[hmurchison2001]

Dual 2.5GHz
1GB RAM
200GB or 250GB hard drive
Radeon 9600XT
$2799


Bwahahahhahaahahah.

Come on people. Wake up. You can't even buy a decent Opteron dual system for $2800. Yet Apple somehow is supposed to??

PCI versus PCI-X- Means squat to someone who will not add in a high performance card. All you idiots talking about "crippled" macs don't know what the hell you're talking about. If PCI= crippled then 80% of the computers out here are crippled.

Wanting features just because they look good in a bulleted list is silly. PCI-X has real world benefits to some people but others won't see a difference at all based on what they're doing.

However EVERYONE benefits from having another processor in the computer with OSX. How could you complain about a feature that will have a minimal effect(PCI-X) for many users and at the same time try to diminish the very thing that will positively affect the experience all user(second processors)

I think the only "lame" thing here is reading the illogical rantings of feebleminded computer users who can't think beyond what's in their own skulls.

[Eug Wanker]

The new dual 1.8 GHz G5 is not lame. It's quite a strong design/value.

Well, two things should have been different IMO.

1) 512 MB instead of 256 stock.
2) It would have been nice to have 8 memory slots, although I can understand Apple's reasoning for 4 memory slots here.

PCI-X - who really cares? It's basically useless to this market segment.

Actually, I'll go against the grain here and say I would have liked to see a single 1.8 as well, albeit at something like $1599. The iMac G5 will be a nice substitute, but it ain't as flexible as a tower.

[thunderous_funker]

Originally posted by hmurchison2001:
Dual 2.5GHz
1GB RAM
200GB or 250GB hard drive
Radeon 9600XT
$2799


Bwahahahhahaahahah.

Come on people. Wake up. You can't even buy a decent Opteron dual system for $2800. Yet Apple somehow is supposed to??

PCI versus PCI-X- Means squat to someone who will not add in a high performance card. All you idiots talking about "crippled" macs don't know what the hell you're talking about. If PCI= crippled then 80% of the computers out here are crippled.

Wanting features just because they look good in a bulleted list is silly. PCI-X has real world benefits to some people but others won't see a difference at all based on what they're doing.

However EVERYONE benefits from having another processor in the computer with OSX. How could you complain about a feature that will have a minimal effect(PCI-X) for many users and at the same time try to diminish the very thing that will positively affect the experience all user(second processors)

I think the only "lame" thing here is reading the illogical rantings of feebleminded computer users who can't think beyond what's in their own skulls.

Speak on, brother/sister!!

[TheDigitalMan]

Well I'll have to agree with the Placid Casual. Apple needs to think longer term than they have been lately. Although I must say coming up with the 64 bit processor was a pretty good move.

I have the Dual 800 G4 at home and I've never been completely happy with it. But it does O.K. When I upgrade from 9.2 to OS 10.3 it actually improved greatly in performance!

I waited until the Dual 2.0 G5s were available before purchasing a replacement machine at work. I must say I love my G5 at work! I upgraded the ram to 1 Gig and threw in another 250 GIG harddrive. It came ready and able to support two monitors. I have NEVER had the G5 crash on me. Which is a first for me. I have had it shut down programs on me however. But oh well.

[BannanaFiend]

This was mentioned once before, but I think it needs to be emphasized.

The old 1.6's main enfeeblement was the fact that it only had one memory channel. The new dual 1.8 has two memory channels, for double the memory performance.

If not for this change, the new 1.8DP would be rather crappy, but as it stands it is pretty nice.

I will also agree that as a "prosumer," i couldn't care less about pci-x. The only use I have for pci slots is nic cards, which work just fine on ol' fashioned pci. Also, I don't foresee the 4 gigs of ram being a limitation during the lifetime of a machine purchased today.

Things may be different for the professional, but for me, this 1.8DP is a great machine. I may end up purchasing one in a couple months.

Edit: I agree that the default 256 megs of ram is a shame. It ought to be 512. If/when I get this machine, I will be making a custom order of it.

[Link]

Originally posted by TheDigitalMan:
I have the Dual 800 G4 at home and I've never been completely happy with it. But it does O.K. When I upgrade from 9.2 to OS 10.3 it actually improved greatly in performance!

