image
image

Go Back   macosx.com > Mac Help Forums > Hardware & Peripherals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #1  
Old October 15th, 2001, 10:31 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: WI
Posts: 30
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
djubelirer is on a distinguished road
G4 (Dual 800 or 867) Which One?

How much faster is a Dual 800mhz G4 compared to the 867? I am considering paying the extra $ and just getting the Dual 800, but I am not sure how much faster in the real world the Dual 800 really is.

I do not do any 3D Animation, and do a bit of Photoshop.

Would the Dual 800 really be that much faster...noticably faster?

I think that having two G4s is really cool, but is it worth the $?

So, in the real world, how much faster is the Dual 800 than the 867 when not only being used for heavy animation/graphics?

Thanks for the help,
Dave
__________________
G4 Tower Dual 800mhz Quicksilver, 80GB, SuperDrive, 1.1GB RAM, 17" Studio Display, OS X 10.1
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old October 15th, 2001, 10:46 AM
Alexandert's Avatar
gonneawaycameback
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: /dev/null
Posts: 791
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Alexandert is on a distinguished road
X or 9?

If you don't want to use X buy single CPU!
If not and you have the money BUY DOUBLE CPU!!!!!!!!!!!! 2 CPU suck under 9! But X is just amazing!!!!!!!!!!!!
__________________
Best wishes,
Alex

Athlon XP 1900+, Ge-Force 4 Ti 4400, 512MB DDR RAM, 80GB HD (ATA 133), ZIP 100MB, TEAK CD-RW 40/12/48, USB 2.0/FireWire PCI, USB 2.0 onboard, BlueTooth onboard, DSL-Router, Ethernet Hub, 768kb/s DSL, Philips DVD-ROM;

beige G3 500MHz, 768MB RAM, 30GB + 10GB + 60GB HD, USB/FireWire UpgradeCard,
ATA 100 Card, ZIP, Jaz, TDK Cyclone CDRW 24/10/40, DVD, Radeon PCI,
LaserWriter; 6 other macs;
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old October 15th, 2001, 11:03 AM
ElDiabloConCaca's Avatar
U.S.D.A. Prime
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 9,926
Thanks: 2
Thanked 63 Times in 59 Posts
ElDiabloConCaca has a spectacular aura aboutElDiabloConCaca has a spectacular aura aboutElDiabloConCaca has a spectacular aura about
As the other post implies, dual-processors would make a HUGE difference when running dual-processor-aware applications, such as PhotoShop. Also, OS X takes advantage of the dual-processors, making the whole computing experience a LOT faster under OS X.

However, under OS 9 running applications that AREN'T dual-processor-aware, the 867 is, by my calculations, only 8% faster than the dual-800 MHz version, which would only be running one 800 MHz processor. That's a negligible amount in my opinion.

With the future of Apple's software and hardware, I think it would be a hands-down good move to get the dual 800 machine. I say this because I think that machine would last you years and years, and based upon that conclusion, I think at one point you'd eventually move to OS X... and the dual-processor version would make a world of difference compared to the 867 MHz version.

Here's my plan once I win the lottery: buy a stripped-down dual-800 machine and upgrade it with aftermarket parts. Get the smalled hard drive there is (40GB I think) and add a 60 or 80GB drive as a slave. Get the GeForce2, just because it'll run what I need it to run, and I can always get a Radeon or GeForce3 later on... knock the RAM down to the minimum, which I think is 256MB (maybe 128 now... I remember earlier 256 was the lowest they'd letcha go) and then add 2x512MB chips. That would get me through the year 2005, I'm betting...

I've had my G4/400 PCI machine with 640MB of RAM since the G4s were introduced. I originally priced a G3/450 machine and ordered it and shortly got a letter back from Apple saying that the G4s were out and they were no longer selling custom-configured G3s... so I got a G4 WITH a monitor for the same price... this machine, albeit slow in comparison to the new machines, works absolutely great. I use PhotoShop heavily, and boot back into 9 when I need to -- of course, yes, I'd love a little speed boost, but it's fast, stable, and fun to work on.

My point: if you can afford the dual-800 machine, I say go for it. That investment, I'm betting, would last you 5 years minimum... good luck with your decision! Besides, if you got the 867 model, you'd always be wondering, "What if I had gotten the dual-800?" I did the same thing with my VW -- the guy TOLD me not to drive the V6 othewise I'd always be yearning for more if I bought the 4 cylinder... and I am yearning for the V6 while I putt around in my 4-cylinder...

