New G5s! Amazon Leak!
Posted 28 April 2005 - 02:59 PM
Posted 28 April 2005 - 05:53 PM
Would of been interesting to see what kind of boost to fps the 6800 and X800 PCI-E versions had over AGP cards in Doom3.
The Dual Layer DVD is handy but a cheap thing for Apple to upgrade.
Over all a bit of a dissapointment
Posted 29 April 2005 - 02:33 AM
Also, the last I saw, AGP video cards performed better than PCI-X (I don't know anything about PCI-e so I can't say).
Posted 29 April 2005 - 03:01 AM
Posted 29 April 2005 - 04:55 AM
The one major benefit is the ability to run two 3D cards off of the same bus - and therefore use the old-is-new-again SLI technology to get super performance by slapping two bleeding edge cards into one machine and having them work together.
Both the curernt generation and next generation cards do and will support AGP... In fact, you cant get an ATI X850 in PCI-e... the AGP market is in so high of demand, that ATI isnt producing those cards PCI-e yet.. which really annoyed my friend when he built his new PC - with PCI-e, becaus the best card he could get from ATI was an X700 Pro. (some third-party card makers are now making Radeon X850 chipset PCI-e cards, howerver)
some nVidia manufacturers DO make PCI-e versions of their high end cards, but the performance difference currently is nothing to write home about.
Mostly, it is a matter of future proofing. More upgradeability, since after the next major release, the manufacturers will probably only support PCI-e for their high end cards. However, since on a Mac you are already accepting an upgradeability deficit, let me remind you that by the time we get to a 3D card generation that really takes advantage of PCI-e, even a G5 Dual 2.7 would need to be replaced to use it anyway... the machine would be your slow spot, not the card, so really, is a wash as far as im concerned.
Would i like PCI-e? You bet. Is it necessary in this hardware revision? No.
My major dissapointment with this hardware revision is the sudden dearth of Video Cards available as BTO from Apple.. holy crap there is NOTHING!
Posted 29 April 2005 - 05:16 AM
I'm sure someone will point out I'm wrong but this is my current understanding.
Posted 29 April 2005 - 12:03 PM
Minor inconvenience for those who don't have broadband access in their areas...
Posted 29 April 2005 - 12:40 PM
tiskippy, on April 28th 2005, 03:38 PM, said:
Actually the low end single 1.8Ghz system does come "standard" configured with
a modem (at least on Apple's website); the higher end models don't. They should
have it standard with or without the modem across the board.
I'm kind of waiting for them to start offering the refurbished G5s with Tiger as an
included update disk. For now they just come with 10.3.4
Posted 29 April 2005 - 02:17 PM
placy, on April 29th 2005, 12:40 PM, said:
I think its a fascinating change. Just like when Apple killed the floppy. It's their way of saying, "Ok people, let GO of this dying technology already," yet not without totally irritating people, since you can still acquire floppies and 56k modems, just not as part of a standard install.
Dell P4/1.4GHz - GF4Ti - 512MB RAM - Windows XP SP2
Posted 29 April 2005 - 04:42 PM
Shade, on April 28th 2005, 02:17 PM, said:
Because the dual 2.0 is still a current model, I'm not feeling like I have an outdated machine, even though its now 2 revisions old. That means that I don't have this urge to trade my machine in towards a new G5.
If I were you, I'd probably get the 2.3 right now. Personally, I bought the high end machine because it was the only dual processor model at the time. If there had been a slower dual machine, I would have gone with that.
MacBook Pro, 2.16GHz Core Duo, 2GB RAM, 15" Glossy Display
Posted 29 April 2005 - 08:34 PM
Joshua, on April 29th 2005, 03:17 PM, said:
I would love to stop using the 56K modem in my G5, but there are still many areas where broadband isn't available or is too expensive. Maybe Apple could arrange something with telecom companies to fix this situation, but until something happens, I'll still probably be using the same modem years from now. Unfortunately. (Although, to be honest, 90% of the time, it's fast enough. It's actually the tying-up-of-the-phone that bothers me more.)
Posted 08 May 2005 - 09:00 PM
Tomorrow we will post an article comparing the speed of the G5/2.7GHz Power Mac to the previous fastest G5, the G5/2.5GHz Power Mac. The results will underwhelm you.
Remember guns don't kill people... Pfhor do.
Posted 08 May 2005 - 09:23 PM
Posted 09 May 2005 - 12:52 PM
Lucian, on May 8th 2005, 10:23 PM, said:
Benchmarks are up at MacWorld
The one test result that puzzles us is the top-of-the-line dual-2.7GHz modelís Unreal Tournament 2004 score. With 256MB of video memory, we expect the ATI Radeon 9650 to beat the older 128MB Radeon 9600 XT found in the dual-2.5GHz system. But even after removing the 9600XT from the dual 2.5GHz Power Mac and installing it in the new system, the older card still bested the new one, even at higher resolutions.
Remember guns don't kill people... Pfhor do.
Posted 09 May 2005 - 02:26 PM
Posted 09 May 2005 - 05:53 PM
iEvan, on May 9th 2005, 01:52 PM, said:
The one test result that puzzles us is the top-of-the-line dual-2.7GHz modelís Unreal Tournament 2004 score. With 256MB of video memory, we expect the ATI Radeon 9650 to beat the older 128MB Radeon 9600 XT found in the dual-2.5GHz system.
That doesn't puzzle me at all...what puzzles me is why some people always put way too much importance on VRAM. Apparently including people who really ought to know better. That would be similar to running some benchmarks and being puzzled as to why a 2.7GHz G5 with 1GB of RAM is faster than a 2.3GHz G5 with 2GB of RAM. Except in extreme cases, the extra RAM will *not* make up for the difference in CPU speed (or GPU speed as the case may be).
Posted 11 May 2005 - 12:20 PM
Eric5h5, on May 9th 2005, 06:53 PM, said:
It's annoying, but the VRAM on a card is the only number that's well publicized for most cards. They mention the core and memory clock speeds in reviews and such, but then the memory size is pasted in big numbers on the front of the box. People then latch on to the easiest way to classify the cards. Why the card manufacturers do this I don't know.
MBP: C2D @ 2.66 Ghz | GeForce 9600M GT 256Mb | 8GB RAM | 120GB SSD + 500GB HD | 10.6.2 / W7 x64
PC: Q9550 | 6950 2GB | 8GB RAM | 80GB SSD + 750GB HD | W7 x64