So I'm in the market for a Power Mac Dual G5, either the new ones that came out or the Revision B ones with 8GB max RAM (The good revision). I was wondering if I should get the new Dual Core 2ghz with educational discount for 1799 or should I get a refurbed Dual CPU 2ghz at the Apple Store for 1499. I know the differences between the two, PCI express, 16gb max RAM, etc. But what would be the better deal? 1500 is kind of my budget, but if I can get a lot better computer for a few hundred more, I might just be able to swing it for Christmas. I don't really want to wait for MWSF so please don't say to wait until then. I do a lot of audio work, web design, photo and video editing, etc. But from what I've read, the performance difference isn't all that different between the two computers. Thanks for the help.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Dual Core or Dual Processor
- Thread starter dwd3885
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
dwd3885 said:
i don't know where you read that the performance difference wasn't that different, but you are wrong. the difference between dual core and dual processor is so great that owning a dual core is the way to go. are you doing professional work or are you a hobby user? if you are a hobby user go with the dual processor, if you are a pro use the dual core. the dual core reduces the communication time between the two processors and thus there is better speed yields. the ddr2 ram is a whole lot faster and the 1mb cache is like twice what the dual processors are. i would go with the dual core if you can afford it
dwd3885 said:
Yeah, it's certainly not worth $300 assuming the other specs (RAM, hard drive and so on) are the same.
dwd3885 said:
Are you looking at the Apple Refurbs site? The Rev B Dualie, I've seen, for $1449 actually, and disappears as quickly as it appears. The better deal is the Dualie 1.8GHZ for $1299 which also gets sold out quickly! I'm hunting for these at 5AM EST and see them flash on and off. It's a race to the finish.
At the same processor speed, a Dual Core system will be faster than a dual processor system. Enough faster to be worth the price difference? That is up to you.
On the dual core systems, the memory bus is faster and each core has twice as much cache as the single core processors. Also, the two cores in on processor can snoop in each others cache which improves speed as well.
ANother major difference is that with the dual core systems, you can do a CTO system. And one upgrade you should do in that case is upgrade the nVidia 6600LE to at least the 6600.
On the dual core systems, the memory bus is faster and each core has twice as much cache as the single core processors. Also, the two cores in on processor can snoop in each others cache which improves speed as well.
ANother major difference is that with the dual core systems, you can do a CTO system. And one upgrade you should do in that case is upgrade the nVidia 6600LE to at least the 6600.
For most of the work you throw, the speed difference would be less than a minute. But if you are doing like more than couple of days required job (100% cpu time all the way) like scientific computation, that one minitue goes to a day or more.
So if you don't plan to do a big job, go for the rev B machine and save money for more ram or display.
Good luck
So if you don't plan to do a big job, go for the rev B machine and save money for more ram or display.
Good luck
dual core!!!
I'd strongly recommend the latest dual core machines! Look at it from the point of upgrading in the future - the dual cores provide a lot better "future" in terms of hardware upgrades than the previous dual processorr machines.
Just some big differences:
* DDR2 RAM vs. DDR RAM (which is slowly on its way out)
* PCI Express vs. PCIx
* 16GB max. RAM vs. 8GB max. RAM
The dual core will be expandable for a much longer time than the previous dual processor machines.
If you like being future proof, at this point in time only the dual cores make sense!
I'd strongly recommend the latest dual core machines! Look at it from the point of upgrading in the future - the dual cores provide a lot better "future" in terms of hardware upgrades than the previous dual processorr machines.
Just some big differences:
* DDR2 RAM vs. DDR RAM (which is slowly on its way out)
* PCI Express vs. PCIx
* 16GB max. RAM vs. 8GB max. RAM
The dual core will be expandable for a much longer time than the previous dual processor machines.
If you like being future proof, at this point in time only the dual cores make sense!
arsey
I cannot agree more. Note that chip manufacturers AND computer suppliers want to go dual core on single die to cut costs. If I were you, AND the need for 16GB of ram and PCI-Express isn't there, Id go with the rev B cos it'll have cost Apple and IBM to actually make to seperate G5 chips. You get better value for money! weird way of seeing things i know, but ib my head it makes sense.
Must admit, the wireless antannae and the dual Gb ethernet are nice on the newer chassis though!
brendel95 said:
I cannot agree more. Note that chip manufacturers AND computer suppliers want to go dual core on single die to cut costs. If I were you, AND the need for 16GB of ram and PCI-Express isn't there, Id go with the rev B cos it'll have cost Apple and IBM to actually make to seperate G5 chips. You get better value for money! weird way of seeing things i know, but ib my head it makes sense.
Must admit, the wireless antannae and the dual Gb ethernet are nice on the newer chassis though!
wiseguy27 said:I'd strongly recommend the latest dual core machines! Look at it from the point of upgrading in the future - the dual cores provide a lot better "future" in terms of hardware upgrades than the previous dual processorr machines.
Just some big differences:
* DDR2 RAM vs. DDR RAM (which is slowly on its way out)
* PCI Express vs. PCIx
* 16GB max. RAM vs. 8GB max. RAM
The dual core will be expandable for a much longer time than the previous dual processor machines.
If you like being future proof, at this point in time only the dual cores make sense!
while I agree about the future proofing concept, I must point out that you can put 16GB or more in any G5, just so long as you can get the RAM chips for that much memory. it's sort of like how Apple used to say the Alubooks have a max of 1GB memory and then at a revision they said the max was now 2GB, and it had nothing to do with any real changes they made, just that 1GB chips were now entering the mainstream market and they officially were supporting their use now
Actually you neglected another huge difference, twice the L2 cache per core on the dual core machine.wiseguy27 said:
This alone is an important features, even though they are shifting to a shared FSB -- the bigger cache still increases performance. Of course there is also improved sideband cache snooping for the dual core, via a more direct connection between the two cores.
in defense of the dual processor machines, they do have dedicated buses to each processor instead of each core sharing a single bus, but I know that doesn't make up for the other advantages the dual-core models have, I'm just throwing more info into the discussion
Actually if you look at the speed of memory versus the speed of the FSB, even two cores sharing one FSB will probably not max out the FSB on the dual core 2.0GHz. This is even more true on the dual core 2.3 and the Quad 2.5.
The memory speed doesn't change. The FSB speed does increase when the processor speed increases. Therefore, the memory bus becomes even more of a limiting factor.generik said:Why would it be even more true??
As the processor speed increases doesn't it follow that it needs a bigger bandwidth to keep its cache fueled?
Now along these lines, what would be the better purchase for longevity? I know the intel macs will be coming out soon, so that might mean the dual core macs aren't as great of a deal? Or I imagine the DDR2 staying and PCI-Express staying in the Intel Macs, so I can just transfer all that RAM if I got an Intel Mac later. I guess I'm saying that buying a dual core pm because it might last longer than the dual proc is a moot point, since everything is switching over anyway. Am I right? What are your thoughts?
You also have to remember that they really don't make any more AGP video cards. All the good ones only come out in PCIe versions. This is a big deal for future expandibility. I would get the latest dual core 2GHz with 2.5GB (512 Apple + 2GB Crucial) with 7800 GT and a Dell 2405FWP if I were to buy a setup now.
i do liike that fact. you're right. i probably would us it for a long long time to come really. probably like 5 years IMO. But I know I would end up selling it and getting the Intel Mac when it first comes out, lol. I do love the 16gb RAM max, even though I just need 1gb for now, maybe 2. It's interesting to say the least. And you can split payment between cards at Apple? I didn't know that, but hey, I just might bite on the $1799 w/edu discount. Debt is a wonderful thing!