Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

PowerMac G5: World's Fastest Desktop Computer

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Typo on Apple's Page & Grievances...

Originally posted by geerlingguy
Also, I've found a typo on Apple's PowerMac page: go to http://www.apple.com/powermac/graphics.html and look down at the "Connect with S-video and RCA (composite) connectors" section at the bottom right; it allows you to preview your "wok"
-is this some sort of new Chinese translation device? ;)
Click to expand...
That is odd that they have a typo. I guess it shows no one is perfect.

Is the RCA and S-video only out or in and out?
 
Originally posted by rjstanford
Actually, 10 bels would be a 1024 fold increase in power. Logarithms are pretty impressive.

Why the confusion? Well, the loudest non-harmful sound level is regarded as being around 110 dB, while the lowest audible sound is defined as 4 dB. That range represents a difference in power output of 40,000,000,000:1. Since those numbers are kind of bulky, this way makes sense.

0 db - the quietest sound you can hear
20 db - whisper
35 db - new dual Power Mac 2ghz
50 db - rainfall
60 db - conversational speech
75 db - washing machine
85 db - big city traffic
90 db - hair dryer
100 db - tractor in use
110 db - chainsaw, rock concert
120 db - jack hammer, ambulance siren
130 db - jet aircraft from 100 feet away
140 db - gun shot, fireworks
175 db - rocket launch

Anything over 180 (or so) db is considered a sonic weapon.

-Richard
Click to expand...
All the values you gave were dbA. A human CAN't hear 0 db. The lowest value a human can hear is around 25-35 db.

The PowerMac isn't as loud as rainfall :eek:
 
Originally posted by tjwett
New PowerMacs are lacking an L3 Cache. I just noticed this. Does this matter, or is this new system not in need of it?
Click to expand...

Originally posted by hacurio1
I think this is an issue only on G4s because they lack a wide enough bus. I'm not sure, can someone post a technical link that answers this?
Click to expand...

The PPC970 (G5) doesn't support L3 caches. However, you can be fairly certain that the next generation of the G5 (whether that be a process shrink or PPC980) will include a larger L2 cache.
 
Originally posted by EdSchouten
All the values you gave were dbA. A human CAN't hear 0 db. The lowest value a human can hear is around 25-35 db.

The PowerMac isn't as loud as rainfall :eek:
Click to expand...

It was based on the lowest sound we could here.
 
Cheers, DTPhonehome

Just doing my bit for British culture, mate.

I was actually over in NY a couple of years ago (looking to teach in Franklin K. Lane High School (Queens/Brooklyn) in fact) and you'd have delighted in my efforts at asking for directions.

God only knows how I eventually made it to 'Gravesend' (I'm from Gravesend in England, so I thought I'd pop down to see what your version was like) but I sure wished I *was* a character out of Lock-stock once I got there.

JJJJeeeeeesh!

Although trying to finish a 'medium' sub was actually more scary than the sound of gunfire from Coney Island, to be honest.

Needless to say, I'm looking to try again next year.


And before someone flames me, I know this has bugger all to do with macs, but DTPhonehome and I are intent upon making the world a better, more loving place through sensitive and meaningful cultural interaction.

So you can take your flame and shove it right up your ar...


Brother Mugga
 
Originally posted by Doctor Q
Funny aside: During the keynote, the live news report at macnn.com had a tiny off-by-a-factor-of-1024 typo: It said (bold is mine) Models start at 1.6MHz ($2000, GF FX5200, 256MB of RAM), 1.8GHz (double memory, double disk, $2399) and dual 2.0GHz ($2999, Radeon 9600 Pro).
Click to expand...

To be accurate, thats a factor of 1000 typo. MHz and GHz are metric. MB and GB are power of 2s.
 
Originally posted by EdSchouten
All the values you gave were dbA. A human CAN't hear 0 db. The lowest value a human can hear is around 25-35 db.

The PowerMac isn't as loud as rainfall :eek:
Click to expand...
Those numbers were from the commonly quoted decibel scale, as referenced on places like http://www.dangerousdecibels.org/hearingloss.cfm. The A scale (dbA) refers to to slow response, in other words measuring peaks averaged several times a second rather than pure peaks, and is normally a truer scale of ongoing noise. At least, that's how I understand it.

