Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

jubbly · Sep 2, 2003, 09:20 AM

well, possibly not, but it's the first one i've seen and i've been checking tottenham court road every day. it was a 1.6, and most frustratingly was only equipped with 256mb RAM - talk about making it look bad. so, bear that in mind when reading these first impressions...

i) it's HUGE. a bit too big possibly, although the design is very nice. if you've been looking at lots of pics like me then imagine it about 80mm taller than you thought it was.

ii) launching apps: it's not that fast. i seriously hope this is mostly due to the RAM issue, but i have to say that even allowing for this it didn't blow me away when compared with my eMac with 1GB RAM. somehow i expected it to. we are talking around 5 bounces for photoshop.

i am planning on getting the duallie but will now doing some pretty thorough testing before parting with my millions....

frownyfrank · Sep 2, 2003, 10:01 AM

Worthwhile to wait for Panther before completely condemning it, too. Given what we think we know about the G5, the 1.6 may not blow everyone away in the app-launching benchmark.

I would hope after Photoshop loads, there would be some kind of noticeable difference. It would help also if you had a G4-based machine right next to it, just so you could see the difference with your own eyes.

You don't suppose they forgot to remove the debug code from the G5, do you?

jubbly · Sep 2, 2003, 10:52 AM

i guess the 1.6 could be the ugly sister. but i want to see some serious !SNAP! before i shell out for the big one, panther or no panther. these machines SHOULD make an eMac look silly.

Originally posted by frownyfrank:
Worthwhile to wait for Panther before completely condemning it, too. Given what we think we know about the G5, the 1.6 may not blow everyone away in the app-launching benchmark.

I would hope after Photoshop loads, there would be some kind of noticeable difference. It would help also if you had a G4-based machine right next to it, just so you could see the difference with your own eyes.

You don't suppose they forgot to remove the debug code from the G5, do you?

pjosborne · Sep 2, 2003, 05:33 PM

ii) launching apps: it's not that fast. i seriously hope this is mostly due to the RAM issue, but i have to say that even allowing for this it didn't blow me away when compared with my eMac with 1GB RAM. somehow i expected it to. we are talking around 5 bounces for photoshop.

I managed to get a brief play with a similar machine in Guildford. I was similarly surprised with long launch times (ImageReady and PS). No noticeable difference from my 867Mhz G4 (single). I'm sure a longer play would have revealed significant improvements, but am sad that my first thought was 'oh...' rather than 'wow!'

Pete

TheTraveller · Sep 2, 2003, 06:26 PM

Yeah the 1.6 (1.25 GB RAM) I played with didn't have amazingly fast app launch times...I mean, not shabby, but not quite as snappy as I had anticipated. However, window resizing was down to almost no lag in several apps I tried, and that was nice to see.

I'd probably get a Dual G5 2.0, too - but it's looking like I'll wait til Rev B or wahtever.

chris.p · Sep 2, 2003, 07:03 PM

Slightly off topic, but do they have any 15gb ipods in Micro Anvica? None anywhere I can find... (in London) but might make the trip up there anyway to see the new beast anyhow

riverfreak · Sep 2, 2003, 07:06 PM

Originally posted by TheTraveller:
Yeah the 1.6 (1.25 GB RAM) I played with didn't have amazingly fast app launch times...I mean, not shabby, but not quite as snappy as I had anticipated. However, window resizing was down to almost no lag in several apps I tried, and that was nice to see.

I'd probably get a Dual G5 2.0, too - but it's looking like I'll wait til Rev B or wahtever.

People, think about what has to happen during launching an application!!

The real measure of performance is not how fast an application launches. I work with databases that sometimes take a loooong time to launch, but once in resident memory fly (of course).

ASIMO · Sep 2, 2003, 09:35 PM

Originally posted by jubbly:
...then imagine it about 80mm taller....

The heads of millions of Americans just blew up trying to imagine 80mm.

turboSPE · Sep 2, 2003, 09:37 PM

Originally posted by jubbly:
well, possibly not, but it's the first one i've seen and i've been checking tottenham court road every day. it was a 1.6, and most frustratingly was only equipped with 256mb RAM - talk about making it look bad. so, bear that in mind when reading these first impressions...

i) it's HUGE. a bit too big possibly, although the design is very nice. if you've been looking at lots of pics like me then imagine it about 80mm taller than you thought it was.

ii) launching apps: it's not that fast. i seriously hope this is mostly due to the RAM issue, but i have to say that even allowing for this it didn't blow me away when compared with my eMac with 1GB RAM. somehow i expected it to. we are talking around 5 bounces for photoshop.

i am planning on getting the duallie but will now doing some pretty thorough testing before parting with my millions....