You ran a dualie on OS 9?! That explains everything.

[Link]

Originally posted by Eug Wanker:
The new dual 1.8 GHz G5 is not lame. It's quite a strong design/value.

Well, two things should have been different IMO.

1) 512 MB instead of 256 stock.
2) It would have been nice to have 8 memory slots, although I can understand Apple's reasoning for 4 memory slots here.

PCI-X - who really cares? It's basically useless to this market segment.

I will agree with this.. surprisingly. PCI-X is practically useless (PCI express on the other hand will be, but not yet)

[Eug Wanker]

Originally posted by BannanaFiend:
This was mentioned once before, but I think it needs to be emphasized.

The old 1.6's main enfeeblement was the fact that it only had one memory channel. The new dual 1.8 has two memory channels, for double the memory performance.

The old 1.6 had dual channel RAM, but it was DDR333 (667 MHz).

[BannanaFiend]

Originally posted by Eug Wanker:
The old 1.6 had dual channel RAM, but it was DDR333 (667 MHz).

Hmm... perhaps i'm misremebering. In any case, I stick to my statement about the ram speed being the main problem with the 1.6.

[Lateralus]

Originally posted by Eug Wanker:
The old 1.6 had dual channel RAM, but it was DDR333 (667 MHz).

I thought the 4 banks of memory shared a single bus with the CPU?

[Simon]

Originally posted by PowerMacMan:
I thought the 4 banks of memory shared a single bus with the CPU?

That's my memory as well.

Other than that I have to say I'm with Eug on this one.

The Dual 1.8GHz is a rather good value. Compare it to a dual Athlon 64 or Opteron. And for most people it will be perfectly fine, even with no PCI-X and only 4 DIMM banks. I think it's really a great thing the PowerMac line went all-dual. It's the PowerMac after all. In that sense it's ridiculous to include the 5200 GPU. But at least the upgrade to the 9600 XT is cheap - for most this should be a no-brainer.

However, and I'll say it again, this does not mean Apple was right in leaving a huge gap between the $999 eMac and the $1999 PowerMac. They have to fill this huge space with a G5 iMac and/or a headless "eMac mini". If they don't they're going to lose a lot of sales, because people will just wait (or even switch)...

Yeah Schiller, wake up and smell the coffee.

[Link]

Originally posted by The Placid Casual:
'Pro' market appeal with 256MB RAM and 5200fx?

It just seems to be very cynical marketing on Apple's behalf.

This is what I'm talking about!

[no1allowed]

Originally posted by Simon:
That's my memory as well.

Other than that I have to say I'm with Eug on this one.

The Dual 1.8GHz is a rather good value. Compare it to a dual Athlon 64 or Opteron. And for most people it will be perfectly fine, even with no PCI-X and only 4 DIMM banks. I think it's really a great thing the PowerMac line went all-dual. It's the PowerMac after all. In that sense it's ridiculous to include the 5200 GPU. But at least the upgrade to the 9600 XT is cheap - for most this should be a no-brainer.

However, and I'll say it again, this does not mean Apple was right in leaving a huge gap between the $999 eMac and the $1999 PowerMac. They have to fill this huge space with a G5 iMac and/or a headless "eMac mini". If they don't they're going to lose a lot of sales, because people will just wait (or even switch)...

Yeah Schiller, wake up and smell the coffee.

They don't make dual Athlon 64s, at least not yet anyways. Not even the vaunted Althon 64 FX is SMP aware. Only Operons have special SMP versions. Also I don't quite see how a headless eMac would be between a regular eMac and PowerMac. Wouldn't it be cheaper? You meant a headless iMac right?

But seriously I agree the 1.8 duals (June 2004) are good values. From my point of view, it looks like all they did was swap the single 1.6 for a dual 1.8 - nothing else is different right? From my viewpoint, (are you listening PowerLogix, Sonnet, GigaDesigns) it looks like a good third party upgrade path (as he busily cleans the area from around he side door on his G5 ).

[Markovich]

Originally posted by no1allowed:
They don't make dual Athlon 64s, at least not yet anyways. Not even the vaunted Althon 64 FX is SMP aware. Only Operons have special SMP versions. Also I don't quite see how a headless eMac would be between a regular eMac and PowerMac. Wouldn't it be cheaper? You meant a headless iMac right?

