[markphip]

You can get the Dual-800 w/512 MB free at MacConnection for $2499. How does this compare to the new 933 at $2299?

I would think that the Dual-800 would be a lot faster in general, it has an 80 GB hard drive, and it would have 512 MB of more memory. On the negative side it has the GeForce 2 instead of the GeForce 4. I do not have any real plans or aspirations for 3D, so I am not sure how important that is.

Any opinions?

Thanks

[Westfoto]

Check that price again, they might drop it some with the new machines out now.

I would go for the Dual as it will handle Mac OS X better as X is dual aware.

Just my 2 cents
West

[markphip]

Originally posted by Westfoto:
<STRONG>Check that price again, they might drop it some with the new machines out now.

I would go for the Dual as it will handle Mac OS X better as X is dual aware.

Just my 2 cents
West</STRONG>

I think I agree. As for the price drop, the $1000 drop from $3499 to $2499 is probably all that we will see. I doubt it will go lower.

Mark

[JBytes]

I'm contemplating the same scenario here, and leaning toward the DP800. Since I do not do 3D or games, the GeForce2 might not impact me too much. Besides, I can always add the GeForce4 card later on. My ONLY concern is the fact that some of the VST Instruments I use to write music tend to choke on dual systems.

--JBytes

[Macmeniac]

Originally posted by markphip:
<STRONG>You can get the Dual-800 w/512 MB free at MacConnection for $2499. How does this compare to the new 933 at $2299?

I would think that the Dual-800 would be a lot faster in general, it has an 80 GB hard drive, and it would have 512 MB of more memory. On the negative side it has the GeForce 2 instead of the GeForce 4. I do not have any real plans or aspirations for 3D, so I am not sure how important that is.

Any opinions?

Thanks</STRONG>

Def. go for the dual when using OS X. My Dual G5 533 is faster than a G4 733 running OS X. In OS X additional RAM speeds up you hole system - unlike in OS 9 where you cant see (obviously) any speeg gain !

[sambeau]

Conservative estimate of 800DP OSX speed equivalent would be around 1.2Ghz on a SP.

- so for an 8% price hike you get 30%+ performance

(by my dodgy maths )

I'd go with the dual if you can afford it.

[ 01-29-2002: Message edited by: sambeau ]

[michad]

I bought a Dual 800 demo from smalldog for $2299

So I figure I saved $1300 from Friday...granted its a demo but I trust smalldog.

[slipjack]

As I mentioned in another post, I bet the 933 will actually do really well against the 800DP with it's 2MB 467 Mhz DDR RAM L3 cache.

The 800 DP backside cache only runs at 200 Mhz, I believe. Anyway, cache makes a big diff in how data gets the processors to crunch in time. For that reason, I also expect the dual 1 Ghz wil get more than just a 20% jump in performance over the 800 DP.

That said, the 800DP's a damn good machine, no doubt about it. Enjoy!

[ 01-30-2002: Message edited by: slipjack ]

[Kristoff]

I think you might be wrong.
The dual 800 has the same L3 cache.
2MB/cpu running at 400MHz.

It appears that the only difference between the dual 800 and the dual 1GHz is SOI .13 G4s, more ram, more HDD, GF4.
Other than that, they are the same.

[GK]

Go for the dual

because of : OS X
MP aware applications (Final cut pro, Photoshop, etc)

[OldManMac]

The dual is the way to go, but you better not wait too long, 'cause they're getting hard to find. Ingram-Micro, which is the distributor that supplies many of the mail order and reseller houses, has none in stock as of tonight! They had 100 Friday night, so a mail order house probably snatched them up, and they ain't makin' any more! The price isn't going any lower, either! Once they're gone, they're gone!

[ 01-30-2002: Message edited by: KarlG ]

[slipjack]

Originally posted by Kristoff:
<STRONG>I think you might be wrong.
The dual 800 has the same L3 cache.
2MB/cpu running at 400MHz.

