Speed tests on Dual 1.25


pgwalsh

macrumors 68000
Jun 21, 2002
1,639
218
New Zealand
I'd like to see similar tests done with more RAM. I can't imagine any professional using a PowerMac with 256MB of RAM.

I was hoping to see better performance numbers, but I guess they're good enough. :expressionless:
 

SilvorX

macrumors 68000
May 24, 2002
1,701
0
'Toba, Canada
when i first looked at it, i was like "wtf? getting the 867 wouldnt be worth $2700 for how much its lagging compared to the 933" then later on when i went back to the page, i realized there was a dual 867 ddr ;) lol, then i felt alot happier lol...
 

Sun Baked

macrumors G5
May 19, 2002
14,874
57
Originally posted by Shadowfax
why the heck did they cut the L3 on the new dual 1 GHz? that doesn't sound like progress!
The DDR is more expensive than the SDR used in the previous machine, it is most likely one of the reasons Apple cut the size and why the upgrade company went with SDR instead.
 

RogueLdr

macrumors regular
Jul 22, 2002
119
0
People's Republic of Ann Arbor
Originally posted by Shadowfax
why the heck did they cut the L3 on the new dual 1 GHz? that doesn't sound like progress!
The faster system bus in the new dual 1Ghz machine compensates for the halving of the L3 cache, according to the MacWorld test. While it would be nice to still have the larger cache, cutting it seems to allow Apple to reduce the cost of the dual 1GHz PowerMac without hampering performance and at the same time enhancing the expandability of the machine.

Just an opinion.

RL
 

Hemingray

macrumors 68030
Jan 9, 2002
2,913
25
Ha ha haaa!
Originally posted by RogueLdr
While it would be nice to still have the larger cache, cutting it seems to allow Apple to reduce the cost of the dual 1GHz PowerMac without hampering performance and at the same time enhancing the expandability of the machine.
In addition to that, I also think Apple did it from a marketing standpoint to set off the performance from the top-end DP 1.25GHz. If the dual 1GHz had 2MB of L3 cache as well, there wouldn't be as much of a perceived performance difference to justify the extra $800.
 

ftaok

macrumors 603
Jan 23, 2002
6,146
1,165
East Coast
Originally posted by Shadowfax
why the heck did they cut the L3 on the new dual 1 GHz? that doesn't sound like progress!
From my point of view, the progress was made in that they bumped the speed from 933 to 1000. Plus they threw in another CPU for s&g's. That sounds like progress even without all of the other new stuff (i.e. GPU, DDR, 166 bus ...).
 

nixd2001

macrumors regular
Aug 21, 2002
179
0
UK
I think a significant factor (note: no pretension of single factors) is that DDR is more likely to be mainstream commodity over the next year, which adds a level of certainty for both pricing and just plain availablity that otherwise Apple probably don't wish to expose themselves to.

In other words, if you don't shape the market, use what the market has chosen or pay an additional price.
 

mr evil brkfast

macrumors member
Jun 18, 2002
62
0
Toronto, Canada
The 1.25GHZ model is no doubt faster than any Apple to date...it still doesn't put us anywhere near (processor speed) the P4 in terms of an upgrade.

I wish they had left the L3 Cache on the 1 GHZ at 2MB per processor. Then we could have seen perhaps if there was any real improvement in the architechture.

I think the Dual 867 is the biggest upgrade in value/speed compared with the model it replaces. I always thought the 800 MHZ model was a poor cousin to the 933 and 1 GHZ
 

madamimadam

macrumors 65816
Jan 3, 2002
1,281
0
Re: Re: Speed tests on Dual 1.25

Originally posted by Inhale420


they look unbiased because they're not being compared to pc's
You always get a lot of pissed off people when you compare with PCs because it is just so bloody difficult to do a fair comparison. Comparing Apples to Apples is far easier and far less time consuming.