-Richard

ps: it seems that that's how orgs like OSHA understand it too. If I'm wrong, please tell me, as I'd like to know.
 
Hum...

The new machines will be in stores September 1? That is my birthday...maybe you all should get together and buy me one!

Otherwise I'll be waiting for Rev. 2....but still, it's good to be back on top.

Sedge
 
Apple's definitely has some very impressive systems now, Hypertransport interconnects, PCI-X, 400 MHz 128 bit Memory, nearly all the rumored features are on these machines. I'll probably get the mid-range system myself.

The Single CPU SPECmarks presented are amazingly accurate, if any of you remember IBM's original specmarks for the 1.8 GHz PPC970, you'll notice that it scored lower than the 2.8 GHz Pentium 4 on SPECint but higher on SPECfp, it's pretty reasonable to assume that a 2.0 GHz PPC970 will perform similarly against a Pentium 4 3.06 Ghz, which was exactly the case.

I'll estimate SPECmarks for Pentium 4s with 800 Mhz buses using the GCC compiler in a later post.

The one fishy aspect of Apple's use of SPECmarks was with the Dual Xeon's SPEC rates. At 3.06 Ghz, a Dual Xeon system would score 19-23 on depending on the compiler, this includes GCC compilers like the ones Apple used. Apple's own score is less than half of that which is to say the least, suspicious.

I would also wait for some actual real world benchmarks come out from some credible site (barefeats, mac speed zone, reputable pc review sites etc), Apple doesn't have a pretty history of using these real world benchmarks in a credible way.
 
An X db increase in audio power (sound pressure level) is 10^.X increase in power. A 3db increase is twice the power, a 6db increase is four times the power, etc. Audio power also falls off with the square of the increase in distance. A 70db measurement at one meter will drop 6db (1/4) down to 64db at two meters. Without knowing the distance at which the decibel rating is specified, you know nothing about the volume.

It is generally considered that the smallest change in audio power detectable by human hearing is about 3db, or a doubling of the audio power. It is also considered that a 10db increase, or 10 times the audio power, is perceived as twice as loud.

But even that's not the end of it. Human hearing is more sensitive in certain frequency ranges than others, so the same increase in audio power will be perceived differently at different frequencies.

And that's still not the end of it. Certain waveform shapes are more perceptable than others.

Noise db ratings can be misleading, and a device rated at a lower level may actually be more intrusive.
 
Originally posted by icsedge1
Hum...

The new machines will be in stores September 1? That is my birthday...maybe you all should get together and buy me one!

Otherwise I'll be waiting for Rev. 2....but still, it's good to be back on top.

Sedge
Click to expand...
The machines won't be in stores until some time in September. Pre Orders will ship in August.
 
Re: 8 gigs!

Originally posted by Java
Oh my *$#!

8 gigs?!? And Steve says you can transfer a whole DVD in one second.

My jaw is on the floor. Wow Wow Wow Wow!:eek:
Click to expand...

Yeah, kinda cool. The entire contents of memory can be loaded into the CPU and written back out again in 2 seconds.

But note that you still won't be reading a DVD in the drive that fast ... you can only do it in one second if the contents of the disk are in system memory ... and forgive me if I'm wrong, but that doesn't apply to dual-layer disks, which are >8GB large ...
 
Apple news #3 on CNN top news

I had never seen Apple news making it to CNN's web page. And in the top stories...
may be it truly is great what we saw today, even though some of those benchmarks (the integer ones) did not impress me
 
Originally posted by Moe
Without knowing the distance at which the decibel rating is specified, you know nothing about the volume.
Click to expand...

Apple says that the G5 is three times quieter than the G4. It is almost certain that these measurements were made at equal distances from the machines.

http://www.apple.com/powermac/design.html

Therefore one does not need the G5 decibel measurements to appreciate the power level of its output sound. Your other points are well taken. We'll just have to wait and listen for when the G5's are available for live testing. I'll be buying one with at least a 10 day return policy -- just in case the sound quality isn't what I'm expecting.
 
