everything whats good with the past

Also, lots of people complaining about performance. "compares only to mid-range current x86 hardware, yadda, yadda, yadda..."

DaveG5: we will always complain until we can whoop intels a!s at all price points, i so wished apple could have made all g5's duals at the same price points and there would be very little complaints, this may yet happen

Need I remind anyone that this is the baseline G5 which is competing with the current mid-range x86 hardware?

DaveG5: this is true i cant wait for more real world test

 

[John Q Public]

Originally posted by PieMac
Many excellent points. I have looked high and low both locally and on line to try and find a firewire 800 G4 that might fit the bill for myself, but unfortunately, these are few and far between. I need one with the superdrive as well which really limits your choices....there are very few superdrive model G4's left at any resellers, period. So it's either order "last years model" from Apple or go with the G5 and I have a feeling I will be choosing the G5 (and I personally prefer the actual design of the G4 as well). As much as I don't like feeling like I am being coerced into this decision by Apple's marketing tactics, I have to give them credit...Steve isn't stupid.

SuperDrive shouldn't be an issue...I bought mine without one...and NewEgg has Pioneer DVR-105BK (the same 4X DVD-RW as Apple used in FW800's) for $154.99 (with free FedEX Ground Shipping)...not to mention CAS 2 PC2700 memory is MUCH cheaper than high quality PC3200 that the G5 needs...and if I remember correctly...PowerMax (http://powermax.com) should still have FW800's...

 

[ColdZero]

Its a matter of price, the G5 1.6 is not a very attractive option at $1999 when the $700 I just spent on upgrading my g4 to dual 1ghz can still compete with it. Not as fast, but not $1299 slower.

 

[PieMac]

Originally posted by John Q Public
SuperDrive shouldn't be an issue...I bought mine without one...and NewEgg has Pioneer DVR-105BK (the same 4X DVD-RW as Apple used in FW800's) for $154.99 (with free FedEX Ground Shipping)...not to mention CAS 2 PC2700 memory is MUCH cheaper than high quality PC3200 that the G5 needs...and if I remember correctly...PowerMax (http://powermax.com) should still have FW800's...

I was wanting to purchase the superdrive built in because I want to be able to use iDVD. Thanks for the suggestions...I think I've already been to those sites but I will double check...you never know!

 

[soggywulf]

Originally posted by job
Need I remind anyone that this is the baseline G5 which is competing with the current mid-range x86 hardware?

The G5 is a good machine. But the baseline G5 compares in price closer to the mid-range PC hardware. And it is priced with hi-range PC hardware if you DIY.

Originally posted by DaveG5
now that we have it they dont see a major performance benefit in the g5 over the g4 at least not yet as it will take time for optimizing just like with the g4 vs the g3. performance wise in osx when multitasking the dual G4 does seem to be the best performance

I don't think so. Not unless you are running (some) continuous benchmarks. If you are multitasking, and actually doing heavy processing with your background apps (as opposed to just opening a bunch of apps and switching between them), then I think the fast memory will make the G5 machine much faster, snappier, and more productive.

John Q--looks like you are defending a purchase. Be objective. The Dual 1.4 you got may suit your needs just fine, but it's not a miracle-machine.

Forget benchmarks. Benchmarks are just for d***-measuring. Except game FPS benchmarks, these actually accurately represent how the computer is used--if you play games. I suppose if you are just doing continuous PS filters on the machine, benchmarks are useful for that too. All other cases, they are pretty useless.

 

[John Q Public]

Originally posted by job
This is the one thing I can't understand.

Before the G5 was released, all the Mac users were screaming for SATA, AGP 8x, dual-channel DDR400, faster buses, and in a few cases, PCI-X.

...personally...I don't think SATA is a great thing...it's only marginally faster than ATA100 (and the drives are more expensive naturally because of the new Techno-Babble Buzzwords)...

...AGP 8x...really isn't...it's only roughly 3-4% faster than AGP 4X...and unless you're running a machine with more than 1GB RAM...it's likely you AGP can only palletize 64-128MB of system memory anyway...

