Slashdot Mirror
Updated Power Macs at Apple.com
Gropo writes "Same old 'scary cyclops' quicksilver face. Up to 1.42 Ghz, FireWire 800, 802.11g and entry-level pricing has dropped. " With the SuperDrive and one of those massive LCD screens, you have a one highly desirable chunk of hardware.
Just keep an eye on the power supply of that eMachine. They have to cut corners somewhere. My kids had one, and thats the part that failed.
Other than that, it seemed to be OK.
My 800 MHz iMac seems much faster than my P4 2GHz. Maybe it's just me, but MHz isn't everything.
My 500mHz iBook seems about the same speed as my old PII-166. I'm not talking about number crunching or actual app speed, I just mean the SUBJECTIVE experience... screen redraws, windows opens, etc.
I really love it, but fast IT'S NOT.
To ensure perfect aim, shoot first and call whatever you hit the target
I am suprised no one noticed that the ATI Radeon 9700 Pro is now a BTO option.
Still listed as "coming soon" though.
I tried every decent and legal way I could think of to resolve the issue w/the business before I rented the chicken suit
Having yet to start repaying my $3500 Apple loan for my dual 1.25GHz machine, I couldn't believe the $1500 price drop. But check the specs -- no SuperDrive, less RAM, smaller L3 cache, smaller hard drive. Still, though.
big price drop on the LCDs, but the towers are upgraded. being the first or among the first machines to ship with Firewire800, 802.11g ready/equipped. it also says blutooth-enabled and bluetooth ready somewhere else, i don't know what the means exactley but .... hrmm... it seems in the stoe the top of the line BTO is Bluetooth included and the others are "ready". i dont know if it's the same little usb nub or some slick integration, but overall the upgrades and price drops are nice.
If I go to Dell, I can configure a system shipped (no 800 firewire) for $1640 that is comparable to the base model.
Yell & scream & rant & rave... it's no use... you need a shaaaave ~ Bugs Bunny
Bluetooth enabled means it comes with it.
Bluetooth ready means it comes with it for $50. It's an internal module of some kind, same as the 802.11g one.
You say that like it's something new. Power Macs have always come without a monitor. Which is fine, because any third-party monitor will work, and lots of people like to save money by using an old monitor, or buying a non-Apple-branded monitor for their new G4.
Of course, now that the 17" display is down to $700, that becomes less of a point.
I write in my journal
What do you mean, lower your prices? This is already (I believe) $100 cheaper than the low end machine they were selling YESTERDAY, and it's faster!
.edu channel, this was what I had priced out on their low end model:
:)
To compare: as of yesterday, in the
$1643.00
867Mhz PowerPC G4
256MG SDRAM
40GB Ultra ATA drive
Combo drive
ATI Radeon 9000 Pro
64 MB DDR video memory
(+ 17" Mitsubishi monitor and Apple Pro speakers, and - internal modem)
On that model there was no FireWire 800, no Bluetooth, no Airport 800...
Right now, I'm looking at a low end machine with a faster CPU (1 Ghz), 20 gig more drive space, GeForce4 MX (better?) video, and faster ram, plus all the bells, whistles, and ports listed above, for $8 more than yesterday. If they want to give me all of that for an extra eight bucks, I'm not going to complain
Come to the University of Mars! Classes starting soon!
They save money by bundling them with a boatload of adware, spyware, trialware, demoware, advertisements, ISP offers, etc. About 7 gigs on a 15 gig HDD was full of ad-ware bloat. A quick format and reinstall and you're all set.
,HP, or Dells') 200 watt PSU to replace the 145 watts they ship with. 20 bucks apiece.
As for the PSU, get a replacement (it's flex atx 5" wide, 4" deep - usually sold as 'for eMachines
The PSUs in there arent really 'cheap' per se, but if you want to add HDDs and whatnot, it's worth 20 bucks. At least that's what I did with the P3-era machines I bought.
My only hassles with eMachines was trying to retrofit a real drive cage into one of 'em so I could mount more HDDs. But thats generally par for the course with boxed brands. I also had trouble getting the goofy HSP modem in the little riser slot to work since they only provided ME drivers. I didnt need or use it anyways, I like my external USRobotics, so no biggie.