But seriously I agree the 1.8 duals (June 2004) are good values. From my point of view, it looks like all they did was swap the single 1.6 for a dual 1.8 - nothing else is different right? From my viewpoint, (are you listening PowerLogix, Sonnet, GigaDesigns) it looks like a good third party upgrade path (as he busily cleans the area from around he side door on his G5 ).

I might be missing something obvious here, but the 1.8 Dual G5 now has a few things over the the previous 1.6 G5, beyond just the additional and speed bumped processor. It also has a faster Superdrive and uses the faster DDR400 RAM. The presence of PCI slots instead of PCI-X slots is pretty meaningless since most PCI-X cards are for high end work. The dual 1.8 seems to be a good value considering what was the low end it now replaces.Im going to order one in a week or so. I get a government discount so I can put the extra $$ towards a Gig of RAM and the ATI 9600XT video card.

Mark
Still using my 10 year old PowerMac 7500 with a 233MHZ G3 card!

[Simon]

Originally posted by no1allowed:
They don't make dual Athlon 64s, at least not yet anyways. Not even the vaunted Althon 64 FX is SMP aware. Only Operons have special SMP versions.

Yeah, my bad. I screwed up the order. What I meant to say was "dual Opterons or Athlon 64". And of course I forgot to mention the dual Xeon. Check prices of dual Xeon machines and compare. No chance.

Basically, Intel/AMD don't have a chip that can really beat the G5 in speed, and at the same time they don't have workstation/server setups (as in dual 64bit, etc.) that can compete price-wise with the PowerMac G5. Along with Panther that puts Apple at a pretty nice spot.

And for those people that just look at numbers: Show me a x86 PC with a 1.25GHz frontside bus.

Originally posted by no1allowed:
Also I don't quite see how a headless eMac would be between a regular eMac and PowerMac. Wouldn't it be cheaper? You meant a headless iMac right?

Feature-wise an headless eMac would be between the regular eMac (which is a low-budget home and edu machine) and a PowerMac (professional machine). Basically it could be an inexpensive replacement for the discontinued MDD PowerMacs in the sense that it gives people a cheap G4 in a case that allows certain expandability (exchangeable AGP graphics card, 5.25" bay allowing choice of optical drive, no built-in screen, etc.). At the same time it wouldn't steal PowerMac sales because it can't compete with the G5's performance and it's in a whole different price range.

I talk about a headless eMac because I believe it should get a G4 (in order for the price to be competitive enough) while I think the iMac should go G5 (in order to offer enough features for its price).

The iMac G5 would be an entirely different market. It's rather difficult to describe actually. It's not ultra-cheap, but it's also not extremely professional. It should deliver decent performance (1.6GHz G5, SD, Radeon 9600 with 64MB) at a price between the eMac and the PowerMac. Basically it caters to people who are not on a tight budget but want a complete and clean setup with style. I think in the Apple world there are many customers for that kind of device, but it has to offer some bang for the buck. The current iMac is not competitive.

Again, all speculation aside, the dual 1.8GHz G5 is a good PowerMac, but it can't fill the gap all the way down to the eMac. Apple needs something in between.

[eddiecatflap]

..the water cooling thing has completely put me off the 2.5

..i've heard of loads of long term problems with the stuff

..i'm going with a dual 2.0 and faster videocard

[sgt. largo]

New 1.8Ghz DP
256MB 4GB Max Ram /80GB HD/Superdrive/Nvidia 5200/3 PCI/1 year warranty $1999

Old 1.8GHz DP
512MB 8GB Max Ram/160GB HD/Superdrive/Nvidia 5200/3 PCI-X/1 year warranty $1799 - Apple Store Refurb

The old one has better specs, a cheaper price and the SAME warranty. That's why I just bought the refurb model.

[Siskomac]

I am about to order a dual 1.8 GHz for my first Mac, too! Maybe I should pay the extra $500 for the PCI-X and other improvements?

[Maflynn]

Originally posted by Siskomac:


I am about to order a dual 1.8 GHz for my first Mac, too! Maybe I should pay the extra $500 for the PCI-X and other improvements?

