Yowsa! Apple Power Mac G5 specs: Dual G5 2 GHz with PCI-X and 1 GHz bus - $2999 and faster than dual Xeon 3.0 GHz.

Page 8 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
24,049
1,681
126
Originally posted by: addragyn
Originally posted by: PG
Apple cheated on the benchmarks. They disabled SSE2 and Hyperthreading on some of the Dell benchmarks.

Link I found at Hardocp:

http://www.haxial.com/spls-soapbox/apple-powermac-G5/

SSE2 was not disabled. The comiler flags in the Veritest report clearly show this.

HT is disabled by Dell on those same benchmarks because it results in lower scores. link

Best discussions I've come across on this issue
HOCP discussion
Apple cheating the G5 SPEC scores (Ars) 1
Apple benchmark analysis (Ars)
Note to Apple: it's baaaa-aaaack (Ars)

Dell says: "Incorporated into Intel Xeon processors, Hyper-Threading technology can provide great benefits to server applications. Unfortunately, it can also degrade system performance in certain scenarios such as those simulated by the compute-intensive SPEC CPU2000 and Linpack benchmarks."

P.S. Can the mods do something about that errant post?
 

Cadaver

Senior member
Feb 19, 2002
344
0
0
Originally posted by: JeffreyLebowski
This still doesn't fix the problem that Macs have virtually no games to take advantage of all that power. So basically it means you can apply filters in photoshop faster as soon as adobe releases an update for photoshop(that you'll have to pay for no doubt)

I don't think Apple is aiming these machines at hard-core gamers. While I'm not an Apple appologist, I do think they make good hardware (now even better) and software for their core market (pro-graphics/video/publishing). Apple does not make good hardware for games. My Athlon XP @ 2.3GHz will run rings around my Mac for games, even with similar graphics cards.

And Adobe has stated there will be a free Photoshop 7 plug-in available for download on their website when the G5s are shipped. I'm sure Opteron/Athlon 64 users will get the same deal when those machines become available (whenever WinXP for the 64-bit AMDs is finished).

If I was going to run Photoshop, Final Cut Pro and Mathematica all day long, I'd be first in line for a G5. I don't. However, I do know people who do, and believe me their mouths are watering.
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
24,049
1,681
126
$2999. It's in the thread title.

Dual 2.0 GHz PowerPC G5
1GHz frontside bus
512 KB L2 cache/processor
512 MB dual channel DDR400 (PC3200)
160 GB Serial ATA hard drive
4X SuperDrive DVD-R/W, CD-RW
Three PCI-X Slots (2x100 MHz, 1x133 MHz)
ATI Radeon 9600 Pro (AGP 8X Pro) with 64MB DDR video memory
(Video comes with ADC and DVI, and a DVI to VGA adapter)
Gigabit Ethernet
Firewire 800
2xFirewire 400
3xUSB 2.0
2xUSB 1.1 (on keyboard)
Digital optical input/output
9 fans at 35 dB
56K internal modem
802.11g Airport antenna (but 802.11g card is extra)
BlueTooth ready (but BlueTooth card is extra)
Aluminum case with front ports
USB keyboard and mouse
Mac OS X and a bunch of software
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
24,049
1,681
126
Pixar is gearing up for a G5 Mac OS X release of its RenderMan software. See here.

Currently Pixar's RenderMan is only supported by Linux, Windows, and Irix, which is interesting since Jobs is Pixar's CEO.
 

Go3iverson

Senior member
Apr 16, 2000
273
0
0
Personally, I'm out here at the WWDC and have been having an awesome time! I'm one of the lucky ones that Apple gave a scholarship to and I'm really taking advantage of every seminar, every info session, every everything I can get into!

From what I've read back as a reply from Apple, the adjustments were made to improve fairness and that the competition actually scored lower with HT and the likes enabled. I can see where the outrage comes from, it would seem that the reverse is correct, but after doing some research, it appears that they actually did this in the hopes of fairness.

I think credability comes into play. It was stated that there's no way Mathematica comes out and states that this machine is so drastically faster when it isn't. They have too much PC money to lose and reputation, but speaker after speaker came out and showed off how their software, or the most popular PC couterpart on the PC, was faster on the Mac rather than the PC. Again, for everyone that says apple has a zero marketshare, consider that lying would alienate them from their 100% PC share of the market, and these were some pretty big vendors. In fact, wasn't it Adobe that stated that their software was faster on the PC a few months back?

