I do a lot of audio recording at 24/96 and that double speed PCI bus sure does sound nice. With my PC, using soundforge and a 2+gig wav file (2.5hours recording) simple operations like cutting and pasting take forever on a 2.26b with DDR333. Sometimes it takes 6 minutes (the program times it) to perform the cut of a six minute segment with heavy CPU usage. That's really sad. I know that Jason Thompson, owner of mudshark studios and my friend uses a Mac for this because he claims it's faster. I know that it sounds like a magaize guy or Emma from Caoine saying that a Mac is just faster with photoshop (which is not necessarily true.) But I'm inclined to believe him on this one. There was a tremendous performance boost going from Athlon XP to northy because of SSE2 (guess) and if altivec is all its cracked up to be it might just do the trick. I'd be interested to see how one of these 1.25ghz duallies with all the cache and such performs in soundforge. I'M TIRED OF SETTING A RESAMPLE AND HAVING TO COME BACK TWO HOURS LATER!!!!
Apple has gradually been moving the tower PowerMacs towards the media production industry. The print design world is basically dead to them, and video/3D is the thing they're after. Be that FinalCut Pro or Maya, they want it. It started with the introduction of Firewire, then Final Cut Pro, dual processors, Maya, gigabit-ethernet, ultra scsi 160, and now ide raid. Sure you can put that into a PC, but these boxes, along with the OS, are being tuned to cater to a particular market. Curiously, it's the same market that Steve's other company is in. They are proving that you can be SGI with a "consumer" computer.
That's not really true. Looking at the diagrams on Apple's website, the entire PCI bus has a 266MB/sec link to the "system controller". Which is Apple's equivalent of the North Bridge/South Bridge combo. You'll also notice that this pipe that the PCI bus has to the system controller is also shared with the i/o controller. Whether this is better than just putting i/o devices on the pci bus is arguable. As we've seen with past SiS chipsets, even putting the ATA controllers directly on the North Bridge didn't really help THAT much.
However, to combat this myth that this 266MB/sec link is somehow a god-send. All Intel chipsets since the i810 have used what Intel calls a hub-link (I think). Intel's I/O controllers have a bus width allowing 533MB/sec of transfer rates. Of course, the PCI bus itself would never saturate this, however, combine multiple PCI devices along with additional i/o methods such as USB (and in the latest chipsets with ICH4, USB 2.0 and integrated LAN) and you can find quite a few ways to use this 533MB/sec bus.
Previous chipsets from Intel (and pretty much all the other chipset manufacturers) have had a 266MB/sec i/o bus. Looking on the diagram on Apple's website, I see that there is a dedicated channel for 2 of the HD's connectors. Maybe this would help in i/o performance, maybe it won't. Who knows.
hey powermac4ever, where are you? Over 20 replies and you are nowhere to be found? 
This actually looks like an Apple that I would consider buying. There is so much raw horsepower behind those dual G4's and DDR memory it would be a beast for video apps. However, like I've always said, the price is just too damn much!
This actually looks like an Apple that I would consider buying. There is so much raw horsepower behind those dual G4's and DDR memory it would be a beast for video apps. However, like I've always said, the price is just too damn much!
Let's not make this into a PC vs Mac thread, like it always turns out into. I've learned my lesson, trying to start any Mac thread inevitably comes out to become a PC vs Mac thread. Let's not compare this Mac to a PC, let's compare this Mac to previous Mac's and see how there really is a decent improvement over previous Mac's. The case looks great, it has the hardware to back it up, but unfortunately these are probably gonna cost an arm and a leg.
GTaudiophile
Lifer
- Oct 24, 2000
- 29,767
- 33
- 81
Supposedly Mac OS X.2 has HUGE speed improvements with symetric multi-processing. Developers have said you can see a 35%+ speed increase in Mac OS X.2......the number supposedly gets larger with the DP systems. The full dual line is nice for that. Especially if you think that you can get a full dual system from Apple for $1699 now. That's not a bad price for an apple, considering last month that got you a single 800MHz system with no L3 cache.
EMac got a SuperDrive. For under $1500, you get a G4 processor, firewire, a slew of ports, 17" flat CRT, speakers, and a SuperDrive. That's not too shabby, either.
Price drops on flat pannel iMacs was nice to see, starting price looks much better starting with a 12xx.
The new IBM chip looks sweet. Looks like it could be the "G5".