...DDR400...although fast...isn't the "End-All" of power and speed...yes it's nice...but in the real world how fast can your machine cache a web page or process what's coming across the LAN without creating a bottleneck at the processor's bus is a more likely case than would be through synthetic benchmarks...besides...it's always a case where more memory is better than faster memory (that's one of the things I'll concede to the G5...but I really don't have a need for more than the 2GB that's in my machine)

...lastly...PCI-X...where to begin with that one...they've been on PC's for the past 2 years (server/workstation logic boards)...but like the 64bit 33Mz PCI that's been on the Mac since '99...there's little industry support...that part will changein the next couple years as AGP falls out of favor entirely for the greater bandwidth afforded by PCI-X...but that won't be for another year or so...

The advertising should be (insert Jeff Goldblum voiceover) "...the new PowerMac G5...with it's PCI-X...AGP 8X...Serial ATA interface...SuperDrive and Dual-Channel DDR400 Memory Bus...It's the World's-Fastest-Fully-Buzzword-Compliant Personal Computer ever made..."

I have a PC that is "Buzzword Compliant" with a AthlonXP 3000+...it's in my SO's posession...'cause I like my pathetic little FW800 Dual 1.25Gz (or so some would try to have me believe'cause I don't want the over-hyped industrial-grade-ugly G5)

...the only thing I've ever asked for from Apple was to bring back the "Cube Era" black-keyed Apple Pro KB...the white keys are a pain-in-the-ass to keep clean...

 

[daveg5]

Originally posted by soggywulf
The G5 is a good machine. But the baseline G5 compares in price closer to the mid-range PC hardware. And it is priced with hi-range PC hardware if you DIY.



I don't think so. Not unless you are running (some) continuous benchmarks. If you are multitasking, and actually doing heavy processing with your background apps (as opposed to just opening a bunch of apps and switching between them), then I think the fast memory will make the G5 machine much faster, snappier, and more productive.

DaveG5:wow i never heard that one so i single 1.6 will out do a dual g4 1.25 when multitasking and perhaps even on multi aware apps. i thought one of osx's best attributes was its ability to work natively with duals. if i hear you the 1.6 g5 will multi task better then a dual G4 comparably equipped simply because of the bandwith advantages.
now you may be right but we still dont have any benchmarks to support that at all. i would love to impot in itunes while exporting in final cut, while rendering in imovie and playing backs some tracks in soundtrake, while working on filters in photoshop.
if the single g5 does multi tasking better and is faster when using multi aware apps then the dual 1.25-1.42 then that is indeed remarkable and i want one.
i just thought multitasking and multi aware apps would be the few areas where the old duals would surpass the single g5s' equally equipped. i hope i am wrong though. i know bandwidth is remarkable for memory based things like logic and 3d video. but for simple things like mp3 encoding, 2d rendering, and playing back tracks with no dsp the g4's bandwidth is never reached.

John Q--looks like you are defending a purchase. Be objective. The Dual 1.4 you got may suit your needs just fine, but it's not a miracle-machine.

 

[wizard]

Well all of thses things would be very helpful if they where connected to a processor that could make use of them. In the case of the 970 we have machine that simple doesn't cut the mustard so to speak. It's nice that the 970 excels at FP but FP is only applicable to a small segment of the user base.

While many people are jumping the gun with respect to their reactions to these first postings, it is probally an unadvised reaction. Apples own publicly posted documentation indicates clearly where the 970 comes up short, why anybody would be surprised is beyond me. In any event I can't see why anybody would puchase the 1.6 GHz machine, it is just an odd implementation relative to its sister machines.

I'm not really sure what the 1.6 GHz machine is, the baseline is really the 1.6 GHz machine. The 1.6 is just to differrent from the rest of the line to be considered baseline - it is its own line. Like someone else alluded to it is the G5 'yikes' machine.

