Slashdot Mirror
Apple Updates Power Mac Line
Phreck writes "Apple has announced an upgrade to its Power Mac line today. The new Power Macs all feature dual G5 processors, 512 MB RAM, and dual-layer 16x SuperDrives. On the low end is the dual 2.0GHz with 160GB HD and ATI Radeon 9600. The mid-range includes dual 2.3GHz processors with 250GB HD and ATI Radeon 9600. The top-end system has dual 2.7GHz processors with 250GB HD and ATI Radeon 9650. The processors are not the dual-core variety as has been rumored for weeks now."
How does a dual-processor compare to a dual-core processor? How do these powermacs compare to the latest AMD?
not big but a higher clock speed than the athlon and thats somthing.
The new dual Power Mac G5 models complement the existing 1.8 GHz single processor Power Mac G5, providing customers with an affordable entry-level system priced at just $1,499 (US).
According to this the low end Power Mac is still the old 1.8 GHz single processor Power Mac, the summary indeicates that the lowest end Power Mac is 2.0 GHz dual processor. However asside from that one slip-up the Power Mac line is shaping up to be incredibly fast.
Nothing too interesting, and they're still 30% behind the claim from steve that they would be at 3GHz.... a *YEAR* ago.
I do not understand their choice of base video card. Why would they use a 9600 series when the 9800s and X series are available? From a price concious view I can see it however the top end is Nvidia.
Also, are they still stuck on PCI-X? Is Apple going to move to PCI-Express anytime soon or will they be left behind for the time being?
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
I noticed an oddity on the linked page to Apple's store: the older 1.8 GHz dual had a built-in modem, but the new ones did not. Sure enough, if you actually order one of the newer PowerMacs you find that built-in modems are now a $29 option.
I suppose nearly everyone who buys these machines is using them in a networked office or can afford broadband at home, and the not-so-recent advent of internet faxing has made the other role of the built-in modem obsolete.
Still, it's an interesting omission. Like the floppy disk, Apple's opinion now is that the POTS modem is sufficiently obsolete to remove it entirely and free up space inside the box, rather than leave it in and lose the $10 OEM or whatever it actually costs them.
It's an 8% CPU clock bump... 2.5GHz -> 2.7GHz and a new DVDR (DVDRW?). 8% is small.
:)) There are cases where dual-core will be faster than dual-chip (see the recent benchmarks of the AMD Opterons published in the last week or so). There are times when dual-chip is faster, for example: if each chip has its own memory bank and a NUMA aware OS and you put the data in the right banks.
Id take a true dual cpu machine over dual 'core' any day.
Good thing you can have both or either in the x86 world (even a true dual CPU machine where each CPU is dual core even
Not wanting dual-cores simply sounds like sour grapes.
IBM had trouble going from 180 nm fabrication to 90 nm fabrication. We announced 3 GHz by 2004, but internally we were predicting 5 GHz by this summer, based on IBM's projections.
... Slashdotters are less interested in the truth than they are in making a big stink! But surely that's not possible ...
They didn't pan out.
For the record, Steve Jobs copped to this publicly during one of his keynote addresses. WWDC 2004, I think it was. Funnily enough, though, it seems like Slashdotters like to remember the initial projection, not the retraction, which is strange because they happened in exactly the same forum attended by exactly the same group of people. It almost seems like
Apple seems to be slacking on their PowerMac product line. This is their most expensive product, supposedly high-end .. they are charging premium 2005 dollar for 2003 hardware.
.. Where is the X800??
... cluster those together and you've got more juice than the PowerMac.
- The Radeon 9600 was released in 2003
- Apple actually launched Dual 2.0Ghz G5's in 2003 (todays speedbump still includes this product)
- The case is still gigantic (2003 size), and still only sports 1 external drive bay
- Still only 3 PCI slots (2 if your using the Nvidia Video card)
- Only 512MB Ram for a workstation?
If you spend $2000 - $3000 for a workstation you should at least get specifications to match.
