Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

mak_attack · Jan 26, 2005, 03:55 PM

i have had enough of this

my final choice is either a dual 1.8 or 2.0 then

i will just get the one which my bank balance allows

then save up for a 20" display

personally 2.0 would be the better investment.....can upgrade ram slowly up2 a mammouth 8 GB when my software needs kick in

the hard bit is making the decision the fun part is 'playing' with the damn thing

sorry to bore people....obviously i need to convince myself to part with my hard earned �'s

thanks,

greenmeanie · Jan 26, 2005, 11:41 PM

i am leaning towards dual 2.0GHZ because of the BUS speeds.

UnixMac · Jan 27, 2005, 01:33 AM

Originally posted by mainemanx:
You should purchase one with liquid cooling, lots of ram, lots of hard drives, a dust filter, a roof, wheels, and most importantly a clear side panel so you can reassure yourself by periodically looking inside... sorta' like those big rig drivers who step out of their cab... walk a few steps and then stop, turn around, and make sure it's still there :-)

What the heck is that contraption you have in your G5 sitting over where the RAM is, next to the two intake fans for the CPUs??? Another HD?

And Oh, by the way.... GET A DUAL!

mainemanx · 11:06 AM

UnixMac... 'first time I've heard three 250GB Hitachi 7K250s referred to as "a contraption." Note the red SATA cable (one of three) just above the video card... you can also see the SATA cables snaking down behind the CPU intake fans.

"GET A DUAL" ... dual what?

mak_attack · Jan 27, 2005, 05:30 PM

hi again,

just wanted some more information.....

is it really worth getting the dual 2.5 powermac g5?

would i really be wasting my money on it?

would i utilise its full power?

should i throw the notion of getting a 2.5 out of my head and settle for a decent dual 1.8 or 2.0?

would i really notice a difference between say the 2.0 and 2.5 with a similar specification?

is choosing big and best the right attitude to go about buying the 2.5 powermac?

should i just hold out and wait for the next set of upgrades to happen....but this could be ages or could be in a weeks time....i am aware technology can become dated very quickly

thanks,

mainemanx · 06:20 PM

a. "We don't buy these machines, we only rent the technology."

b. The best 2.5 technology is only a few hundred dollars more than next best 2.0 technology (at least at educational pricing, with the same video board, HD, etc.).

c. Is it noticeable? Who knows? Who's going to take the time to A-B them. If you buy the 2.5 then you can quit worrying about it. "It's as good as it gets."

I rationalized the 2.5... got the clear side panel to show-off the liquid cooling to my friends.

My only regret is the F-15 Strike Eagle sound when it gets up close to full chat.

Yes, tomorrow it will be obsolete... but day after tomorrow, so will I.

mak_attack · Jan 27, 2005, 06:15 PM

"My only regret is the F-15 Strike Eagle sound when it really when it gets up close to full chat." - are they really that loud? i was hoping that the system was quiet more often than not. i dont mind it being loud if i am multi-tasking 24/7 but if browsing the net or writing a document is it quiet?

i dont want to be throwing money around like it grows on trees. so i would like to make a rationale decision thus asking all these questions.

i mean i could get the dual 2.0 for 1450 and the 2.5 for around 1700 ish. if i can save myself 250 then cool. but i would like to know the real benefits of jumping to 2.5. if it is minimal then i see no point in my purchasing it. am i right?

wouldnt the 2.0 still rip through everything at pace?

thanks,

mainemanx · Jan 27, 2005, 06:37 PM

You know, there's really no answer for your question... at least not one that anyone else can give you.

Noise? Maybe because it's so dead quiet most of the time... so that when the CPUs heat up and all nine fans start pumping... and the radiator pump begins to rumble... "How loud is it?" Again, only you can say... go down to the Apple Store, over to a friend's, or... I may be a bit weird, but for me, not owning a stone cold rock is part of the fun... sans inverse cone megaphone, of course.

Yes, I'm sure the 2.0 will more than suffice, albeit at two point oh divided by two point five, i.e., 80% speed...

P.S. I do teach economics and thus have an incurable tendency to say, "On the other hand...."

jamil5454 · Jan 28, 2005, 08:51 AM

I'm sure the dual 2.0 is plenty fast for your needs. But I agree - it IS hard buying a powerful new PowerMac and not getting absolutely the best. You're just gonna have to put that thought in the back of your head. I would be worried about the reliability of the liquid cooling on the dual 2.5. But, if you have the money, you would probably notice a difference when doing Really Heavy Work.

mainemanx · Jan 28, 2005, 11:27 AM

Originally posted by jamil5454:
I'm sure the dual 2.0 is plenty fast for your needs. But I agree - it IS hard buying a powerful new PowerMac and not getting absolutely the best. You're just gonna have to put that thought in the back of your head. I would be worried about the reliability of the liquid cooling on the dual 2.5. But, if you have the money, you would probably notice a difference when doing Really Heavy Work.

