I mean hey, what's the deal with these G5's

Quad processors...that scares me a bit. I bought a Dual 2 ghz which is rock-solid, but I was looking first at the Dual 2.5 and then heard a lot of complaints with overheating issues. Anything faster is going to need its own refridgerator.:)
 
I appreciate all of your comments and advice but I'm going for a dual 2.5ghz G5 cause in the long run I really think I'm getting alot of bang for my buck.

Tony
 
flotone said:
I appreciate all of your comments and advice but I'm going for a dual 2.5ghz G5 cause in the long run I really think I'm getting alot of bang for my buck.

Tony
Click to expand...

You'll certainly notice a huge difference moving up from your G4. I certainly did moving from a 933MHZ G4 to a Dual 2GHZ 3GB Ram machine. Just keep in mind, you'll get a better price for the dual 2.5ghz after NAB.
 
bgundu said:
You'll certainly notice a huge difference moving up from your G4. I certainly did moving from a 933MHZ G4 to a Dual 2GHZ 3GB Ram machine. Just keep in mind, you'll get a better price for the dual 2.5ghz after NAB.
Click to expand...

This is mostly likely going to be the case. Even if it's just a small price drop for only a hundred dollars, it's still worth waiting a few more weeks to find out. If the new PowerMacs are announced / released you may be kicking yourself after NAB because you didn't wait. ~reservoir~
 
Wait for NAB but....
If it comes down to deciding between the 1.8 vs. dual 2.0 vs. dual 2.5. My opinion is that that the 1.8 is a waste of money (totally different architecture than the 2.0 and 2.5). A 2.5 would be great, but if a bare bones 2.5 is the top of your budget- it would make more sense to go with a 2.0 with an upgraded top of the line 256mb video card (core graphics is gonna be BIG when Tigers hits) and MORE RAM. And of course as much extra hard drive space as you can afford.

In fact- even if newer machines do arrive soon, the dual 2.0 may still be your best option as it will be reduced drastically in price as they clear out the old stock. With the extra cash you save there- you could put into other necessary things like a video monitor, deck, or flat panel display etc. Sure having the BEST of the latest crop is great- but not at the expense of not being able to much with it because you can't afford all of the other "necessary" peripherals.

Just my 2 cents ; )

Jon
 
Suck it up... pay the extra $400, and get the extra .5. It's a different archicture from the 2.0, not just in processor speed. I can be a nerd and describe it, but you can check internet forums and the apple.com website for the specs.

If you plan on running motion, then yah, the 2.5 AND a kickass graphics card is required. Don't even bother with the 1.8.

I have edited full HD resolution feature clips on a 2.5 with 4gigs of RAM on FCPHD, (yes it did have a raid system & Kona card) but it worked fantastic and rendered FAAAST.

My system at home has 4gigs or Ram, the GeForce 6800 Ultra, and I have edited over 30 hours DV-NTSC with magic bullet filters up the wazoo with no chug issues.

Overall advice, if you need it, get it now.
If you don't have a paying gig, and don't really need it... then wait for NAB.
It's kinda like people deciding if they should get a DVX100A now, or wait 3 months for whatever it is everyone is waiting on. Of coarse, I would tell people to get the 100A and not wait, especially if they can start using it and learning how to use it etc...

but that's just me.

But in plain user-English terms.. from using a 2.5 and a 2.0 at work, I'd say the performance increase is about 15%.

I know alot of people here are saying to wait for NAB, but even if you do wait, the price drop won' t be more for than a couple hundred bucks. Plus. there are still some 2.5 procs out there which have overheating problems. Apple isn't necessarily the type to keep releasing new processors every 6 months, and even if a faster proc comes out, I wouldn't recommend getting it since it is new 1st generation Mac hardware.
 
My opinion is that that the 1.8 is a waste of money (totally different architecture than the 2.0 and 2.5)
Click to expand...

Are you sure? If so that's a complete and total suprise to me!! I'm not a Mac guru or anything, but I thought all G5's were based on 64-bit architecture, and that the higher end models just had more speed and processing power. Guess I was wrong?!?