I lok at it this way the G5 offers the Mac consumer everything they asked for except for a high performance CPU. Hopefully that will arrive around January. I will also admit that the GPUs are a bit lacking also.



Thanks
Dave

Originally posted by job
This is the one thing I can't understand.

Before the G5 was released, all the Mac users were screaming for SATA, AGP 8x, dual-channel DDR400, faster buses, and in a few cases, PCI-X.
...snipped
Also, lots of people complaining about performance. "compares only to mid-range current x86 hardware, yadda, yadda, yadda..."

Need I remind anyone that this is the baseline G5 which is competing with the current mid-range x86 hardware?

 

[garymm]

Originally posted by wizard

I will also admit that the GPUs are a bit lacking also.

Umm, the 9800 pro is there if you want it. That's about as good as it gets.

 

[wizard]

Your statements below are all well and good but you seem to mis one important thing here. The 970 does not have the hardware to optimize for, it only has 2 integer units. The VMX unit barely competes with the one in the G4. What the 970 does have is FP performance and more bandwidth, these advantages only come into play for certain code bases so you do not get a uniform increase in performance.

People should not get their hopes up to far. For some code bases the 970 will excel and simply be fantastic. You will never see a fantastic performance increase in run of the mill software. If your lucky you will get clock rate increase and maybe 10% over the G4.

Dave

Originally posted by eric_n_dfw
Acutally, yes. P3's were faster at many things than P4's were untill P4 optimized code started showing up.

You've got to realize that while the G5 may run any PPC binaries, it will not be able to shine unless those bits are arranged in a way that takes advantage of the G5. It's like trying to run a top fuel drag car on low octane gasoline - it might run but you're not going to win any races with it!

So yes, early adopters of G5 machines will have to live with relatively mediorcre performance until their software is recompiled for the G5; just like the first Power Mac users did on the 601, just like G4 users did before Alti-Vec app's came out and just like Windows users did on the P4.

(Disclaimer: Intel did have some design issues in the early P4's which contributed to it being slower than P3's at lower clock frequencies - but the main problem was still that existing code was not taking advantage of P4 technologies like NetBurst and whatnot - it still is a problem with the new HyperThreading P4's as app's are slowing catching up to use it)

 

[rog]

Originally posted by job
"

Need I remind anyone that this is the baseline G5 which is competing with the current mid-range x86 hardware?

Except that the low end G5 sells for more than most high-end PCs with much better video cards. It's too bad Apple is letting the slower G5s trickle out 1st. People will be disappointed and underwhelmed, and when the DP 2GHz comes out, people won't care much. If that came out first, or at the same time, everyone would be going on and on about how fast it is. Once again, Apple turns what should have been a successful rollout into a disappointing mess.

 

[wizard]

Yes his points are excellent. I'm wondering if you guys have considered the X-Serve as possibly the best choice for a G4 based machine at the moment?

Something that has been running throu my head recently.

Dave

Originally posted by PieMac
Many excellent points. I have looked high and low both locally and on line to try and find a firewire 800 G4 that might fit the bill for myself, but unfortunately, these are few and far between. I need one with the superdrive as well which really limits your choices....there are very few superdrive model G4's left at any resellers, period. So it's either order "last years model" from Apple or go with the G5 and I have a feeling I will be choosing the G5 (and I personally prefer the actual design of the G4 as well). As much as I don't like feeling like I am being coerced into this decision by Apple's marketing tactics, I have to give them credit...Steve isn't stupid.

 

[John Q Public]

Originally posted by daveg5
John Q--looks like you are defending a purchase. Be objective. The Dual 1.4 you got may suit your needs just fine, but it's not a miracle-machine.

...actually no...not defending a purchase...I made the rational decision to buy a G4 before the G5's hit stores rather than waiting for a machine I wouldn't have been happy with...just because Uncle Steve says it's the best thing since buttered-bread...

...and trying to illustrate that although Apple NEEDS for you to buy into all the hype and buy a G5...you don't need to buy it...

