New & Old dual 1 Gig. PowerMac Compared.

**Samuel** · August 20th, 2002, 01:51 PM

Here's the link:

http://www.barefeats.com/pmddr.html

**Sogni** · August 20th, 2002, 02:42 PM

I don't see a measurable difference between the two honestly (as long as it's the faster DDR Bus and RAM)...

We're getting the new DP 1Ghz vs the Old because it fit the bill perfectly for what we where looking for (we where NOT concidering _ANY_ of the SDR systems).

No one's saving the world in a few nanoseconds (unless, ofcourse you're Superman)

**xaqintosh** · August 20th, 2002, 02:51 PM

that is kinda depressing...

**Oscar Castillo** · August 20th, 2002, 03:05 PM

I think we need to look at benchmarks in a different light. There are benchmarks which measure CPU performance and those which measure I/O. I can't say which if any of these measure I/O since I haven't looked at them closely, but I keep hearing how crippling the 1MB L3 cache is.
Did anyone stop to consider that these tests may mainly measure CPU performance so comparing an 1Ghz G4 with 2MB L3 cache versus new one with 1MB L3 cache you'd expect to get the same results or close to it. And if that is the case, it tells me the 2MB L3 cache doesn't do much in terms of performance.
I'd expect these test to be the same or close to it if that was the case.
What we need to see are memory and hard drive benchmarks to determine if the 133 or 167 system bus and new DDR RAM gives any improvement there.

**serpicolugnut** · August 20th, 2002, 04:34 PM

Did anyone stop to consider that these tests may mainly measure CPU performance so comparing an 1Ghz G4 with 2MB L3 cache versus new one with 1MB L3 cache you'd expect to get the same results or close to it. And if that is the case, it tells me the 2MB L3 cache doesn't do much in terms of performance.

Hmmm. What it tells me is that this upgrade really is no upgrade in any sense of real world speed.

This round of PowerMacs will probably only be bought by people who absolutely need a new machine, or haven't upgraded in a long while. People (like me) who have a G4/800DP machine or better will probably wait for awhile, as these machines offer no real reason to upgrade.

**Oscar Castillo** · August 20th, 2002, 05:29 PM

Originally posted by serpicolugnut

Hmmm. What it tells me is that this upgrade really is no upgrade in any sense of real world speed.

That's not what I want to imply. Comparing a dual 1GHz 2MB cache with a new 1GHz 1Mb cache and see the same results tells me, if the tests are solely CPU dependent, that the exta 1MB cache in the older duals does nothing for performance.
What I would like to see are subsystem tests all I/O independent of CPU to see if indeed there are any gains.
Disk I/O and memory speed tests in the similar fashion as the SiSoft Sandra benchmarks for the PC.
I'm sure there must be some Unix benchmark programs for OS X by now. Anyone know of any?

**Leonis** · August 21st, 2002, 02:13 AM

Looks like I can keep my SlowSilver(tm) for a little longer

**Oscar Castillo** · August 21st, 2002, 05:10 AM

If I had a old dual 1GHz I wouldn't bother ugrading either. For the gains you may see in I/O still aren't known. If you are running a file server then perhaps you may see the difference with the ATA100 drives, but it doesn't make much sense to go through the upgrade.
If the old dual 1GHz were priced better I would have gotten one of those from MacWarehouse to whereever. And the prices on Ebay for a used one is pretty ridiculous. $3000 cause it comes with installed software "you will need to get a license for" as it says in many listings. Some offer nothing more than the basics.
Those that are trying to get rid of 933s are having a hard time deciding on price cause they'e almost squeezed out of the picture.