Yes, the liquid cooling certainly has the potential for additional problems... but AppleCare takes you out to three years. Plus, I've not heard of any problems with the cooling system.

UnixMac · Jan 29, 2005, 11:28 AM

Originally posted by mainemanx:
UnixMac... 'first time I've heard three 250GB Hitachi 7K250s referred to as "a contraption." Note the red SATA cable (one of three) just above the video card... you can also see the SATA cables snaking down behind the CPU intake fans.

"GET A DUAL" ... dual what?

Ah, never noticed the cable.... what did that rig cost you to put together?? is it Raid?

Cool

UnixMac · Jan 29, 2005, 11:31 AM

Originally posted by mak_attack:
hi again,

just wanted some more information.....

is it really worth getting the dual 2.5 powermac g5?

would i really be wasting my money on it?

would i utilise its full power?

should i throw the notion of getting a 2.5 out of my head and settle for a decent dual 1.8 or 2.0?

would i really notice a difference between say the 2.0 and 2.5 with a similar specification?

is choosing big and best the right attitude to go about buying the 2.5 powermac?

should i just hold out and wait for the next set of upgrades to happen....but this could be ages or could be in a weeks time....i am aware technology can become dated very quickly

thanks,

Answers are sequential:

1. YES
2. No
3. Do you do 3D? Adobe PS on large RAW files and Jpg? Video Editing? Disk Burning?
4. Only if you have a better place to spend the money (Investment grade)
5. YES (especially in CPU intensive apps)
6. No (but it is if you want to stretch out the shelf life of your machine as long as possible)
7. 7+ months before Apple has a new hardware announcement is my bet.

Zubir · Jan 29, 2005, 11:58 AM

Get the 1.8 dual, 1gb ram, a 9600XT Radeon, and buy a Dell LCD. The 2.5 is too expensive, and you won't be able to tell the difference between the 1.8 and 2.0, except with benchmarks. If it's not enough, you can resell it for practically the same price you paid for it. Unless you're a hardcore gamer, this system will be enough.

mainemanx · Jan 29, 2005, 01:12 PM

Originally posted by UnixMac:
Ah, never noticed the cable.... what did that rig cost you to put together?? is it Raid?

Cool

Never added it up, but here goes:

$180, Sonnet TempoX 4X4 SATA Controller (ClubMac)
$5, Molex 3-way power splitter (MicroCenter, Boston)
$95, www.g5drivebracket.com
$360, 3 250GB Hitachi 7K250s ($120 each, CompUSA Sale/Rebate)

Soooo... $640... no RAID, just a bunch of the wife's "trendy dramas," backups, etc. One Hitachi contracted the "click of death," three week turn around for new/refurbished unit from Hitachi.

No discernible change in temperature... but so close to floor, it does make a good vacuum cleaner, hence the dust filter.

mak_attack · Jan 29, 2005, 03:44 PM

hi again,

i have saved enough and have decided to go for the dual 2.0 along with 2 * 17" lcd displays to aid multitasking etc.

what do people think?

the dual 2.0 a good machine that allows good upgrade-ability?

any 2.0 dual owners out there who want to tell me the good and bad things about their system?

i am hoping this machine serves as a good investment that will last a good period of time

thanks,

Appleman · Jan 29, 2005, 04:16 PM

Originally posted by mak_attack:
hi again,
i have saved enough and have decided to go for the dual 2.0 along with 2 * 17" lcd displays to aid multitasking etc.
what do people think?
the dual 2.0 a good machine that allows good upgrade-ability?
any 2.0 dual owners out there who want to tell me the good and bad things about their system?
i am hoping this machine serves as a good investment that will last a good period of time
thanks,

I have bought the same machine a week ago, together with a Apple Cinema Display 20". Great machine.
Will buy an additional harddisk, Western Digital Raptor 74 GB 10,000 rpm for System disk
see this thread ,ordered the Nvidia 6800 Ultra DDL, and will ad RAM in the coming months: 512 for OS X is not enough imho.
Great machine though. I really was impressed by its speed, overall performance. I also equiped it with the Bluetooth Apple Keyboard & Mouse, but using a D-link USB Bluetooth adaptor while waiting for the to be build in Bluetooth card, I have to say I do not really like it. Looses connection now and then, and isn't recovering from bad connections. Hope this will change with the built-in module though.

