[Esquare]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
GAWD man! You sound like my GF!

GF stands for grandfather...right?

[Eug Wanker]

Having to buy 2 memory sticks at once just to updgrade is a huge negative.

Something to consider with the new G5s vs. the old G4s.

Memory bus bandwidth:
G4 (fastest): 2.7 GB/s
G5 (any): 6.4 GB/s

Front side bus bandwidth:
Single G4 (fastest): 1.3 GB/s
Dual G4 (fastest): 1.3 GB/s
G5 1.6 GHz: 6.4 GB/s
G5 1.8 GHz: 7.2 GB/s
Dual G5 2.0 GHz: 16.0 GB/s

Thus, I don't think it's a problem having to buy two memory sticks (at about the same price as buying 1 memory stick twice the size).

[osxisfun]

jeebus. ram is like dirt cheap.

[zigzag]

Originally posted by superfula:
Like I said, the G5 isn't future proof. No place to upgrade (the iMac has almost as much expansion possibilities as the G5) . . .

Please tell this to my iMac, which has one inaccessible hard drive, one inaccessible optical drive, one extra memory slot (barely accessible), no FW 800, no USB 2, no PCI slots, no audio in/out, a fixed monitor . . . etc.

[PacHead]

Don't forget the audio people.

I guess I'm one of the ten percent then, since I'm looking at getting a dual G5.

I'm not too into the video stuff, but I'd think that audio is even more demanding than video, since audio people run all their stuff in realtime. No rendering or anything going on here,

Also, i hope the ram prices come down soon, because I could definitely make good use of that 8 GIG w/ram.

[Eug]

Originally posted by PacHead:
Don't forget the audio people.

I guess I'm one of the ten percent then, since I'm looking at getting a dual G5.

I'm not too into the video stuff, but I'd think that audio is even more demanding than video, since audio people run all their stuff in realtime. No rendering or anything going on here,

Also, i hope the ram prices come down soon, because I could definitely make good use of that 8 GIG w/ram.

It's not the same as what you're interested in but, the optical ports definitely interest me. I'm a little disappointed though since for 5.1 DVD output my computer sound system has only a coax digital input. No optical on that one.

Also, maybe you can help me. I have a velocity sensitive MIDI controller (no sounds) that I'd like to hook up to a Mac. With the insane bandwidth and speed of the G5 it sounds like with the proper program I could simply use a low end sequencer to output the sound, if it had some good instrument samples. For MIDI I'm guessing I could just use a cheap MIDI I/O box like this:



But what cheap software to use? And would I benefit greatly from a G5 or should my TiBook suffice? (I'm a n00b as you can see.) A problem with my older Celeron was that I would sometimes get a slight lag when running my sequencer this way. I haven't tested it lately though on my faster XP CPU though, since my software doesn't run under XP.

All I want is a nice set of samples for a piano and to be able to play with no lag, and maybe record my playing into MIDI on the sequencer every once a while. And I'm thinking that for li'l ol' me, a 1.8 GHz G5 would still be fine, but a TiBook might be problematic in certain situations.

[eddiecatflap]

..i'm convinced the dual 2ghz is the ONLY way to go..

[LightWaver-67]

I am one of the lower percentile that actually does a LOT of processor-intensive work... and I do mean "Work"... I am a designer by trade.

I do a lot of 3D, Video editing via FCP & DVD Studio Pro, your typical array of design apps (PShop, Illustrator, InDesign, etc.) and audio editing (I co-own a 24-track studio too).

I would LOVE to have a dual-2Ghz G5 to cut my rendering times from 30-minutes per frame to mere minutes (I'm currently running a 533Mhz w/ 1.5Gb RAM). My best "guess" is that a dual-2G would be roughly 10-times faster at rendering (?). but that's an extremely uneducated guess. Some think it may be more... if that's true... I'd LOVE to get 3-minutes or less per frame for full-frame resolution rendering...!!!

(I'm currently too-lazy to render in compositing layers)

[Eug]

To be honest, if I were to get a PowerMac in 2004, I'd consider a dual as well. But that's only because I can get an educational discount, and because my work would pay for a good chunk of it. But I don't think I'd actually need one, and neither would most people here. However, there ARE many people who would be able to use the speed. If they have the money then great, go for it. The ADC and student discounts are also good incentives for dual G5.