EMac got a SuperDrive. For under $1500, you get a G4 processor, firewire, a slew of ports, 17" flat CRT, speakers, and a SuperDrive. That's not too shabby, either.
Price drops on flat pannel iMacs was nice to see, starting price looks much better starting with a 12xx.
The new IBM chip looks sweet. Looks like it could be the "G5".
Just went and looked at it again, nothing technical, but something caught my eye...
Look at the size of that heatsink!
(Quicktime VR)
Man, thought my Alpha 8045 was big, but it's tiny by comparison. Apple's is clever, looks like there's a 120mm fan midcase pushing air through, where the fan is noise from it is going to be minimized. Just, well, HUGE with about 30 fins each the size of a small PCI card. Very slick, two CPUS sharing one sink (or so it seems) with what's almost certainly a quiet overall system.
Just shocked me so much I had to point it out
Look at the size of that heatsink!
(Quicktime VR)
Man, thought my Alpha 8045 was big, but it's tiny by comparison. Apple's is clever, looks like there's a 120mm fan midcase pushing air through, where the fan is noise from it is going to be minimized. Just, well, HUGE with about 30 fins each the size of a small PCI card. Very slick, two CPUS sharing one sink (or so it seems) with what's almost certainly a quiet overall system.
Just shocked me so much I had to point it out
Originally posted by: McCarthy
Just went and looked at it again, nothing technical, but something caught my eye...
Look at the size of that heatsink!
(Quicktime VR)
Man, thought my Alpha 8045 was big, but it's tiny by comparison. Apple's is clever, looks like there's a 120mm fan midcase pushing air through, where the fan is noise from it is going to be minimized. Just, well, HUGE with about 30 fins each the size of a small PCI card. Very slick, two CPUS sharing one sink (or so it seems) with what's almost certainly a quiet overall system.
Just shocked me so much I had to point it out
Good lord, that is a huge heat-sink... I think these new Powermac's are uber cool. I'd buy one if I had $3,000 of expendible cash available. Then again i'd probably buy something else before a PowerMac
Eug
Lifer
- Mar 11, 2000
- 24,167
- 1,812
- 126
Heh. I never thought I'd see the day.
Over on the Mac forums, everyone is complaining about these PowerMacs, whereas here on a PC forum, most people are drooling.
Anyways, I'd love to have one of these, but there's no way in hell I'd pay CAD$5000+ for a dual 1.25 GHz G4 system. It's nice, but C$5 Gs is a lot of coin. I'd be more into the iMac or eMac (with SuperDrive) myself.
By the way, it was mentioned that the OS is 3D accelerated. Actually the most significant OS X.2 acceleration comes from Quartz Extreme, which will do OpenGl acceleration of the OS. With 32 MB RAM and a fast GPU, it's supposed be VERY nice. Those us with older machines (like my iBook with 8 MB Rage 128 Mobility) will not be able to make use of Quartz Extreme. So, our 2D video will still be very nice looking, but it will remain somewhat slow.
As for DDR, it seems that Xserver does really well against other similarly spec'd desktop servers, although I wonder how much of this has to do with the OS vs. the double-pumped system bus. However, at least one review has concluded that DDR for non-server desktop applications means squat with the current G4. The 7470 G4 is supposed to address that issue, but it is currently vapourware. And I don't know if the G5 (which would have a very different design) will ever appear either.
Over on the Mac forums, everyone is complaining about these PowerMacs, whereas here on a PC forum, most people are drooling.
Anyways, I'd love to have one of these, but there's no way in hell I'd pay CAD$5000+ for a dual 1.25 GHz G4 system. It's nice, but C$5 Gs is a lot of coin. I'd be more into the iMac or eMac (with SuperDrive) myself.
By the way, it was mentioned that the OS is 3D accelerated. Actually the most significant OS X.2 acceleration comes from Quartz Extreme, which will do OpenGl acceleration of the OS. With 32 MB RAM and a fast GPU, it's supposed be VERY nice. Those us with older machines (like my iBook with 8 MB Rage 128 Mobility) will not be able to make use of Quartz Extreme. So, our 2D video will still be very nice looking, but it will remain somewhat slow.
As for DDR, it seems that Xserver does really well against other similarly spec'd desktop servers, although I wonder how much of this has to do with the OS vs. the double-pumped system bus. However, at least one review has concluded that DDR for non-server desktop applications means squat with the current G4. The 7470 G4 is supposed to address that issue, but it is currently vapourware. And I don't know if the G5 (which would have a very different design) will ever appear either.