I played with a 1.8 at the Apple store in Dallas (the one on Knox St.), and it didn't seem any faster than my MDD 1GHz. I was pretty disappointed.

turboSPE

bastion · Sep 2, 2003, 10:34 PM

Could it be a case of over hype again?

jubbly · Sep 3, 2003, 03:50 AM

actually that was why i used mm - rather than cm! i forgot they use inches. what's that all about?!?

seriously though, there are quite a few people here who appear to have been quite reasonable in their expectations, yet have found the single processor G5s severely lacking. As I said, even the lowest G5 should batter my 700mhz eMac out of contention - yet I was struggling to find noticeable benefits even though the 1.6 costs twice as much (with no monitor included!!!) yes, the RAM could be a factor...but not that much.

We all know where OS X needs real speed improvements - in the GUI and in app-launch and start-up times. these are the complaints you always hear about. crushing pentiums in photoshop bake-offs impresses no-one except the Apple evangalists who are going to buy one anyway. i am now going to wait for panther, then go and try a G5 duallie (checking first that it has at least 2GB RAM installed). if it doesn't blow my socks off then i'll wait till they get them up to 3-4Ghz.

Originally posted by ASIMO:
The heads of millions of Americans just blew up trying to imagine 80mm.

biposto · Sep 3, 2003, 05:04 AM

Originally posted by jubbly:
As I said, even the lowest G5 should batter my 700mhz eMac out of contention - yet I was struggling to find noticeable benefits even though the 1.6 costs twice as much (with no monitor included!!!) yes, the RAM could be a factor...but not that much.

We all know where OS X needs real speed improvements - in the GUI and in app-launch and start-up times. these are the complaints you always hear about. crushing pentiums in photoshop bake-offs impresses no-one except the Apple evangalists who are going to buy one anyway. i am now going to wait for panther, then go and try a G5 duallie (checking first that it has at least 2GB RAM installed). if it doesn't blow my socks off then i'll wait till they get them up to 3-4Ghz.

If you don't need a new powermac right now, wait.
I played with the 1.6ghz and I agree with you, its not that you say "wow" performance wise.
I think within a couple of months we see more dual G5's ( i think 1.8ghz)
I will wait a bit longer to buy a new powermac.

Love Calm Quiet · Sep 3, 2003, 08:38 AM

Apple's big mistake:

Shipping units with 256MB RAM to stores where potential buyers will test drive them.

Those are effectively *crippled* machines. I wonder if *anyone* in the forums would consider operating a G5 (or a G4) with that little RAM to actually get any work done?

This is not exactly "putting best foot forward" on Apple's part. A real shame.

Commodus · Sep 3, 2003, 09:47 AM

I would probably avoid buying a G5 until Panther comes pre-loaded (or is at least available as a cheap upgrade) just because of this. The G5 has a lot of potential power under the hood, but because Jaguar is relatively slow compared to Panther, it doesn't feel like that.

DrBoar · Sep 3, 2003, 09:58 AM

Looks like I will get a G4 upgrade (tripling my CPU speed) rather than getting a G5 now. I will aim for revision C then

Greasyboy · Sep 3, 2003, 10:04 AM

Originally posted by jubbly:

As I said, even the lowest G5 should batter my 700mhz eMac out of contention - yet I was struggling to find noticeable benefits even though the 1.6 costs twice as much (with no monitor included!!!) yes, the RAM could be a factor...but not that much.

We all know where OS X needs real speed improvements - in the GUI and in app-launch and start-up times. these are the complaints you always hear about. crushing pentiums in photoshop bake-offs impresses no-one except the Apple evangalists who are going to buy one anyway.

You're joking, right? Some of us actual real work--3-D renders, Final Cut Pro, heavy Photoshop work, for example. I don't give a crap if something opens in 4 bounces vs 1 bounce. I care how fast it renders. I don't even know how long most stuff takes to open on my Quicksilver 867 because i leave everything I use open. That's what OS X is about.

If you don't do any real work, I suppose gaining 1 second on application lauches will help you. But under OS X there's rarely a reason to open an application.

DeathMan · Sep 4, 2003, 02:38 AM

You make a good point about leaving apps open, but application launch time is indicative of i/o speed, which is very important, even if you do have 8 gigs of RAM in there. You've got to look at that drive sometime, and when you do, you want it to be fast.

Also, I've noticed that Photoshop opens much faster after its been launched once. Is it possible your normal eMac launch times are quicker because of this? I'm just asking, not saying that you're a liar.