However, I'd hazard to guess that many users might do better to get dual hard drives than dual CPUs:

If your budget ceiling is <$3000 for hardware, then dual G5 is probably already out of your range. Don't forget memory and hard drives, etc.

1.8 GHz G5
2x256 MB RAM
2x512 MB RAM from a 3rd party (+$185).
ATI Radeon 9600 Pro (+$50)
160 GB HD
160 GB HD from a 3rd party (+$200, and yes my local stores sell serial ATA drives)
SuperDrive
Total $2805.

For comparison, the dual G5 setup with 2 drives and 1.5 GB RAM would cost you $3355. Not a bad deal for $550 more who need the speed, but it's a lot of extra $ for those on a budget.

[�ig�]

Originally posted by Arkham_c:
_________________
Vinicit qui patitur.

Correctly: Vincit qui patitur.

[zazou]

First, the ammount of mis/mal-informed info floating around in here is pretty thick.

The G4's MPX bus (slow) is it's Achilles Heel... it always was and always will be. No benchmark will ever change that. Regardless of how great the G4 cpu maybe it is crippled by its total set up...the G4 is starved for data from memory. Anything beyond 1.42 only makes it worse and the speed benefit falls of dramatically

There is basically enough left in the G4 to get the iMac up through 1.4 in the next 12 months and then it will convert to G5 (.13 process) at similar clock rate (1.5 ish) on a revised G5 buss...probably not unlike the entry G5 now.


With SJ and IBM saying 3Ghz within a year I imagine we will see a MWSF 04 something like

G5 single 1.8 1999
G5 Dual 2.2 2499
G5 Dual 2.6 2999

Then in 12 mths-ish from WWDC 03

G5 single 2.0 1899
G5 dual 2.5 2399
G5 dual 3.0 2999 (.09 process)


Just a guess.

[zigzag]

Originally posted by Eug:
If your budget ceiling is <$3000 for hardware, then dual G5 is probably already out of your range. Don't forget memory and hard drives, etc.

1.8 GHz G5
2x256 MB RAM
2x512 MB RAM from a 3rd party (+$185).
ATI Radeon 9600 Pro (+$50)
160 GB HD
160 GB HD from a 3rd party (+$200, and yes my local stores sell serial ATA drives)
SuperDrive
Total $2805.

Eug, I agree with your reasoning - actually, the 1.6 would be plenty for me - but is the ATI Pro card worth an extra $50 for non-gamers/non-designers? Is it useful for DV and Photoshop (which I do), or is it mostly for gaming and 3D graphics?

[edit: you can disregard this - I just saw the other thread on video cards.]

[PacHead]

Originally posted by Eug:
It's not the same as what you're interested in but, the optical ports definitely interest me. I'm a little disappointed though since for 5.1 DVD output my computer sound system has only a coax digital input. No optical on that one.

Also, maybe you can help me. I have a velocity sensitive MIDI controller (no sounds) that I'd like to hook up to a Mac. With the insane bandwidth and speed of the G5 it sounds like with the proper program I could simply use a low end sequencer to output the sound, if it had some good instrument samples. For MIDI I'm guessing I could just use a cheap MIDI I/O box like this:



But what cheap software to use? And would I benefit greatly from a G5 or should my TiBook suffice? (I'm a n00b as you can see.) A problem with my older Celeron was that I would sometimes get a slight lag when running my sequencer this way. I haven't tested it lately though on my faster XP CPU though, since my software doesn't run under XP.

All I want is a nice set of samples for a piano and to be able to play with no lag, and maybe record my playing into MIDI on the sequencer every once a while. And I'm thinking that for li'l ol' me, a 1.8 GHz G5 would still be fine, but a TiBook might be problematic in certain situations.

I'm not sure of your definition of cheap, but Reason (about $230) is a killer program that is very low on the CPU and It would absolutely scream on a G5. Reason is even acceptable when i run it on my pismo 400. It is not a full -fledged sequencer such as Logic, Cubase or Performer, but it all depends how much intensive midi work you intend to do.

Those who are serious about this stuff use a multitude of different programs .

If you just want something easy to record midi into, that works great and is easy to learn, Reason is awesome. Reason will not record audio, so if you're looking to do that, you should perhaps look into one of the other sequencers perhaps. Some of them have "lite" versions available.

For a beginner, I'd say reason has everything you could want and more. Drummachine, sampler, rex-player, various synth modules, FX , and now they even have Akai import available for it.