As for the machine, I got to use one! This was cool. I wandered off into the testing lab and, though it was specifically for having Apple reps help you with your code, since there was an open seat, they let me sit down and try out the G5 for a bit. I didn't get to go crazy on it because, well, I didn't wanna look like some dumb kid that's just playing with the machine, but then I noticed the guy next to me writing Email, so I didn't feel so bad! ;)

It's true. The machine flies. I used the new Apple industry standard "bounce" test to judge start times and the like. When I got to the machine, it was open physically so I could be shown the insides. The cooling system is a thing of beauty and the machine was very quiet, especially compared to G4. The rep closed it up, plugged it in, and it took about 13 seconds or so, give or take, for the entire machine and OS to be up and ready to go. Oh, this was the dual 2.0GHz machine. Now, there wasn't a whole ton in the way of software on this machine, of course, it being set up for coding, but all of Apple's software was, including iMovie, which is a beefy app. I launched every single app on this machine and none of them took more than 1 bounce. In fact, they all took less than 1. The machine just felt so incredibly slick and powerful, it was really something to see.

I'm not here to cause a whole war on this thread, just report my experiences from the conference. It's been a great time out here and Apple deserves a great deal of credit for having a program that will pay for students to come and learn out here in this environment.

The most contraversial thing that I will say in this post is that every computer user should hope that Apple survives and continues innovating. A lof of the things that we love about our Macs and our PCs were brought to us by Apple. From colored cases, to standard USB keyboards/mice, to FireWire and now FireWire2, Apple has continued to take chances. Now that Apple has a 1GHz bus and a chip that really rivals the PC world, maybe we will all experience a new age in computing. The more competition out there means better products for us all and more alternatives.

I'm off to my next class, so I'll see y'all later! :)
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
24,049
1,681
126
Sweet, Go3iverson! I wonder if you could sneak an Xbench download onto it when they weren't looking. ;)
 

xype

Member
Apr 20, 2002
60
0
0
Originally posted by: Eug
Pixar is gearing up for a G5 Mac OS X release of its RenderMan software. See here.

Currently Pixar's RenderMan is only supported by Linux, Windows, and Irix, which is interesting since Jobs is Pixar's CEO.

Actually it only shows that Jobs can make a distinction between both of his jobs. On a G4 RenderMan would really suck, so it was clever to not port it over. On a G5 RenderMan will probably fly and since the G5 machines will likely find their way in the one or other 3D company, porting it makes sense. I really wonder, though, if Steve-o will try to _sell_ the G5 to pixar folks or whether he'll let them decide on their own.
 

Go3iverson

Senior member
Apr 16, 2000
273
0
0
I'd try to get that XBench on there, but there's this little issue of I don't like being banned from conferences! ;)

Anyway, one thing I noticed is, the G5 appears to pick up steam. It has a energy saving capability that scales the dual 2.0 down to a single 1.3 while doing things like word processing and email checking. When the CPU load increases, it throttles the CPU's back up to the dual 2.0 in a millasecond, so you don't feel any hit or lose any processing time. Pretty slick. It makes the machine use up a fraction of the power and keeps it very cool.
 

xype

Member
Apr 20, 2002
60
0
0
The Go3iverson post has been rigged, it's not using HT and SSE2 just to make Apple look better. Clearly if you look at posts done by others you'll see that they were typed faster and did cost half as much. :p
 

dakels

Platinum Member
Nov 20, 2002
2,809
2
0
Great post Go3iverson!

I totally agree with your summary and feel the same way. Even if apple's machines didnt fully run up to Spec... err so to speak with other x86 systems, their continued innovations push the whole PC (as in personal computing) market to higher levels of expectations. I believe companies like Apple, and people like Linus Torvald are a huge assets to the computer industry as a whole. Whether directly or indirectly, it is often the non conformist innovators who help set new standards that benefit all users, no matter what platform they run.

