Reading Hardware

I will kill to get this... hmm... I have 2 christmases and 2 birthdays until I go off to college 'Umm, hey all giving me presents, can you just give me cash instead?'. I WANT this. Holy Lord In Heaven, read the specs on this. A 'Flash' Harddrive (like flash chip, only massively large) capeable of 8 gb/s transfer rate.

...

Fond memories

I'm reaching critical geek mass over here.

'Yeah, That's what Jesus would do. Jesus would bomb Afghanistan. Yeah.' - snowlion

Omg.

I wish I'd never clicked that link. How could I ever be happy with my puny pc again? ;-)

'Repent, Harlequin!' said the Ticktockman. 'Get stuffed!' the Harlequin replied, sneering.

You gotta live with that - others (me) have to live with such technological disadvantages since .. i dont know what time ...

the "best" system I currently own is my notebook: Celeron 533, 196 MB RAM, 6.1 GB HDD, 2x PC-Card/PCMCIA-slots, all slots one can long for, all of that cramed inside a cheap plastic hull.

cu, w0lf.

ps: something i'm missing in this ubercomputer: some Linux BIOS, which lets you initialize the system in less than 2 seconds. (read more iX).

beards are cool. every villain has one!

This post was edited by ginsterbusch on Dec 02, 2003.

Nice.

It almost makes the new G5s look slow. However, I didn't hear them say they were running 64 bit processors. In fact, if they're using P4 special editions, imagine how mush faster they'd be if they were using Mac technology. G5's are running 1 GB bus speed, and 512K of L3 cache.

Can't get past that flash storage though...

Once Fred Neitszche declared God is Dead, f*ck became the most important word in the English languag

I hate to tell you this, but the G5's aren't the best.

The performance would be far greater if it was running an AMD Athlon 64. I read a benchmark test comparing an AMD Athlon 64 to a dual G5 system, and the Athlon out performed the G5's in all but one test (a photoshop test applying filters on a 50 mb image. The G5 rendered 18 seconds faster). The benchmark compared rendering workspaces in Premier, Quicktime, and 2 different functions in Word. The AMD (system built by alienware) was tested by PC World, and the G5's were tested by Mac World (or whatever the mac sister of PC world is).

Souce: PC World Magazine (Click link for results)

Fond memories

So what is the best? <inser="rhetorical question">
This is neat. I was just on the Mac site today looking at some of the vitals. It's funny, they were comparing the G5 with dual 1.6 gig proc against dual Xeon 3.2g and it trampled it handsomely. But this was in the Photoshop test (don't know the sizw file.) Was there really briefly, didn't see other kinds of tests.

Oh, if only they used 64 bit Athlons...But truth be told, with the rest of the "plumbing," I don't think these Athlons could stay stable.

The way I see it is that the macs aren't perfect. They too have their quarks. But the point is that at half the rated speed, they usually out perform the competition, pretty regularly. I don't have a mac, or sell them, etc., but when i started reading about their architecture, I was impressed. And the fact of the matter is that in the professional arena, Macs are king; for good reason.

And think about this: the mac G5 with dual 1.6 gig cpuS running 64 bit instruction sets, Superdrive, 80 GB storage...and the 1GHz bus to each processor...is running $1800 if I've read it correctly. NOTHING CAN TOUCH THAT THAT! PERIOD! :)

Once Fred Neitszche declared God is Dead, f*ck became the most important word in the English languag

This post was edited by zen on Dec 04, 2003.

Goodness... slight modesty in a Mac fan. Seriously, I am impressed. I don't know a single Mac-cultee that would ever admit what you just admitted.

Speed ratings mean nothing nowadays. I run an Athlon XP 2000+ that runs at 1.3 ghz, but performs just the same as a P4 2 ghz. AMD has a different focus than Intel (and Mac it seems). Intel boards focus on the bus speed while AMD focueses on memory latencies and other such items (such as their Quantispeed, and such).

Personally, I wouldn't trust a benchmark by Apple. Neither would I truly trust a benchmark by Gateway, Dell, Compaq, Alienware, Falcon Northwest, etc. I trust 3rd party benchmarks (loyalty is not there) but the element of bribery does come into play, but what is the point?

And think about this: the mac G5 with dual 1.6 gig cpuS running 64 bit instruction sets, Superdrive, 80 GB storage...and the 1GHz bus to each processor...is running $1800 if I've read it correctly.

There is no way you read that correctly. Macs are typically far more expensive than PC's (due to the fact that Apple is the only place you can buy a mac, while there are atleast 20 different PC motherboard manufactures (abit, ecs, etc...), and all are competing for the market, which is larger than Apple's). Though, it may just be a bare bones system.

But, I bet you I could built the PC equivalent for a slightly lower price (probably only $500 to a thousand less...). Was looking for a place to build (online ya know), but this is one of those specilize companies (3dboxx). I'll get back to you on that.