Audio latency has a lot to do with the soundcard you're using, and the drivers it has. The latency with the internal soundcard in the G4s is a bit too much for most serious work, and I'm not sure what kind of card apple is going to put into the G5's. Theres a few decent soundcards available for around $150, that will give you an extremely low latency and pretty good quality sound. As an example the m-audio 24/96 is a decent card that offers very low latency, decent sound at up to 24 bit 96 k, even midi in /out and analogue in out and spdif in/out. The only drawback with this card is that it disables sleep on your system, but then again i never put my g4 to sleep. So, how much of a disadvantage this is, depends on the user.

Yeah, that midiman USB interface will work fine. Most midi controllers nowadays have built in midi interfaces, but since you already own a midi controller, that will do the trick. Now, if you were to buy a soundcard that also has midi on it, you would not need to buy that midi interface.

And by the way, you don't mention which tibook you have, but even the lowest tibook will run f. ex reason just fine. With a G5, im scared to even think about all the voices one will be able to run at once. If you were to get a soundcard for your tibook, you would either have to get a pcmcia card or a USB interface or Firewire interface. The card i previously mentioned is for desktops, since it's PCI only.

Hopefully my babbling has been useful.

[OreoCookie]

The middle model is usually the sweet spot. Wish it were dual though.

[Eug Wanker]

Thank you so much PacHead! It will take me a while to digest it all though. BTW, I'm using a GHz TiBook.

The 1.6 G5 is futurer-proof, I believe, because it can handle 4GB of memory. As memory becomes cheaper, you can load more in over time (like my eight slot IIci--I had 8x8MB for 64MB when prices fell to $50 for an 8MB chip.--WHAM!).

Heh. I am giving a talk to some computer n00bs about taking digital pictures. My recommended low-end hardware for new desktop setups on the Mac side is a G5 1.6 with 512+ MB RAM. I won't bother mentioning the G4 unless somebody asks or wants a Mac laptop. I'm sure I'll only get Windows questions though.

[PoisonTooth]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
GAWD man! You sound like my GF!

GF: So tell me why you want a new $3000 computer... You just got a new Powerbook.

Me: Because it's fast.

GF: You keep talking about how fast that Powerbook is, are you saying it's not fast enough for you now? That this G5 is better?

Me: No, the G5 is just... faster.

GF: So this justifies you spending $3000 when the computer you already have will satisfy your needs?

Me: Silence woman! Can't you see that I need and crave more performance and mutiple processors?!? IT MUST BE MINE!!!

GF: So, you want this new G5 to simply satisfy your testosterone driven compulsion for more power?

Me: Well yeah... That's about it...

GF: I thought so.

Yes, but the PowerBook is nowhere near fast. The G5 is.

[Shaddim]

Originally posted by PoisonTooth:
Yes, but the PowerBook is nowhere near fast. The G5 is.

That would be your opinion. It's plenty fast for most of the work I do (especially with 10.3). I'm getting the Dual 2GHz because I need a desktop machine and it's the best value.

[x user]

Girlfriends and computers are used for the same reason, therefore they are always jealous of each other. When one gets more time, the other gets left out...

On topic, I can get a -non- superdrive 1.8ghz for $2299, VERY tempting.

Seriously, I don't need a superdrive since I don't even have a MiniDV cam...

[all2ofme]

Your username is at least as appropriate, Eug ,at least to those not of American persuasion (do Canadians use wanker the British way?), that is.

I'm still tossing up (pun not intended, but now that it's there what the hell) whether I'd be better off getting a nasty beige PC and putting it in a cupboard as a server. If the G5 had been released before I bought my TiSD I think I would have bought one of them and a 12" to go with it. As it stands now I'm happy, but my next purchase might be different.

Originally posted by Eug Wanker:
Yeah, especially now that Skywalker has a new and improved robotic hand that never tires...

[Eug]

In case you haven't seen these already, some benches from a NASA geek:



Actually, I find this one more interesting:



Kick-@ss (TM, Steve Jobs, Inc.)

[TC]

Originally posted by Arkham_c:
I warned my wife more than a year ago that this machine was coming, and that I'd be buying one.

Now I just gotta get the cash together. I'm selling my Sawtooth G4, my B&W G3, my Daystar Genesis, and whatever else I can find.