We can sit here and nitpick these details all day and compare them to this and that, but most important fact IMO is that Apple has just made a humongous leap for it's feild of expertise. They didn't just jump to the next level, they went 2 levels beyond. They created an remarkably better platform for which their customer base and future customer base can work from. This fact in and of itself should be commended.
 

Go3iverson

Senior member
Apr 16, 2000
273
0
0
I agree with what your saying Dakels....and not just because you liked my post! ;)

What's being lost on people is the fact that they went to a 1GHz bus. That's outrageous. Think of what they've done in comparison to where they were. Their new top o' line machine was at 167MHz....most of their products were at 100MHz and 133MHz with people who had the slightly older iBooks trudging along at 66MHz as the bus. Compare that to 1GHz. That's phenominal innovation. Not only did they get to 1GHz, but I believe they are the first to do so. They've taken great steps forward to help secure their place in computing and that should be commended. When every expert wrote them off as dead, they came back again.

This truly was a make or break for Apple. If they didn't pull out some huge hardware improvements and some new software to run on it, they may as well have folded. Waiting until July's NY Expo would have even been too long to wait.

If Apple wasn't here, even with their small marketshare, we all lose. Apple sets the trends that PC manufacturers follow. It's easy to see that.

Had some great sessions today on new Panther technologies that are absolutely amazing. I mean, its stuff that seems almost impossible at times, or some of it seems so simple, its almost genius...you almost wonder why no one thought of it before. They are really polishing this new OS to be a blockbuster, note even that they're not announcing a release date for GM, just before the end of the year. They're getting it right the first time with this chip and that's a great thing to see. A company truly trying to make a better product. The Q&A sessions here are off the charts. When they don't have a feature that you mention that they see great value in, they make note of it even. True, that note may wind up in the garbage, but in past releases I've really seen the user influence come through with new technologies that we've asked for.

.....and it's only Wednesday! ;)
 

Go3iverson

Senior member
Apr 16, 2000
273
0
0
OH and BTW, we selected the whole Applications folder (which includes utilities) on a G5 running 10.2.7 and hit command-O.......


Yeah, the machine didn't even stutter......it's a beast folks!
 

GL

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
4,547
0
0
The folks that are already upset at the benchmarks aren't going to like this if it holds true. Hannibal at Ars was in discussion with a GCC developer and the conclusion they've come to is that GCC's PowerPC 970 optimization file was borked. That is, GCC isn't optimally compiling code for the G5. In fact, it might be making things worse. I believe he's trying to find out whether the broken optimization file was used by Veritest for its SPEC tests. If it was, there may just be a bit more oomph in that G5. Hannibal speculates this accounts for the discrepency between IBM's SPEC estimates and the SPEC scores unveiled at WWDC.
 

addragyn

Golden Member
Sep 21, 2000
1,198
0
0
GL it's my understanding that GCC 3.3.4 is where the really big optimizations for PPC will appear.
 

LethalWolfe

Diamond Member
Apr 14, 2001
3,679
0
0
Originally posted by: JeffreyLebowski
This still doesn't fix the problem that Macs have virtually no games to take advantage of all that power. So basically it means you can apply filters in photoshop faster as soon as adobe releases an update for photoshop(that you'll have to pay for no doubt)


I agree. I mean, what's the point of having a fast machine to run PS, AE, FCP and other professional programs I use to make an income, when I can't even use it as a hardcore gaming rig. Where are my priorities...
rolleye.gif



Lethal
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
24,049
1,681
126
By the way, I think the test underestimates the potential of both the Intel chips AND the Apple/IBM chips. Why? See below.

The IBM SPEC numbers for the 1.8 GHz are:

SPECint2000 - 937
SPECfp2000 - 1051

Apple/VeriTest's numbers for the 2.0 GHz are:
SPECint2000 - 800
SPECfp2000 - 840
 

MistaTastyCakes

Golden Member
Oct 11, 2001
1,607
0
0
$3000 computer.. can I play my $50 game on it? No? Well, crap. :p

Seriously though, it does look pretty interesting. I'm not going to be making the Switch(tm) anytime soon, but it's nice to see some competition. That's never a bad thing.
 