 

[leicaman]

Originally posted by John Q Public
...actually no...not defending a purchase...I made the rational decision to buy a G4 before the G5's hit stores rather than waiting for a machine I wouldn't have been happy with...just because Uncle Steve says it's the best thing since buttered-bread...

...and trying to illustrate that although Apple NEEDS for you to buy into all the hype and buy a G5...you don't need to buy it...

I think the hype here is all the noise about how G5s are flim-flam. Have you studied the architecture? Have you seen the videos at the ADC site? (You have to be at least a free member to see them.)

http://developer.apple.com/adctv/

I'd say a whole lot of horse puckey has been blown around here by people who have no idea what the final performance of any G5 is going to be. Rationalizations for sure.

Of course G5s will be faster with optimizations. But the people who have actually used them in real world applications are blown away with the performance. People looking at numbers on paper, on the other hand, seem to feel free to pontificate all they want to feed their own prejudices and cynicism.

 

[mim]

I question the need for the internal expansion slots. They're expensive to add, and will increase the heat load on the inside of the case. This may not be an issue now, but if this case is to last you 2 or 3 years then it may become a problem (esp. with a super hot running graphic card upgrade + 2 more 10000rpm drives ).

I also think that you'll get the same speed out of external FW800 devices as you would plugging them into the internal connections. Maybe slightly higher latency...but then you could just swap the new and old drives around.

I read recently that FW800 external drives were getting close to the theoretical maximum read/write speed of the fastest available drive (I'll look for the link).

Personally I think it's no bad thing for Apple to leaverage FW800 a bit more by reducing the number of bays inside the case - especially when it allows for the real crux of "life extentions"... frying hot processor upgrades.

 

[daveg5]

options are good to have

Originally posted by mim
I question the need for the internal expansion slots. They're expensive to add, and will increase the heat load on the inside of the case. This may not be an issue now, but if this case is to last you 2 or 3 years then it may become a problem (esp. with a super hot running graphic card upgrade + 2 more 10000rpm drives ).

DaveG5:wow please dont say that to creative pros that build thier studios around protools, and those with special purpose cards for vido and what not. you dont want us all with non upgradable imacs and emacs so you. all with g3/g4 can add usb2 firewire 800 newer video cards, processor upgrade cards bandwidth heavy sound and special purpose cards and i think that is a great selling point. when you buy a pci based mac you know you can have usb 3 firwire 1600 sata 300 and new agp video cards and processor cards in the future.so it can still be on your desk and fast 4 years from now if you get a closed system you are stuck out of any new technical changes and standard

I also think that you'll get the same speed out of external FW800 devices as you would plugging them into the internal connections. Maybe slightly higher latency...but then you could just swap the new and old drives around.

DaveG5: technically you do, you can get about 60+ MBS with one, two will over saturate it and require a pci firewire 800 card to over come that, a scsi 320 or dual 320 can do 640MB per second, but is overkill except if you need it for your buisness as are the 10000-15000 rpm scsi drives with thier close to 80MBS speed and under 4ms access speed.
many people want everything in one box, less cables, clutter etc. and many g4 systems have worked well fully loaded
also those 800 external cases add about $100+ per drive

I read recently that FW800 external drives were getting close to the theoretical maximum read/write speed of the fastest available drive (I'll look for the link).

DaveG5:actually its faster. storage review has ide doing 60+ tops and scsi doing 80+per single drive, but be careful some external firewire cases dont have fans, making the drive cooler in the machine

Personally I think it's no bad thing for Apple to leaverage FW800 a bit more by reducing the number of bays inside the case - especially when it allows for the real crux of "life extentions"... frying hot processor upgrades.

DaveG5:i agree, but i dont thinl apple did this on purpose. it the size of the g5 chips that made this a necessity. you can bet as the g5 chips get smaller cooler that these same g5 cases will have another optical drive and 2 extra hard drive bays. they cant at this time.

 

[mim]

DaveG5-

Sorry, I didn't mean NO expansion slots

I was talking more about the need (or desire) to have 4 rather than 3, etc. Even with your example there are many things (like pro soundcards) that are starting to use firewire as an interface.

