New Power Mac G4s Announced 301
benh57 writes "Apple today announced the new Power Mac G4 towers with new faces, running at dual-867MHz (US$1,699), dual-1GHz ($2,499), and dual-1.25GHz ($3,299). All are running DDR, the two higher end models at 166MHz FSB with Radeon 9000, the low end at 133 w/GF4MX." Check it out at The Apple Store, and keep your eyes peeled for an appearance on the Power Mac G4 site.
dual processors - all of them (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:dual processors - all of them (Score:2)
I've already spec'd out my dream machine. (Realistically, that is.) It comes in just over $2,000, all-inclusive. For more than twice the oomph I could have gotten yesterday.
The new exteriors are sexy, too.
Re:dual processors - all of them (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:dual processors - all of them (Score:3, Informative)
I guess they want to space out product announcements all year long, and to make them as much of a surprise as possible so as not to affect their sales volume so dramatically.
~Philly
Re:dual processors - all of them (Score:2)
D
Re:dual processors - all of them (Score:5, Informative)
from macminute.com- [macminute.com]
* the ability to have two internal optical drives via a build-to-order option that adds a second DVD/CD-RW Combo Drive ($250)
* support for four internal hard drives (two ATA/66, two ATA/100)
* support for up to 2GB of DDR RAM with four slots (266MHz in the dual-867MHz, 333MHz in the dual-1GHz and dual-1.25GHz)
* dual-867MHz and dual-1GHz feature 1MB of DDR L3 per processor, dual-1.25GHz features 2MB per processor
* processor heatsink is considerably larger than previous models, but lacks a fan
* the return of an audio-in port
* ATI Radeon 9000 Pro replaces NVIDIA's GeForce4 MX in the mid-range and high-end models, but a GeForce4 Ti card is still available for an additional $250 (or $350 on the low-end Power Mac G4)
* video cards feature ADC/DVI connectors; VGA is supported through an included adapter
* dual-1.25GHz system delivers 18.3 gigaflops, versus 15 gigaflops for the previous generation dual-1GHz (20% increase)
yes, there is a fan (Score:2)
Well, if you look at apple's site [apple.com] you can see a fan... but it looks like its up by the CD/DVD drives. What's up with that?
another, even bigger fan. (Score:2)
the giant fan conspiracy (Score:2)
yesterday they had dual 1GHz machines in the quicksilver cases. the quicksilver case has little ventilation. no front vents, small back venting ports. today they have the dual 1GHz and dual 1.25GHz with a massive 7lb heatsink, fan directly blowing across it and it basically is sitting in a windtunnel with those front and rear speedholes. i can only guess this is for the next coming speedbumps? i think this 1GHz chip is actually a revised version of yesterdays 1GHz chip, so it might run a little hotter? also the DDRam and whatnot might be a lil warmer, but i would guess this is planning for the next speedbumps till they fully redesign the case (if they do anytime soon).
7455 or 7470 PPC chips? (Score:2)
Re:the giant fan conspiracy (Score:2, Informative)
Also, with newer revisions of chips (smaller dyes/etc.), the chip should actually give off _less_ heat, not more. This is the case most of the time, but not always.
Re:yes, there is a fan (Score:2)
Re:yes, there is a fan (Score:2)
Does this mean, that when/if I get one, I can dispose of my furnace? Will I get to use AC in winter? That'd be cool.
Re:dual processors - all of them (Score:2)
The original G4/MP machines, http://manuals.info.apple.com/Apple_Support_Area/
The machines were offered in 400, 450x2, and 500x2 MHz.
I am sitting here with my G4/933, jealous of the new machines. I am really glad they have finally decided that dual optical drives could be important. While I have recently become glad that I go the Superdrive (having to brun 3.2 gigs worth of pictures for friends), I really wish I had the ability to burn CD's faster than 8x. Yes, I could go with a Firewire burner, but that seems like a lot of money when I already have a decent burner. A cheap iternal CD-RW would fit the bill perfectly.
I do not see why each option has a DVD drive, though. I would think that most people that would want dual optical drives would want either DVD-R/CD-RW or DVD/CD-RW as one drive, and CD-RW in the second. How often does one person need two DVD drives?
In the meant time, I suppose I can just wait for Jaguar (10.2) to ship. Apparently it is almost as fast as a harware upgrade on a CD.