The mobo is micro-atx form factor, with a fairly low profile CPU cooler, I just finished moving all of an eMachine into a slick looking little VCR-style case with a cheap TV out card. Makes a nifty media player.
You get a lot of bang for your buck in those cheap boxes. Usually cheaper than the components would cost seperately. And like I said, the cheapness is because of kickbacks from all the spyware bloat thats preinstalled, so install your own OS of choice over it.
I dont think it's fair that only the editors get to slashvertise stuff. Buy an eMachine.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
Except that according to various recent tests, it isn't. At least not in the Apple vs Wintel case.
PowerPC was invented by IBM, and may I remind you that Apple's going to purchase a consumer model of the IBM Power4 (from IBM) fairly soon.
Latewire
Troll and Flamebait? My first one - I guess I should be proud.
Anyway - I did a rough pricing on a system for around the same amount of money.
I could get -
Dragon Full-Tower Case 75.00
Enermax EG651P-VE 550 Watt Power Supply 130.00
Intel® Pentium® 4 Processor 2.8GHz 533MHz FSB w/ 512KB Cache 361.00
Hi-Performance Heatsink/CPU Cooling Fan 22.00
ASUS P4T533-C Intel 850E478-pin Pentium 4 Motherboard 157.00
Standard 1.44MB Floppy Drive 5.00
1GB RDRAM PC-1066 512.00
200GB Western Digital UltraATA 7200RPM 8MB Cache 285.00
16/48x IDE DVD-ROM Drive w/Software MPEG-2 Decoder 40.00
Lite-On 48x12x48x CD-RW - IDE - Black 61.00
Hercules® 3D Prophet 9700 Pro 128MB AGP Dual Monitor 366.00
KoolMaxx Video Cooling System 22.00
Sound Blaster® Audigy 1394 - 5.1 59.00
Intel® PRO/1000 MT Gigabit Desktop Adapter 37.00
if I wanted - (and I used some of the better stuff out there) for around the same amount as this apple.
I'm sorry a funny comment got modded into hell by folks that like Macs, but seriously - for the same amount of money - pc's still are the better value.
_ _ _ Go for the eyes Boo! GO FOR THE EYES!
You need a device called a DVIator (good name, eh?) http://www.drbott.com/prod/DVIator.html
It's a little expensive, but that's because it has to do all of the power stuff that you get over the ADC.
Also P4's can't run in SMP mode
Depends on just how much hacking you're willing to do, but it's a pretty safe assumption that most sane people wouldn't be willing to draw new traces...
a Dual G4 1.42GHz is roughly equal to a single P4 4.26GHz
No it's not. SMP does not give you 2x the horsepower. If you get 80-90% of the horsepower you're doing well... and even then you only get the horses if you're actually doing something that take advantage of SMP. Which most users don't. Ever.
Frankly, most of the time your CPU is sitting idle waiting on you to do something. Or waiting on the I/O bus if you are doing something. SMP doesn't mystically solve this problem... usually it just makes it worse.
Are there applications for SMP? Sure. No question. But even most geeks who lust after SMP won't ever actually utilize it to the fullest.
currently the fastest P4 is 3.06GHz
Yes, and it can simulate two CPUs in one, which according to your SMP math makes it 6.12 GHz. Of course, even in the latest linux development kernels nobody's seeing a speed improvement of more than 30-40% in optimal conditions. In most scenarios it adds nothing, or actually slows things down due to I/O contention (which, admittedly, is more severe in a hyperthreading situation than a true SMP one).
Frankly, for the price of the Dual G4 1.42 GHz I can buy more than 2 P4 3.06 GHz boxes, which is a much better solution for most cases.
Apple updates Power Macs, releases 20 inch display:
I hope so... I don't want my next Mac to end up looking like this...
Still, a bit expensive for the casual user. For a small business, this baby rules.
