[Skypat]

This is the G5 I would like to buy ... a 2x2.3 ghz. If you have one already, are you happy with it ? Is it much faster than a 2*2Ghz and is it lound ?

Thanks (as usual)

[BZ]

A) Yes.

B) No idea (didn't own a 2*2)

C) It is not loud, but not quiet either.

BZ

[doublep]

Mine is great and surprisingly silent. I put 4 Go of RAM in it and am pleasantly surprised by the performance.

No problems so far!

[d.fine]

I have a 2x2.0GHz and I don't hear it while it sits 30cm from my head on the desk. Don't know about a 2.3GHz tough...

[Skypat]

Great to hear that ... I am coming from a G4 MDD, so I know the noise issue pretty well What video card did you choose ? Do you work with video programs and Motion in particular ?

[Skypat]

No more 2*2,3 owners ?

[d.fine]

My DP 2.0 has an Ati 9600XT (fanless). I work with Photoshop, Illustrator ... and the lot, and sometimes some basic use of FCP-HD and C4D. I always have Mail, Safari, iTunes, Adium, Stickies, Hardware Monitor and iCal open as basis, on top other graphic programs. this has no influence on the noise level/fan speed on my G5. Sometimes using Cinema 4D while rendering, it speeds up, but it has to go over 1500RPM before it becomes clearly audible.
Hope this helps its not a 2.3 but...

[Eug Wanker]

Has anyone been able to play Apple's Serenity HD 1080p24 H.265 trailer (129 MB) with a SINGLE 2.3?

So far we've got a report that it works on a SINGLE 2.5 (ie. dual 2.5 plus CHUD tools to turn off one CPU). I'm thinking a single 2.3 would be very borderline at full 24 fps playback of this H.264 clip.

On my G4 1.7 GHz Cube, I get about 1 fps.

[Eriamjh]

Where the heck does one buy a single 2.3 G5?

[Eug Wanker]

Originally Posted by Eriamjh

Where the heck does one buy a single 2.3 G5?

Umm...

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker

Has anyone been able to play Apple's Serenity HD 1080p24 H.265 trailer (129 MB) with a SINGLE 2.3?

So far we've got a report that it works on a SINGLE 2.5 (ie. dual 2.5 plus CHUD tools to turn off one CPU). I'm thinking a single 2.3 would be very borderline at full 24 fps playback of this H.264 clip.

On my G4 1.7 GHz Cube, I get about 1 fps.

[Eriamjh]

OK. But WHY would you turn off a processor?

[Big Mac]

In order to get an idea of how a single processor model of that speed would likely perform, I imagine.

[Pierre B.]

Originally Posted by Big Mac

In order to get an idea of how a single processor model of that speed would likely perform, I imagine.

Exactly. This would give you an idea of how a 2.3 GHz iMac (quite possible for the next update) would perform in this task.

[Eug Wanker]

Originally Posted by Pierre B.

Exactly. This would give you an idea of how a 2.3 GHz iMac (quite possible for the next update) would perform in this task.

Yeah, I was originally planning on holding off on my iMac purchase until rev. C came out, possibly with a 2.3 GHz G5.

However, then I saw the specs for the 2.0 and was sold. Plus, I was thinking that a 2.3 GHz will have problems with 1080p24 movie trailers (1920x816), and for true 16:9 1080p24 (1920x1080), even a 2.5 would still have problems too anyway.

I don't know about the former (since no one has tested a single 2.3 yet), but the latter is true. A single 2.5 slows right down to 12 fps with full 1920x1080 material, which is no better than a single 2.0. (Actually, at 12 fps, the single 2.5 is only using 2/3rds of the CPU, and I have been told that this is related to the way the H.264 clips are encoded/decoded. Above 12 fps, things get MUCH harder, and QT7 would rather just play things smoothly at 12 fps, rather than play things at 15 fps with stutters like other players do.)

[Pierre B.]

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker

However, then I saw the specs for the 2.0 and was sold.

