BryanBensing
Apr 6, 03:11 PM
Rotfl
apple also sold about 100k ipad's - yesterday.
apple also sold about 100k ipad's - yesterday.
rotarydialz
Apr 27, 08:58 AM
correct. wasn't sure how long it would take for people in general to get up in arms about location privacy on the idevices... what did people think was going to happen??
such it is, our electronic tethers are really leashes.
It's not very accurate information apparently. I would like to know just how accurate this location tracking is before I get too excited.
such it is, our electronic tethers are really leashes.
It's not very accurate information apparently. I would like to know just how accurate this location tracking is before I get too excited.
AngryCorgi
Apr 6, 04:16 PM
Since you have no clue how the sandy bridge airs will perform, I'll take your statement as FUD.
I'll give you some insight into their potential. The desktop i7-2600k has been benchmarked to be roughly equivalent to a 9400m in performance (assuming similar CPU).
i7-2600k GPU clock = 850/1350 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i5-2410m (13" Mac Pro base) GPU clock = 650/1200 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i7-2620m (13" Mac Pro upg) GPU clock = 650/1300 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i5-2537m (theorized 11/13 MBA) GPU clock = 350/900 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i7-2649m (theorized 13 MBA upg) GPU clock = 500/1100 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
As you can see, none of the mobile GPUs run quite as fast as the desktop, but the 13" 2.7GHz upg cpu's comes fairly close. Now, the 2.13 GHz MBA + 320m combo matched or beat out the i7-2620m in 75% of the tests (and only narrowly was defeated in 25%). There is going to be some random inconcistancy regardless, due to driver variances in different apps. The issue here is (and this can be shown in core2 vs. i5/i7 testing on the alienware m11x) the core2 duo really very rarely gets beat by the i5/i7 in gaming/video playback. This is because not many games are single-threaded anymore, and if using 2+ threads, the i5/i7 ULV won't jump the clock speed any. Further, the 2.13GHz was keeping up with and beating a 2.7GHz (27% higher clock!) in that test, because graphics are the bottleneck, not the CPU. Take into account that NONE of the ULV core-i options match the MBP 13" 2.7GHz upg GPU speed and its pretty clear that for graphics-intensive apps, the older 320m would be the way to go. Now for most everything else, the i7-2649m would overtake the core2 2.13GHz. This includes a lot of non-accelerated video playback (high-CPU-overhead).
Something you guys need to be wary of is the 1333MHz memory topic. Likely, Apple will choose to run it down at 1066MHz to conserve battery life. Memory speed hikes = gratuitous battery drain.
I for one am happy Apple is growing with the modern tech, but I hold no illusions as to the benefits/drawbacks of either system.
I'll give you some insight into their potential. The desktop i7-2600k has been benchmarked to be roughly equivalent to a 9400m in performance (assuming similar CPU).
i7-2600k GPU clock = 850/1350 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i5-2410m (13" Mac Pro base) GPU clock = 650/1200 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i7-2620m (13" Mac Pro upg) GPU clock = 650/1300 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i5-2537m (theorized 11/13 MBA) GPU clock = 350/900 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i7-2649m (theorized 13 MBA upg) GPU clock = 500/1100 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
As you can see, none of the mobile GPUs run quite as fast as the desktop, but the 13" 2.7GHz upg cpu's comes fairly close. Now, the 2.13 GHz MBA + 320m combo matched or beat out the i7-2620m in 75% of the tests (and only narrowly was defeated in 25%). There is going to be some random inconcistancy regardless, due to driver variances in different apps. The issue here is (and this can be shown in core2 vs. i5/i7 testing on the alienware m11x) the core2 duo really very rarely gets beat by the i5/i7 in gaming/video playback. This is because not many games are single-threaded anymore, and if using 2+ threads, the i5/i7 ULV won't jump the clock speed any. Further, the 2.13GHz was keeping up with and beating a 2.7GHz (27% higher clock!) in that test, because graphics are the bottleneck, not the CPU. Take into account that NONE of the ULV core-i options match the MBP 13" 2.7GHz upg GPU speed and its pretty clear that for graphics-intensive apps, the older 320m would be the way to go. Now for most everything else, the i7-2649m would overtake the core2 2.13GHz. This includes a lot of non-accelerated video playback (high-CPU-overhead).
Something you guys need to be wary of is the 1333MHz memory topic. Likely, Apple will choose to run it down at 1066MHz to conserve battery life. Memory speed hikes = gratuitous battery drain.
I for one am happy Apple is growing with the modern tech, but I hold no illusions as to the benefits/drawbacks of either system.
Macnoviz
Jul 20, 04:23 PM
Sort of proves the point i was trying to make, at some point mose users wil rather get a beter IO subsystem than more processing power.
Actually, that was my point, but now that you mention it, reversed hyperthreading would solve some problems.
In the long run (really long run, I'm talking quantumcomputers here) however, you are right, and innovation in computing will mostly come from software and how you tell the computer what to do. The nec-plus-ultra would be thinking of a result and getting it (or saying it to your computer) like a photoshop user going, well I would like the sun being more dominant in that picture, the power lines removed, and make those persons look younger. Boom. It happens.