In terms of upgrading an existing machine, I still have my first generation G3 desktop machine that I bought in 1997. I have upgraded this machine several times over the years to keep it semi-up to date. I put in a 400 MHz G3 for about $200 (probably 4 years ago now), tons of extra RAM, a bigger HD, and added a FireWire/USB card. This machine runs OS X (although the GUI is much slower than on my 500 MHz G4 Titanium PB) and is still perfectly functional. I have friends who own PC's from that same era and they have long since had to abandon them (or change them to linux boxes, e.g.). Games are another matter - I was a bigger gamer in the past, but now play games like Civilization 3 and Sims that run fine on my PB. Twitchy first-person shooters (Unreal, etc.) really do need the power and graphics cards that you can't get in a laptop. If you are big into those types of games, laptops are NOT the way to go. On the other hand, the desktops are very upgradeable, especially now that Apple has AGP, uses IDE drives, etc.
As far as PB's breaking down, that would cost a bundle (as would any laptop), but you can get a 3-year extended warranty (covers EVERYTHING) for about $300. I thought it was worth it but will also be happy if I never need it (haven't had to invoke it yet).
Hope this helps.
I think the Quartz Extreme technology is only supported on NVIDIA cards.
Quartz extreme is supported on any AGP video card for mac.
I even got it to run on my sister's Beige G3 with a PCI ATI Radeon 7000 using PCI Extreme
Latewire
It's the older graphics system that's most likely killing your performance. If you're using OS X, some hardware acceleration is really needed to get good performance out of Quartz. My 700 MHz iBook is far more responsive than my wife's 1.2 GHz HP laptop; she says her next machine will be a Mac.
As the original poster pointed out, MHz isn't everything... both your experience and mine confirm this, even though we come out giving the nod to different systems.
I still have an old "Beige" G3 tower at home. 266MHz overclocked to 300MHz, 256 MB RAM, came with a 4 GB (Yes "four") HD and I dropped a 60GB in it recently. I also added USB and Firewire PCI cards and upgraded the video card ( free from a friend ). It does everything I want it too, but is a little slow with the latest games. My point is they are very upgradable machines and they definitely have staying power.
I also work in a graphic design shop where we still have many Blue and White G3's running Photoshop and Quark all day long. They hold their own against the G4's and are not seen as a burden to work on.
Overall, I think Mac's tend to hold their value for quite awhile. If your not looking for the highest Quake frame rates on your block you should have a machine that will last for years.
----------------------------------
I'd rather not take sides until I hear the monkey's version - PHB
Mac vs. PC III: Mac Slaughtered Again
v iews/cw_macvspciii2.htm
Apple Power Mac G4 Dual 1.25GHz
VS
Dell Precision Workstation 350 Intel P4 3.06 GHz
http://www.digitalvideoediting.com/2002/11_nov/re
If by "equivalent" you mean "50% slower" than you are correct.
The newer G4's (with the 4 intake holes) have a firmware revision availble which will vary the fan speed by load. So the fan noise is reduced, but it's still annoying sometimes.
Actually, Apple has been offering a $400 rebate on the 17 inch for quite some time (well, you had to buy a CPU, too).
It sure looks to me like Apple's gotten ahead of its problems of last summer getting its hands on affordable LCDs. Apple announced that its future models would be LCD-based back in January 2002, but shortages forced them to back up a few steps. This pricing and the new range of laptop screens indicates that they're over the hump, I think.
...Now these microinstructions execute at a rate directly proportional to the overall frequency of the machine
This is *vastly* oversimplified - there are complexities to processor design & trade-offs to be made that make clock speed almost useless for the sake of comparisons between chips with different architectures - even if they DO perform the same number of instructions per cycle (which often isn't the case).
there can be, and usually are, parrallel microrocessing units inside of each processor, so this can increase the operational speed
And this is one of the differences between PowerPC and Intel architectures - in general PowerPC has chosen to sacrifice clock cycle speed to do more instructions per cycle while Intel has chosen to sacrifice the number of instructions to get more speed. In other words Intel usually chooses to do one thing at a time really fast while PowerPC chooses to do several things at once more slowly. Right there you have a *partial* explanation for the MHz (now GHz) gap.
Fact: Intel chips have been extended to include all the same vector processing functionality included in most PowerPC chips.
