Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

idyll · Oct 5, 2002, 09:56 AM

Here are my choices.

A Power Mac SP G4/733 = $1199.00
or
Power Mac Dual G4/867 = $1694.00

What I plan on doing with this -
GRAPHIC DESIGN. Photoshop Photoshop Photoshop 24/7.

I know the Dual would be a much better choice for me, but is it really worth the extra $500? I've tested both out at my local retailer but didn't notice any difference as I didn't use any heavy DP apps. If I bought the SP I could probbably max out the RAM, with the DP I could only go as far as 512 MB max(what my budget allows).

So what's your take on this? Give me your two cents.

Zimmerman · Oct 5, 2002, 10:48 AM

It kinda depends. Do you work on the computer for a living? The slower machine shows a better cost/perfrom ratio if Photoshop isn't optimized for dual processors (I really don't know). If you are doing a lot of highly repetative tasks, or filters that freqently require you to go make coffee and fiddle with your mouse while you wait for the spinning beach ball, then get the faster machine. However, if you don't work on a just-in-time basis, then cost/performance is more important, IMHO.

Anybody else wanna weigh in on this?

coolmac · Oct 5, 2002, 11:07 AM

Macconnection has the Powermac Quicksilver 800 Mhz. for $1249 available today.

For just $50 more you might be better off with it.

Read the reviews, its a very good machine, here's the link:

http://www.macconnection.com/scripts...duct_id=278698

aaanorton · Oct 5, 2002, 11:30 AM

Originally posted by idyll:
Here are my choices.

A Power Mac SP G4/733 = $1199.00
or
Power Mac Dual G4/867 = $1694.00

What I plan on doing with this -
GRAPHIC DESIGN. Photoshop Photoshop Photoshop 24/7.

I think the missing piece to this equation is what you are using now. When you buy something new, you want it to FEEL faster, not just be faster. I have a G4 450 AGP now. I'm vaguely in the market, but may wait til Jan/Feb. For me, I want a new machine to blow my current one away. I do PS all the time as well, and film scanning. I'm sure that the 733 would be faster for me, but the DP is the way to go. AND you need a ton of RAM too.
Maybe hold off til the DPs are more affordable. Or go for the dual 867 and look for really cheap RAM out there. Obviously, don't have Apple sell you RAM.
Good luck.

mikemako · Oct 5, 2002, 11:58 AM

get the dual processor. OS X and Photoshop are both optimized for the DP and it's not too much more.

enjoy your new machine!

mikemako · Oct 5, 2002, 12:02 PM

Oh also, what our friend said above.. get as little RAM as possible in the machine you buy from Apple, then just buy it from a 3rd party.. I believe you can get 512Mb Memory for like $160 or so.. So if your machine comes with a minimum of 256Mb, and you drop about $320 for 2 sticks of 512Mb, you'll have 1.2Gb Memory!! That is what I did with my machine.

derekn · Oct 5, 2002, 02:42 PM

Get the DDR-867, you can't beat dual processors. And check around, various retailers are running offers for free RAM, either 256megs or 512. You can either get it for free with an installation fee or free after a mail in rebate. It's not maxed out but it's still pretty good.

D'Espice · Oct 5, 2002, 03:23 PM

Originally posted by mikemako:
get the dual processor. OS X and Photoshop are both optimized for the DP and it's not too much more.

enjoy your new machine!

Photoshop is definitely NOT optimized for SMP/SMT, only few filters are.

That's why I would suggest the QS 733 with 2GB of RAM which will be really a lot faster in Photoshop than the DP867 with 512MB of RAM. It's a huge difference whether you have 512 MB or 2 GB, hence you should get as much as you can afford. In most tasks, the 733 with 2GB of RAM will blow away the DP with less than that, only those filters optimized for SMP/SMT will use the second processor and thus show an improvement.

coolmac · Oct 5, 2002, 04:13 PM

The 733Mhz maxes out at 1.5gig's RAM. but if you get the 800Mhz Powemac with 256mb RAM and add lets say 512mb+ from Crucial you'll have a very fast system that can keep up very well.

mikemako · Oct 5, 2002, 04:38 PM

Originally posted by D'Espice:

Photoshop is definitely NOT optimized for SMP/SMT, only few filters are.

from : Adobe's Website "All Photoshop features are faster on a multiprocessor system, while the advantage is greater for some."

Regardless if the program is specifically SMP aware, the performance will be better with a Dual Processor.

OreoCookie · Oct 5, 2002, 04:42 PM

Get a new one.

Three reasons:

1. SMP systems are the future for Apple, so future versions of Photoshop will be streamlined to work with dualies.

Even if Photoshop uses just one CPU, the second CPU takes some load off (Quartz, Quartz, Quartz).