Using IBM from now on will finally relieve us of that motorola LAG in updates. I suspect they will be more reliable/frequent. So strange (and such a relief) to hear stevie talk about a future product (3GHz chip).

Crazy times friends. We've caught up in terms of speed and power. Windoze will never catch up in OS. Let the bragging begin.
 
alright, i gotta gripe...

most everyone here, before the leaked specs, were expecting at the fastest a 1.8 ghz chip in these bad boys. Apple has cancelled out the mhz gap, and still you piss-ant's are not happy. they have gone and given you above and beyond what you would have expected without the leak, and still you piss-ants gripe. they frickin' gave you OPTICAL input and output audio for CHRIST SAKE, and still you PISS ANTS GRIPE!!! I, as a designer LOVE the new case design, as it moves to accomodate the heat issues in a more effecient way, as well as looking modern and very zen-like in the process, but no. "wheres my fold down door!" boo hoo. you do noot know what apple engineers had to do to fit everything into the box... none of us do, but the simple fact remains that they have given REAL MAC LOVERS what they wanted and then some. "but technocoy, i want it all to kick a PC's ass and cost me only $750" shut the hell up and go buy your damn dell you yap about so much and let us mac users who appreciate something from time-to-time enjoy the day that steve jobs hath brought us. By GOD this is the best DAY IN APPLE HISTORY!!!! anyone who doesn't think so can GO TO HELL!!!!!!

sorry i could go on and on, but i will spare the good people my wrath for now

a literally cried i was so happy that not one PC user can say CRAP to me today. You are ALL DUMBFOUNDED!

good day,
technocoy:)
 
Re: Re: Re: A Step Backwards in Expandability

Originally posted by rjstanford
Speed is very comparable in recent benchmarks. Don't have the numbers in front of me, but its a few percent here or there, nothing you're likely to notice in real-world use. Maybe you will be willing to answer my question then (since nobody else has). What, on a system like this with Firewire, 802.11g, etc, built in, do you need more than 3 PCI-X slots for? I really am curious.

-Richard
Click to expand...

Ok, don’t get me wrong, I’m not complaining, Just MHO. I will try to answer your question the best way I can. When I bought my current system (Dual 500) three years ago, the four PCI slots weren’t an issue; though, as time progressed I had the need to upgrade the system. For example, a SCSI card that I use to connect some legacy hardware like my scanner, my Zip drive, and some HDs uses one port, another port is used by my ATA 133 RAID controller that I had to buy because the onboard ATA 66 was not fast enough, another port is used by the USB 2.0 firewire combo card that I bought to connect some new cameras, and finally, the fourth port is used by an upgraded sound card. When I bough the machine, the four PCIs where more than enough, but as time progresses, PCIs will allow you to extent the life and functionality of a computer. I know the new PowerMacs have everything one can wish for, but when one buys a computer, it’s usually a three year purchase; more over, there is a pretty good chance that you will need to upgrade by using PCIs. I think 3 PCI slots are good, but I’m concerned to whether it will be sufficient or not. I’m not saying 3 are not enough, but it concerns me. Other than that, I REALLY LOVE THE NEW PMs
 
PB G5 15" thoughts...

The longer Apple waits to update the 15" PB, the more likely it will be a G5 for lots of reasons.

1. The 12" (or perhaps the 17") motherboard could fit in the 15" case, so from a tech standpoint, I can't see the motherboard design being 6+ months behind that of the 12" (or 17"), it would be nearly impossible to be that far behind.

2. Steve wants to be the first to ship a 64 bit portable. (No one is closer than Apple now).

3. Bluetooth, AirPort Extreme. Plenty of people want those in a portable, but don't want a 12" screen or a 17" screen. (me for one :) ).

All this points to the fact that something significant is going on. It is something like the G5 or, perhaps, a higher-density screen. I doubt it would be the higher-density screen because that should NOT be that huge a tech issue, and I can't believe they'd delay the product 6+ months for that when they could've shipped it with a regular screen and then updated it now.