I'm no expert on this but most reviews & articles from fairly non-partisan sites have concluded that Altivec is superior to the Intel alternative and that this shows up in real world scenarios.
The final upshot is that *in general* the PowerPC does more per cycle than an Intel chip. How much more (or even if it's more at all) depends on what exactly it's doing. But the fact remains: for most applications, especially multimedia applications that use Altivec, the PowerPC outperforms Intel chips of the same clock speed.
BUT intel is so far ahead in speed that even taking the "MHz Myth" into account Intel is still far ahead of the PowerPC in overall performance. Apple has got to get it's old AIM partners to step up or it will have to abandon the PowerPC for Intel (or intel compatible)
I'm no expert on this but most reviews & articles from fairly non-partisan sites have concluded that Altivec is superior to the Intel alternative and that this shows up in real world scenarios.
I've actually programmed both SSE and Altivec, and you're right in one way: Altivec is far easier to program, provides a much cleaner vector instruction set, and does more per cycle.
The only problem is that it doesn't do TWICE as much per cycle in practice (save a couple of photoshop filters carefully selected by Apple), so the raw clock of x86 still makes Intel the winner in most cases.
Intel have also worked hard on getting their compilers to automatically generate SSE/SSE2 code, which really improves performance on _all_ programs. There is no such thing for the PowerPC - if you want altivec you will have to handcode it. (And no, all the new altivec support in gcc is limited to the compiler supporting the altivec C language wrapper instructions - it will not generate them automatically).
Motorola probably did the right thing FOR THEIR PRIMARY MARKET. Most PPC chips are doing signal processing in built-in systems where it is perfectly OK to handcode a filter for better performance/lower power consumption. The problem is that most general PC programs benefit more from Intel's approach which is more automatic.
Finally - Apple/Motorola has a bigger problem: it makes sense to invest time in handcoding SSE/SSE2 for a CPU with 95% of the market, but usually not for one with 5% of the market.
"My 4 THz Intel Pentium IIIVIXXX is father then your 16 KHz G101"
For those of you who have not read ALL of the CPU articles at ArsTechnica. Go there now and do so. Before posting any of your inane babble about clock speed and processor power.
It IS true that Motorola has fallen behind Intel - sort of.
There are other advantages to hardware other then Intel based systems.
Since this is an Apple thread I'll focus there - One of the most note worthy (My opinion) Is apple's System controller.
Go READ the articles at ArsTechnica!
Rather than re-writing I'll simply cut & paste.
Fast system controller: The system controller, first introduced in Apple?s highly-regarded Xserve line, coordinates and transfers data and instructions among the processor(s), PCI bus, memory, graphics and I/O buses of the Power Mac G4. Controller speeds in the new Power Mac G4 configurations run as high as 167MHz.The PCI bus is what really impressed me.
Direct PCI bus: In another example of superior architecture, the Power Mac G4 optimizes PCI performance by connecting the PCI bus directly to the system controller. In a typical PC architecture, PCI devices connect to the I/O controller through a bridge, a bottleneck in the data path where all connected PCI devices are slowed down to avoid overloading the system controller. Going through this bridge constrains PCI throughput to 133Mbps (the bus speed on Pentium 4 systems), even with otherwise fast PCI devices. This slowdown of data to and from PCI devices results in greater overall system latency. The Power Mac G4, on the other hand, features a direct 266-MBps bus to the PCI slots to guarantee high throughput and low congestion ? in effect, lowering latency. The Power Mac G4 also supports write combining, which allows write instructions to be grouped into one large instruction, further increasing data throughput.
Then Apple oficially slams PC architecture.
On the Power Mac G4, FireWire, Gigabit Ethernet and even the ATA/100 bus are built into the system and integrated directly into the system controller. (The ATA/66 bus has its own controller.) This dedicated connection reduces PCI congestion and guarantees low latency, resulting in optimal FireWire, Ethernet and hard drive performance. And as a side benefit, it also keeps the computer?s PCI slots free for your specialized audio and video cards instead of using them to provide basic technologies.
I got this info here.
Go READ the articles at ArsTechnica!