It's a different archicture from the 2.0, not just in processor speed. I can be a nerd and describe it, but you can check internet forums and the apple.com website for the specs.
Click to expand...

So now I'm going to have to call BS on this claim...unless of course you all didn't explain yourselves as precisely as you'd hoped. To say the dual 1.8 is waste of money and is *TOTALLY DIFFERENT ARCHITECTURE* is a bit of stretch if not an out and out lie. I hope by saying this you are actually referring to things such as faster bus speeds, more addressable memory, 133Mhz PCI-X, etc. When I think of *Totally different archetecture* I think of x86 (vs.) PowerPC. That makes sense. Saying that the lower end of the G5's is radically different from the high end one is just plain misleading. So yes WAVERIDERXIX, I want you to be a nerd and explain to us peons what makes the 2.5Ghz such a different machine *architecturally* speaking. Here are the *Official Specs* from Apple:

Technical Specifications
Processing

* Single 1.8GHz, dual 1.8 GHz, dual 2GHz or dual 2.5GHz 64-bit PowerPC G5 microprocessors
* PowerPC processor architecture with 64-bit data paths and registers
* Native support for 32-bit application code
* 512K on-chip L2 cache running at processor speed
* Parallel data structure supporting up to 215 simultaneous in-flight instructions
* Simultaneous issue of up to 10 out-of-order operations
* Dual-pipeline Velocity Engine for 128-bit single-instruction, multiple-data (SIMD) processing
* Two independent double-precision floating-point units
* Advanced three-stage branch-prediction logic
* One 600MHz or two 900MHz, 1GHz or 1.25GHz 64-bit DDR frontside busses supporting up to 20 GBps data throughput
* Point-to-point system controller

Memory

* 128-bit data paths for up to 6.4 GBps memory throughput
* Single and dual 1.8GHz systems:
o 256MB of PC3200 (400MHz) DDR SDRAM
o Four DIMM slots supporting up to 4GB of main memory
* Dual 2GHz and dual 2.5GHz systems:
o 512MB of PC3200 (400MHz) DDR SDRAM
o Eight DIMM slots supporting up to 8GB of main memory
* Support for the following DIMMs (in pairs):
o 128MB DIMMs (64-bit-wide, 128- or 256-Mbit)
o 256MB DIMMs (64-bit-wide, 128- or 256-Mbit)
o 512MB DIMMs (64-bit-wide, 256-Mbit)
o 1GB DIMMs (64-bit-wide, 256-Mbit)

Graphics and displays

* AGP 8X Pro graphics slot supporting up to 2 GBps data throughput, with one of the following graphics cards installed:
o NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra with 64MB of DDR SDRAM, DVI and ADC ports
o ATI Radeon 9600 XT with 128MB of DDR SDRAM, DVI and ADC ports
o ATI Radeon 9800 XT with 256MB of DDR SDRAM, DVI and ADC ports (build-to-order option; occupies AGP slot and adjacent PCI slot)
o NVIDIA GeForce 6800 GT DDL with 256MB GDDR3 SDRAM, two dual-link DVI ports (occupies AGP slot and adjacent PCI slot)
o NVIDIA GeForce 6800 Ultra DDL with 256MB GDDR3 SDRAM, two dual-link DVI ports (build-to-order option; occupies AGP slot and adjacent PCI slot)
* Built-in support for digital resolutions up to 1920 x 1200 pixels. The NVIDIA GeForce 6800 Ultra DDL or NVIDIA GeForce 6800 GT DDL graphics card is required to power the 2560 x 1600-pixel resolution of the 30-inch Apple Cinema HD Displays.
* Support for analog resolutions up to 1600 x 1200 pixels
* Dual display support for extended desktop and video mirroring modes
* Support for up to two Apple Cinema Displays(2)