Re:dual processors - all of them (Score:5, Informative)
That's a really good description of the 10.2 experience. Apple could have marketed it that way. I have 6C106 running on several machines, G3s and G4s, but my personal machine is a 500 MHz iBook. OS X 10.2 6C106 makes my machine (get this) more responsive, more capable, more energy-efficient, and cooler!
I mean, I could understand faster and more features; that's what OS upgrades are good for. But something in the new power management subsystem has tripled my battery life (no kidding) and seriously reduces the amount of heat that my iBook generates. I used to get uncomfortable after using my laptop for an hour or 90 minutes because the trackpad and palm-rests were hot to the touch. It was okay, though, because the battery would be almost flat by that time. But now I get three plus hours of battery and the machine is always cool to the touch. I don't know if that comes from hard drive spin-down or from processor cycling, but I love it.
Incidentally, that three-plus hours is doing stuff like surfing and email and MS Word, but it's with the AirPort card on.
Mac OS X 10.2 really is like a hardware upgrade on a CD, at least for us laptop owners.
Re:dual processors - all of them (Score:2)
Yup (Score:2)
Re:dual processors - all of them (Score:2)
Re:dual processors - all of them (Score:2)
You will see a speed-up from 10.2. It would not be as fast as if you had Quartz Extreme capable graphics, but you will still see quite a speed-up.
Re:Woah (Score:2)
That's 4:30, +/- 30 minutes. I had the screen at full brightness, using the automatic power management setting in System Prefs (which, I believe, spins down the drive and cycles the processor speed), with my AirPort card off. I haven't timed it with AirPort on, but I'm guessing that might take 60-90 minutes off the battery life. But that's totally a guess.
If you only get 3 hours out of Jaguar, I'll be disappointed.
Re:dual processors - all of them (Score:2)
I could see some people who would find it useful to have both DVD-R and DVD+R or +RW (or whatever the hell all the different versions are) on their machines in order to produce custom disks for special situations.
Re:dual processors - all of them (Score:2)
And I wasn't disappointed, and I have real-world evidence to back it up.
When Final Cut Pro 3.0 for MacOS X came out, I tried it out in the store on one of their then-new single-processor 867 systems. The 867 seemed a bit sluggish - when I was rendering, the whole world would stop and I couldn't even pull up a web browser window. But I can do this seamlessly on the dual 450, so in my eyes it's a much nicer machine to work with than the 867.
So I don't think you'd regret buying a dual processor system even if it was a small cut in nominal processor speed (933 to 867 for instance).
My main problem with my system is that my ego really wanted the dual 500 as the top of the line, but my rational self couldn't justify paying $1,000 more for it(*).
Anyway, it looks like a repeat with the current range - the dual 1.25ghz system is only about 25% faster in mhz and is 32% more expensive. Might not be so bad if the total performance was 32% better, but it's probably not since it doesn't have a memory subsystem or disks that are 32% faster. I would have certainly gone for the high-end machine if it had been $2,999, but for $3,299 it seems like they're pushing it.
What do you think? Is the
D
(*) Of course I could have ordered the 500 bare through the Apple Store online, but I called them and the whole experience was pretty bad because I did not have a credit card capable of handling the full amount, and they're pretty inflexible on payment options (no COD, not even cash).
At any rate, that doesn't apply anymore since you can no longer downgrade machines on the online Apple store, and you can no longer upgrade CPUs on the lesser systems. So you're stuck paying $800 more if you want
In the end, this means there's little point to buying an Apple machine online anymore. Might as well be pampered at an Apple Retail Store for the same prices to the penny (including sales tax).
Re:dual processors - all of them (Score:3, Informative)
It might be cheaper--no shipping charges. Also, there's an Apple store in tax-free New Hampshire [apple.com], if you can get there.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:dual processors - all of them (Score:2)
Re:dual processors - all of them (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:dual processors - all of them (Score:2)
So it's really just a way to get gullible customers like me to pay extra for the speed bump
D
All Dual Processors (Score:3, Insightful)
Sadly...my dual G4 800 may be getting grey hair...
blakespot
The Achilles Heel: Backups (Score:3, Insightful)
That leaves Retrospect as the only sensible solution for backup: a third party product. And the regular Retrospect Mac OS X client won't dump a Mac OS X Server system! Instead you have to spend $800 (!!!) for the Server backup software. That software will also dump Windows 2000 and NT workstations, whoop-de-do.