Apple is not the end all - be all of systems. Two of the greated systems are made by DEC & H/P. The UltraSparc kicks the crap out of anything Motorola & Intel have to offer.
And let's not forget the Alpha. The Pentium - Pentium III architectures were based on technology stolen from DEC. Technology that Intel is still paying for today.
It basically falls down to system preference. Mac users DO NOT CARE if you can build a PC for $400. Mac users DO NOT CARE if only a few of the best selling game titles are ported to the system.
Having more game titles available is a Good Thing - naturally -but I find myself being... PRODUCTIVE instead of having my time eaten away by games - Linux users also what I'm talking about - unless they've downloaded BZFlag or Crack Attack.
Go READ the articles at ArsTechnica!
___________________________
I'm not a geek, but I play one on TV.
Unfortunately those fans spin at constant RPM and don't respond to firmware fixes that others have remarked on -- the firmware fix is just for the mid-case variable-speed CPU fan.
Can't you see that everyone is buying station wagons?
If you want it so bad, buy a USB2 card. Jaguar has built-in support for it, Apple just doesn't include it in their machines.
Most if not all of the USB2 peripherals can be connected to a USB1 bus as well (but will just run at USB1 speeds), so there's pretty much no reason why you couldn't buy them if you REALLY wanted to.
~Philly
>> Someone here said that CISC does more per clock cycle than RISC, but that because of the inherant simplicity, RISC could run at higher rates
You are talking shit through your ass. A CISC instruction doesn't do more per cycle, it may do more per instruction, but takes much more cycles, so the clock rate correlates very little with the real performance. In other words, CISC instructions may take anything from 1 to 40 instructions to finish, which makes them difficult to optimize, while most of the RISC instructions take 1 or 2 cycles, which is why the clock rate can't be arbitrarily increased like the P4.
The old Intel x86 instruction set is truly a piece of shit in terms of computer architecture, and actually not used very much by modern software. But for backward compatability and marketing reasons, Intel keeps patching it with new instructions and never bothers to remove the legacy, which is why the P4 gets so complicated and consume so much electricity.
>> But, all that being said, my 1GHz AMD, which may be running at any one time Photoshop, Outlook, Visual Studio, Kazaa, DC++, a web server, and a whole host of other crazy things in the background.. well, my system seems much faster than any Mac I've used.
What the hell are you talking about? Have you ever used a Mac and do you realize that Mac OS X is a real server grade OS with true Unix power and stability as well as Cocoa ellegence. My 700 MHz iBook can do more things than you mentioned simultaneously and runs weeks and months without Windows style crashes. What's more, a Mac can be put to sleep and wakes up instantly, so you never have to power down the system for months. In normal usage, my iBook definitely feels more usable than the 16" 2.6 GHz Sony Vaio I was playing the other day, and it's virtually silent with a single battery lasting smore than 4 hours, while my brother-in-law's Sony lasts 2 hours with 2 batteries.
Explain to me again how a school buying more expensive hardware that isn't generally used in the real world is going to help my kid get a better education?
1) Macs remain viable computers much longer than Windows PCs. Hell, wouldn't surprise me if there were STILL a few schools with labs of Apple IIs that are plenty of machine for what they're used for.
2) Macs have been historically easier to maintain. Those schools that save so much money on their Dell hardware don't like to talk about the one or two dedicated Windows support guys they had to unexpectedly hire to keep the labs running. Mac labs were usually maintained by the teachers in their free time with little effort. Once OS X becomes prevalent in schools this should be even easier with the use of NetBooting and/or the utilities that automate re-imaging of the drive.
3) "Isn't used in the real world" is a bullshit argument. You shouldn't teach a child to use Windows, you should teach him/her how to use a GUI so they can apply the concepts to whatever they happen upon by the time they get to the real world. You shouldn't teach a child how to use Word, you should teach him/her how to use a word processing application so they can apply the concepts to whatever they happen upon by the time they get to the real world. Trade schools don't teach future plumbers only how to install Delta fixtures. They don't teach future carpenters only how to build stuff with Weyerhauser wood. Likewise they shouldn't teach children only how to use Windows and Windows applications.