I understand. The current iMac (with the exception of the rather weak--for today's standards--GPU) is a particularly good deal. Perhaps the best from Apple in a long time.

Plus, I was thinking that a 2.3 GHz will have problems with 1080p24 movie trailers (1920x816), and for true 16:9 1080p24 (1920x1080), even a 2.5 would still have problems too anyway.

I don't know about the former (since no one has tested a single 2.3 yet), but the latter is true. A single 2.5 slows right down to 12 fps with full 1920x1080 material, which is no better than a single 2.0. (Actually, at 12 fps, the single 2.5 is only using 2/3rds of the CPU, and I have been told that this is related to the way the H.264 clips are encoded/decoded. Above 12 fps, things get MUCH harder, and QT7 would rather just play things smoothly at 12 fps, rather than play things at 15 fps with stutters like other players do.)

The decoding requirements of H.264 make me wonder if Apple has really in the works some SPE-based solution for their hardware lines (something like low power multimedia co-processor based on the SPE units). But I am afraid we will wait until next year to find out.

[cmoney]

Originally Posted by Pierre B.

I understand. The current iMac (with the exception of the rather weak--for today's standards--GPU) is a particularly good deal. Perhaps the best from Apple in a long time.



The decoding requirements of H.264 make me wonder if Apple has really in the works some SPE-based solution for their hardware lines (something like low power multimedia co-processor based on the SPE units). But I am afraid we will wait until next year to find out.

By next year all the current hardware will play H.264 just fine...my prediction at least. Remember MPEG 2 decoder cards? Yeah they don't really sell anymore! I remember the first DVD kit for the Wall Street II laptops had a PC Card for decoding DVDs, and after that model, they went to software based decoding.

[Eug Wanker]

Originally Posted by Pierre B.

I understand. The current iMac (with the exception of the rather weak--for today's standards--GPU) is a particularly good deal. Perhaps the best from Apple in a long time.

Yeah. Surprised me, that's for sure.

As for the GPU, it's slow, but at least it's an improvement. I'm not a gamer anymore anyway.



Also, I'm very happy it gets the 128 MB RAM. 64 MB can sometimes be limiting on a 20" screen.

The decoding requirements of H.264 make me wonder if Apple has really in the works some SPE-based solution for their hardware lines (something like low power multimedia co-processor based on the SPE units). But I am afraid we will wait until next year to find out.

I doubt it, but we shall see. Also, the possibility exists that the PPE variant in Xbox 360 may be more appropriate, with it's rumoured specialized VMX. With such a core, perhaps no SPE would be needed. (Cell's PPE has normal Altivec.)

Originally Posted by cmoney

By next year all the current hardware will play H.264 just fine...my prediction at least. Remember MPEG 2 decoder cards? Yeah they don't really sell anymore! I remember the first DVD kit for the Wall Street II laptops had a PC Card for decoding DVDs, and after that model, they went to software based decoding.

Well, 1080p is gonna be out of reach for some time. I think a reasonable gauge is 720p, but even today's fastest PowerBooks can't do full 720p. So I doubt that the iBooks and maybe not even the mac minis are gonna be doing 720p next year too well, especially since no GPU in existence (not even the GeForce 6800 or Radeon X800) supports H.264 decode assist.

[Pierre B.]

Originally Posted by cmoney

By next year all the current hardware will play H.264 just fine...my prediction at least. Remember MPEG 2 decoder cards? Yeah they don't really sell anymore! I remember the first DVD kit for the Wall Street II laptops had a PC Card for decoding DVDs, and after that model, they went to software based decoding.

This comparison does not make much sense. The MPEG 2 decoders was a very specialised piece of hardware with a rather limited use. The CELL components are much more than media decoders (PPE is a normal CPU with Altivec and SPE a more specialised vector CPU) and are intended to be used in a uncomparably more wide range of applications. And a HD video decoding on SPE (or PPE) would not be different from software decoding, Apple has already the necessary abstraction in place in the form of a full-fledged API (Core I/V/A).

I am not saying that they will do it this way. I am saying that the pieces of the puzzle fit nicely .