Thanks for the info on the tech specs. And ofc ourse you're right about it nice being able to have everything inside the case - but all I'm doing is questioning how often all those expansion bays and slots get used.

Mind you, I personally have got very good at minimizing my needs given the shoeboxes I've been living/working in for the past few years. It's very easy to get used to being very particular about what you "need" when you've got so little room to play with

Apple's hidden social strategy.

 

[John Q Public]

Originally posted by leicaman
I think the hype here is all the noise about how G5s are flim-flam. Have you studied the architecture? Have you seen the videos at the ADC site? (You have to be at least a free member to see them.)

http://developer.apple.com/adctv/

I'd say a whole lot of horse puckey has been blown around here by people who have no idea what the final performance of any G5 is going to be. Rationalizations for sure.

Of course G5s will be faster with optimizations. But the people who have actually used them in real world applications are blown away with the performance. People looking at numbers on paper, on the other hand, seem to feel free to pontificate all they want to feed their own prejudices and cynicism.

I do agree with waiting for the final analysis before declaring G5 faster or slower...my chief complaint (other than being uglier-than-mass-produced-sin and lacking the aesthetics of the MDD G4's) about the G5 was lack of options (ie internal expansion) and price...by opting for the older (and cheaper) machine I afforded the opportunity to get my hands on a 23" Cinema HD that I wouldn't have allowed myself to spend otherwise...and the ability to use some of the ATA100 drives out of my now dead G3...

 

[leicaman]

Originally posted by John Q Public
I do agree with waiting for the final analysis before declaring G5 faster or slower...my chief complaint (other than being uglier-than-mass-produced-sin and lacking the aesthetics of the MDD G4's) about the G5 was lack of options (ie internal expansion) and price...by opting for the older (and cheaper) machine I afforded the opportunity to get my hands on a 23" Cinema HD that I wouldn't have allowed myself to spend otherwise...and the ability to use some of the ATA100 drives out of my now dead G3...

If i works for you, great. But I think that with the airflow setup and the G5 being quieter, I don't see any reason to worry about internal expansion for hard drives. One would do better to have a nice Firewire 800 RAID outside the box. Check Barefeets to see the numbers. Pretty compelling.

 

[daveg5]

Originally posted by John Q Public
...actually no...not defending a purchase...I made the rational decision to buy a G4 before the G5's hit stores rather than waiting for a machine I wouldn't have been happy with...just because Uncle Steve says it's the best thing since buttered-bread...

...and trying to illustrate that although Apple NEEDS for you to buy into all the hype and buy a G5...you don't need to buy it...

uhh that wasnt my quote but a quote of a quote i quoted heehee

 

[WM.]

Re: Audio Guys

Originally posted by curious0
if you have a UAD or a PCI Powercore or any PCI audio interface card (like myself) then my understanding is that they won't work on the new 3.3V PCI-X architecture, but will work just fine in the 1.6Ghz machine because it has the older architecture PCI slots.

NOT TRUE!!!

It's not the PCI-X that's the problem, it's just that Apple has decided to go wtih 3.3V-only slots--on all three models of the G5.

In other words, contact MOTU to make ABSOLUTELY SURE your cards will work before you blow two grand on a G5 that (AFAIK) won't work with them.

HTH
WM

 

[Mav451]

Originally posted by John Q Public
...personally...I don't think SATA is a great thing...it's only marginally faster than ATA100 (and the drives are more expensive naturally because of the new Techno-Babble Buzzwords)...

...AGP 8x...really isn't...it's only roughly 3-4% faster than AGP 4X...and unless you're running a machine with more than 1GB RAM...it's likely you AGP can only palletize 64-128MB of system memory anyway...