Nevermind... don't make a decision. There's only one decision -- if you can afford it, get the dual-800.
__________________
Power Macintosh G4/500MHz "Yikes!" 10.4.11 Server • 1024MB • 3 x 120GB + 320GB • DVR-111D • 2 x Radeon 7000 PCI • 2 x 17" CRT
MacBook 2.0GHz Core 2 Duo - White 10.5.5 • 2048MB • 80GB • CD-RW/DVD-ROM
iPod Photo 60GB • iPod nano 1GB • AT&T DSL 6Mb/768k
http://www.jeffhoppe.com
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old October 15th, 2001, 11:50 AM
Alexandert's Avatar
gonneawaycameback
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: /dev/null
Posts: 791
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Alexandert is on a distinguished road
Talking

GOGOGOGOGOGOGOGOGOGOGOGOGOGOGOGOGOGOGOGOGOGOGOGOGO
FOR DOUBLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

PS: I want double 1GHz!!!!!
__________________
Best wishes,
Alex

Athlon XP 1900+, Ge-Force 4 Ti 4400, 512MB DDR RAM, 80GB HD (ATA 133), ZIP 100MB, TEAK CD-RW 40/12/48, USB 2.0/FireWire PCI, USB 2.0 onboard, BlueTooth onboard, DSL-Router, Ethernet Hub, 768kb/s DSL, Philips DVD-ROM;

beige G3 500MHz, 768MB RAM, 30GB + 10GB + 60GB HD, USB/FireWire UpgradeCard,
ATA 100 Card, ZIP, Jaz, TDK Cyclone CDRW 24/10/40, DVD, Radeon PCI,
LaserWriter; 6 other macs;
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old October 15th, 2001, 05:33 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Vancouver,BC, Canada
Posts: 204
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Leonis is on a distinguished road
DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL! DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL! DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL! DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL! DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!DUAL!



I switched from SP 450 to a DP 500 and the different is soooooo huge....even under OS 9 when you are running MP aware apps like Cinema, Photoshop, AfterEffects, Final Cut Pro they fly

Under OSX....I can do many tasks at once with the DP machines even the app isn't MP aware


ps. I want a Dual 1.6Ghz G5
__________________
My Web Site

Dual 1Ghz "SlowSilver" (tm), 1.5GB RAM, Radeon 8500, 20" Cinema Display, 80GB + 40GB HD, SuperDrive, Wacom Intuos 6x8, Kensington Optical Mouse, OS X 10.2 Jaguar

iBook DVD 600, 384MB RAM, OS X 10.1.4

Dual 1.2GHz Athlon PC in an ugly beige case, 512MB RAM, 30GB HD, Win 2k Pro
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old October 15th, 2001, 09:59 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Victoria, BC, Canada
Posts: 72
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
doppelbock is on a distinguished road
*If* you have the $$ and are using OS X most of the time, defintely go for the dual.....I bought the dual 800 and love it.....this will last me for years.....
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old October 15th, 2001, 11:57 PM
Denneye's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: NJ
Posts: 12
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Denneye is on a distinguished road
see my sig

The dual RAWKS, especially in X. And when you can afford it get more ram. I got it with 256 and it smoked, but when I added another gig (only $200), holy friggin smokes, I can't believe how fast it goes. Dual, dual, dual!!!!
When Adobe, and Final Cut get to X it's really gonna be a beatiful day!!!!
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old October 16th, 2001, 10:59 AM
ulrik's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,360
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
ulrik is on a distinguished road
I own a 867 and I set up a dual 800 for a company.
My 867 gives me 3,1 gigaflops in the fractal carbon and around 1.1 seconds in the random number benchmark which was posted here.

The dual gave me incredible 4.9 gigaflops in the fractal demo (running the other benchmark is senseless since it doesn't use DP).

I think it depends on what you want to do:
If you have to do a lot of "background" work like 3D rendering, video rendering or something and you need a responsive system, get it.
For anything besides 3D design, audio/video authoring, very heavy graphic design (print format etc.) or as a server, I'd say get the 867 and spend the other money for really good peripherals...

...just my 2 cents...
__________________
Ulrik
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Dual 867 MHz fan unbearably loud ynotsmile Hardware & Peripherals 7 October 31st, 2002 11:46 AM
emac vs. 733 Quicksilver and 867 Dual pbmac Hardware & Peripherals 2 August 19th, 2002 03:39 PM
Dual 800 or 867 G4 under OS X 10.1? djubelirer Hardware & Peripherals 5 October 16th, 2001 11:08 PM
G4 (Dual 800 or 867) Which one? djubelirer Hardware & Peripherals 0 October 15th, 2001 10:29 AM
Dual 800 PowerMac rharder Apple News, Rumors & Discussion 9 August 16th, 2001 10:23 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:52 AM.


Mac Support® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.1.0
Copyright 2000-2008 DigitalCrowd, Inc.