Anyway, you won't regret! Enjoy!

lexhair · Feb 3, 2005, 02:55 PM

Originally posted by Appleman:
I have bought the same machine a week ago, together with a Apple Cinema Display 20". Great machine.
Will buy an additional harddisk, Western Digital Raptor 74 GB 10,000 rpm for System disk
see this thread ,ordered the Nvidia 6800 Ultra DDL, and will ad RAM in the coming months: 512 for OS X is not enough imho.
Great machine though. I really was impressed by its speed, overall performance. I also equiped it with the Bluetooth Apple Keyboard & Mouse, but using a D-link USB Bluetooth adaptor while waiting for the to be build in Bluetooth card, I have to say I do not really like it. Looses connection now and then, and isn't recovering from bad connections. Hope this will change with the built-in module though.

Anyway, you won't regret! Enjoy!

I thought built in Bluetooth was only available in a custom order configuration. Can it be retrofitted?

Appleman · Feb 3, 2005, 03:08 PM

Originally posted by lexhair:
I thought built in Bluetooth was only available in a custom order configuration. Can it be retrofitted?

According to one of the main resellers here in The Netherlands, yes it can. Actually I'll get it tomorrow.
Apple Support guy neither didn't knew this. The Book that came with the PowerMac doesn't state anything about it, but I'll keep you informed when finished installing it.

pliny · Feb 3, 2005, 07:28 PM

I like the dual 1.8, but get the most powerful Mac you can afford.

Appleman · Feb 3, 2005, 07:47 PM

Originally posted by pliny:
I like the dual 1.8, but get the most powerful Mac you can afford.

Indeed, just get the best Mac money can afford. That's actually a nobrainer.

jamil5454 · Feb 3, 2005, 11:42 PM

For me, that's probably about a used imac G3 with minimal RAM, used. I guess I need a job. Good thing my church decided it was important to digitally record every worship. That's how I got my iBook for free - I'm the recording guy.

The audio is at http://www.eastgateministries.com if you wanna check it out.

It's a really small church so right now there's only a pianist (doubles as singer).
Soon hopefully I'll be good enough to play drums. Just started a month ago.

Woowee I drove this topic into the ground.

douglasgb · Feb 4, 2005, 07:03 PM

As others have posted, a dual processor machine is certainly worth the extra money. I still use a dual 450 G4 (though with an upgraded video card) and it's just fine.

I used to have two screens hooked up (a 17" LCD and 15" CRT) and that was nice because they were small. I found that dragging between them was kind of annoying. Even the clich� you hear about 'document on one screen, palettes on the other' is annoying because it's too far to mouse around.

When I upgraded I got one large display and find it's more efficient. The one thing I do miss is doing two completely different things at once using dual screens. But with expos� and more screen area that's less of an issue.

The dual 2.5 would be nice simply because you've gotten the best, but it's alot more money than the dual 2.0. If you can't afford a 2x2.5, you're down to the 2x2.0, but IMO that's not different enough from the 2x1.8 to justify the expense. If you were maxing out the RAM of putting in PCI-X cards that might not be true, but you (and most others) probably never will.

Therefore, I'd get the dual 1.8 with 2x512 from Apple (why waste slots with 2x256 chips?) and then buy another 2x512 from a third party. With the money you save, get the 20" Apple LCD because when you buy them together they're both covered by AppleCare (even if you have to wait to buy AppleCare later). Bluetooth is a daughtercard and could be plugged in to the motherboard but I don't think Apple sells the module after the fact.

Good luck.

Davedot · Feb 4, 2005, 10:35 PM

Here's a quick look at the things that affect performance:
-Processor speed cannot be (easily) upgraded. Two processors will increase performance by 1.5 to 1.6 times.
-On a Mac, RAM makes a huge difference. Without enough RAM, even a dual 2.5 is going to run slower than it should. Upgradeable.
-On any machine, especially with video/graphic apps, you have a lot of disk access. All three machines come with Serial ATA (faster than most ATA drives). Upgradeable.

My suggestion:
If you can buy the dual 2GHz with 256MB RAM and then add 512-1024MB in one to two months, then do that. When you do, it'll seem like a whole new machine. Until then, it will still seem as fast as what you've got.

If you can't upgrade the RAM that quick, then get the dual 1.8 and put in 512 or 1GB right away.