Whatever happened to UNIX as a self-hosting, self-supporting system? Gaaaah. I'm thinking hard about wiping our Mac OS X Server machine and just installing the regular Mac OS X, where at least we can afford the backup software.
Or maybe just dumping Macs entirely and going to FreeBSD on a dual-processor Xeon box. All hail Amanda! At least I could back up a box like that.
Re:The Achilles Heel: Backups (Score:2, Informative)
Every instance of Linux I've ever installed came with the traditional dump/restore, which had no troubles reading Solaris ufsdump images, and generated images that Solaris' ufsrestore had no trboule reading. That includes every version of RedHat since 3.1, a preview release of Caldera before that, and Slackware even earlier, going back to March 1994 when I did my first Linux install.
Re:The Achilles Heel: Backups (Score:2)
A couple.
Drive Restore- its a pretty good program, and while a little buggy, recovered my drive after I let Norton and another product really fsck it up. (NEVER USE NORTON!)
For backup, I started putting my files into encrypted
Re:All Dual Processors (Score:2)
I'm so ashamed.
Re:All Dual Processors (Score:2)
Aww yeah.... G3/233DT beige bay-be
At least it's got 480 MB of RAM, so things still seem surprisingly zippy.
Damn, I remember when that was next-to-top-of-the-line back ni Dec. '97.... *sigh*...
Re:All Dual Processors (Score:2)
What was the point of that purchase?
blakespot
DDR Memory, but not bus. (Score:2, Insightful)
here's your heat sink picture........ (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.apple.com/hardware/gallery/pmg4_august
yes it is huge, and notice the holes in front of case venting through to the back plate that is all speed holes. i wonder if it is these dual processors that are that hot, or if Apple is just planning for the future speed bumps? also, look in the open case... there is a fan right about in the middle of the case blowing right across (or sucking air over) the heatsinks. they moved the hard drives out of the air path and use an Xserve-like (or the actual Xserve) low profile power supply strapped up to the inside top of the case. interesting layout changes inside.
DDR, yes -- but no the CPU (Score:4, Informative)
These machines do have DDR memory and a DDR system bus but the G4's themselves are running at 133 or 167MHz (depending upon model). The system controller and memory are running full tilt though (266 or 333 depending).
blakespot
Re:DDR, yes -- but no the CPU (Score:2)
No!!!! (Score:3, Funny)
Noooooooooooo!!!!
Re:No!!!! (Score:2)
Re:No!!!! (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:No!!!! (Score:2)
Only if you're doing more than one thing at the same time.
The answer is yeah, overall the dual-proc machine should be faster than the single-proc machine, thanks to new multithreading enhancements in the Finder and the faster busses.
this is good (Score:2)
>:D
Re:Still out of range, only faster.. (Score:2)
Huh? $1700 is out of your price range?
Then just go buy an older G4. I'm certain you can find plenty of used ones on eBay or at the discounters...
Or just wait a few weeks and there will be a mess of them on apple refurbished area (I bet).
Oh yeah! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Totally OT (Score:2)
Pretty sweet, but the other big news (Score:4, Insightful)
Meaning that unless you really like the cool look of the iMac, you can save a couple of hundred dollars by getting an eMac instead, without giving anything else up (I believe they're based on the same motherboard spec) besides the cool screen. And the eMac has a pretty decent screen.
I've been leaning towards getting an iMac in the fall to replace my wife's old iMac DV 450 (we could use the DVD burner to make movies of the baby), but assuming no other drastic changes I'd be inclined to go with the eMac now instead. And Apple is steadily returning the CRT to it's place as the lower-end anchor even though LCD prices are starting to drop again (they also reduced the prices of all the other iMac configs). That's interesting.
Basically, I'm going to be watching the early fall with great interest - once these new configs are well-established there'll probably be some speedbumping of the whole line around October or so. My guess is that the iMac and eMac could hit 1 GHz, the PowerMac towers will start at 1 GHz and go to either 1.4 or maybe as high as 1.6 (Moto is supposedly sampling the 1.6 part now), and the PowerBook will probably get a speedbump to, say, 933 MHz at that point, too. They may not all be at once, but those are the next logical steps, and I'd expect to see them all before years' end (and before Christmas season, in particular).