Storage

* Two 3.5-inch hard drive bays, each with a 150MBps Serial ATA controller; with the following hard drive options:
o 1 80GB 7200-rpm Serial ATA; 8MB memory buffer (1)
o 1 160GB 7200-rpm Serial ATA; 8MB memory buffer(1)
o 1 or 2 250GB 7200-rpm Serial ATA; 8MB memory buffer(1) (build-to-order option)
* Optical drive bay with SuperDrive (DVD-R/CD-RW) installed; writes DVD-R discs at up to 8x speed, reads DVDs at up to 10x speed, writes CD-R discs at up to 24x speed, writes CD-RW discs at up to 10x speed, reads CDs at up to 32x speed

PCI expansion

* Single and dual 1.8GHz systems:
o Three open full-length 33MHz, 64-bit PCI slots
* Dual 2GHz and dual 2.5GHz systems:
o One open full-length 133MHz, 64-bit PCI-X slot and two open full-length 100MHz, 64-bit PCI-X slots

I intentionally left out the specs that didn't really didn't matter (Weight, Comm, etc.)

Now here is what I know. You just fill in the blanks and "learn" me something ok:

Dual 2.5Ghz - Is Liquid Cooled (vs.) Air Cooled on the Dual 1.8
- Has a 1.25Ghz Front side bus (vs.) 900 Mhz for the Dual 1.8
- Addressable memory up to 8Gigs (vs.) 4Gigs for the Dual 1.8
- 133Mhz PCI-X slots (vs.) 33Mhz for the Dual 1.8

These are the MAJOR differences *I* see. The rest of the specs appear to cover all models of the G5 processors:

* PowerPC processor architecture with 64-bit data paths and registers
* Native support for 32-bit application code
* 512K on-chip L2 cache running at processor speed
* Parallel data structure supporting up to 215 simultaneous in-flight instructions
* Simultaneous issue of up to 10 out-of-order operations
* Dual-pipeline Velocity Engine for 128-bit single-instruction, multiple-data (SIMD) processing
* Two independent double-precision floating-point units
* Advanced three-stage branch-prediction logic

References:

Apple Official G5 specs - http://www.apple.com/powermac/specs.html
Technology & Performance Overview - http://images.apple.com/powermac/pdf/PowerMacG5_TO_20041019.pdf
Official G5 Whitepaper - http://images.apple.com/powermac/pdf/PowerPCG5_WP_06092004.pdf
2.5Ghz G5 Creative Workflow Benchmark - http://images.apple.com/pro/design/calculator/pdf/pfeifferreport.pdf
2.5Ghz G5 Benchmarks (vs.) G4 & G3 - http://pfeifferreport.com/G5_Bench_Rep.pdf

So please, do me a favor and explain in great detail using all of your *flux capacitor* geek terms how the Single and Dual 1.8 G5's differs soooooooooooo much from the Dual 2.5 G5's. I'd love to know just for personal reference so then I can go around and "0wn" everyone when it comes to G5 architecture leet-speek.

My ORIGINAL point I was trying to make was this: If whomever decides to get a G5 RIGHT NOW and not after NAB, the price / performance ratio leans toward the Dual 1.8 based SOLELY on the specs and BENCHMARKS. Not how "Cool" it sounds on paper!! But if you can justify the extra $1000 dollars or more for the 2.5Ghz then go ahead. My theory was that the person could get the Dual 1.8Ghz model and use the other $1000+ that they would have spent on the Dual 2.5....to get cool accessories for their camera. The fact of the matter is that *ANY* G5 single or dual will all do the exact same thing they want. Edit Video. AND...even the slowest Single 1.8 G5 will do it faster than the Fastest Pentium / AMD processors. The higher-end models will indeed do it a certain % faster based on what model you get of course. But if the extra few minutes LESS of rendering times is worth the extra $1000...go for it. See for yourself:

rendering06092004.jpg


photoshop20041013.jpg


Also, let me point out your mistake about Apple Motion:

If you plan on running motion, then yah, the 2.5 AND a kickass graphics card is required. Don't even bother with the 1.8.
Click to expand...

...And now for my final act, I will pull the specifications for Motion out of my hat...