If you want the 20" Apple display now, buy the used single 2GHz machine, 'cause it's already got good RAM and can be upgraded. It will keep you happy for 2-3 years. A big plus would be if it's still under warranty or has Applecare.

Remember too, that you can always sell your machine later and uprgade.

On a tangent, last year I upgraded to a G4 iBook from my old G3 500 iMac and didn't notice much difference. Why? The iMac had 1GB RAM and a 7200 RPM hard disk vs. the iBook with 256MB RAM and a 4200 RPM disk. Needless to say, I threw in another 512MB right away. The point is that the CPU is fixed where you buy it, but the RAM and HDs can be swapped out to improve performance.

I'm facing a similar decision but I'm also weighing whether to get a new i/PowerBook or a desktop. In my research, I found out that the iMac G5 has a nasty IO bottleneck. Check out http://www.macintouch.com/perfpack/comparison.html

You might also want to look at this piece about Serial ATA disks (what drives are in the single 2GHz?) http://compreviews.about.com/od/stor...ATACompPg2.htm

Best of luck!

Alexei · Feb 5, 2005, 01:46 AM

My man, get dual 2GHz and upgrade as you go. Get a third party LCD, you can actually do research and find out who makes panels for Apple, unless you are stuck on brushed metal look. A decent video card - ATI 9800 since it will help Tiger to run faster.
And enjoy!
Good luck.

mak_attack · Feb 5, 2005, 01:56 PM

hi again,

thanks for everyone's input so far over the last week or so.

i have decided on the dual 2.0

i am going to buy a refurbished one from apple.

i nearly bought one last wednesday but my indecisions meant i missed out as they all went out of stock by the time i went to order

in the UK, apple only have their refurbishment store open on a wednesday, so hopefully this coming week they have them in stock and i will purchase it.

i decided on going with a 2 * 19 lcd setup by buying one now and one in the summer.

thanks again,

OtisWild · Feb 5, 2005, 01:59 PM

... The G5 architecture links the FSB speed to the CPU speed. For example, 1.8GHz systems have 900MHz FSBs, 2.0GHz have 1.0GHz, 2.5GHz have 1.25GHz.

So the speed difference between systems isn't just a matter of CPU GHz percentages..

Also, keep in mind that you should upgrade G5 memory with a mind towards dual-channel operation.. That is, matched pairs of DIMMs installed correctly. Dual-channel is essentially RAID-0 for RAM, something midrange and up Suns and AIX boxes (at least) have done for 15+ years and something which recent x86 chipsets have started to support.

lewd0006 · Feb 5, 2005, 02:02 PM

Originally posted by mak_attack:
hi again,

thanks for everyone's input so far over the last week or so.

i have decided on the dual 2.0

i am going to buy a refurbished one from apple.

i nearly bought one last wednesday but my indecisions meant i missed out as they all went out of stock by the time i went to order

in the UK, apple only have their refurbishment store open on a wednesday, so hopefully this coming week they have them in stock and i will purchase it.

i decided on going with a 2 * 19 lcd setup by buying one now and one in the summer.

thanks again,

Enjoy!

andreas_g4 · Feb 5, 2005, 04:25 PM

Originally posted by mak_attack:
i do not want to use CRT. what tft's lcd's are people using with their g5's? can anyone recommend a good tft to go well with this setup. i will just have to live with 1280 x 1024! I have seen the viewsonic vx715 for 199 / iiyama 431 for 199 / lg 1730 for 225 / samsung 172x for 275.

For the kind of work you are going to do, I'd take a good 21" CRT with 1600*1200 anytime over a TFT with 1280*1024.

cgc · Feb 6, 2005, 12:33 PM

Aren't the newer dual 1.8GHz G5's without PCI-Express (or PCI-X, whichever it is)? The older 1.8GHz G5's have the faster PCI slots and the newer ones have slower slots.

jrome · Feb 6, 2005, 04:30 PM

Originally posted by Mafia:
whether you get #2 or #3 make sure to add atleast a gig of ram. osx alone uses about 190 megs of ram while idle, your gonna want more then 512 especially running those apps.

Can someone point me to a site that has benchmarks for Macs (and Windows PCs for that matter) for application usage with and without 1 GB of RAM? The "add at least a gig of RAM" advice is thrown around so cheaply, but I never see a reference to a study that shows the benefits. The whole thing reminds me of the "doctors recommend 8 glasses of water a day" claim, which had zero attribution by sounded like good advice.