Re:Pretty sweet, but the other big news (Score:2)
That arm is a wonderful ergonomic invention, too - I just wish they could add that to their bigger monitors.
D
Re:Pretty sweet, but the other big news (Score:2)
Re:Pretty sweet, but the other big news (Score:2)
But I will admit that's quite a bit more money.
D
Zip bay, vents... ? (Score:2)
Hopefully Apple or a third-party mfr will offer an attractive Zip bezel for this case.
Also, those massive cooling vents on the front of the machine kind of have me worried that this thing is going to sound like a wind tunnel... but that is the bitter reality of it: you can't have all the speed and none of the noise.
Otherwise this looks like a damn impressive machine, and a long-overdue overhaul to the G4 line. I'm drooling already. Nice work Apple.
Re:Zip bay, vents... ? (Score:4, Insightful)
You can still buy a USB or FireWire Zip drive and connect it externally, but now Apple doesn't dedicate a place in the case that is a waste of space for anything other than a Zip drive.
Re:Zip bay, vents... ? (Score:3, Informative)
The lack of Zip isn't the end of the world for me by any means, I'll just need to get an external Zip so that my workflow won't change.
I suppose in the grand scheme, Zip is going the way of the floppy anyway, at least in Apple's view, and if these machines are the speed demons I expect them to be I can certainly forgive Apple for making my Zip external :)
My favourite thing here is that while they have nudged the top end up about 20% in speed, the bottom and mid-range towers have gotten a massive boost.
Re:Zip bay, vents... ? (Score:2)
I have a couple Mac with built-in Zip drives. I stopped using Zip disks years ago for the reasons listed above.
17" iMac price increased $100? (Score:2)
(OH GAWD NO NOT $100 OH THAT'S BLOODY LARCENY OH THE PAIN OH MY GAWD NOOOOO.... sorry...
Re:17" iMac price increased $100? (Score:2)
I don't think so. I was at the local Apple Store this weekend drooling^W admiring the 17" iMac with Jaguar on it. I remember the price for the system being $1,999, which is the same price as they're listing on the Apple Store web site today.
But they did drop the price on the 15" non-SuperDrive models by $100.
Re:17" iMac price increased $100? (Score:2)
heat sink is HUGE (Score:2)
the blue board is f'n gorgeous, but i NEED my zip drive!!!
Re:heat sink is HUGE (Score:2)
Mac users like their computers to be furniture, not machines. They like quiet.
(and yes, I am a partial mac user)
Mixed reaction (Score:2, Interesting)
Basically, the motherboard is a thing of beauty: DDR finally comes to Mac, dual procs, gobs of cache, ATA/100 AND ATA/66, a bitchin memory controller, 4x AGP and 4 PCI slots... This is the culmination of everything Mac users have been lusting over in a mobo.
But what the $&#*@ is up with that case??
It looks like Apple is so stubbornly hanging on to the 4 year old G3 design that theyre just cramming everything in wherever it will fit- some HDs mounted sideways, some flat. PCI slots on TOP? vents everywhere, ungly front bezel that looks like it was cobbled together last minute to accomodate the two optical drives, and a heatsink the size of an air conditioner. The engineers should have stopped and asked themselves if this was a good idea after they started perforating the thing like a cheese grater just to get air flowing through it.
----------------
www.overstim.net
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Mixed reaction (Score:3, Insightful)
What were you hoping for? An iMac-style dome?
Ran to the Apple Store at Lunch (Score:2, Informative)
about the video cards... (Score:2)
(don't like LCD's: too expensive, lousy color gamut, way too expensive)
Anyone have any experience with this sort of setup on a recent G4?
Michael-
Re:about the video cards... (Score:2)
Dr. Bott [drbott.com] has this [drbott.com] "VGA Extractor for ADC" for us$35 plus S&H. I can't find any reviews of how well it works or how good the video quality is. On the other hand, I can't find any complaints.
My additional complaint is that the available video cards don't have standard TV Video out! This is becoming standard on equivalent WinTel video cards. I would rather use my Region 2 DVD drive to watch Spaced [spaced-out.org.uk] on my TV through a reliable MacOS box than my wonky WinTel box.