Oops, forgot. Mac's have got to watch out professional wise. Dreamorks switched its servers and desktops to Linux. Plus, every major piece of graphics software (Mayay, 3ds max, Lightwave, etc..) are only for the pc (some may have come out w/ mac ports). Though mac does have Adobe, most 3d animation companies all use either SGI or PC's. Mac's have the publishing world though.

Fond memories

This post was edited by eljefe on Dec 04, 2003.

Goodness... slight modesty in a Mac fan. Seriously, I am impressed. I don't know a single Mac-cultee that would ever admit what you just admitted.

I guess it's kinda like a guy admitting that he's sensitive. He'll get lynched. When one is hopelessly outnumbered, he'll keep his mouth shut. I'm not a Mac cultee, or fan. I'm just impressed by what the new platform has to offer.
And the truth of the matter is that ifI had money, I'd get one to do my video editing and not regret it for a second.

Speed ratings mean nothing nowadays. I run an Athlon XP 2000+ that runs at 1.3 ghz, but performs just the same as a P4 2 ghz. AMD has a different focus than Intel (and Mac it seems). Intel boards focus on the bus speed while AMD focueses on memory latencies and other such items (such as their Quantispeed, and such).

well, the fact is that speed stopped mattering long ago. Remember when they hit 1GHz? That was a BIG deal. After that, it stopped being relevant. For the average person who doesn't know about pipeline burst, bandwith and the fact that Noth and South Bridges are no longer produced, speed is all that really matters. It's like buying a car for a guy; engine size is everything. And think about something else, the average person, if he/she knows anything about computers, asked what is inside their "box" they'll tell you "Pentium." It's for those people that speed ratings are so important.

And I don't know if AMD and Intel focus on doing different things with their engineering. I think that they develop their technology in different ways (a good thing) and have strengths and weaknesses. AMD has Quantispeed archetecture. Pentium has Hyperthreading. Both are supposed to have the same end result, right? Essentially having the OS recognize one as two cpus.

Personally, I wouldn't trust a benchmark by Apple. Neither would I truly trust a benchmark by Gateway, Dell, Compaq, Alienware, Falcon Northwest, etc. I trust 3rd party benchmarks (loyalty is not there) but the element of bribery does come into play, but what is the point?

There has to be benchmark and statistics. That is the nature of the beast. However, tests can be biased, as hard as that is for people to accept. The Premiere "test" for example. Lots of people use Premiere, and lots of people use Pentiums. However, Pents have always sucked at the type of instructions that Prem uses. Give it a bigger chore, it'll suck more.
Overll I agree, who gives valid test results <insert= rhetorical questionmark here">

Previous post: And think about this: the mac G5 with dual 1.6 gig cpuS running 64 bit instruction sets, Superdrive, 80 GB storage...and the 1GHz bus to each processor...is running $1800 if I've read it correctly. see link @Mac-G5

There is no way you read that correctly. Macs are typically far more expensive than PC's (due to the fact that Apple is the only place you can buy a mac, while there are atleast 20 different PC motherboard manufactures (abit, ecs, etc...), and all are competing for the market, which is larger than Apple's). Though, it may just be a bare bones system.

No, the difference is that one has to buy a few other things, like the monitor, et al, and that brings up the price at least a grand. But still, that's cheaper than the L Mach L 3.8 system that this thread started on.

But, I bet you I could built the PC equivalent for a slightly lower price (probably only $500 to a thousand less...). Was looking for a place to build (online ya know), but this is one of those specilize companies (3dboxx). I'll get back to you on that.

I'd love to hear what you come up with. I'm going to be going through my semi-annual computer building process shortly after X-Mas, so I welcom your results.

Oh, almost forgot. Mac's have got to watch out professional wise. Dreamorks switched its servers and desktops to Linux. Plus, every major piece of graphics software (Mayay, 3ds max, Lightwave, etc..) are only for the pc (some may have come out w/ mac ports). Though mac does have Adobe, most 3d animation companies all use either SGI or PC's. Mac's have the publishing world though.

Sure. We don't have the budgets they do, noe the headaches of cutting costs like the studios. Linux is basically Unix on modern DOS units. Or put another way, the Mac OS on PC hardware...the best of both worlds :)
(And yes I know this is simplifying things, and I don't care:)

Once Fred Neitszche declared God is Dead, f*ck became the most important word in the English languag

Give me a bit. I don't have the time right now, but I know of good places for PC hardware. As for your G5, these are the specs:

1.6GHz PowerPC G5
800MHz frontside bus
512K L2 cache
256MB DDR333 128-bit SDRAM
Expandable to 4GB SDRAM
80GB Serial ATA
SuperDrive
Three PCI Slots
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra
64MB DDR video memory
56K internal modem
Source [Click Here]

So, I will match this (using an AMD because AMD > Pentium, plus AMD is 64 bit while Intel's 64 is the Xenon, which is not mainstream.)

Fond memories