You don't seem that excited. Unless you have a specific need for PCI-X or you know that you will be hitting the wall with the maximum ram, then go for the 1.8. Its an awesome machine.

[3.1416]

Originally posted by Siskomac:
Maybe I should pay the extra $500 for the PCI-X and other improvements?

I don't think it's worth it. On the other hand, I'd consider the refurbished Rev A dual 1.8 for $1800. Better specs (8 RAM slots and PCI-X), cheaper, same warranty. Mine arrived last week, and it's indistinguishable from new.

[*Mhz]

Originally posted by Eug Wanker:
The old 1.6 had dual channel RAM, but it was DDR333 (667 MHz).

This is a very common mistake. It has DDR333 memory sticks but their actual operating frequency is 166MHz not 667. DDR memory transfers data on rising and falling edge of the clock signal unlike SDRAM which uses only one edge of it. The marking DDR appeared when manufacturers wanted a difference in memory types. There was 133MHz SDRAM and DDR memory with the same operating frequency and to avoid confusion they started to name DDR modules after theri effective frequency.

[Markovich]

Originally posted by 3.1416:
I don't think it's worth it. On the other hand, I'd consider the refurbished Rev A dual 1.8 for $1800. Better specs (8 RAM slots and PCI-X), cheaper, same warranty. Mine arrived last week, and it's indistinguishable from new.

The new Dual 1.8 has a better( faster) Superdrive.

[Zoom]

Originally posted by sgt. largo:
New 1.8Ghz DP
256MB 4GB Max Ram /80GB HD/Superdrive/Nvidia 5200/3 PCI/1 year warranty $1999

Old 1.8GHz DP
512MB 8GB Max Ram/160GB HD/Superdrive/Nvidia 5200/3 PCI-X/1 year warranty $1799 - Apple Store Refurb

The old one has better specs, a cheaper price and the SAME warranty. That's why I just bought the refurb model.

Here's my problem. First, I don't want PCI-X. Second, I want to upgrade the video card, with you can't do on a refurb (or can you?). Third, with educational discount, I can get the new one for $1799.

This does look ridiculous, though. These damn machines are overpriced.

[Turias]

Originally posted by Zoom:
Here's my problem. First, I don't want PCI-X. Second, I want to upgrade the video card, with you can't do on a refurb (or can you?). Third, with educational discount, I can get the new one for $1799.

This does look ridiculous, though. These damn machines are overpriced.

Why wouldn't you be able to upgrade the video card? You can't get Apple to do it for you, but there's nothing stopping you from buying the machine, yanking out the old card, and installing a new one.

[Zoom]

Originally posted by Turias:
Why wouldn't you be able to upgrade the video card? You can't get Apple to do it for you, but there's nothing stopping you from buying the machine, yanking out the old card, and installing a new one.

Sure, but it costs more money, unless I can eBay the original card for the same diff.

[bradleykavin]

my dad just bought me the new dual g5 1.8...i upgraded the memory and bought new hard drives for it..it now "with xbench and cinenebch being testers" runs faster than a dual 2.5 g5 with 1 gig of memory and a 250 gig hard drive..whats lame about that?..pci-x ...will you really notice the difference between regular pci and pci-x..do u even have a g5?

[The Placid Casual]

Originally posted by bradleykavin:
my dad just bought me the new dual g5 1.8...i upgraded the memory and bought new hard drives for it..it now "with xbench and cinenebch being testers" runs faster than a dual 2.5 g5 with 1 gig of memory and a 250 gig hard drive..whats lame about that?..pci-x ...will you really notice the difference between regular pci and pci-x..do u even have a g5?

Wow, a post risen from the dead.

But, alas, you missed the point.

The 'new' dual 1.8 G5 is inferior to the older Version 1 model. *That* was the point of view from which I posted and outlined clearly throughout my postings in this thread....

And yes, I have a G5 thank you very much.

[booboo]

I'm about to buy a1.8 DP but i resent 2 things:

� 2 x 128 MB RAM sticks! Where is Apple getting these from? Is apple paying extra to get this practically discontinued RAM size? it wouldn't be so tragic if there were a full 8 slots . . . but there ain't so it's crap.