Actually $3000 gets you 6 Mac Minis
Apple's performance page: http://www.apple.com/powermac/performance/
What would be interesting is if someone took that page and listed the total cost of each system next to each machine type.
http://slashdot.org/~tf23/journal
i didnt say IBM cant keep up, i said they missed the ball with apple on this and let down users(me being one of them).
if your claiming AMDs design is a rushed design then you are the one that doesnt seem to know what they are talking about. AMD designed the chip from the begining with dual core in mind
my back up
"Memory requests are piped through a system request interface to a crossbar switch. The original Opteron/Athlon 64 design was designed with multiple cores in mind, he reminded the audience." FTA
relax, i didnt talk smack about your mother, i just said i was let down.
thats pretty much my best post ever. I spent like 3 hours typing it.
Certainly true. I don't keep up with what the competition is currently shipping, but from what I've heard all the microchip manufacturers found the 180-90 transition to be more of a challenge than they expected.
But you know what? That's an excuse. A totally valid excuse, but an excuse. Bottom line: We "pre-announced" 3 GHz machines, sort of. That was a mistake. We copped to it.
And yet we continue to take shit.
Meh. Nobody said life was fair.
Lot of people are complaining about the "just 200MHz" speed bump for the high end model. 8% may not be that much of a speed bump, but neither Intel or AMD has been able to pull off dramatic clock frequency jumps lately. Clock speed stagnation seem to be a general problem in the processor design industry.
As for the dual cores, obviously AMD and Intel have much more incentive. The entire PC world is built around a standard form factors: ATX motherboards and ATX cases. Intel's efforts to move to a new form factor (BTX) has been quite unsuccessful so far. It is very hard to put two "hot" processors on an ATX motherboard in an ATX case. PC market is also driven by cut throat price pressure and low margins. There is a huge price difference between the prices of single processor motherboards and dual processor motherboards. Given the stagnation in the clock frequency, the only practical way for Intel and AMD to drive the mainstream PC to higher performance is the SMP model through dual-core chips. This way, all of the rest of the system components (motherboard, chipset, case, cooling system) can stay the same.
Apple does not have this constraint. Apple has been manufacturing mainstream multiprocessor desktops for manty years. Overall, it may actually be more cost effective for Apple to ship multiprocessor system. It may be a lot cheaper for IBM to manufacture two instances of a small die like the PPC970 FX (less than 60mm2) than a larger dual core die. As for Apple, having the source of the heat distributed accross two chips makes thermal management somewhat easier than dealing with one extremely hot dual core chip.
I am sure Apple will eventually move to dual core PPC970MP chips, potentially later this year, but this will most likely be in the context of being able to offer quad systems (two dual-core processors) for higher performance.
As for the choice of the base graphics card, the 9600 or 9650 is a perfectly reasonable choice. The primary driving force behind high end graphics cards in the PC world are 3D games. PowerMac G5 is obviously not the best 3D game platform. Most people buy PowerMacs to use in professional applications. Many pro applications do not require super-duper 3D performance. For those who are planning to do serious 3D work, the 6800 Ultra upgrade is the reasonable choice. There is no reason to burden all customers with an expensive (and potentially loud) graphics card.
I'm surprised that this hasn't been brought up, but Apple is using a liquid cooling system on the 2.7Ghz model.
Details (including a cutsie animation) here.
It's much cheaper to buy the memory elsewhere, like 50% cheaper, and dead easy to install if you aren't stoned
The point is, that you shouldn't have to. You are buying a very high-end 3000$ machine, and it comes with the same size of RAM 1000$ PC's do. You are also getting a 2 year old video card.
IMHO only the bottom line power mac should come with 512MB, the middle one perhaps 768 or more and so on, and they should come with GF6800 Ultras.
Open Source Java Web Forum with LDAP authentication
They didn't raise the price to accommodate that $120 worth of hardware. Thank you Jesus! Ooh!
Well, the price of the 2Ghz version that I was looking at dropped $500. That's pretty cool.
"We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
When Microsoft comes out with security patches, let alone actually comes out with a new version of something, it's on the front page of Slashdot. Where have you been that you don't notice this.
Dell changes the computers it offers weekly, sometimes daily. I'm not talking about EACH machine, mind you, but something somewhere at Dell is always changing. In one memorable day they changed the same laptop TWICE in the same day, and I managed to order the middle one which didn't exist by the time my order actually got to our Dell rep. (They changed the CPU of the laptop, and then discontinued the model, in the same day. Frankly bizarre.)