What about selling the wife? If she's faster than mine + can multitask I'll give you $1000. Just have to wait till i sell mine as there could be compatibility problems if I try to use them together.

[Eug]

OK, I got this thx.



Now I just need software.

As for the single 1.8 G5, that still seems like the sweet spot to me. I check out some pricing lately (and the prices have dropped):

$2,419.00

Single 1.8 GHz PowerPC G5
1GHz frontside bus
512K L2 cache/processor
512MB DDR400 128-bit SDRAM
Expandable to 8GB SDRAM
160 GB Serial ATA
SuperDrive
Three PCI-X Slots
ATI Radeon 9600 Pro with 64MB DDR video memory

+

160 GB Serial ATA hard drive - $175
2 x 512 MB DDR400 (Crucial) - $190

Total: $2784 for the 1.8 with 320 GB hard drive space, 1.5 GB RAM, & Radeon 9600 Pro.

[slider]

Some of you are predicting the low end PowerMac to remain a single processor machine for quiet sometime. I just see them moving the pro line to duals by the second revision at the latest, I think now that Apple can move forward, they will. And if they stick a G5 in an iMac ( really, "when" they stick a G5 in an iMac), that will be the difference between the pro line and consumer line, single vs. dual, not G4 vs G5. Personally I think they need to move the iMac to the G5 as soon as possible, more for a preception bases than for consumer need. But, why not have a smokingly fast consumer machine? People need to be able to sit in front of a Mac and just have their jaws drop. It is not enough for Apple to just have caught up, it needs to pull ahead, the preception needs to be that Macs are just faster than PC's, especially since the preception is that Macs are more expensive, give them a reason to pay for it.

[Eug Wanker]

But, why not have a smokingly fast consumer machine?

Cost and heat dissipation.

I don't know how much a G4 costs, vs. a G5, but an iMac with real DDR support and a fast G4 would be a great consumer machine. (Too bad that G4 CPU doesn't exist yet.)

Personally I think it would be foolish to have all the pro line as duals, unless there are issues with CPU speed (eg. recent G4s). If the CPU is fast enough, you should save the coin and go single.

[Arkham_c]

Originally posted by TC:
What about selling the wife? If she's faster than mine + can multitask I'll give you $1000. Just have to wait till i sell mine as there could be compatibility problems if I try to use them together.

They'd have to come out with some VERY interesting attachments to the G5 to make me trade my wife for it...

[Esquare]

Originally posted by Arkham_c:
They'd have to come out with some VERY interesting attachments to the G5 to make me trade my wife for it...

Hey guys, warn me when they come up for auction on eBay! Will there be a Buy Now option?

[Eug Wanker]

The 1.6 G5 is futurer-proof, I believe, because it can handle 4GB of memory. As memory becomes cheaper, you can load more in over time (like my eight slot IIci--I had 8x8MB for 64MB when prices fell to $50 for an 8MB chip.--WHAM!).

1.6 --> 1.8 - Big motherboard design changes.

By the way, this is why I think the 1.8 is a way better deal than the 1.6 too:

1) Much easier memory expansion compared to the 1.6.
The memory must be installed in pairs, but the 1.6 only has 4 memory slots.
Say you get the upgrade from the stock 2x128 to 2x256. Then you add an extra 2x256 from a 3rd party. That give a total of 1 GB, using up all the slots. 1 year later you want to upgrade? Well you'll have to remove memory.

2) The 1.8 uses faster memory than the 1.6. Dual channel DDR400 vs dual channel DDR333.
The 1.8 has an 800 MHz memory bus vs. a 667 MHz memory bus on the 1.6.

3) The 1.6 is only $150 less than the 1.8, if spec'd the same.
Remember the 1.6 comes with less memory and less hard drive space. The 1.6's 256 MB stock memory is totally inadequate for a Power Mac. The 80 GB hard drive is OK, but again for many Power Mac users it will be limiting.

4) PCI-X (not very useful for most people though).