2. A newer system design has to be replaced later than an older one.

3. Expandability. (More RAM, more HDs, a second optical drive).

No matter what you do, make sure you put in at least additional 512 Megs of RAM.

idyll · Oct 5, 2002, 08:36 PM

To answer aaanorton's question..
Well, right now im not even using a mac. The school I plan to attend requires me to get a Mac, though, so therefore I'm left with the above choices.

Right now I have a Pentium 4 2.9 Ghz with 1 GIG of ram. I'm quite happy with it for now, but it certainly isn't as inspiring as Apple and it's own operating system.

Even if the school didn't require me to have an Apple, I think I'd still get it. If I hadn't bought my new PC I think I could go for a high end PowerMac, but oh well =(. That's one of my problems, I kind of jump into things. That's why I'm asking you guys to help me with my decision.

I do have a job right now and I use my computer all the time. I bet the PowerMac could beat my PC in PS 7 anyday.

Either that or I could bite the bullet and buy a PowerBook. I thought it might be a good idea but it's not like I'll be taking it to a lot of places with me. I usually stay at home, and so do my computers. It would also be a rip off for me that way, because I could get a PowerMac SP system for half the price.. well, kind of. So I decided PowerMac is the way to go. Now I just have to decide which one. Thanks guys. Keep those two cents rolling in

nvaughan3 · Oct 5, 2002, 09:13 PM

Originally posted by mikemako:
Oh also, what our friend said above.. get as little RAM as possible in the machine you buy from Apple, then just buy it from a 3rd party.. I believe you can get 512Mb Memory for like $160 or so.. So if your machine comes with a minimum of 256Mb, and you drop about $320 for 2 sticks of 512Mb, you'll have 1.2Gb Memory!! That is what I did with my machine.

Er...those prices are way too high. You can get a gig of pc133 guaranteed compatible ram for $93..

http://www.18004memory.com/category....9&subcatid=904

idyll · Oct 5, 2002, 09:29 PM

I'm really confused now. The PowerBook might be an option. I'm not sure. Help me out here

CheesePuff · Oct 5, 2002, 11:38 PM

Just get the new Dual G4 867 with at least 512 MB RAM. If you going to be running Mac OS X and Photoshop a lot, then this will be the best for you. The others lack the L3 cache which Photoshop and OS X will use to improve performance.

idyll · Oct 6, 2002, 09:27 AM

Thanks. I ordered it from MacConnection

I cant wait.

CheesePuff · Oct 6, 2002, 09:51 AM

I got a good deal on a Quicksilver G4 800 MHz before the new ones came out (no doubt) so for this Christmas I might sell this G4 and get the Dual 867 for myself.

D'Espice · Oct 6, 2002, 04:36 PM

Originally posted by idyll:
Thanks. I ordered it from MacConnection I cant wait.

Congrats on your purchase, you definitely will enjoy it. Especially when the big fan kicks in and your new Mac transmutates into a vacuum cleaner.

lx · Oct 6, 2002, 06:15 PM

Not wanting to cause any aggro, of course, but I was interested in the dual 867 new Powermacs....
I was messing about with one in the shop and spotted a Quicksilver hiding in the corner with no price tag on - this one just happened to be the dual 1 GHz with 2MB cache, running two plasma screens (last display model....) The salesman only had prices for the new ones so I convinced him that he'd have trouble selling the old ones now DDR was out...

To be honest if the new ones used DDR properly then I'd go for them. But the dual QS 1 GHz that I got (cheap) seems to go pretty fast. The graphics card could do with more horsepower but it can still run two screens. And the QS doesn't make a load of noise (then again there are 3 dual processor PC servers sitting next to it. Wind tunnel stuff)

So can anyone tell me why the new powermacs are worth it over the QS??? Obviously the 1.25 GHz will be quicker, but at a cost. I'm talking about the 1 GHz and 867.

D'Espice · Oct 6, 2002, 06:18 PM

The 1 Gig DDR is a little faster than the QS 1 Gig, but not because of the DDR-RAM, but because of the 166 MHz FSB compared to the 133 MHz the QS has.
This, however, is not worth the extra money, if you can get a good deal on the "old" QS

idyll · Oct 12, 2002, 12:00 AM

wow im thinking it over and over.. well.. for the monitor, should i get a 21" (20" viewable) crt or 17" apple display? i love more space (not desk-wise) but that 17" is just so cool!!

Avon · Oct 12, 2002, 12:24 AM

Originally posted by idyll:
wow im thinking it over and over.. well.. for the monitor, should i get a 21" (20" viewable) crt or 17" apple display? i love more space (not desk-wise) but that 17" is just so cool!!

Get the LCD. Its the best thing I ever did. Its so much easier on your eyes and a 17" is really not that small, is like a 18-19" monitor....

