Power Mac advice: Dual 2.7 Ghz vs. Dual-core 2.3 Ghz

[Christiaan]

In terms of rendering speed has anyone got advice on the new Dual-core 2.3 Ghz Power Mac versus the older model Dual 2.7 Ghz?

I couldn't find any benchmarks comparing the two.

The Dual 2.7 GHz has a faster front side bus than the Dual-core 2.3 GHz but the 2.3 has a 1MB L2 cache per core.

[ 10-20-2005, 06:31 AM: Message edited by: Christiaan ]

[alanmac]

Take a look here

http://media.99mac.se/g5_dualcore/

Alan

[APE Design Ctr]

Wow, an easy to read, simple, understandable unbiased review. Go figure.

Nice reference, alanmac.

[Christiaan]

Yeah I had read that one, but it only compares the new dual-cores with a old dual 2.5 Ghz. What I'm interested in seeing is a comparison between the new 2.3 dual-core with the old 2.7Ghz PCI-X machine which you can still purchase.

[ErichR]

Is investing before the Intel switch a good idea?

[alanmac]

Erich

I'd say that real must depend on your circumstances. I think the Intel machines are still some way off, and many cautious people will wait for the "revised" model to iron out bugs etc.

How often do you upgrade etc. How many machines are we talking about are obviously important issues.

So in my opinion if you were planning to upgrade your machine, go ahead.

Lets face it by the time they've sorted out the Intel Mac machines for people to feel confident it could well be time in the natural upgrade cycle to buy another machine/s anyway.

Why hold back productivity for a year whilst you wait.

To some they would say the lost time and money would be more than a new machine anyway !!

Look at it another way, if you're still, by any chance, running with a early model G4 then you obviously felt you could struggle along okay with that up untill now, so what makes it that you can't "struggle" along with a dual processor or dual core processor G5 brought now for the same number of years in the same way?

In my opinion whilst the two dual core processor machines seem reasonable value for the money, given that they are still on the pricey side compared to what a Windows machine would offer, the dual core dual processor 2.5 seems to offer very good value for money indeed. I doubt you could spec a Windows machine anywhere comparable.

Alan

[Christiaan]

Erich, the computer purchase cycle in our office mostly revolves around the arrival of new employees. We've looked at the implications of the Intel switch; we already have a large investment in high-end PPC hardware, and this coupled with fat binaries has lead us to believe there is no reason to act any differently than we would if Apple hadn't announced their change to Intel. We will be using PPC for some time to come and we'll gradually migrate to Intel as our hardware needs dictate. I doubt very much that our current PPC hardware will become obsolete any sooner than it would if there was no switch.

I'm still interested if anyone has an opinion on 2.3 dual-core vs. the 2.7 dual. From what I've been reading the 2.3 dual-core appears to be less powerful than the 2.7 dual. But whether it's less so with regard to rendering I don't know. If it's just as fast at rendering as the dual 2.7 then it's better value for us because it's a few hundred quid cheaper.

[RickBern]

Christiaan

Take a look at the architosh website

http://architosh.com/news/2005-10/2005c1021_quad-modo.html

there's a link to a Moto discussion that is the only real facts I've seen about the new machines. The speedup for the quad looks to be amazing if you put in the time doing ray traced renderings

Rick

[Christiaan]

Thanks Rickbern, yeah I saw that one too. Again, though, I'm interested here only in comparisons between the 2.3 dual-core and the 2.7 dual.

The 2.7 Dual is a previous generation model. It is still available through Apple's online store (by clicking up in the right hand corner of the Power Mac section of the store).

[alanmac]

From the article Rick pointed out on Architosh

" In fact, early Xbench scores for the mid-range 2.3 dual core single chip machine do not point to much of an improvement to previous dual chip single core machines. In fact, there are actually some slower areas of performance, as in thread scores. Architosh will be doing a full report on Xbench and other scores early next week."

Alan

[Christiaan]

Ah, apologies, thanks guys.

[alanmac]

Hi Christiaan

I think the only reason they are keeping the 2.7 in the line up is to do with graphics cards. The way I see it certain users needs are only catered for by particular cards that are only available to fit the slot type in this machine. I think that's correct but check with Apple.

Certainly by going with the new machines with changes to the graphic card connecting architecture, in line with PC machines, will increase your potential to upgrade these easier into the future I would have thought.

In the same article the author did point out the 2.3 did seem poor value for money in his opinion, compared to the other models.

For what it offered over the base model they felt it was not worth the extra money, and for the relatively small additional sum of money that the dual core/dual processor cost over the 2.3 did offer a great performance increase and as such made a better proposition.

I agree that if buying Apple, the new top of the range seems to offer very good value for money, the base model is a good price if you need a tower unit, and the middle one struggles to offer anything really different over that. I'd put the money into more ram and buy the base model rather than the middle model.

In an ideal world I'd buy the dual/dual ...

Alan

[RickBern]

Christaan

Are you running VW under OS X server?

My impression is that the server version is actually slower and the main advantage is that more than 10 users can simultaneously connect. I'm not sure I have my facts straight but if you get a new box you may want to consider standard OS X.

Rick

[Christiaan]

Thanks Alan. Rick, yeah I am, but a new dedicated server is one of the things we're in the process of purchasing