Go3iverson

Senior member
Apr 16, 2000
273
0
0
I'm so tempted to pick up one of these Dual G5's. Guess I have some time to think about it, being that they don't ship for another month or two. After developer discount, I could swipe up a Dual 2.0GHz with 250GB drive, 512 RAM, etc with a 17" display for $3400.00.......that includes AppleCare....gotta get my AppleCare!

This is a tough call! Especially with Apple's 6 months same as cash.....
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
24,049
1,681
126
Stolen from a MacNN thread:

Ok, I've scoured the net, trying to get the info needed to compare the optimizations dell used in their own benchmarks and the ones apple used in theirs.

Here's what I've discovered:

Compiler options used by dell (based on their CINT2000 Result file at spec.org): -Qipo -QxW -O3 +FDO breakdown for each option (as best I understand it - based off this information.):

ipo - interprocedural optimization across multiple files and link objects
xW - optimize code to run exclusively on Pentium IV processors (uses SSE2)
O3 - aggressive optimization (prefetching, loop transformation, etc.) (same function as in gcc)
FDO -(??) Feedback Directed Optimization - apparently further optimizes code during runtime.

I think Apple's compile time options are a little more widely known and understood than these, but just to be through: (info from the VeriTest report)

Dell Precision 650 flags: -O3 -march=pentium4 -mfpmath=sse
Dell Dimension 8300 flags: -O3 -march=pentium4 -mfpmath=sse
Apple G5 flags: -fast -lstmalloc

The flags used for the Dell systems are somewhat analogous to the ones used above (SSE2 enabled, P4 specific optimizations, etc. for the Apple flags:

fast - enables G5 specific optimizations (implies -O3)
lstmalloc - links to faster malloc libraries

I'm not sure why faster malloc libraries were used in the G5, it may have something to do with a discrepancy in OS X and x86-Linux memory management and/or efficiency. The most important thing, I believe, is that the library is single threaded, which may increase the benchmark speed.

In the end I'd guess that the various optimizations evened out across the two platforms (PPC and IA-32), though I'm not 100% sure. The customized malloc libs may be a sticking point, but I don't know how much of an effect on the result they'd have.

 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
24,049
1,681
126
Interesting picture of a dual G5 dock: Link

Apple's Final Cut Pro
Pixar's RenderMan
Luxology's demo
Adobe Photoshop 7
Wolfram Research's Mathematica 5.

And Apple is pouring on the PR with statements from these companies.

Pixar: "The G5 is the fastest desktop in the world."
Luxology: "It took 15 minutes to recompile our software for the new chip."
Adobe: "Twice as fast as Apple's previous Macs."
Wolfram Research: "Faster than Unix workstations costing twice as much"
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
24,049
1,681
126
So here is a post that made its way onto one of the Mac sites. Take with a grain of salt since it hasn't yet been verified.


Hey everyone, I've been at Apple's developer conference and had a chance to install and try out After Effects on a new G5. I ran the Night Flight file that has come to be the standard for AE benchmarking. Since I didn't want to sit there and watch it render for hours, I ran just the first 10 interlaced frames from the project's pre-set render queue...

http://www.aefreemart.com/tutorials/3DinAE/nightflight/nightflight.html

Here are my results for this test on the three computers I have available to me:

1 x 1.0 GHz G4 PowerBook 17" - ~30 minutes (3 min/frame)
2 x 2.66 GHz Pentium Xeon from Boxx - 11 min, 39 sec (1.2 min/frame)
2 x 2.0 GHz PowerMac G5 - 6 min, 1 sec (0.6 min/frame)

I ran the Xeon test on a couple different identical machines to make sure mine wasn't just running slowly, but got identical results. Of course my Mac bias is well-documented, but I'm sure many people here can vouch for me as an honest person. If the results had gone the other way, I'd just keep my mouth shut and let someone else break the bad news.

Other observations about this test that may ultimately work in the Mac's favor:

1) The machine was not running 64-bit Panther, but only a tweaked version of 32-bit Jaguar. Likewise, AE is obviously not yet compiled to take advantage of the G5 chip in any way. Both or these situations will automatically be rectified in the future.

2) Night Flight is very CPU-intensive, but not very disk I/O intensive. I think the 1 GHz system bus and other details on the G5 will provide greater gains for typical projects that rely more heavily on I/O."