Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

yuhui · Jul 19, 2000, 11:35 AM

Hi

So, Apple has finally launched its dual CPU PowerMac G4s. But I wonder, what software is optimized for multiprocessors? Otherwise what's the use of getting one? In Steve Jobs' demo with the dual CPU PowerMacs and Photoshop, does this mean that Photoshop is optimized for multiprocessors or was the MacOS dividing the work between the CPUs?

The dual CPU PowerMacs look enticing considering the price, but I'm more concerned about whether there is commonly-used software on the market that can take advantage of the 2 CPUs.

Thanks
Yuhui

Elderloc · Jul 19, 2000, 11:44 AM

Photshop is Altivec and Double Processor optimized. My question is will there be a Dual G4 500mhz upgrade card from newer? I have a 3 month old G4 500mhz. It did not look like the case changed from what I could see in the keynote.

yuhui · Jul 19, 2000, 11:50 AM

What about other Adobe products, eg Illustrator, Premiere, After Effects, etc?

Is Apple's Final Cut Pro dual CPU optimized too? Or Terran's Media Cleaner Pro?

It'd be nice if someone could list all/most of the optimized software.

As for Elderloc's question, I don't think it's a question of the casing design, but the motherboard's architecture.

Yuhui

MacOS761 · Jul 19, 2000, 12:16 PM

From what I gathered, with MacOS 9, the program needs to be optimized to gain significantly from MP, but with X, the OS or maybe the kernel will automatically split up tasks. Anyway, with no proce chage, how can you lose?

Elderloc · Jul 19, 2000, 12:21 PM

Most Adobe stuff is. Final cut Pro is Altivec and MP optimized

Jul 19, 2000, 12:51 PM

Does it have the same old video card, or a new one? I can't tell! Thanks!

disectamac · Jul 19, 2000, 01:07 PM

I wonder how fast it will encode Mp3?

Jul 19, 2000, 01:29 PM

Cinema 4D XL (high end 3D modeling/animation program) is multi-processor "aware".

Dual processors will speed rendering, and, I believe, screen redraw.

Macguy · Jul 19, 2000, 01:45 PM

By the time OS X rolls around there will be a lot more MP programs.

It would be cool to see Halo take advantage of the two processors.

Jul 19, 2000, 02:52 PM

uhuh... The same was said about Altivec. Alticec enhanced applications are still in short supply. Most of the software for mac right now is NOT altivec accelerated, you think by the time osx ships they will be MP enhanced?

Orbit · Jul 19, 2000, 03:01 PM

That's not the point.. by the time OS X ships, the operating system itself will be SMP enabled. Most programs are at the very least multithreaded and the operating system is capable of balancing threads over multiple processors. The only optimization needed right now is for individual programs running under OS 9.x. Altivec is also being adopted at a pretty reasonable rate- you're not seeing the acceleration in things like Word because that program has no need for it. However, stuff like Photoshop, Unity DS-1, Cubase VST, Logic Audio, etc.. programs with huge processor burdens which stand to gain huge performance increases from vector processing- these programs are already optimized and have been for several months. I think that's a great turnaround for a technology which was introduced less than a year ago. Think about Intel and their MMX and SIMD extentions- how long did it take companies to optimize for those technologies, if they even did at all? You begin to see my point. I think that nothing but good will come of the multiproc systems and I can't wait to get my hands on one.

Jul 19, 2000, 03:04 PM

>Most of the software for mac right now is NOT altivec accelerated,
>you think by the time osx ships they will be MP enhanced?

Uh I think just about every Application will take advantage of Multiple Processors under OS X. OS X will have very good SMP support, meaning all applications you run on top of OS X will be split up among the processors.

Gregory · Jul 19, 2000, 03:35 PM

I read that OS X memory management would be optimized for Altivec. Maybe 9.1? As for SMP, I'd think Pixar and video production, anything running on RS/6000 or SGI could be ported easily.

From what I have seen on TV, it seemed that human gnome project used Macs, NASA (shuttle and ISS?) could take advantage of Cube and MP-G4s.

Greg

Jul 19, 2000, 03:45 PM

Dual G4s is the wave of the future because it accelerates Photoshop so dramatically! Look at me; I'm sending this email with Photoshop. I do my accounting with Photoshop. Heck! I even compile my programs with Photoshop!!!

Maybe Apple is taking so long to come out with Mac OS X SMP because they also do everything with Photoshop?...