� 80 GB HD? Can you even buy new SATA drives this small (new old stock excepted):? Not so according to a main London dealer. Plus the extra Apple wants for a larger drive is actually the cost of the larger drive, not the difference between their prices . . .

[Maflynn]

Well, nobody is twisting your arm to purchase the 1.8.
I understand why apple did it - product line differentiation, but I don't agree with there actual implementation. Search the web, perhaps you still can find a rev a. 1.8, otherwise move up to the 2.0. Your going to need to spend money bumping up the ram and hard drive anyways.

Mike

[fiesta cat]

Originally posted by booboo:
I'm about to buy a1.8 DP but i resent 2 things:

� 2 x 128 MB RAM sticks! Where is Apple getting these from? Is apple paying extra to get this practically discontinued RAM size? it wouldn't be so tragic if there were a full 8 slots . . . but there ain't so it's crap.

� 80 GB HD? Can you even buy new SATA drives this small (new old stock excepted):? Not so according to a main London dealer. Plus the extra Apple wants for a larger drive is actually the cost of the larger drive, not the difference between their prices . . .

I have a 1.8DP (new one). I don't mind the two things you mention, for two reasons

I don't mind discarding 2x128MB sticks for 4x512MB or 2x512+2x1024MB sticks. If it was 2x256MB sticks, I would be hesitant to pull it and throw it in a drawer.

80G is just find for an OS drive. In addition to the stock 80G, I bought and use 160GB and 200GB SATA drives (had to add a card, plus one of the drives is mounted vertically in front of the CPU fans) and prefer to use those drives for swap/work.

[QuadG5Man]

The new Dual 1.8 is a good configuration from Apple, and is appreciated by me.

Here's what's good:

1) Low end Dual G5.

Those who understand the Dual G5 (and even dual G4) computing experience with os 10.3 know why dual G5 processors are where it's at. Period. Dual CPU systems provide a fluid, fast computing experience.

2) Low ram is good

3) Bad video card is good.

These are part of the cost cutting that put the dual g5 in this machine at it's price point. You can take this machine to 512 or 1024 megs (or 4 gig) on your own if you're on a budget. Budget minded folk who want a dual G5 with a heap of ram can appreciate this config.

95% of mac users do not need more than 1500 megs of ram. 90% don't need more than 1 gig.

Another bonus to this low end model is the fact that it's the cheapest way to get a Daul G5 system with the 6800 NVidia card, if you're REALLy that concerned about the video card. I bet this was already mentioned.

Video cards are overrated. These DUAL machines are quite fast with the stock video card, and only HARDCORE gamers or people looking to drive the new 30" Apple display need more than the stock vid card.

It's nice to see such a professional processor put into a slightly stripped down tower, so the user can build his or her system around the most important and integral part of the computer: the Dual G5 Processor.

Everyone should be thanking Apple for the Dual G5 in the low end. It's a HUGE step forward over the single 1.6, and comparisons to the 'old' dual 1.8 are not very meaningful, since it is a $500 price drop to get a Dual G5 system now.

New Dual 1.8 G5 = GOOD

My 2�

�-�-�-�-�

[Link]

The part that irritates me about the dual g5 is I recall it used to be possible to get dual 1.8s for less than they're selling now.

Either way, cheap machine. If I got a g5 I'd probably buy one. PCI-X won't mean a crap in another year or two and they all will be limited to AGP video cards, so no loss.

A Geforce 6800 and cinema 23" *drool*

[Mac Hammer Fan]

I ordered this Mac because
@ I don't need PCI-X slots and I doubt I will in the future
@ I was able to buy it with 2 x 512 MB RAM installed, so there is still room for another RAM upgrade and I doubt I will need more than 2 GB in the future
(I only do some simple video-editing)
@ I was able to buy it with 128 MB VRAM (an ATI Radeon 9600) instead of 64 MB Geforce
@ it will be a huge improvement over my current G4 500 (actually a G3 Beige with G4 ZIF)
@ it was only 15% more expensive than a Dual G4 1.25 but signifcantly faster.
@ it has a better DVD-drive than the rev A model (8x speed vs 4x speed)
@ I have read positive reviews here:
http://www.lowendmac.com/musings/04/0609.html
http://www.macuser.co.uk

Not that bad. I will be happy with this machine...