My scenario about the 15" delays is this:
They intentionally held back on the 15" in Jan/Feb 2003 and kept it as it was so that if there were huge problems with the 12" and 17" (e.g. long(er) delays, engineering/manuf issues etc) they'd have a proven machine that was shipping. They were planning that the PB 15 was supposed to be updated in May at WWDC with a G5 (or very shortly thereafter) and so didn't waste any design and engineering resources on updating it to the specs of the current 12" and 15" because (back then it would have been May 2003 for WWDC, so only about 3 months wait for it). They intended to make it the 1st 15" G5 and have it ready with the PM G5s.

However, they are a little behind for some reason, just like they were with the PM G5s - that's why they pushed back WWDC a month.

Until they know when they can ship them in volume they're not announcing it for at least two reasons: avoid killing 12", 15" and 17" sales; and so they'll get even more bang for the buck when the announce "the world's first 64-bit portable," just like they got with the "world's 1st 17 inch portable". It will be on its own and won't get overshadowed by the PM G5s.

Face it, Apple loses sales because of some of the factors above and they don't want to lose sales. Therefore there is some BIG reason for the delay. The only logical one is a 15" PB G5, followed as quickly thereafter as possible with a 17" ("The world's 1st 64-bit 17 inch portable) and a 12" ("The world's smallest 64-bit portable). Followed thereafter by G4 iBooks.

I can see a 15" PB G5 announcement within 1-3 months (e.g. by the end of the summer). Apple *has* to do something to update the 15" PB to current specs (speed, AEX, Bluetooth) and if they've invested engineering in the PB G5 they don't have time to go back and do the engineering to make it a G4 - which is why I think it will be soon. If it was going to be > 3 months then they'd have time to do a 15" G4 to match the 17", BUT then they would've done it well before now.

I don't think it is wishful thinking because Apple is not dumb. They wouldn't hold up 15" PB sales for more than 6 months without a great reason. (Plus I read somewhere that 15" PB supplies were low.)
 
Originally posted by tpjunkie
If decibels are a logarithmic scale, a 10 decibel increas would mean a 10 fold increase in volume, wouldn't it?
Click to expand...

The decibel scale was formulated to give meaning to the way we perceive sound with respect to actual atmospheric pressure fluctuations.

It is based on the threshhold of hearing whith is measured at about 2x10^-5 newtons per meter squared at 1000 Hz. This is 0 dB. The upper limit of hearing is aproximately 1 million times greater in pressure, this is about 120 dB.

The way our ears percieve sound is not linear like the sound output out of a stereo. The ears respond in a non-linear fashion. Most of the scale is taken up with what we cope with normally 0-100 dB. The intolerable aspect of the scale takes up typically 100 - 120 dB. Beyond that the decibel scale is pointless even though sound pressure levels can go much higher.

Some examples: Soundproof studio: 20 db, Bedroom at night 30 db, Normal conversation at 1metre 60dB, a big truck at 15m 90db.

Sound perception though is more complicated when you throw in frequency and distance. The human ear will percieve the same sound pressure level at different frequencies as either louder or softer. Taking a step forward or back can change your perception depending on your distance from the source and it's sound intensity level.

So measuring loudness with an instrument which measures pressure must take into account a range of frequencies and distance from the source and map them to what's relevant to the ear. There are different weightings: (A,B,C) so you will see measurements listed as dbA or dbC.
 
Although the new Powermacs are VERY impressive and long overdue, I'd have to say I'm a little let down by the keynote.

"Year of the laptop" yet he just glossed over the powerbooks (read old 15" design.) 80% of what he was talking about not shipping for another 2 months. Hmmmm....just don't know about that.

ehhh - just my opinion. maybe too much hype :)
 
Re: Workstation Pricing

Originally posted by rjstanford
I just want to add my voice to those talking about Sun / HP workstations being the true targets of the new PowerMac line. And its about time. When you figure that for under $7000 you can pick up a fully loaded dual G5 with 4gb (alright, so I used Crucial pricing here), APP, iSight, a 23" flatscreen, and oh what the heck the 5.1 speaker set, that's some mighty fierce competition.

ps: Now, if they'd just get autoCad for OS X, and some of the other apps like it .. whoo!
Click to expand...

Is the G5 rackable out of the box?

Rocketman
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back