Just a thought.

Leonard · Jul 19, 2000, 04:20 PM

Regarding the question of the what video card is in the new MP PowerMac G4s, as far as I can tell, it's the old ATI Rage 128 Pro. Everywhere I looked there is no mention of a ATI Radeon card in them, just the ATI Rage 128 Pro.
The good news is that IMG reports that ATI is releasing PCI and AGP versions of the Radeon as well as low-end and high-end cards.

From a gamer's point of view, there's not too much new about the PowerMac G4's - no Radeon, dual G4's won't help current games much, and the mouse seems to still be one-button. Don't get me wrong, the machines are impressive.

denim · Jul 19, 2000, 04:46 PM

Well, I don't know about how SETI@Home would work with a multi-processor Mac, but I expect that distributed.net would work very nicely.

Macguy · Jul 19, 2000, 05:09 PM

With a MP mac, couldn't you have one processor crunching seti while you check your e-mail and surf the internet while using the other one?

I am pretty sure you can do that with windows, not sure about Mac OS 9, perhaps X?

ebeitzuri · Jul 19, 2000, 05:16 PM

The MP macs are practically useless right now. Not until OSX ships will these machines be any better than a single processor mac. Even then, you'l need carbonized apps to run under OSX. It will be at least 6 months 'till these macs are much different from a single processor machine. What kind of mac do you think you could get for $2500 by then? This is simply a ploy by Apple to sustain profits and fodder for the MHz wars. While you wait for your MP mac to make use of the other processor, it is depreciating and becoming outdated. Is there really any reason not to wait?

Jul 19, 2000, 07:09 PM

There has to be an updated ATi Rage card in the new G4's considering they switched all there own monitors to that new connection the developed.

Zwilnik · Jul 19, 2000, 07:20 PM

Even OS9 should run faster (and more stable) under OSX running MP. Although it uses more memory. This of course should mean that your older aps will quite happily run on OS9, faster than a single CPU. I'm looking forward to seeing the first benchmarks

I'd like to see Virtual PC optimised for OSX and MP. You should be able to emulate a pretty quick Pentium with that

Herr Newton · Jul 19, 2000, 09:20 PM

Originally posted by denim:
Well, I don't know about how SETI@Home would work with a multi-processor Mac, but I expect that distributed.net would work very nicely.

Wait a few months till MacOS X beta ships. Then you can run the FreeBSD om the command line and advantage of the power.

MacOS761 · Jul 20, 2000, 10:22 AM

Grr... you people make me mad. First off, the MP Mac used in the demo was running OS 9, and it still went from 100 seconds to 60-some (64?) doing the same thing. Is the MP useless? Hardly. Granted, OS X would probably go something like 100 seconds to 45 seconds, so it's much better, but MP is quite effective even now.

Next, why do you think Photoshop is used for benchmarking? I'll tell you - it's one of the few "common denominator" programs that can actually benefit from more processor power! Most consumer-level programs (office apps, simple games, internet apps) are waiting for YOU (or your internet connection), not the processor. Orbit' list of optimized apps are the ones that more processor power makes a difference for - Photoshop, Unity DS-1, Cubase VST, Logic Audio, etc.. - how many SOHO or first time computer buyers use those kinds of programs? If you're going to show off processor power, you have to do it with something you can benchmark - and spreadsheets don't cut it.

denim · Jul 20, 2000, 11:20 AM

Originally posted by MacOS761:
If you're going to show off processor power, you have to do it with something you can benchmark - and spreadsheets don't cut it.

There are many programs out there which are CPU-bound, but most of them are fairly low profile or they simply don't run on a Macintosh. Now that MacOS X is coming RSN and we've got hefty multiprocessor Macintoshes, we may expect some of these programs to be ported, or even to be initially written on a Mac.

A presentation like the ones at MacWorld Expo has to be done using programs which are widely known. That doesn't mean they're the only ones which can or will use the power once it's there. Remember that most programs are developed in-house, are very specialized, and are never seen outside of their original situation.

I've worked on many programs which were either in-house or were for such a specialized purpose that you'll never see them mentioned in any kind of expo. I'm working on such a program right now. These programs do something for the people who use them. It's not very glamorous to just pay the bills.

Engineering software, medical software, little system management tools... you don't hear about these things, but some of them, especially the engineering software, can use all the power you can throw at them.

[This message has been edited by denim (edited 07-20-2000).]