By the way, you're welcome for my Googling "ADC VGA adapter" ;^)
Re:about the video cards... (Score:2)
All the machines announced today come with an ADC-VGA adapter at no charge. If you acquire a DVI-VGA adapter, you can use two independent CRTs with your new machine.
Apple also sells the ADC-VGA adapter separately, but I'm too busy/lazy to look it up for you right now. You can find it at store.apple.com.
Re:about the video cards... (Score:2)
One important thing to realize is that Quartz Extreme will probably work best with the entire VRAM for it, and not split up for two monitors (it requires 32megs VRAM). Running with a 64 or 128 meg card might allow you to run two monitors with QE, but you might want to check on that.
I picked up the Radeon for about $120.
Of course, if you need all of the PCI slots for something else, you will probably want to run the two monitors off of the original video card.
Just some things to think about.
(And now I have the great option of being able to run four monitors, and have TV-out off the 7000)
Re:about the video cards... (Score:2)
benchies (Score:2)
Apple again shines... but only in their traditional strengths.
As a frame of reference... (Score:4, Interesting)
So in a year...
1.56x increase in CPU clock speed (ignoring other CPU enhancements).
2.5x increase in RAM throughput.
1.66x increase in FSB throughput.
2.94x increase in L3 throughput (possibly only 2.5x).
over a doubling in internal disk storage support (not counting SCSI options).
Looking over things on the Intel/AMD side...
AMD had about a year ago 1.53GHz chips (1800+ Athlon XP) today 1.8Ghz (2200+ Athlon XP) (FSB speeds did not changed). Intel had about a year ago 2Ghz P4s with FSB of 266MHz (133Mhz dual pumped) and today 2.53GHz P4s with FSB of 533MHz (133MHz quad pumped, AFAIK).
So in a year...
AMD...
1.18x increase in CPU clock speed.
no change in FSB (from what I see).
Intel...
1.27x increase in CPU clock speed.
2.01x increase in FSB throughput.
AMD/Intel system have been using PC2100 for a while and are now starting to use PC2700 (some are starting to use DDR400 and/or going dual channel to RAM). This is side stepping the issue of RDRAM.
Again just as a frame of reference...
[1] Apple's current specs don't add up fully on this, one states that it stops at 500MHz DDR but the throughput numbers lead me to believe it is running faster then 500MHz DDR for the top end system.
p.s. I am doing the above math with a fever of 102+ so I may have messed up someplace... just don't tell the pink elephant sitting next me.
Re:As a frame of reference... (Score:2)
This is incorrect. The quicksilvers have a 133Mhz bus.
a decent critism of the new powermacs at (Score:2, Interesting)
Worried about the "System Controller" (Score:3, Interesting)
The thing that bothers me to the core is how long it took for the UMA, UMA 1.5, and UMA 2.0 chipsets to be released from Apple on prior designs. Now, all of these functions are put into one ASIC that would have to be redesigned to upgrade any one of the functions that it covers.
For example, it integrates the IDE interface on the chip. It didn't make sense to me that ATA100 was used on this chip in the Xserve, since Maxtor was practically giving away PCI ATA133 cards back in January of this year with some of their hard drives. With this new G4, only two of those ATA100 channels are used, and they use an external chip to provide ATA66. This doesn't scream cutting edge, and the design seems crippled to protect the position of the Xserve.
Maybe Apple packed a whole lot more into this System Controller than they are using. It appears to support multiple bus speeds (133 & 167), but does it support the DDR bus of the 7470? How about the interface of the upcoming IBM chip? Does it have the capability to support HyperTransport already? How about 800 Mbps Firewire?
Who knows! If it is capable of any of these things, then Apple planned correctly to integrate everything and then drip out features as they see fit (or as tested drivers and not-yet-existant hardware are ready and feasible).
Unfortunately, I am afraid that this may not be the case. It looks like this system controller was designed to be wintel compettitive last year.
-- Len
Re:What this also means.. (Score:5, Insightful)
No, I don't think so. I think they're moving entirely to multiple processors in the towers for two reasons. First, they're more clearly distinguishing between the iMac and the tower. Yesterday, a low-end G4 seriously overlapped the top-of-the-line iMac. Today, the line is clearer.
The other thing is that Apple's proud of the degree to which Jaguar is threaded at low levels of the OS. Dual-processor machines really will be faster, even for just basic surfing and email and whatnot, than otherwise equivalent single-processor machines.