...DDR400...although fast...isn't the "End-All" of power and speed...yes it's nice...but in the real world how fast can your machine cache a web page or process what's coming across the LAN without creating a bottleneck at the processor's bus is a more likely case than would be through synthetic benchmarks...besides...it's always a case where more memory is better than faster memory (that's one of the things I'll concede to the G5...but I really don't have a need for more than the 2GB that's in my machine)

...lastly...PCI-X...where to begin with that one...they've been on PC's for the past 2 years (server/workstation logic boards)...but like the 64bit 33Mz PCI that's been on the Mac since '99...there's little industry support...that part will changein the next couple years as AGP falls out of favor entirely for the greater bandwidth afforded by PCI-X...but that won't be for another year or so...

The advertising should be (insert Jeff Goldblum voiceover) "...the new PowerMac G5...with it's PCI-X...AGP 8X...Serial ATA interface...SuperDrive and Dual-Channel DDR400 Memory Bus...It's the World's-Fastest-Fully-Buzzword-Compliant Personal Computer ever made..."

I have a PC that is "Buzzword Compliant" with a AthlonXP 3000+...it's in my SO's posession...'cause I like my pathetic little FW800 Dual 1.25Gz (or so some would try to have me believe'cause I don't want the over-hyped industrial-grade-ugly G5)

...the only thing I've ever asked for from Apple was to bring back the "Cube Era" black-keyed Apple Pro KB...the white keys are a pain-in-the-ass to keep clean...

AGP 8x? One word. Games. You'd be suprised how well a 5900/9800pro can saturate that AGP bus. Understandably, 3 years ago i had a motherboard capable of using AGP4x. Guess what? I had a 5 year old G400--reknown for its "image quality". Needless to say, an 8500 replaced that (sadly) only 9 months ago.

PCI-X: for the future...but i agree with you. Right now, most of your everyday consumers will not need it. Did PC users REALLY need SATA 2 years ago? No, but people still wanted it anyway.

DC DDR memory? Um, anyone using FCP/FCE would gladly like that kind of memory interface to FEED that monstrous FSB. Any less would be uncivilized

 

[John Q Public]

Originally posted by Mav451
AGP 8x? One word. Games. You'd be suprised how well a 5900/9800pro can saturate that AGP bus. Understandably, 3 years ago i had a motherboard capable of using AGP4x. Guess what? I had a 5 year old G400--reknown for its "image quality". Needless to say, an 8500 replaced that (sadly) only 9 months ago.


glad to see I'm not the only one who bought a G400...my G400MAX is currently resting in my "Retro Box" PIII 667 on a BX mobo (AGP mildly overclocked to 83Mz) but insofar as 4X vs 8X...it only yeilds 3-5% improvement based on identical hardware...

PCI-X: for the future...but i agree with you. Right now, most of your everyday consumers will not need it. Did PC users REALLY need SATA 2 years ago? No, but people still wanted it anyway.

I never wanted SATA...I wanted Ultra320LVD SCSI

DC DDR memory? Um, anyone using FCP/FCE would gladly like that kind of memory interface to FEED that monstrous FSB. Any less would be uncivilized

DC/DB DDR ain't as fast as some people believe...though an improvement over the status quo...again only marginal improvement over running high quality/low latency DDR Interleaved...as far as FPM goes...CAS2 PC133 SDRAM gives up only a little over PC2100 DDR SDRAM because of the design...DDR is a MUCH faster memory chip...but suffers from higher latency timings...

oh...btw...the G5's "Monstrous FSB" you mention is only the "Processor Bus"...the SystemBus is significantly slower...and the MemoryBus is only 400Mz (thus the usage of PC3200)

If Apple designed the G5 in a manner consistant with the past PowerMac...the actual SystemBus is only 200Mz...

and BTW...I only see a PC listed there...where's YOUR Mac...LOL...

 

[eric_n_dfw]

Originally posted by PieMac
I was wanting to purchase the superdrive built in because I want to be able to use iDVD. Thanks for the suggestions...I think I've already been to those sites but I will double check...you never know!

It will. I added a Pioneer DVR104 to my old Blue & White G3 (with a G4 ZIF upgrade) and iDVD installed and worked just fine.