Canadian Mac Forums at ehMac banner
1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
24 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I'm caught between wanting a Dual G5 but only being able to afford a G5 1.8.
Now that Panther is coming out, my only dilemma is dual processors.
The 750.00 difference is more than I can spend for the Dual, does anyone think the next revision will have a dual for around 3500?
Otherwise, I think I'll have to accept that a dual isn't in the cards for me.
thanks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
454 Posts
Im thinking we will see a speed bump along with some new stuff at Macworld in January.

Hopefully once they bump the speed we will see some openbox dual 2ghz going for something closer to 3500.

=)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
273 Posts
I have a sneaky feeling that the next round of G5's in January will see all 3 models equipped with DAUL G5's. Why? You ask. I think that there are always problems getting quantities of more powerful processors whenever the computer line up being offered is new. Apple has dealt with this in the past by simply offering DUAL processor machines to placate consumers so that we feel that it's a good deal. I just bought my single 1.6 GHz G5 at the end of September. If Apple makes all machines DUAL in January and the entry level machine is the same price ($2700.00 CAN) as what I just payed, then consumers are going to buy a lot of machines thinking, wow, what a great deal, two processors for the price of what one was 5 months ago. This would be my reaction as well and I might consider trading up at that time if it does happen that way. I personally would rather see larger MHz gains than DUAL G5's. I say this because in the past Apple has offered DUAL G4's in many machines with smaller gains in MHz. About 80% of the applications I run on my powermac's are single processor savvy only and I want MORE POWER! The motherboard in my single G5 1.6 GHz MAC has all the connections there for the second processor, but it's sadly vacant. So I know how easy it would be for Apple to simply decide to go dual all across the board for the new models in January, and make MHz increases very minor like only 200 MHz or less. Apple also makes more money from the professional users who have to keep trading up when they require more power. Final Cut Pro's real time effects for example. You need a minimum DUAL G4 MDD to be able to barely use this feature for 2 video layers simultaneously. You really need the DUAL G4 1.42 to use this feature with ease and power. I know, I've tested all the MDD models with real time effects feature. What it comes down to is availabilty of the IBM G5 chips. If IBM hasn't made vast improvements in the MHz than Apple deals with it by offering pretty much the same chips from September 2003 models and putting two in every new MAC. Keeping us happy. And it does make me happy for applications that UTILIZE dual processors but my audio apps are crying out for more SPEEEED!!

Here is the recent history of the powermac line up. You be the judge.

January 2001
G4 466
DUAL 533 G4's
G4 667
G4 733

July 2001
G4 733
G4 867
DUAL 800 G4's

January 2002
G4 800
G4 933
DUAL 1 Ghz

August 2002
DUAL 867 G4's
DUAL 1.0 Ghz G4's
DUAL 1.25 Ghz G4's

January 2003
G4 1.0 Ghz
DUAL 1.25 Ghz G4's
DUAL 1.42 Ghz G4's

August 2003
Single G5 1.6 Ghz
Single G5 1.8 Ghz
DUAL G5 2.0 Ghz

My prediction for January 2004 [I feel like Karnak, the envelope please!]
DUAL G5 1.8 Ghz
DUAL G5 2.0 Ghz
DUAL G5 2.25 Ghz

In answer to the question posed. Will there be a DUAL G5 2.0 GHz powermac for 3500.00 soon. I believe the answer is YES! And they will be $2700.00. But you will have wait until January 2004 to get them new. But if you need one today you will have to look on ebay and pray for a good deal because the duty and shipping from outside of Canada will kill you on anything you buy outside of our boarders.

I know this post is going to make for a lot of debate amongst ehmac members. Come on guys what do you think of my hypothosis?
--------------------------------------------------
"Welcome to the real world." - Morpheus in The Matrix


[ October 09, 2003, 02:29 PM: Message edited by: Timothy J ]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
I like your long, thought out reply!

What I'm wondering, looking at the recent history- why did it take from jan 2001 - Aug 2002 to see duals for every G4? (I imagine since duals were new and OsX is very dual aware, that a similar waiting period will not re-occur.)

I looked at the photoshop MP aware test on bare feats and the results are enough to make me pause in ordering a 1.8, since any MP computer easily beats it.
So I guess I'm wondering how much faster will some applications and OSX go using MP?
And is there going to be a large increase of MP aware functions in programs, or are they utilizing MPs as much now as they will in the next few years?
Is there a tarot card reader in the house?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,247 Posts
I think Apple expanded the dual line, reluctantly, when it became obvious that Motorla wouldn't be able to scale the G4 speed fast enough. I could be wrong, but I don't see single CPU G5's disappearing from the lineup in the near future. I would agree, however, that dual-CPU Macs are here to stay.

My totally uneducated guess is that we will see Apple getting the introductory pricing down to below $2500 and some decent CPU speed improvements in early February. Perhaps keeping the ear to the ground with IBM and the chip's fab yields could shed some insight (haven't heard much lately, but that could be a concession to Apple). However, that might be when we see other models upgraded instead; it's hard to say.

We might (or might not) see the entry-level machine move to the better MB at the next revision; if they can change that and remain at ~US$ 1500, they will.

