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.
PowerMac Specs...
- Thread starter arn
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
OK ITS UP NOW:
http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APP...HttJa8/0.3.0.3.34.37.1.0.1.3.1.3.1.1.0?108,72
they are UGLY!!!!! The back is hideous in my opinion. The front not much better. Overall they offer some nice stuff... but man good thing i didnt eat breakfast yet...
http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APP...HttJa8/0.3.0.3.34.37.1.0.1.3.1.3.1.1.0?108,72
they are UGLY!!!!! The back is hideous in my opinion. The front not much better. Overall they offer some nice stuff... but man good thing i didnt eat breakfast yet...
apple
Looks like daul's all the way with top 1.25.
I'm sure with DDR and Jaguar taking advantage of the daul's it will be fast.
But still moto said bend over apple. All we can give you is .25 more in 8 months. Apple needs to "switch" it's self. They'll go to IBM if they're smart.
I wouldn't buy a mac now. They will up date the whole line next with a new processor line.
Looks like daul's all the way with top 1.25.
I'm sure with DDR and Jaguar taking advantage of the daul's it will be fast.
But still moto said bend over apple. All we can give you is .25 more in 8 months. Apple needs to "switch" it's self. They'll go to IBM if they're smart.
I wouldn't buy a mac now. They will up date the whole line next with a new processor line.
I agree - it is a pretty weak speed bump. especially I am DYING to find out the relative performance gain going from the 133Mhz bus to the 167Mhz. I would be surprised it is of any real significant. I know nothing about processors but I am open to bets on this. Sounds like lots of bs. Like someone said earlier this is just Apple's effort to clear G4 inventory and other stuff related to the current PM. I might buy one, for me it is a no brainer since I have a 350Mhz BW G3, but I have a strong feeling Apple is just finishing up the line and getting ready for some true INNOVATION around the beginning of 2003.
Bottom line eMac now comes with Combo Drive at same price as former entry-level CD-RW.
Bottom line iMac comes only with CD-RW.
Wow. That's an interesting decision.
Bottom line iMac comes only with CD-RW.
Wow. That's an interesting decision.
If I remember correctly, once Wintels hit the 1 GHz processor mark, then they started flying, adding tenths of GHz on what seems like a monthly basis. It took the industry 15 years to get to 1 GHz and 6 months to get to 2. If this can happen to those stupid Wintels, why can't the same thing happen to Macs? A major speed upgrade - 1.5 or 1.6 GHz would be a start, not this 1.25 crap - would definitely entice people who work on Wintels to switch. They're used to those high numbers like that.
Happy User
I'm a graphics & video pro for a high-end design shop in Boston. Personally, I buy a new mac about every two years, so whatever I get typically blows away that which I am used to, so I am happy. I don't care if pc's are ten times faster than macs (although maybe I should but see no need at the moment), I just vastly prefer them for so many tangible and intangible reasons, if someone gave me a kiler pc today I would sell it and buy a better mac tomorrow.
Tofu is better for me than a cheeseburger but guess which one is more enjoyable?
$.02
-Mike
I'm a graphics & video pro for a high-end design shop in Boston. Personally, I buy a new mac about every two years, so whatever I get typically blows away that which I am used to, so I am happy. I don't care if pc's are ten times faster than macs (although maybe I should but see no need at the moment), I just vastly prefer them for so many tangible and intangible reasons, if someone gave me a kiler pc today I would sell it and buy a better mac tomorrow.
Tofu is better for me than a cheeseburger but guess which one is more enjoyable?
$.02
-Mike
BAh just as I had expected.
Just a lame cheesy upgrade. They can't put in faster processors in the G4 so hey! we gunna put 2 slow ones in there.
I'll wait for a better mac.
Just a lame cheesy upgrade. They can't put in faster processors in the G4 so hey! we gunna put 2 slow ones in there.
I'll wait for a better mac.
same memory arch as Xserve
The Apple website says about the new PM's memory architecture:
"The all new Power Mac G4 features rock-solid engineering reflective of the industrial-strength Xserve. Its turbo-charged dual processors are finely tuned for optimal performance with innovations providing increased memory bandwidth and faster data transfer."
As for throughput it says:
"The resulting throughput between main memory and the system controller is 2.7GBps, more than double the throughput from the previous dual 1GHz Power Mac G4."
But look at what macteens.com published about the Xserve. It states similarly higher throughput from the memory to the system controller but that the system controller is limited to 1.05 GB/s.
Is this the same system controller to CPU's limit?
The Apple website says about the new PM's memory architecture:
"The all new Power Mac G4 features rock-solid engineering reflective of the industrial-strength Xserve. Its turbo-charged dual processors are finely tuned for optimal performance with innovations providing increased memory bandwidth and faster data transfer."
As for throughput it says:
"The resulting throughput between main memory and the system controller is 2.7GBps, more than double the throughput from the previous dual 1GHz Power Mac G4."
But look at what macteens.com published about the Xserve. It states similarly higher throughput from the memory to the system controller but that the system controller is limited to 1.05 GB/s.
Is this the same system controller to CPU's limit?
Attachments
Re: same memory arch as Xserve
I don't interpret that diagram that way- I read it as - That bottle neck is going to be there anyway, the system controller makes sure it is fed evenly and as quickly as possible from the fatter upstream pipe rather than having to wait another cycle or whatever. Does that seem like a foolish interpretation?
Its the Xserve board design- the controller, the traffic cop makes it go FASTER not slower, by making sure there are no wrecks.
I don't interpret that diagram that way- I read it as - That bottle neck is going to be there anyway, the system controller makes sure it is fed evenly and as quickly as possible from the fatter upstream pipe rather than having to wait another cycle or whatever. Does that seem like a foolish interpretation?
Its the Xserve board design- the controller, the traffic cop makes it go FASTER not slower, by making sure there are no wrecks.
Re: Re: same memory arch as Xserve
Unfortunately what it means is that the dual CPUs don't have two 166MHz busses to the system controller, therefore the DDR memory is next to useless. I'm assuming that the AGP bus has its own connection to main memory... if not then the DDR ram is truly useless.
Unfortunately what it means is that the dual CPUs don't have two 166MHz busses to the system controller, therefore the DDR memory is next to useless. I'm assuming that the AGP bus has its own connection to main memory... if not then the DDR ram is truly useless.