Here is my recommended 1.6 setup ($2300):

� 1.6GHz PowerPC G5
� 512MB DDR333 SDRAM (PC2700) - 2x256
� 160GB Serial ATA - 7200rpm
� ATI Radeon 9600 Pro
� 56k V.92 internal modem
� SuperDrive (DVD-R/CD-RW)

And here is my recommended 1.8 setup ($2450):

� 1.8GHz PowerPC G5
� 512MB DDR400 SDRAM (PC3200) - 2x256
� 160GB Serial ATA - 7200rpm
� ATI Radeon 9600 Pro
� 56k V.92 internal modem
� SuperDrive (DVD-R/CD-RW)

Thus:

1.6 --> 1.8 = $150
1.8 --> dual 2.0 = $550

[xMetal]

Originally posted by itai195:
Next time, ask her why she buys so many shoes... That tends to put an end to the girlfriend issue

My girlfriend would counter with "All the shoes I've ever bought don't add up to the cost of half that computer."

(darn smart girls...)

[hadocon]

Originally posted by Eug Wanker:
Cost and heat dissipation.

I don't know how much a G4 costs, vs. a G5, but an iMac with real DDR support and a fast G4 would be a great consumer machine. (Too bad that G4 CPU doesn't exist yet.)

Personally I think it would be foolish to have all the pro line as duals, unless there are issues with CPU speed (eg. recent G4s). If the CPU is fast enough, you should save the coin and go single.

You are right about a single being fast enough, but a dual can do 2 things fast enough. With the multitasking abilities of OS X, Steve should let everyone take advantage of this capability.

[ckohler]

I think the Dual 2.0 would be best for me as I tend to do a LOT of video encoding (MPEG2, DivX, etc.).

For example, currently it takes my 800mhz G4 iMac about 3 hours to encode 30 minutes of DV footage into DivX. I'd love to know how long it would take one of these new G5s to do the same task.

[zigzag]

Originally posted by Eug Wanker:
By the way, this is why I think the 1.8 is a way better deal than the 1.6 too: . . . [/B]

Great analysis EW. It's great to have other people around who are similarly obsessed but can do the thinking for me.

Any idea whether the single will be noticeably quieter than a dual? I'm really counting on the G5 being quieter than previous towers.

[Bbazzarrakk]

Eug Wanker, I agree with most of your points, which are very well thought out. I even agree that the design of the G5 probably makes it more of a monster than the Dual G4s. However, I think you're just dead wrong about two things:

And contrary to popular belief, OS X doesn't magically SMP-ize everything.

I completely disagree. OS X is an SMP monster, that pretty much does "magically SMP-ize everything". The thread scheduler is multi-processor aware and that makes all the difference, in my opinion. According to top, I have 120 threads running at this very moment. That could be split 60/60 or a billion other combinations. That's huge, in my book. Safari uses 5 threads all by itself as I'm typing this, so maybe Apple needs to give quads more thought! (Yes, I'm kidding.)

For instance, with Bryce (if you're into that sort of thing), the single 1.6 G5 would wipe the floor with the dual 1.25 G4, no question.

The problem with this whole line of thinking is that you're considering one operation in one application at a time. Modern computers don't work like that at all. How much is your OS doing in the background when it's completely at rest? A little work, I promise. Right now I have six applications open, which is probably about average for me. The OS is serving web pages, running it's services, etc., in addition to remembering to keep everything running. Even a lower speed Dual (I have 2x533) keeps everything just flowing along all the time. You've spent too much time on that powerbook!

I agree that 1.8 is an animal. I do believe that it probably even whips the Dual 1.25 G4 in a lot of things. (That magic G5 bus is a scale tipper.) For me though, I didn't even have to think about the single / dual tradoffs and since I wanted a G5, that left just one choice...

Baz (Awaiting his 2x2.0 with much excitement)

[bri-guy]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
GAWD man! You sound like my GF!

GF: So tell me why you want a new $3000 computer... You just got a new Powerbook.

Me: Because it's fast.

GF: You keep talking about how fast that Powerbook is, are you saying it's not fast enough for you now? That this G5 is better?

Me: No, the G5 is just... faster.

GF: So this justifies you spending $3000 when the computer you already have will satisfy your needs?

Me: Silence woman! Can't you see that I need and crave more performance and mutiple processors?!? IT MUST BE MINE!!!

GF: So, you want this new G5 to simply satisfy your testosterone driven compulsion for more power?

Me: Well yeah... That's about it...

GF: I thought so.

My conversation:
Me: So Apple just came out with a new computer. I was thinking about buying one, but I don't know if I can justify $3000 when my computer works just fine. All it needs is a new hard drive.

GF: You like playing on computers, right? Would you be happy with a new one?

Me: Well, yeah.

GF: So buy it.

