Mac Pro combined thread

doemel

doemel

Mac addict since 1993
Now that the new beast has been released I can't help but notice that despite its age the double-2.5 G5 PowerMac was and still is a beast of its own! I mean, how old is that configuration? Looking at Apple's shiny performance comparisons which I would take as rather best-case-scenario in favour of the new beast the performance gain of mostly less than 60% (often a mere 20-30%) is less than impressing. And we're talking about a Quad-vs-Double system here. In the real world, only a handful of professionals will ever fully use the potential of the new beast so this is not so much a problem. Just a thought. Maybe 10.5 will unlock the real power of the new beast?
 
I don't think there's much in the new hardware that requires OS-level optimization, so I doubt Leopard will change matters much.

I think people had unrealistic expectations for this machine. Look at the progress made in the past few years. It's been along the lines of 10-30% speed boost per year. (And despite popular belief, the G5 increased at a higher rate since its release than the P4 or pre-Woodcrest Xeon). The big exception was the switch to dual-core chips, but obviously that's over now.

Nothing about Intel's new line is a quantum leap forward from the G5. From the G4, yes. Presumably, Apple made the move because of laptop/consumer chips, not desktop/pro chips. The G5 left very little to be desired.....except a low-power version.

But I'm repeating myself a bit! See http://macosx.com/forums/showthread.php?t=275172


Remember that all the other machines were going from single-core G4s or G5s to dual-core Intel chips. That's the main reason they're so much faster. But the Power Mac already had dual-core chips, so...*shrug*. But if you compare the low-end Mac Pro to the low-end Power Mac G5 (which had only one dual-core chip), then you'll see quite a boost!

And even the high-end is a lot cheaper. Looks like a nice update to me.
 
Also, the Intel processors are not as power hungry, and leaves a lot of room in the tower for expansion.
 
Hmmm... tough to trust a source that keeps doctoring their final report. I see they've now revised the square inchage of the Mac Pro to include the footprint of the monitor.

Shouldn't these things be reviewed fully before being published? Yikes.
 
I think the overall "test" is utter crap. Nice to see you get a "free" display for the same price, though. ;) ... What I'm really looking forward to, though, is Adobe CS 3. When finally we'll see what platform Adobe puts more work to optimisation wise. ;)
 
Normally, after matching other hardware specs, keeping the hardware specs in line with each other includes making sure that if one system includes a display, the other system includes one as well. In this particular case, the price discrepancy was so great between the two systems that I made an exception.
Click to expand...
Ok then..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top