I have a dual G5 myself, and would add more RAM if I knew my CPU would be faster. Does MacBench (or other test suites) run faster with more RAM when other applications are running? If I have Excel, Firefox, NetNewsWire, Mail, Y!M, iChat, Preview & TextEdit all running at the same time (my current set-up), will my 640MB iBook G4 slow to a crawl? When I first got it with 128MB, it was pretty obvious, but with 640MB I've never noticed a lag when switching apps. Obviously, if I run RAM-hungry apps like Photoshop every bit helps, but I thought half the point of OS X is that it handles memory & virtual memory very efficiently and will use every bit you throw at it while the theory of diminishing returns kick. 256MB is worlds better than 128MB, but how much does moving to 512MB or 1GB help. Benchmarks?

OreoCookie · Feb 7, 2005, 05:02 AM

Originally posted by jrome:
Can someone point me to a site that has benchmarks for Macs (and Windows PCs for that matter) for application usage with and without 1 GB of RAM? The "add at least a gig of RAM" advice is thrown around so cheaply, but I never see a reference to a study that shows the benefits. The whole thing reminds me of the "doctors recommend 8 glasses of water a day" claim, which had zero attribution by sounded like good advice.

I have a dual G5 myself, and would add more RAM if I knew my CPU would be faster. Does MacBench (or other test suites) run faster with more RAM when other applications are running? If I have Excel, Firefox, NetNewsWire, Mail, Y!M, iChat, Preview & TextEdit all running at the same time (my current set-up), will my 640MB iBook G4 slow to a crawl? When I first got it with 128MB, it was pretty obvious, but with 640MB I've never noticed a lag when switching apps. Obviously, if I run RAM-hungry apps like Photoshop every bit helps, but I thought half the point of OS X is that it handles memory & virtual memory very efficiently and will use every bit you throw at it while the theory of diminishing returns kick. 256MB is worlds better than 128MB, but how much does moving to 512MB or 1GB help. Benchmarks?

First of all, by adding RAM, your CPU isn't gonna get any faster.

If you want to know if you need to add RAM, launch the activity monitor. If you constantly use more than 3/4 of your memory, you should think about adding RAM. It's comparatively cheap.

eddiecatflap · Feb 7, 2005, 03:32 PM

i'd buy a dual 1.8 as pci-x is irrelevant

but considering pci-express is just around the corner

personally i'm still waiting

Al G · Feb 7, 2005, 08:05 PM

jrome, the Xbench memory test doesn't get any faster when you add more memory, nor will any other Xbench test.

The recommendations are really a subjective thing. We can't give you benchmarks because it's not about benchmarks, but a user's experience. The more RAM, the less need for swapping to the much, much, MUCH slower hard drive.

As for how much is needed, well again that's pretty subjective and hard to quantify. You can look at pageouts and pageins, etc. and get some idea of how much the hard drive and virtual memory are utilized but that doesn't give you a very good idea of how slow or fast it feels to use the machine.

You mention running several apps at the same time: Excel, Firefox, NetNewsWire, Mail, Y!M, iChat, Preview & TextEdit. None of those require much memory so they should all run fine with 640MB. It's the memory hogs like Photoshop where you can run into trouble.

In my totally subjective opinion, about 512MB is the minimum needed to run OS X well, meaning without the pauses, stutters and slow-downs that come with disk paging. That assumes you run several normal-sized applications simultaneously. If you only run a single app all day then 256MB is probably plenty, but who does that?

Going beyond 512MB depends on whether you use RAM-hungry applications. If you do a lot of work in Photoshop for example, 1GB or more will make a huge difference. On the other hand, if you stick to the apps you listed, going from 512MB to 1GB should be a small improvement but I don't think it will be dramatic.

jrome · Feb 8, 2005, 12:18 AM

A helpful friend pointed me to this helpful site that performs benchmarks with a mini. They test it with & without other applications running with 256MB & 512MB RAM. They find essentially no difference in performance. This isn't applicable if you're a Photoshop guru, but probably applies if you're mostly using basic consumer apps.

OtisWild · Feb 9, 2005, 06:28 AM

Originally posted by OreoCookie:
First of all, by adding RAM, your CPU isn't gonna get any faster.

Yep, but if you keep launching and using apps until the RAM is used up, you'll go a whole lot slower, and your CPU will bog down as it tries to keep up with paging and swapping demands (as it starts to smash your HDD as a virtual memory bank)..

If you want to know if you need to add RAM, launch the activity monitor. If you constantly use more than 3/4 of your memory, you should think about adding RAM. It's comparatively cheap.

Make sure you do it properly to take advantage of dual-channel.. Matched pairs according to the docs:
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=86414