~Philly
No it isn't. How many multi-threaded programs have you written? It is nowhere near as simple as just creating a thread and setting it loose in a program that wasn't designed to be multi-threaded.
I don't know about the grandparent but I have written a Cocoa app with threading and it was pretty simple. Not every multithreaded app is a shedload of worker threads all modifying the same database - sometimes the task to split up is fairly trivial.
In my case I was applying filters to an image to convert it to Sinclair ZX Spectrum format. To take advantage of dual CPU's I simply split the image in to two parts when applying those filters and have a simple lock to make sure that the job is truly done before moving on to the next filter.
--
Reverse outsourcing: it's the future
Or if you don't want to build a plywood case, you can always go for one of these things:
a te gory&category=Silencer
http://www.crywolfstore.com/cms/?action=BrowseC
"The CoolMac Silencer uses heat pipe and air flow technologies to provide silent cooling while eliminating the need for external fans. The CoolMac Silencer reduces the noise of a Power Mac G4 from 65 dB to 37 dB. For comparative purposes, an empty 70 square-foot office with a computer, heat or air conditioning, and lights on typically emits 40 dB. What's more, the cabinet is airtight to prevent dust and dirt from contaminating the components."
There are several different models, including some that have built-in racks for Xserves (but you could put any rackable item in there).
They work really well. We have an Xserve in one and I didn't realize it was on until I sat on it and felt the vibration. =P
Here's a spec'd out Dell so as you can compare:
$2676 gets you:
3.06 GHz P4 w/HT
512MB RAM
60GB HD
DVD-R/CD-RW Combo Drive
19" monitor
Radeon 9700 TX graphics card
Turtle Beach Santa Cruz DSP Sound Card
Harmon Kardon speakers
a couple apps
Windwos XP Pro
56K Modem
Ethernet
802.11b adapter
3 years support
The main advantage over the Mac being the addition of a monitor and 2 more years of support. I would imagine that Dual 1.42GHz G4s are roughly equivalent to a 3.06GHz P4 w/HT.
HP and eMachines are aproximately equals is crapiness. Especially at the low end. I have two low end HPs. They are evil little things. I also have a custom built PC and a mac wintunnel. They are far superior in quality (keyboard, mouse, screen, vid card case powersupply are all better). I will grant you that the processor speeds are were you would expect, however.
Unfortunately, it is not as level a playing field as it should be. GCC is not as well optimized for PPC as it is for Intel. Under Mac OS, you get better optimization from CodeWarrior.
CISC only does more per cycle if you assume that it takes one cycle to complete every instruction. This is not the case. Intel chips take CISC code, break it down into their own microcode, which is then processed. The clock speed that Intel reports is the clock speed of the chip that processes this microcode. The smaller the instructions can be divided up, the faster they can run the chip at. Clock speed is not necessarily a basis for comparing two different chips, even when of the same architecture, especially when Intel is involved.
Apple had specifications for a CPU bus that would meet its needs, but Motorola couldn't justify the expense of making a special version of the G5 in relatively small numbers, for one customer (who, face it, would just keep asking for special versions of any good future PowerPC model - not just a one time cost).
So Motorola kept its G5 design until the embedded market is ready for it, and Apple took its bus elsewhere.
IBM is developing the PowerPC 970 for its own use - specifically in "blade" servers, which need a lower power, cheaper and cooler CPU, while keeping up performance, which is exactly the same needs that Apple has. I don't know if Apple is going to get its bus in the 970, but it would be a simpler design than the POWER4 which actually uses two busses, one in and one out, allowing the CPU to keep sending addresses out even before it gets the data back in.
Either bus would be very fast. Motorola will ba happy it doesn't have to make custom CPUs, IBM will be happy it can sell more 970s, and Apple will be pissed at Motorola but will at least be back in the performance race again so it'll end up happy. Finally.
You know, the 1.25GHz macs were never overclocked. Take off the heat sink and see "7455A 1250" on the chips. This rumor started to spread after Motorola didn't update their G4 specs to include 1250MHz availability. The likely explanation is that these parts are only available to Apple.
Marko Karppinen