MindFad · Sep 4, 2003, 03:01 AM

Originally posted by Greasyboy:
You're joking, right? Some of us actual real work--3-D renders, Final Cut Pro, heavy Photoshop work, for example. I don't give a crap if something opens in 4 bounces vs 1 bounce. I care how fast it renders. I don't even know how long most stuff takes to open on my Quicksilver 867 because i leave everything I use open. That's what OS X is about.

If you don't do any real work, I suppose gaining 1 second on application lauches will help you. But under OS X there's rarely a reason to open an application.

I have to agree here. Man, some of you are using computers for the wrong reasons if you're looking for app bounce benchmarks. Not that give much a crap about app bouncing, but these G5s tested probably only had 256MB in them, so why are people surprised when app launching takes longer since OS X is making virtual memory disk swaps? But I agree, Photoshop is almost always open for me. The things I need are usually open, otherwise, I've got plenty of RAM for things to launch fairly quickly.

I'm more interested in seeing all the tweaks Apple gets done in Panther to speed up the GUI for the G5s. Maybe scrolling finally won't suck. compared to OS 9.

Mr Scruff · Sep 4, 2003, 03:41 AM

Originally posted by jubbly:
well, possibly not, but it's the first one i've seen and i've been checking tottenham court road every day. it was a 1.6, and most frustratingly was only equipped with 256mb RAM - talk about making it look bad.

Was this at Micro Anvika? I may pop down there at lunch...

AngryAngel · Sep 4, 2003, 04:57 AM

Yes, the Micro Anvika nearest the tube station, on the left as you walk away from the tube station (the ones further along don't have any).

michaelb · Sep 4, 2003, 07:08 AM

Originally posted by jubbly:
actually that was why i used mm - rather than cm! i forgot they use inches. what's that all about?!?

At least they're consistent... What's with schizoid countries that are half metric and half imperial?

I mean, you measure your fruit in kg, a G5's height in cm, and fuel in litres, but drive out onto the motorway and it becomes yards and miles.

What's that about?!

Says me, speaking smugly from an all metric country... typing on his 12" iBook... oops.

LightWaver-67 · Sep 4, 2003, 07:47 AM

At this moment, running in my dock (and almost ALWAYS running 24/7):

- iCal
- DragThing
- Suitcase
- Mail
- iChat
- Safari
- Photoshop
- Illustrator
- DreamWeaver
- LightWave (Layout, Modeler & Hub)
- Transmit (3rd-party FTP)
- FinalCut Pro
- DVD Studio Pro

Those are always open & running 100% of the time. One thing to keep in mind people... speed is a never-ending quest. You will ALWAYS want more and the software developers will always add features that max-out it's potential.

I'm rendering still-frame images at 1600 x 1200, Medium AntiAliasing WITH Radiosity & Caustics enables with HDRI images and it's still doing them within 4-8 hours.

On my old G3... I could NEVER get anything CLOSE to that done in less than a week's time of rendering 24/7.

Having said that... I can't imagine how in the future, I might be on my G7? using "Hyper-GL" to manipulate my 3D world with real-time Radiosity, Reflections, refractions & volumetric effects... and STILL think... "Man, I wish I had a G8...!"

365 · Sep 4, 2003, 08:16 AM

Originally posted by michaelb:
At least they're consistent... What's with schizoid countries that are half metric and half imperial?

I mean, you measure your fruit in kg, a G5's height in cm, and fuel in litres, but drive out onto the motorway and it becomes yards and miles.

What's that about?!

Says me, speaking smugly from an all metric country... typing on his 12" iBook... oops.

Hey, you want to watch how you address your sovereign rulers

The metric system was forced upon us by Europe, that place somewhere to the East of us.

osiris · Sep 4, 2003, 10:56 AM

Originally posted by ASIMO:
The heads of millions of Americans just blew up trying to imagine 80mm.

Yeah, that's like, what, 67 degrees or something?

michaelb · Sep 4, 2003, 10:31 PM

Originally posted by 365:
Hey, you want to watch how you address your sovereign rulers

Beg pardon, your highness, I forgot my place as a colonial.

Originally posted by 365:
The metric system was forced upon us by Europe, that place somewhere to the East of us.

Oh, I get it now. The roads remained free of metric because unlike the Europeans you were still allowed to drive on the correct (left) side of the road!

What's with americans and europeans driving on the rightmost side of the road anyway? Don't your swords arms get in the wrong place?

Originally posted by osiris:
Yeah, that's like, what, 67 degrees or something?

I think that's what JPL thought when they were working with NASA's metric figures and crashed the Mars lander. I mean it's not like science uses metric or anything, nah.