The apple display is so slick!

aloner · Oct 12, 2002, 04:35 AM

Color management and display is better in a CRT monitor. Check the LaCie Electron19BlueIII and Electron22BlueIII monitors. They are great.

mikerally · Oct 12, 2002, 07:34 AM

Two words for you:

"L3 CACHE"

The Quicksilver 733Mhz and 800Mhz, do not have one, but the dual processor 867Mhz has about 1MB per processor of it.

Quite simply, even a single processor 867Mhz Powermac with 1MB L3 Cache will blow the socks off a 733/800Mhz without one.

So there's your answer.

idyll · Oct 12, 2002, 09:59 AM

i know mikerally, i already made my decision =).

anyway, i alreayd have a 19" crt. i wanted to go dual this time... not completely sure if an lcd is the way! i wish i could afford that 23" apple display though

Mark Tungston · Oct 12, 2002, 12:40 PM

Originally posted by idyll:
i know mikerally, i already made my decision =).

anyway, i alreayd have a 19" crt. i wanted to go dual this time... not completely sure if an lcd is the way! i wish i could afford that 23" apple display though

if you're worried about color calibration, and if it's your job to do so...

Maybe you should get a sony trinitron. it's the next best thing to a lcd. lcd technology is great but it still doesn't do color that great. especially in the red spectrum. the sonys have nice flat surface even though i's crt andis better than most monitors.

but i would get perhaps a lcd and use your existing crt monitor in a dual set up with your new 867. best of both worlds.

anyway...you're a lucky man my friend

idyll · Oct 12, 2002, 12:53 PM

why so lucky

?

hmm, do CRTs really damage the eyes that bad? which would be better in the long run - a CRT or LCD?

Leonis · Oct 12, 2002, 01:13 PM

Originally posted by idyll:
why so lucky ?

hmm, do CRTs really damage the eyes that bad? which would be better in the long run - a CRT or LCD?

I am not too sure if CRT damages the eyes more than LCD does. Just make sure to set the refresh to 85Hz when using CRT.

Mark Tungston · Oct 12, 2002, 02:54 PM

Originally posted by idyll:
why so lucky ?

hmm, do CRTs really damage the eyes that bad? which would be better in the long run - a CRT or LCD?

i wish i was getting a dual mac...

what do you do for a living? print professional? do colors need to match? can you use your old crt in dual mode?

answer these questions and you can decide better.

idyll · Oct 12, 2002, 07:36 PM

well right now im attending a college and i plan on doing graphic design for a living. yes - print professional. colors should match. i can use my old crt in dual mode.

the school im attending (ringling school of arts) uses the apple cinema displays. i wish i could afford one..

anyway, about the monitors, all i really care about is my eyes. i want something that'll do me good in the long run.

Avon · Oct 12, 2002, 07:57 PM

Well, buying an LCD was the best thing I ever did. No longer do my eyes burn from sitting at my desk too long. I can't and I refuse to go back, its not worth the pain.

Yes I ran my monior at 85 hz, It still hurt my eyes after a long day.

idyll · Oct 12, 2002, 08:22 PM

yeah ill probbably bite the bullet and buy a LCD. i cant pay it all at once, but ill try to lease it.. we'll see.. two 17" LCDs is better than one 23" LCD right?

idyll · Oct 22, 2002, 04:59 PM

you guys have to be kidding me.. i just got my new powermac dual, and this thing makes hardly any noise.. compared to my pentium 4 system, this sounds like "whisper".

anyway, im quite happy with this setup =). i also got a 17" LCD.. it's all good. not quite the improvement from my pentium 4 system that i expected but great nonetheless.

thanks for the tip guys.

if you want i could start a whole new thread on this with pictures and a full review =)

Mac Zealot · Oct 25, 2002, 05:23 AM

but the quicksilver is sooooo much better for humping!

godzappa · Oct 25, 2002, 05:46 PM

The new DPs are louder than previous macs I've owned, quite abit louder than my PCI G4 400, BUT, when I was over at my business partners the other day working on his PC, I realized that loud as hell for someone who owns macs and someone who uses PCs is completely different.

We're USED to having machines that are alot quieter, so these new machines sound like a plane, but to most PC users the sound is not a concern because the majority of PCs are much louder than macs.

Just my observation. Enjoy the new machine! I am with mine, just want to get some more memory again, but prices in Canada arent as dirt cheap here in Canada.

raskol · Oct 25, 2002, 06:14 PM

DDR RAM is way to expensive to justify buying a DDR Mac over the Quicksilvers if available. DDR is 3x more expensive and on current Macs yields no performance benefits. So taking it to 1.25 gigs costs over $300! Bullshoot.