It appears that the only difference between the dual 800 and the dual 1GHz is SOI .13 G4s, more ram, more HDD, GF4.
Other than that, they are the same.</STRONG>

Nope... Apple's specs say's :

256K on-chip L2 cache running at processor speed 2MB backside L3 cache running at one-fourth the processor speed

One fourth = 200 Mhz. Still, I agree that the dual 800's a good deal.

[tramahound]

what exactly is SOI .13?
does the dual 800 really have the same L2 and L3 cache?
what difference would L2 and L3 cache make to an average user anyway?
i plan on doing video editing (mostly iMovie, but later maybe fcp3), photo editing (not necessarily photoshop 6.0 though. i wanted to wait for an os x version before buying it), web browsing, normal office work, creating and burning of dvds to share with friends and family and that's about it. depending on the configuration i could get into a 933 cheaper than the dual 800 though. i like the idea of os x flying with a dual configuration, but will the dual also cause my non-dual-friendly working habits to be slowed down due to having "only" 800mhz to work with rather than 933?
thanks for any input you may have regarding my utter confusion

[GK]

Dual Dual Dual Dual Dual


Grab them while you still can, esp if you're goning to do video editing.

[tramahound]

but for the time being, will i even see a benefit with the dual configuration on iMovie? i thought only final cut pro took advantage of dual processors in video editing?
and memory wise, are the new 933s better equipped?

[osiris]

A dual 800 is tempting, especially for OS X. And you can change the video card if you want to (in a year or two)

For OS X you can't beat having an extra processor - OS X really shines. MP aware apps under OS 9 will be served better too.

Go for it!

[tramahound]

also, isn't the dvd burner in the dual 800 slower than the one in the new 933?

[tramahound]

...AND (can you tell i'm seriously thinking about this?) how does one go about getting an appleCare warranty if you don't buy from apple directly?
thanks, and sorry for all the questions

[guerro]

You can buy an Apple Care Warranty at any Apple reseller.

[Hydra]

I believe the 2mb cache on each of the dual 800 CPU's is the same thing as the new machines. Apollo will get a 512k full speed on chip cache which may boost things a bit along with a smaller fab process but the new Quicksilvers new G4 chips are just lower power consumption with a SOI fab process. The nice thing is they will do nicely in a Tibook and will kick butt. Apple seems to be touting this cache RAM as DDR more than they did before so in effect 200MHZ is 400MHZ because of the double pumped effect of DDR. I'm no engineer but this is what I have gathered from various sources.

That said, I would definitely go with the dual 800's for such a small price difference. The duals in OSX are the way to go and if the video card worries you you could always put in a GF3 which is better than the 4MX. apparently the 4MX should have been called the 3MX because it is a slightly dumbed down version of the GF3 (which I love in my own dual 800). The dual 800 came standard with the Twinview GF2MX so you can still have two displays going at once.

-JerryC.

[slipjack]

Originally posted by Hydra:
<STRONG>I believe the 2mb cache on each of the dual 800 CPU's is the same thing as the new machines. Apollo will get a 512k full speed on chip cache which may boost things a bit along with a smaller fab process but the new Quicksilvers new G4 chips are just lower power consumption with a SOI fab process. The nice thing is they will do nicely in a Tibook and will kick butt. Apple seems to be touting this cache RAM as DDR more than they did before so in effect 200MHZ is 400MHZ because of the double pumped effect of DDR. I'm no engineer but this is what I have gathered from various sources.

That said, I would definitely go with the dual 800's for such a small price difference. The duals in OSX are the way to go and if the video card worries you you could always put in a GF3 which is better than the 4MX. apparently the 4MX should have been called the 3MX because it is a slightly dumbed down version of the GF3 (which I love in my own dual 800). The dual 800 came standard with the Twinview GF2MX so you can still have two displays going at once.