Considering the prognisis for the US dollar (not good), we might even see near $2K Canadian for the base model; price points are determined based on the US market, and Apple wants that unit to be near or below $US 1500.00.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
273 Posts
One thing that is starting to get very over used (and misleading) out there in the land of testing is the PHOTOSHOP is this fast on these machines test. I know how the bar graphs at the Bare Feats web site look. If I didn't know anything about computers I would assume top-o-the line DUAL machines with the shortest times to do the tasks were the best MAC's to buy. BUT! and I say this BUT! Besides Final Cut Pro and the Adobe family of applications and maybe now Logic Audio because Apple recently it took over. I don't know of any other applications that are specifically written to take advantage of the 2nd processor. When I run my audio apps like REASON, REAKTOR or CUBASE on DUAL G4 machines it only uses 50% of each processor. So that's like having only one processor anyway. So I go back to my original plea...MORE horsepower please! I want G5 chips running at blasing fast speeds so I can push my music to the limit. I'm tired of all my friends WINTEL boxes being twice as powerful as any G4 MAC I've ever owned. The 1.6 G5 is a great improvement but the PENTIUM 4's at 3 Ghz still kick the powermac's ass, for all the audio applications. Not everyone sits at home using ONLY photoshop all day long. And when are MAC users EVER going to have a fraction, just a fraction of the choices for graphics cards like PC users. Some of the reason the top-o-the line DUAL G4's score so well in QUAKE and UNREAL games is because they have the best graphics card you can get from Apple. IE the ATI 9600 or 9800. I would like to be able to order a better graphics (higher RAM & more pixels per cycle) card that isn't 3 times more expensive than the same model card for a PC. I'm not the biggest gamer in the world but I do know that a great graphics card will help speed your computer along nomatter what it's doing. DUAL processors are not for everyone. If the programers who write for MAC applications were to all start writing all the code with two processors in mind, then my point here is moot.

--------------------------------------------------
"Life moves pretty fast, if you don't stop and look around once in a while it'll pass you by." - Ferris Bueller
 

·
Mac Guru
Joined
·
14,627 Posts
And when are MAC users EVER going to have a fraction, just a fraction of the choices for graphics cards like PC users. Some of the reason the top-o-the line DUAL G4's score so well in QUAKE and UNREAL games is because they have the best graphics card you can get from Apple. IE the ATI 9600 or 9800. I would like to be able to order a better graphics (higher RAM & more pixels per cycle) card that isn't 3 times more expensive than the same model card for a PC.
I don't think that's even worth complaing over. Yes, the PC has far, far more graphics cards than the Mac has, but 3/4 of their options are cheap, crap or completely no-name brand video cards - so who cares? They have more options, but they also have far more junk options as well. Apple only has some of the best graphics cards in their Macs.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
30,991 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
273 Posts
quote:
I don't think that's even worth complaing over. Yes, the PC has far, far more graphics cards than the Mac has, but 3/4 of their options are cheap, crap or completely no-name brand video cards - so who cares? They have more options, but they also have far more junk options as well. Apple only has some of the best graphics cards in their Macs.
--------------------------------------------------
I realise that a large percentage of the graphics cards may be **** or no name brands for PC's. But having choice of more than 2 manufacturers (ATI & nVidia) may make for some competition on our platform. Monopolies make for complacency. The nVidia cards shipping in the new G5's are not even the middle ground cards from nVidia they are the entry level cards. Competition between more companies usually benifits the consumer. I think I would be smart enough to know how to NOT buy a piece of crap graphics card for my MAC. I would only change the graphics card my MAC came with if it was a step up in quality. Call me a dreamer but I want more control of my options.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
232 Posts
Far more likely 1.8 will be entry

2.X single in the middle

2.X dual on top.

733 no cache 933 2 meg cache DP 1 gHz
Assuming the 733,933,and 1ghz refer to frontside bus speed.

The frontside bus speed on the 970's are all half of the processor speed, so they would scale up with the newer processors. So it Apple put out a 3ghz G5 they would have a 1.5ghz bus. You would never have a 2+ghz processor with a sub-1ghz bus.

Thats why the
1.6 has a 800mhz bus
1.8 has a 900mhz
2.0 has a 1ghz bus.

I seriously doubt Apple would stray from this principle in the future, it is one of the key reasons why th G5's are so fast.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
232 Posts
I realise that a large percentage of the graphics cards may be **** or no name brands for PC's. But having choice of more than 2 manufacturers (ATI & nVidia) may make for some competition on our platform.
If you want a decent video card for the consumer to say run games ATI and nVidia are pretty much the only real players, even in the PC world. You can run other cards but the drivers will probably bite. Besides on a mac Quartz Extreme will definately not be supported by a crappy video card manufacturer.

If you want some serious power that there are rumors that 3DLabs might support Macs in the future.

http://www.appleinsider.com/news.php?id=210
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,247 Posts
" ... But having choice of more than 2 manufacturers (ATI & nVidia) may make for some competition on our platform. ..."

What is important to keep in mind here, is that while ATI manufactures video cards, nVidia doesn't.

All nVidia cards are made by 3rd party providers, including the Apple ones. So, what PC users really have is a bunch of companies making pretty much the same thing, with various features implemented/not implemented.

There are a bunch of Apple-compatible cards out there, it's just that most of 'em are high-end cards consumers don't hear about (and are no good for gaming).
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Top