-fred
Sign #11 of Slashdot overdose: You see the phrase 'moderate Republican' and you wonder if that would be a +1 or a -1.
"The "Radeon 9650" is the highest upgrade option .. also an old card. There are no options for current graphics cards."
... this isn't the 70's"
... things that power users who buy PowerMacs typically need.."
True, but you can sell the stock card (quite a few earlier G5 users would glady take it off your hands) and just purchase an X800, but you aren't going to get $499 for that 9650. So, while Apple doesn't offer it as an option, it certainly is still an option to be had if wanted/needed.
"So where is the dual-core??".
We'll have them, just not quite yet. My Dual 2.5 is plenty fast.
Why wouldnt you. CD to CD or DVD to DVD copying is much easier with 2 drives. Why not give the user options??
It's called Firewire/USB 2. You can add one if you wish.
"Alot of people care. I personally don't want a 4+ foot tall computer
I didn't like the size either. But, I aboslutely love the internal case design, and like the previous poster stated it sits under my desk as well and therefore have no problem with the size whatsoever.
"AMore network cards, better Audio cards, Raid controllers
Well, there's your three slots.
"You shouldn't have to buy extra RAM on a $3000 machine"
Doesn't the new dual core Dell start at $3000, and with only 512MB RAM?
"The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance - it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel Boorstin
oh wait, no games....... :P
j/k, but seriously they can't even include the 9800 Pro if not the X800? For $3K+ I want a damn good card in there.....
It makes sense totally. And it's exactly what Dell, HP et. al. do for their corporate lines of machines.
If you look at the Lattitude laptops, or the Optiplex workstations, you'll notice that they stay pretty much the same over several years as far as overall design, enabling businesses to purchase the machines over the course of a long time with variations on speed, RAM, etc and keep spare parts that work for the whole line.
My company, for example, has a bunch of C series lattitude laptops. We can swap out the bay devices around all of them from the thin and light c400s to the desktop replacement ones. Docking stations are common too.
So yeah, just good business, and a practice that is shared across most large manufacturers.
- ------- There are ten kinds of people in the world. Those who understand binary, and those who... Huh?
Huh? You're glad to be stuck with a 167 Mhz system bus and slow, limited RAM?
Well, whatever makes you happy. Personally, I love my G5.
I am a believer of momentum and curves.
But as I said originally, it's "a performance gap (real or perceived, it matters not in the marketplace)."
I really would prefer that Mac not fall to the whole flash over substance sort of thing that seems to pervade the intel side of things. 2.5G dual processor computers are much better than RDRAM or marketing-driven 3.8G P4s any day of the week.
Even disregarding that, the sad fact is that PCs far outnumber Macs in the world, and their transition to PCI-E is well underway. Once that's done, graphics card makers like ATI or nVidia will be even more reluctant to sink money into Mac graphics card development .[...] neither of those are good signs for a machine that is meant to "likely last 5+ years" as you said. A machine that is meant to last a long time needs to be designed with an eye toward future expandability, not just current needs.
I am confident that it will be at least a year or three before AGP8x starts to show its age - aren't the current games using about 10% of the available bandwidth? With the current large graphics card memories, I expect that the bulk of the bandwidth is consumed by render data, and not texture data. As for your worries over obsolesence, keep in mind that there are a raft of computers out there that still use AGP4x - they aren't going away anytime soon.
"We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
"Apple is unhappy with the PowerPC production at IBM and will be switching to Intel-compatible chips this very year. ...seriously"
Actually, it was "Yeah, seriously," which makes the sarcasm more obvious.
At this point, it seems like nobody is using Intel compatible chips except people who are tied into Windows legacy code.
GameCube: PowerPC
Playstation3: fancy multicore PowerPC
TiVo: PowerPC
XBox2 (or is it XBox360?) PowerPC
I'd find it easier to believe a rumor that Microsoft was releasing a version of Windows for PowerPC, especially in the wake of XBox2.
I agree with you. I never understood why Apple hobble the low end PowerMac. It should be PCI-X and 8GB Ram capable across the board. I would seem to me cheaper to just produce one board for all 3 Powermac systems and just set the bus speed accordingly.
You don't have to be smart to use a Mac, you just have to be smart enough to buy one