-JerryC.</STRONG>

Again, the cache is not the same. The 800DP has a 2 MB cache, yes, but it's not DDR and not half the processor speed.

The 933 and 1000DP have faster caches. Both of them. DDR RAM 2 MB L3 cache at half speed. and 256k L2 cache at full speed. This would give the 933 a backside cache of 467 Mhz compared to the dual 800 @ 200 Mhz. I'm thinking the extra 133 speed plus the extra 267 Mhz in backside will make a BIG difference.

Peace.

[Hydra]

Originally posted by slipjack:
<STRONG>


Again, the cache is not the same. The 800DP has a 2 MB cache, yes, but it's not DDR and not half the processor speed.

The 933 and 1000DP have faster caches. Both of them. DDR RAM 2 MB L3 cache at half speed. and 256k L2 cache at full speed. This would give the 933 a backside cache of 467 Mhz compared to the dual 800 @ 200 Mhz. I'm thinking the extra 133 speed plus the extra 267 Mhz in backside will make a BIG difference.

Peace.</STRONG>

Sorry- you are right about the cache being better on the new Quicksilvers but Apple claims the new cache is running at full processor speed but it looks like on the dual gig it may be 500mhz doubled to 1000mhz through the magic of DDR. The part numbers of the original cache shows that they seem to be DDR running at 1/4 clock (in effect 1/2 processor speed) so an 800 would give you 400 mhz cache. Any way you slice it the new cpu's have better cache but as I seem to recall the last 733MHz L3 cacheless model didn't fall too far behind the 1mb cache model (yeah I know we are talking about on-chip cache here). As far as the diff in performance I'm sure benches will spring up all over the place to see how effective the new cache is going to be. I hurts to go from top-dog with my dual 800 to obsolete but it still is a fast machine in my book , besides I hope Apple makes a G5 later this year that will make me think my dual 800 is a dog and shame me into selling it

Also someone mentioned the Superdrive being faster in the new systems - I read that Pioneer upped the CD/RW speed from 4 to 8 but that Apple doesn't support it so their spec sheets don't reflect the improvement (why Apple wouldn't want it faster is beyond me) and I think the older drives were 5x DVD read while the new ones are 6x. The DVD-R is still 2x's. So it may be slightly better but very little if any real performance improvement.

-Jerry C.

[Dan Szwarc]

Other than arguing about cache, it seems the votes are pretty biased towards the Dual.

So if these are the facts, since Smalldog has duals for $2399, which is truly the better deal for me?

Dual 800, GeForce2MX Twinview (won't use it), 80GB HD, 256MB

or

Single 933, Geforce4MX (Which is actually a GF3MX), 60GB, 256 MB
?

I use OSX and plan on doing a lot of video editing this summer.

Answer: Duals.

Both systems will be obsolete by July MWNY anyway, might as well get the duals....

[BRussell]

First, the new machine is not .13, but it does have SOI. Those technologies really don't mean anything in themselves to an end-user, it just means a chip can get up higher in Mhz in the future without catching on fire.

I've done some research on this dual-single issue in OS X, and the following are my conclusions, based on looking at benchmarks etc.:

1. If you use software that is specifically designed to be dual-aware, the dual 800 will be significantly faster than the single 933 in that software.

2. If you're trying to speed up an app that is not dual-aware, it's not gonna happen, even if it is running on OS X. A single 933 will be a bit faster than a dual 800.

3. Running two apps simultaneously will be much faster on a dual. I know I don't spend much time running more than one processor-intensive app at the same time, but some people probably do.

I personally have concluded that unless you run lots of processor-intensive apps that are specifically coded to be dual-aware, OS X or no OS X, you'll be better off with a faster single.

However, this doesn't address the other issues like RAM and hard drive size, of course. And 800 and 933 are pretty close, so close that you may not see much of an improvement in the single 933 vs. the dual 800, even if you are running on just one 800 Mhz processor.