Incidentally, was anybody else slightly surprised that Apple didn't just double the whole product line, introducing "small" and "medium" dual-proc machines and a "large" quad-processor system at the $4,000 price point?
Re:What this also means.. (Score:2, Interesting)
I felt those claims were groundless, but they gave me a really good laugh. This new product release is much more like the Apple that I have come to expect and love.
Re:Omissions (Score:3, Insightful)
Who cares how fast your G4 is clocked? It won't run OS X.
Uh... is there some joke in here that I haven't gotten?
Incidentally, 10.2 is a big improvement. I've been running 6C106 (the release was 6C115) for about 10 days now. It's heaven, really peppy even on 400-500 MHz G3 systems.
Re:Omissions (Score:2, Funny)
Re:maybe I'm the only one (Score:2)
I can't believe the way you just glossed over that to talk about eject buttons on the optical drives! Your priorities are seriously out of whack.
Re:maybe I'm the only one (Score:2)
Oh, you're trolling? nevermind.
Re:maybe I'm the only one (Score:2)
Let's see...
Re:maybe I'm the only one (Score:2)
There's two USB ports on the keyboard and two on the monitor... why put any on the front of the case??
Re:maybe I'm the only one (Score:2)
What a waste that would be. (The drives to have eject buttons, if you ever need them.)
Your computer probably has a floppy drive built in. USe it much?
Haven't missed not having one...
Can you imagine what the iMac G4 would be like if they'd included a floppy drive? Sheesh.
Re:maybe I'm the only one (Score:2, Interesting)
as for USB 2... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:maybe I'm the only one (Score:2)
Sorry, but they are not speakers. Those are air vents. It still has one speaker in front, near the top.
If you look at the QuickTime VR movie of the case opening, you can see where the bottom vent holes are, there is a mesh screen inside the case close to them.
Re:A Q about DDR (Score:2, Informative)
As for why the system bus is still 133 or 167 MHz, I think it may be limitation of G4 processor - all the PDFs on Moto site say 100 or 133 MHz bus, depending on the model. More info at architecture [apple.com] page.
Re:A Q about DDR (Score:2)
There are two processors.
This means the memory subsystem can keep BOTH processors completely saturated. (the processor core could use more data... but there is NO way to get more data into the processor faster than SDR (except for L3 cache)
So essentially this is a HUGE improvement for heavy tasks which get a big improvement from bus speeds and processor count...
This is a very good thing. It'd be better to have the processors on a DDR bus... but and extra 33Mhz is definately welcome.
AltiVec is soooo powerful that an altivec algorithm generally runs at the same speed as your memory subsystem... the cpu is actually idling waiting for memory.
Increase the memory speed and you release the latent potential of the altivec unit..
In many ways its more important these days than processor speedbumps.
Re:A Q about DDR (Score:2, Informative)
There are two processors.
This means the memory subsystem can keep BOTH processors completely saturated.
I don't thik so... This is the case of the Athlon, but that's for a very strange and unusual reason. Ever wonder why dual Athlon mobos cost so much? It's because the processor bus on the Athlon is point-to-point. That means each processor has its own bus, its own set of traces on the mobo. With a dual Athlon, 333MHz memory makes sense because even though each CPU bus is only 266, there are two independent buses. Each processor can use a full 266MHz of bandwidth at the same time.
The G4 bus (to the best of my knowledge--please provide link proving me wrong) isn't point to poit, just like the P3/P4/Xeon bus isn't point to point. That means all the processors share the SAME 133MHz bus. So, no, two G4 processors can't each use 133MHz of bandwidth to the memory at the same time. G4s, like their shared processor bus cousins the P4 and Xeon, must share their processor bus across the board.
The DDR memory is a good thing to be sure, and the memory subsystem could keep both CPUs saturated, but it can't. In fact, in standard SMP mobos (i.e. non-Athlon/Alpha dual mobos) there is NO way to ever saturate both CPUs.
Hope that helped.
Re:18.3 Gigaflops! (Score:4, Insightful)
Um. I'm no expert, but to me that sounds like any cache-resident vector function, like a 5x5 convolve or something. You take a small performance hit when you have to load the next cache line, but if you're lucky your pipeline is deep enough to keep the processor units going while that fetch happens.