"Anyways, I'd love to have one of these, but there's no way in hell I'd pay CAD$5000+ for a dual 1.25 GHz G4 system. It's nice, but C$5 Gs is a lot of coin."
You don't have to, they sell one for $3300 too which isn't too bad. The only obvious differences is that the $5000 comes with 2GB of RAM instead of 512MB, a TI4600 instead of Radeon 9000 Pro, and it includes a second optical drive (dvd-cdrw combo). I'm not sure how those additions account for a $1700 price hike, but for most users they wouldn't need any of those upgrades.
You don't have to, they sell one for $3300 too which isn't too bad. The only obvious differences is that the $5000 comes with 2GB of RAM instead of 512MB, a TI4600 instead of Radeon 9000 Pro, and it includes a second optical drive (dvd-cdrw combo). I'm not sure how those additions account for a $1700 price hike, but for most users they wouldn't need any of those upgrades.
5G? what are you talking about? I'd say that their $2499 ($3,899cdn) model is the best bang for the buck. That's dual. It would probably cost more than that to come up with a 2.53ghz P4 with a DVD burner from a major OEM offering a similar warranty. Their $1699 ($2,699Cdn) model isn't a bad deal either.
It's got:
Dual 1GHz PowerPC G4
256K L2 cache
& 1MB L3 cache per processor
256MB PC2700 DDR SDRAM
80GB Ultra ATA drive
SuperDrive (DVD-R/CD-RW)
ATI Radeon 9000 Pro
It's got:
Dual 1GHz PowerPC G4
256K L2 cache
& 1MB L3 cache per processor
256MB PC2700 DDR SDRAM
80GB Ultra ATA drive
SuperDrive (DVD-R/CD-RW)
ATI Radeon 9000 Pro
"It would probably cost more than that to come up with a 2.53ghz P4 with a DVD burner from a major OEM offering a similar warranty."
Dell:
P4 2.53GHz
256MB PC800 RDRAM
80GB HD
Ti4200
DVD+r/+rw drive
3 year warranty+3 year at home service
Total: $1966
It's still considerably cheaper to go with a PC. Ignoring the fact no one outside of Apple thinks a dual G4 1GHz is faster than a P4 2.53 except in the rarest of circumstances.
Dell:
P4 2.53GHz
256MB PC800 RDRAM
80GB HD
Ti4200
DVD+r/+rw drive
3 year warranty+3 year at home service
Total: $1966
It's still considerably cheaper to go with a PC. Ignoring the fact no one outside of Apple thinks a dual G4 1GHz is faster than a P4 2.53 except in the rarest of circumstances.
Ya, I think Anand at this point doesn't wanna spend so much money to buy a comp just to review it. Most of the stuff he gets is free samples from the manufacturer. Although if anyone here does have one, I'm sure you could set something up in which he gives you the benches to run.
Sounds like you need more RAM. I recommend a minimum of 2048MB to do this. SoundForge 6.0 is much much faster doing copy+paste ops too! Of course, it helps to have a fast ass SCSI RAID array working on your side!
Cheers!
L3 isn't even on-chip, what a waste. Notice how it doesn't even hit 200 FPS in Q3A 1024x768 Normal with a GF4Ti4600! A P4 or an AXP would SLAUGHTER that thing by at least 100fps.
I stand corrected on price. I don't believe that the G4 is that much faster than a single P4 2.53 BUT I also know that looking at those old G4s with PC133 nearly meeting a 2.53 in 3d rendering that duals with DDR333 should be able to beat it. They got a healthy cache boost too. I'm honestly not sure which would be faster. In day to day apps I'm sure it's the p4 but the dual G4 with all their cache and the architecture of the system seems to be designed for video and audio work. Doing, say, 20 channels at once at 24/96 you need a lot of PCI bandwidth and the architecture in this area is great. I also think that the dual G4s with all that cache should kick butt in video and audio work. I know that with this P4, soundforge is too slow. It takes 4 minutes when cutting a 3 minute clip of a 1.g gig wav file. I think the new G4s definitely have a valid market in high end workstations.
Believe me, ram isn't the issue. There is always at least 100megs of physical memory free and resampling (2 hours!) is entirely CPU based. Processor usage is sitting at 100% all the time.
Pariah, the price you provided was for a single P4 2.53. To be fair I think you'd have to compare to a dual Xeon.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter