[Eug Wanker]

Benchmark Suite #1

Benchmark Suite #2

The PowerLogix G4 1.35 GHz 7457 with 2 MB L2 does very well though. The Sonnet 1.7 7447A does very well on some tests and not so well on others. However, a few of the tests seem pretty wonky, which makes me wonder if it's due to differences in video cards or something.

[Lateralus]

FYI: NewEgg has the Sonnet 1.7GHz for towers in stock and shipping for $459, $40 less than Sonnet's MSRP.

[brucejy]

The PowerLogix G4 1.35 GHz 7457 with 2 MB L2 does very well though. The Sonnet 1.7 7447A does very well on some tests and not so well on others. However, a few of the tests seem pretty wonky, which makes me wonder if it's due to differences in video cards or something.

Do you mean that perhaps these benchmarks can't take advantage of the 7447A's architecture? I'm kind of amazed that it scores so poorly.

BTW, here is a comparison to duals:

Time (in seconds) to open and close 1000 windows in the finder
Lower is better:
Time (in seconds) to export 500MB File to MPEG-4 w/ Final Cut 4
Lower is better:
AltiVec Fractal Carbon - Overall Score
Higher is better:
CPU Loading (stress test) - iTunes & Photoshop CS
Lower is better:
Cinebench 2003 (CINEMA 4D R8) - Overall Score
Higher is better:

GigaDesigns G-Celerator Dual G4/1.2GHz @1.3GHz
18
217
9126.5
413
1599

PowerLogix PowerForce Series 133 Dual G4/1.33GHz 7457
25
225
10163.8
426
1309

Sonnet Encore/ST G4/1.7GHz 7447 (512k L2 / 0MB L3)
23
214
6354.9
692
1193

Looks like the dual really makes a difference. Plus, the L3 cache appears to be really important for interfacing with the low-speed G4 bus.

[Eug Wanker]

Originally posted by brucejy:
Looks like the dual really makes a difference.

Of course it does. A HUGE difference in many apps. Not really a fair comparison though.

Plus, the L3 cache appears to be really important for interfacing with the low-speed G4 bus.

Remember, the 7457 and the 7447A have the same L2 cache, so having the L3 is of course a bonus. OTOH, with the 7455, the L2 is half the size, so the comparison is less clear.

[Lateralus]

I'm still wondering why GigaDesigns has only offered and is only offering their Dual 7457 for 100MHz FSB G4s.

I'd like to see some larger adoption of the 7457 until the 7448 is ready to roll. But if the past few weeks is any indication, I doubt we'll see it happen.

[Eug Wanker]

Originally posted by Lateralus:
I'd like to see some larger adoption of the 7457 until the 7448 is ready to roll. But if the past few weeks is any indication, I doubt we'll see it happen.

Well, the 7447A clocks higher, and is cheaper to implement. And the 7448 is a direct replacement for the 7447A. (There is no such thing as the 7457A or 7458.) So I agree... I wouldn't count on anyone going the 7457 route for new stuff.

[Eug Wanker]

Originally posted by Lateralus:
And they don't bode well for the 7447...

Cube benches:



The Cinebench score is high for the Sonnet because of the GPU, but AFAIK, everything else is a CPU bench.

[MORT A POTTY]

actually, things look very good for the 7447A... I don't know what you are talking about. it is holding it's own (single processor) against dual processor 1.33Ghz configurations and beating some dual processor configs...

this is pretty contrasting to what Giga said about the 7447As...

[Lateralus]

How do things look good? It's barely holding it's own against 7455s and 7457s that are at a 300MHz+ clock speed disadvantage.

[Eug Wanker]

Originally posted by Lateralus:
How do things look good? It's barely holding it's own against 7455s and 7457s that are at a 300MHz+ clock speed disadvantage.

Hmmm... it's beating the 1.35 GHz PowerLogix 7457 with 2 MB L3 by 28% in After Effects (and by 27% in Altivec Fractal Carbon). It's also winning in the MP4 and Photoshop/iTunes tests, although not by much. It will be a bit slower in a few other tests, but on average the 7447A does better. OTOH, if you can find an inexpensive PowerLogix 7457, then it would be a good deal for the performance, if you don't mind their not-so-stellar reputation.

[LeeG]

Based on the OWC benchmarks for my AGPG4/500 for the 1.4 OWC vs the 1.7 Sonnet, picking the 5 things I do most (itunesCPU, startuptime, framerates, etc), the 1.4 roughly equalled, or beat the 1.7 on everything but 10.3 startup time. So I ordered the 1.4 - save $75 - maybe I'll blow it on the iTMS.




I'll let you all know how I make out when it comes (12/28)-

Lee

[Eug Wanker]

My Cube with Sonnet 1.7 vs. the stock Cube 450.

Code:
	CPU Test	200.41	
 _GCD Loop	187.53	7.32 Mops/sec
 _Floating Point Basic	198.91	719.32 Mflop/sec
 _AltiVec Basic	208.54	6.06 Gflop/sec
 _vecLib FFT	206.50	3.21 Gflop/sec
 _Floating Point Library	201.96	8.08 Mops/sec

Cinebench CPU is 149.

The stock Sonnet fan is too loud. Maybe I'll get the GigaDesigns one, or else undervolt the Sonnet one, if the plug is convenient to get at. It even makes my table vibrate slightly, which adds to the noise. Air coming out the top is barely warm though, even with benchmarking.

BTW, I didn't install it the CPU upgrade. The store did. The first time didn't work, but he said he just reinstalled it and it worked fine. He says he did not update the firmware (which was already the latest).

There is no hiss or chirping whatsoever. Stability is perfectly fine, and sleep works great.

Recommendation: The Sonnet 1.7 works great, but a different fan is recommended.

[LeeG]

Card came today - 1.4 OWC - I ran Xbench on the old 500Mhz CPU, but then had to go to work, I get home at 7AM, and I will IMMEDIATELY install the card, and run some post-mod numbers on Xbench to see where we are at. Then I start the long process of "real world testing"--

Lee

[LeeG]

Installed it myself in the tower without a problem (except I had to install OS9 to upgrade my firmware)-

Here's the xbench pre/post, Sawtooth AGP/500, Radeon 8500, 1Gb Ram - upgraded to 1.4Ghz OWC card-



Works great,

Lee

[Lateralus]

Congrats.

Wouldn't hurt to see if 1.5GHz is stable.

[MORT A POTTY]

coolness. I second the 1.5Ghz motion

[Eug Wanker]

Originally posted by Eug Wanker:
The stock Sonnet fan is too loud. Maybe I'll get the GigaDesigns one, or else undervolt the Sonnet one, if the plug is convenient to get at. It even makes my table vibrate slightly, which adds to the noise. Air coming out the top is barely warm though, even with benchmarking.

Fan problem solved! I stuck a 100 Ohm resistor on the fan wire, and now it's very quiet, but there is still noticeable flow. I suspect it's running as if it were around 7V instead of 12V. 7V is within the operating range of this fan.

[brucejy]

So, after five days, how pleased are you with the 1.7 GHz sonnet card?

[Eug Wanker]

Originally posted by brucejy:
So, after five days, how pleased are you with the 1.7 GHz sonnet card?

Works great, and snappy. The fan mod (to slow down the fan) doesn't affect stability at all despite the fact I've been making lots of use of the hard drive as well, and the hard drive is the other piece in the Cube that can make it warm. That not a surprise though, since it was completely stable when I ran it fanless (for several hours) too. (However, without the fan, the Cube is very warm. With the slow fan, the air coming from the vent only slightly warm, even with heavy usage.)



The fan mod consists of just of a 100 Ohm resistor spliced to the red wire. The red wire usually runs parallel to the blue wire, but I added a bit of wire length to the resistor on the red wire so it'd be easy to tuck away.



It's basically silent overall, since I'm using the quiet Seagate Barracuda V drive too. (Without the fan mod, the fan noise is very noticeable... and irritating.)

BTW, with the Sonnet extension installed, one can still boot directly into OS 9. I have no use for OS 9, but it may be of interest to some of you. Classic doesn't need the Sonnet extension though I'm told.

[MORT A POTTY]

I'm glad you're happy with it.

which reminds me... it's now January! the GigaDesigns dual 1.7Ghz upgrades should ship out later this month!

hazzah!

[Chinasaur]

Mort,

Are the Dual 1.7's shipping yet? Has your's shipped yet?

I've got the cash...now just waiting for word they are available.

[MORT A POTTY]

Originally posted by Chinasaur:
Mort,

Are the Dual 1.7's shipping yet? Has your's shipped yet?

I've got the cash...now just waiting for word they are available.

funny you should ask. I called Giga today to confirm what they had told me a couple weeks ago (end of January) and the guy confirmed that they were still indeed slated for end of this month and that everything was going well with them and he sees no reason why there would be a delay.

so, I'm still waiting but it shouldn't be much longer. just a few more weeks. and they haven't charged me for it yet (and won't till it ships) so that's awesome too (although I kinda wish they would in a "so I will know how much money I have left in my bank account" kinda way... I live very much paycheck to paycheck.

I'll post the minute I get a shipping confirmation though and let you guys know.

[saru boy]

I was thinking about getting a processor upgrade for my 450mhz Cube, but with the introduction of the Mac Mini, now I'm not so sure. $499 for a 1.7Ghz G4 proc upgrade or $599 for a 1.42Ghz Mini...hmm.

Pros on the Cube upgrade: Can use existing memory/HD and the 1.7Ghz 7447 may be faster, but can't say for sure since Apple doesn't list what type of G4 they use in the Mini.

Cons on the Cube upgrade: The Cube is old (and out of warranty) and I can't be sure how long the various parts inside will hold out (especially the power supply). Memory is slower PC100. Will have to pay $129 for Tiger (plus $49 for iLife). Video card is slower (I have a GeForce 2MX) and uses obsolete ADC port. Limited to built in DVD-Rom drive.

Pros on the Mini: It's new (with Apple warranty). Memory and system bus is faster. Video is faster and uses DVI (comes bundled with VGA adapter). DVD-CDRW Combo drive standard with optional superdrive. Granted adding memory will add a bit of cost, but in a few months it'll come bundled with Tiger and that would offset the cost of upgrading the memory.

Cons on the Mini: Memory will cost more, and the HD may be slower since it's a 2.5 inch drive.

Personally, I'm leaning towards spending the extra $100 and getting a Mini rather than a processor upgrade. How about other Cube owners out there?

[Lateralus]

1) The Mini uses the 7447A, not much doubt there. Same as the upgrade cards.

2) You'd have to pay $129 for Tiger anyways unless you wait until closer to summer to buy a Mini, so that it is preloaded.

3) I wouldn't count on the 32MB Radeon 9200 being any faster than the 32MB GeForce 2 in the your Cube. And having ADC is a plus as I see it, so long as you have VGA along with it.

4) I would count on the Cube's HDD being significantly slower than your Cube's.

I'd stick with the Cube, personally. It is in a higher class than the Mini. The Mini is more of a disposable.

[JohnM15141]

Since I have a Cube already, I was thinking, I can get the 1.7Ghz upgrade for my Cube at Macworld for $460 which is close to the "mini" Mac. However, I think I''ll do it because I have a Radeon 9000 Pro that I can cram in there too. What do you Think?

Originally posted by Lateralus:
1) The Mini uses the 7447A, not much doubt there. Same as the upgrade cards.

2) You'd have to pay $129 for Tiger anyways unless you wait until closer to summer to buy a Mini, so that it is preloaded.

3) I wouldn't count on the 32MB Radeon 9200 being any faster than the 32MB GeForce 2 in the your Cube. And having ADC is a plus as I see it, so long as you have VGA along with it.

4) I would count on the Cube's HDD being significantly slower than your Cube's.

I'd stick with the Cube, personally. It is in a higher class than the Mini. The Mini is more of a disposable.

[Lateralus]

Any reason to prolong the life of a Cube is a good one.

[yikes600]

I built my own mini-killer during the last couple weeks. Some parts were new and some off Ebay:
"Digital Audio" G4
Giga Designs 1.33GHz G4 w/ 2MB L3 cache
1.5GB PC133 RAM
160GB HD
Radeon 9600 Pro 64MB
8x Superdrive (DVR-107)
$865 total

vs.

Mac mini
G4/1.25GHz G4 (no L3)
512MB RAM
80GB HD
Radeon 9200 32MB
4x Superdrive
$724 total or
$1074 with 1GB RAM or
$1124 with 1GB RAM, G4/1.42GHz (no L3)

Mac mini is probably fine for most people unless they want to play games. I love upgrading and tweaking more than I love a small footprint.

[Simon]

I'd dump the old Cube, spare myself the hassle of upgrading all its components and get a properly BTO'ed mini.

You get a better bus, GPU, and a smaller and sexier enclosure with a new warranty. And best of all, you get that new Mac smell when you take it out of the box. No CPU upgrade will give you that.

The Cube is dead, long live the Mac mini!

[MORT A POTTY]

Originally posted by yikes600:
I built my own mini-killer during the last couple weeks. Some parts were new and some off Ebay:
"Digital Audio" G4
Giga Designs 1.33GHz G4 w/ 2MB L3 cache
1.5GB PC133 RAM
160GB HD
Radeon 9600 Pro 64MB
8x Superdrive (DVR-107)
$865 total

how much was the RAM, and where can I get 2x512MB for cheapest

(sorry this is a bit OT)

[Agent69]

Did anyone notice the MDD upgrades at Gigadesigns? It looks like I could upgrade my single processor 1.25ghz G4 MDD to a Dual 1.42Ghz G4 with this upgrade, although I am not sure it makes sense to do so.

[MORT A POTTY]

you could have done that when you bought it

but seriously, I'd wait till they come out with faster upgrades, a few Mhz and one more processor (to me anyway) isn't worth the premium they charge for such an upgrade.

[yikes600]

Originally posted by MORT A POTTY:
how much was the RAM, and where can I get 2x512MB for cheapest

(sorry this is a bit OT)

The seller's name was "hartmurmur" and he was selling about 20 sticks of 512MB crucial PC133 going for ~$50 each. Unfortunately that was a few weeks ago and he's not selling anymore. Just keep an eye out.

TransIntl is selling mac-compatible 512MB PC133 for $69 with this link. Pretty decent deal as long as there's no tax.

[Weezer]

http://powerlogix.com/press/releases/2005/050111g4.html

how do we feel about the powerlogix new dual 1.7s vs the gigadesigns?

[Lateralus]

Overpriced, not-tinkerwithable, questionable quality due to past.

I have had two GigaDesigns upgrades and they have been sold as a rock.

However, I am intrigued by PL's 7457 upgrades. But I am a little put off by the pricing on the high-end.

[Todd Madson]

Been looking at this thread with interest. I've got a 400 mhz
Sawtooth PowerMac G4 with 2 gigs of ram and about 240 gigs of
disk, a Radeon 8500, and an Adaptec 2930.

If I go to the new G5 towers (much further down the road since I'm
currently unemployed) I gain a faster bus but it will be a while
before I had a 2 gigs ram / > 200 gigs of drive space but I also
gain in addition to the fast bus a faster CPU architecture.

On the other hand, if I upgrade my G4 to a faster CPU I would see
a vast increase in speed just from CPU alone although I'd be stuck
at the 100 mhz bus.

What to do? Best value/performance would be to obtain a dual CPU
upgrade and use that, then relegate my G4 tower to webserver duty
when I do eventually get the cash to get a G5 tower.

Of those out there with sawtooth machines, what upgrades are you
using? Would you suggest a lower mhz dual CPU upgrade vs. a higher
single? Thinking. Or just go fast dual?

[THE MAC GOD]

Wonder how well this will work on my 400 agp sawtooth.

[MORT A POTTY]

Originally posted by Lateralus:
Overpriced, not-tinkerwithable, questionable quality due to past.

I have had two GigaDesigns upgrades and they have been sold as a rock.

However, I am intrigued by PL's 7457 upgrades. But I am a little put off by the pricing on the high-end.

I would definitely agree with this based on my experience with them and the fact you can't change the jumper settings.

(see sig for more details on my experience with PL)

[LeeG]

Originally posted by Todd Madson:
Been looking at this thread with interest. I've got a 400 mhz
Sawtooth PowerMac G4 with 2 gigs of ram and about 240 gigs of
disk, a Radeon 8500, and an Adaptec 2930.

If I go to the new G5 towers (much further down the road since I'm
currently unemployed) I gain a faster bus but it will be a while
before I had a 2 gigs ram / > 200 gigs of drive space but I also
gain in addition to the fast bus a faster CPU architecture.

On the other hand, if I upgrade my G4 to a faster CPU I would see
a vast increase in speed just from CPU alone although I'd be stuck
at the 100 mhz bus.

What to do? Best value/performance would be to obtain a dual CPU
upgrade and use that, then relegate my G4 tower to webserver duty
when I do eventually get the cash to get a G5 tower.

Of those out there with sawtooth machines, what upgrades are you
using? Would you suggest a lower mhz dual CPU upgrade vs. a higher
single? Thinking. Or just go fast dual?

I detailed my upgrade experience earlier in this thread - 500Mhz sawtooth now 1.4Ghz for <$400. I was in the same boat - do I replace with a G5 tower, or upgrade. The 8500 I had, the HDs I had, the Ram and the superdrive convinced me to do the upgrade - and the machine rocks again!

It depends on your uses - if you are a graphics/video pro, I think you know the answer, if you're an internet/email/iLife person - the upgraded CPU will keep you cooking for a couple years at much less expense....

Lee

[Lateralus]

Well, looks like I may have to take myself out of the upgrade race guys. Just picked up a mint Dual 1.25GHz/1GB/SuperDrive MDD G4 with an unopened retail copy of Panther for $1,000 w/ shipping on eBay.

Sorry.

[MORT A POTTY]

sweet deal!

congrats.

[awcopus]

Are people fetishizing the continued use of outdated hardware here? I mean, I know the G4 is technically a live product for Apple with the iBooks and Powerbooks, but the performance edge of newer G5 machines is not insignificant. Leading me to wonder about people who are investing hundreds of dollars in "upgrades" to faster G4 chipsets.

Not trying to be a spoilsport, just suggesting that maybe hard earned money may yield a higher ROI with a G5-based Power Mac.

[MORT A POTTY]

Originally posted by awcopus:
Are people fetishizing the continued use of outdated hardware here? I mean, I know the G4 is technically a live product for Apple with the iBooks and Powerbooks, but the performance edge of newer G5 machines is not insignificant. Leading me to wonder about people who are investing hundreds of dollars in "upgrades" to faster G4 chipsets.

Not trying to be a spoilsport, just suggesting that maybe hard earned money may yield a higher ROI with a G5-based Power Mac.

if you want to pay the difference between an 800 dollar processor upgrade and a 3500 dollar Mac, then be my guest.

[animationeditor]

I just found the link to this thread from the main macnn.com page and wanted to chime in. I've got this upgrade, and have been running it in my Cube for the last couple of weeks.

It's a LOVELY upgrade, and along with the GeForce3 card, makes for a tasty 'Cube experience. I use my Cube as a MP3 server (both with my Tivo and with my SliMP3s on the network) and it servers both up without delay. On my original 450, there was a pause before playing would start, but now, BAM! I also use it for editing with Final Cut Pro HD. The screen redraws feel supersnapy, much faster than even my MDD G4 that I'm running my Avid on at work. Nice.

The only real downside is that I've got two fans in my Cube now, one for the GeForce3 and for the new fan in the bottom of the Cube from Sonnet. Small price to pay to prevent my Cube from turning into a molten block of goo.

I ran XBench, and uploaded the results at http://ladd.dyndns.org/xbench/merge.xhtml?doc2=91232, If that link doesn't work, go to go to http://ladd.dyndns.org/xbench/ and do a search for JHV Cube and you can compare the results to your own Cube to see if the upgrade is worth your money.

The results are:
Results 113.45
System Info
Xbench Version 1.1.3
System Version 10.3.7 (7S215)
Physical RAM 1536 MB
Model PowerMac5,1
Processor PowerPC G4 @ 0 MHz
L1 Cache 32K (instruction), 32K (data)
L2 Cache 256K
L3 Cache 1024K
Bus Frequency 100 MHz
Video Card GeForce3
Drive Type HDS722525VLAT80
CPU Test 186.07
GCD Loop 182.29 7.12 Mops/sec
Floating Point Basic 168.68 610.02 Mflop/sec
AltiVec Basic 203.07 5.90 Gflop/sec
vecLib FFT 199.04 3.09 Gflop/sec
Floating Point Library 181.52 7.27 Mops/sec
Thread Test 135.87
Computation 97.74 1.32 Mops/sec, 4 threads
Lock Contention 222.77 2.80 Mlocks/sec, 4 threads
Memory Test 72.88
System 80.07
Allocate 1027.51 670.24 Kalloc/sec
Fill 101.66 809.22 MB/sec
Copy 37.51 187.56 MB/sec
Stream 66.88
Copy 63.71 465.72 MB/sec [altivec]
Scale 64.46 475.70 MB/sec [altivec]
Add 70.82 453.27 MB/sec [altivec]
Triad 69.08 422.06 MB/sec [altivec]
Quartz Graphics Test 118.79
Line 93.59 2.38 Klines/sec [50% alpha]
Rectangle 99.43 6.99 Krects/sec [50% alpha]
Circle 110.92 2.56 Kcircles/sec [50% alpha]
Bezier 127.26 1.38 Kbeziers/sec [50% alpha]
Text 223.39 3.64 Kchars/sec
OpenGL Graphics Test 98.91
Spinning Squares 98.91 69.22 frames/sec
User Interface Test 125.70
Elements 125.70 40.43 refresh/sec
Disk Test 114.08
Sequential 120.95
Uncached Write 103.59 43.18 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write 109.54 44.86 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read 164.93 26.11 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read 121.56 49.11 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Random 107.95
Uncached Write 109.42 1.64 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write 102.96 23.22 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read 104.51 0.69 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read 115.84 23.84 MB/sec [256K blocks]
-----

So... as great at this is, let me tell you the heartbreak that is putting the specs up against the new Mac Mini 1.42... it's faster than my SuperCube!