I mean, how else are they supposed to quote processor performance if it's not this way? If you want them to talk about performance of the whole system, taking things like memory and busses into account, they're going to have to pick a real-world application to test with. They do that already, using Photoshop as their benchmark the same way the graphics board companies are using Quake as theirs. Apple's test shows the dual 1.2 GHz machine to be about 90% faster (or almost twice as fast) as a single-processor 2.5 GHz P4. And yet Apple still gets hell for using Photoshop as their metric.
Seems like you can never satisfy everybody.
Re:18.3 Gigaflops! (Score:2, Insightful)
Sorry, but I happen to be an expert on these things, and those 18 Gflops are just a theoretical peak of perfectly combined multiply-add operations in the vector unit. As soon as you can't match an add and a multiply your performance would drop in half. More important - that's the THEORETICAL peak. You will never see anything close to it in practice. Apple's own version of FFT performs at 1-2 gflops.
And the vector unit can't even do double precision, which is kind of important in science. For a double precision FFT the performance is LESS THAN HALF that of a current Athlon CPU.
And yet Apple still gets hell for using Photoshop as their metric.
Nobody is blaming Apple for using Photoshop. The problem is that they don't provide any details. In practice, it looks like they are only testing 3 or 4 filters that are heavily Altivec-optimized, so it is not typical for Photoshop performace. When third parties [digitalvideoediting.com] perform benchmarks based on a large set of Photoshop actions, the Apple machines are
much slower than current x86 offerings.
Re:18.3 Gigaflops! (Score:2)
That digitalvideoediting.com site is even more biased than Apple. For instance, for their video performance benchmarks they use and orphaned unsupported application on the mac side-- one that isn't optimized.
A fair comparison would be to use Final Cut Pro on the Mac side and see how fast it does the comperable work.
IF you really want to compare how fast you can GET STUFF DONE, that is.
Unfortunately, most benchmarks out there are really pre-designed to give the answer the creator wants.
Apple is explicit when they say the 18Gflops is a max performance, not a typical one.
Re:The holes in the front (Score:2)
Those little holes that you're talking about are for air intake.
Re:The holes in the front (Score:5, Informative)
Did you just make this up or something?? Nowhere on Apple's page does it say it has more than one speaker. And it does say it has a "Built-in speaker"
They are air vents. It has ONE speaker. Same HK speaker as the Quicksilver, but near the top now. Why in hell would it have 5 speakers anyway? Mono at that!
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Board Colors (Score:2)
Apple doesn't have a factory they own making PCBs.
Apple contracts with others to make thier PCBs. (This is quite an industry, actually, you can take your desing file, email it to people and get a PCB back in a week.)
The colors vary from vendor to vendor, and don't really mean anything... so during prototype they'll have one color depending on which vendor made it (they probably use multiple-- one for overnight turnaround, one when they want to run a dozen and one when they want to run a couple hundred.)
The final PCBs are made by yet another company, probably in asia, which due to local supplier variation will likely produce PCBs with a different color than the US prototyping houses.
It doesn't really mean anything.
Re:Board Colors (Score:3, Funny)
Don't you know anything?!?!? Blue motherboards are faster! ;)
Re:"Faster than light" processor speed? (Score:2)
I thought "spring loaded folders? who cares?" when I heard about it.
But now that I've been using it, its quite wonderful.
Re:x86 gigaflops (Score:2)
DOUBLE PRECISION IS IRRELEVANT.
Gigaflops are SINGLE PRECISION.
You don't get to redefine the term and then accuse apple marketing of redefining the term BACK.
Re:Too little -- too late (Score:2)
Cutting edge for apple == two years ago for the PC world.
Really? Where are the PCs shipping with Firewire 2 that you complained Apple doesn't have?
And who would want USB 2 when Firewire 1 is twice as fast (in real world use)? Ok, I lied, its often ten times as fast.
Oh, and world+dog make Firewire devices, I've never seen nor heard of an external USB 2 device.
Oh, well, I'm having deja vu-- you posted this same list of whines awhile back and I pointed out the same sets of idiocy of it. Why feed the troll?
but I do LOVE the fact that you whine about the lack of firewire two and then claim the PC world had it two years ago. Heh.
Re:Too little -- too late (Score:2, Interesting)