*VOILA*

Minimum System Requirements

* Macintosh computer with 867MHz or faster PowerPC G4 or G5 processor
* 4X AGP slot
* 512MB of RAM (2GB or more recommended)
* Mac OS X v10.3.5 or later
* QuickTime 6.5.1 or later
* Display with 1024 x 768 resolution or higher (1280 x 1024 resolution recommended)
* One of the following graphics cards:
— ATI Radeon 9800 XT (R360)
— ATI Radeon 9800 Pro (R350)
— ATI Radeon 9700 Pro (R300)
— ATI Radeon 9600 XT (RV360)
— ATI Radeon 9600 Pro (RV350)
— ATI Mobility Radeon 9700 (RV M11)
— ATI Mobility Radeon 9600 (RV M100
— nVidia GeForce 6800 Ultra DDL (NV40)
— nVidia GeForce Go5200 (NV34M)
— nVidia GeForce FX 5200 Ultra (NV34)
— nVidia GeForce 6800 GT DDL
* 10GB of disk space for application, templates and tutorial
* DVD drive for installation

So in fact...*ANY* G5 regardless of Single or Dual Processor will handle Motion just fine. Now again...None of this was said to piss anyone off, just to point out that some of your facts are misleading. However, I would be more than gratified to stand corrected on ANY of this. Like I said, I'm no hardware or software engineer. Just a lowly graphic artist who doesn't even OWN a MAC!! So please feel free to scold me, or correct me where I may be wrong. I only read what is Official from Apple, and if *I* misinterpreted any of the technical data, please forgive me. Thank you all for your time and I hope I was able to further the discussion and convey my points and opinions in an unbiased and ethical way. Thank you!!

~reservoir~
 
reservoir said:
...And now for my final act, I will pull the specifications for Motion out of my hat...

*VOILA*

So in fact...*ANY* G5 regardless of Single or Dual Processor will handle Motion just fine.
~reservoir~
Click to expand...

This is true, but even the dual 2.0 has trouble somtimes with motion. For example, head down the the local apple store and try out motion on the G5s. You will find that the 1.8 and the 2.0 will handle motion alright,but you will encounter the spinning wheel (at least I did) many times. It will work fine for normal SD files and stuff. If you want to move up to rendering your files in 1080 HD, even the dual 2.5 stutters. That is why apple will answer this with the dual dual core processors at 3.0 GHZ :grin:
 
SkiUtah...I'm not arguing the fact that Motion is a very processor intensive application as well as a little buggy at version 1.0 (Expect an upgrade to drop at NAB hopefully), I'm just pointing out the fact that it will indeed work with any G5 and some G4's...maybe a little sluggish, but working is working!! I have used the dual 2.5's and agree that even they have their stutter moments. But let's be realistic. I doubt there is more than 5% of DVX users on here that even use Motion and if they do use it, they are probably VERY serious and have 2.5ghz's with at least a few gigs of RAM. My point being that Motion is not exactly some *Kid's Toy*. It is in my opinion a highly advance application which most users will never even use, much less use enough to warrant a dual 2.5 purchase over say a standard entry level G5. It's no iMovie!! In 5 years when they come out with iMotion then it will be a different story. But for now it is a very advanced and often difficult to use / master effects tool. Mom and Pop are not going to use it very much!!

And yes in fact Apple will be migrating to the multicore PowerPC chips very soon. We are all hoping to hear an annoucement at NAB. 05' - 06' looks to be the year of High Def as well as multicore processors. PS3 is already stated to have a multicore cell processor as well. I'm sure Intel and AMD are also hard at work on their next generation chips. It will take every bit of 3-4Ghz to keep these systems efficient and stable while working with 720 and 1080 signals. Moore's law has kept up so far, but I have to imagine there will be a slow down sometime. I mean, you can only fold a piece of paper before it gets too small to fold anymore. I think this is the theory behind multicore processors. I really don't think they can get much smaller. They are already microscopic. So I guess using multicores will help to continue pushing the Ghz speeds. But I think in the next 10 years we *may* hit a wall somewhere. How small and how fast can we possibly go? ~reservoir~
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top