Oh well... progress....

John V

[awcopus]

Originally posted by MORT A POTTY:
if you want to pay the difference between an 800 dollar processor upgrade and a 3500 dollar Mac, then be my guest.

I hear ya. I'd have a Varicam if somebody would pick up the $150,000 difference between what I can spend and what I'd need to run it. But seriously...

... if you spend $800 on this, you're $800 farther away from a G5. Otherwise, there are options before one is compelled to pony-up for the highest-end G5, but if that's you're goal, maybe it's worth making do with what you have until you can have what you want.

I guess it all depends on the percentage/perceived improvement in your specific computing experience that $800 gets you. Having recently sunk a ton of dough on the 2.5 duallie, I can vouch for the fact that you get used to the speed of a machine no matter how it performs... and its delays begin to feel as interminable as the delays on a 933 G4 felt.

[OsakaBill]

Originally posted by Weezer:
any word on what the native chip speed is? Is this a 1.42 overclocked to 1.7?

I think this is an excellent question. One of the reasons I would be more likely to buy from GigaDesigns is that GD readily posts this information on their website. Admitedly you have to decipher it, but it is there:

GigaDesigns Part Numbers

I purchased a one of GigaDesign's Dual 1.3 GHz upgrades for my Gigabit PowerMac G4 last year. If I remember correctly, this upgrade is based on 1.2 GHz chips. The important point is that the processor speed can be set by changing jumper settings. According to the sheet that came with upgrade, I can set the jumpers for speeds from 1 GHz to 1.5 GHz. (BTW, my G4 won't boot at 1.5 GHz and has frequent kernel panics at 1.4 GHz but runs beautifully at 1.3 GHz.)

I'd be leery of over-clocked chips, especially from PowerLogix.

[OsakaBill]

Originally posted by P:
FWIW, I'd prefer a 512K L2 over a 256K L2 + 2 MB L3. The lower L2 latency is worth the loss of the L3 in mixed applications. The L3 does save the situation a bit when the application is bandwidth limited, but in that case you should probably consider a G5 anyway.

While I do not think I am in any position to disagree with you from a technical viewpoint, I find this difficult to believe from personal experience.

I had a 450 MHz iMac DV+ which came with 512kb of L2 cache (not on processor) and a 400 MHz PowerBook G3 which came with 1MB of L2 cache (not on processor). At the time these machines were new and SETI@Home was around version 2, the PowerBook would crunch a work unit in about 7-9 hours whereas the iMac would crunch the same work unit in about 10-12 hours.

When we bought an iBook for my wife, 466 MHz with 256 kb of L2 cache (on chip), it would crunch a work unit in about 10-12 hours.

(To account for variations in hardware, I would keep the SETI@Home files on a RAM Disk.)

[OsakaBill]

After reading everything here, it seems like there is no consensus on which processor upgrade is "better".

One question I did not see answered was this:

Putting caches aside and looking a pure processor performance, is there a performance difference between the 7447, 7447A, 7455 and 7457 processors? GHz for GHZ, do they do the same amount of work?

If their performance is identical, then it would seem to me that the size of cache and type would make a huge difference in performance.

My current CPU upgrade is from GigaDesigns. It is dual G4 7455 running at 1.3 GHz, with 256 MB L2 cache and 2 MB of L3 cache. At the time I bought it last year, I chose this over a 7457 based upgrade from PowerLogix with 512kb of L2 cache because I did not trust PowerLogix (and I wanted to support the new kids on the block).

[Lateralus]

The main difference seems to be in the cache. All current processors on the market are derived from the 7450, making them pretty much identical aisde from cache and power consumption.

[Chinasaur]

Lateralus,

You mentioned two dual 1.7 upgrades? I've only found one.

Can you list both companies making dual 1.7 of any lineage?

[Lateralus]

PowerLogix is making a Dual 1.7GHz upgrade for $729. I'm not sure if it is using 1420 or 1600 7447As. But knowing PowerLogix, it's probably using 1420s.

GigaDesigns has two Dual 1.7GHz upgrades. One for $699, based off of 1420s and one for $799 which is based off of 1600s.