She rocks.

[Spliffdaddy]

Note that the bar graph represents MFLOPs per MHz. Having more MFLOPs per MHz is a good thing - if you've got enough MHz. However, the 2.66GHz P4 would have better performance than the 2GHz G5 - by virtue of its higher MHz. In that respect, the bar graph is misleading. The 2.66GHz P4 actually does more MFLOPs in the same amount of time (one second, in this example) than the G5 (254 vs 255). The G4 gets trounced in a bad way. We won't discuss that.

[Eug Wanker]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
Note that the bar graph represents MFLOPs per MHz. Having more MFLOPs per MHz is a good thing - if you've got enough MHz. However, the 2.66GHz P4 would have better performance than the 2GHz G5 - by virtue of its higher MHz. In that respect, the bar graph is misleading. The 2.66GHz P4 actually does more MFLOPs in the same amount of time (one second, in this example) than the G5 (254 vs 255). The G4 gets trounced in a bad way. We won't discuss that.

Actually, the 2.66 P4 and 2.0 GHz G5 are basically identical. The difference between 254 and 255 is 0.4%.

However, note that this graph does NOT take into account vector optimization. Much more important is the fact that Dr. Hunter was easily able to Altivec the PPC code, for huge gains over the P4 2.66 (even with a lowly 1 GHz G4). He said he has having problems doing the same sort of thing with the P4 using the Intel compiler, because the compiled code simply produced garbage data.

[Loopydude]

I was thinking something similar...

When I do the math, a SP P4 2.66GHz kinda stomps on a SP G5 1.6GHz.

The G5 in question, with combo drive, costs about $1800.

You could pick up the P4 for under $1000 without searching hard.

Also, it looks like, cycle for cycle, the speed diff. between a G4 and a G5 ain't all that different.

Am I missing something here? Where's all that extra raw speed you're supposed to get with 64 bit and a fast, fast bus? I thought the G4 is kinda hobbled by slow bus speed. Doesn't seem to perform as badly as I thought it would, speaking in terms of power/cycle, compared to the G5.

So...what's so great about the G5 then, other than greater clock speeds than the G4, in practical terms?

[Eug Wanker]

Originally posted by Loopydude:
I was thinking something similar...

When I do the math, a SP P4 2.66GHz kinda stomps on a SP G5 1.6GHz.

The G5 in question, with combo drive, costs about $1800.

You could pick up the P4 for under $1000 without searching hard.

Also, it looks like, cycle for cycle, the speed diff. between a G4 and a G5 ain't all that different.

Am I missing something here? Where's all that extra raw speed you're supposed to get with 64 bit and a fast, fast bus? I thought the G4 is kinda hobbled by slow bus speed. Doesn't seem to perform as badly as I thought it would, speaking in terms of power/cycle, compared to the G5.

So...what's so great about the G5 then, other than greater clock speeds than the G4, in practical terms?

This bench does not stress the memory bus.

As for 64-bit: Don't expect much speed boost from it. Most of the time it will make no difference, unless you're running an 6 GB database or something.

[Eug]

I found this bench interesting. It is by no means definitive, since it's a synthetic bench, but it puts a single 1.8 GHz G5 ahead of a dual 1.25 GHz in terms of raw CPU performance. Of course, the dual 2.0 absolutely screams, however.

[Thilo Ettelt]

I'm about to order a Dual 2 GHz PowerMac and my usage (all together/simultaneously) would look like this:

- running X-Plane in the highest detail setting for several hours (realtime flights)
- Safari
- iChat
- Mail
- iTunes (playing)
- Virtual PC
- Project Builder / IB (probably compiling)
- Dock Temp

Some apps will add occasionally (most certainly to the already running ones):

- Dilo
- FTP Client
- iPhoto
- AIM or ICQ
- TextEdit
- iMovie (only when a vacation movie needs to be edited)
- iDVD (only when a vacation movie needs to be burned on DVD)
- watching QT movies

I will probably end up with 2 GB of RAM. I hope the RAM is enough for that.
And I wonder if the Dual 2 GHz PowerMac will really handle this without slowing down too much (still flowing Aqua gfx etc).


- Thilo

[idyll]

Definitely. You don't even need a dual 2GHz G5 for that. I need it more than you and unfortunately due to financial reasons all I can afford is the single 1.6GHz G5. I'll be running Photoshop all day every day.