Actually, that was my point, but now that you mention it, reversed hyperthreading would solve some problems.
In the long run (really long run, I'm talking quantumcomputers here) however, you are right, and innovation in computing will mostly come from software and how you tell the computer what to do. The nec-plus-ultra would be thinking of a result and getting it (or saying it to your computer) like a photoshop user going, well I would like the sun being more dominant in that picture, the power lines removed, and make those persons look younger. Boom. It happens.
raymondso
Sep 19, 10:14 AM
Could be that they are expecting a flood of returns after they introduce the new MB and MBP. And they are waiting so they can send out fresh referbs. Just a though.
reasonable:p
and i hope u are right! :D
reasonable:p
and i hope u are right! :D
zacman
Apr 19, 02:43 PM
Ya right. :rolleyes:
http://ronnie05.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/gartner-1011101.jpg?w=594&h=256
Apple Q3/09: 7 million devices and 17.1% marketshare
Apple Q3/10: 13.4 million devices (almost doubled!) but 16.7% marketshare.
Nokia Q3/09: 18 million devices and 44% marketshare
Nokia Q3/10: 29 million devices (+ 11 million!) but only 36% marketshare
So Apple sold 6.5 million more units but lost 0.4% marketshare.
Ya, right.
http://ronnie05.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/gartner-1011101.jpg?w=594&h=256
Apple Q3/09: 7 million devices and 17.1% marketshare
Apple Q3/10: 13.4 million devices (almost doubled!) but 16.7% marketshare.
Nokia Q3/09: 18 million devices and 44% marketshare
Nokia Q3/10: 29 million devices (+ 11 million!) but only 36% marketshare
So Apple sold 6.5 million more units but lost 0.4% marketshare.
Ya, right.
CaoCao
Feb 28, 02:06 PM
A same-sex attracted person is living a "gay lifestyle" when he or she dates people of the same sex, "marries" people of the same sex, has same-sex sex, or does any combination of these things. I think that if same-sex attracted people are going to live together, they need to do that as though they were siblings, not as sex partners. In my opinion, they should have purely platonic, nonsexual relationships with one another.
Heterosexual couples need to reserve sex for opposite-sex monogamous marriage. If I had a girlfriend, I might kiss her. But I wouldn't do that to deliberately arouse either of us. If either of us felt tempted to have sex with each other, the kissing would stop right away. I know of a woman who gave an excellent answer when men asked her why saved sex for marriage. She said, "I"m worth waiting for." She lived by her Catholic convictions, and she wouldn't risk letting any man use her as a mere object, as a mere tool.
Some may say, "I have sex with my girlfriend to show her that I love her." If I had a girlfriend, I would hope I would love her enough to protect her from the physical and psychological risks that come with non-marital sex. The best way for me to do that is for my hypothetical girlfriend and me to be celibate before marriage.
Sacramentally same-sex "marriage" isn't marriage. Neither is merely civil marriage of any sort. If I understand what the Catholic Church's teachings about marriage merely civil, it teaches non-sacramental marriage, whether same-sex or opposite-sex, is legal fornication.
Excellent post.
Yes, sex in merely civil marriage is fornication
Heterosexual couples need to reserve sex for opposite-sex monogamous marriage. If I had a girlfriend, I might kiss her. But I wouldn't do that to deliberately arouse either of us. If either of us felt tempted to have sex with each other, the kissing would stop right away. I know of a woman who gave an excellent answer when men asked her why saved sex for marriage. She said, "I"m worth waiting for." She lived by her Catholic convictions, and she wouldn't risk letting any man use her as a mere object, as a mere tool.
Some may say, "I have sex with my girlfriend to show her that I love her." If I had a girlfriend, I would hope I would love her enough to protect her from the physical and psychological risks that come with non-marital sex. The best way for me to do that is for my hypothetical girlfriend and me to be celibate before marriage.
Sacramentally same-sex "marriage" isn't marriage. Neither is merely civil marriage of any sort. If I understand what the Catholic Church's teachings about marriage merely civil, it teaches non-sacramental marriage, whether same-sex or opposite-sex, is legal fornication.
Excellent post.
Yes, sex in merely civil marriage is fornication
Hamish
Apr 11, 10:36 PM
Looking forward to the new final cut studio.
if apple is smart they will allow access to individual parts of the suite
as seperate Mac App Store downloads.
If it were possible to buy apple Motion on it's own I think many existing After Effects would be very happy to have something else to play with that can take adavantage of their hardware and deliver some fun realtime workflows...
it could be a halo product for such editors as well to end up using the whole suite...
I bought motion for 300 when it used to be sold individually, and I have spent a tonne of money since simply because I love that product.
do it apple. please.
if apple is smart they will allow access to individual parts of the suite
as seperate Mac App Store downloads.
If it were possible to buy apple Motion on it's own I think many existing After Effects would be very happy to have something else to play with that can take adavantage of their hardware and deliver some fun realtime workflows...
it could be a halo product for such editors as well to end up using the whole suite...
I bought motion for 300 when it used to be sold individually, and I have spent a tonne of money since simply because I love that product.
do it apple. please.
Malithion
Mar 26, 11:12 AM
Ignoring all else what I want is the ability to run my IOS applications on Mac OS. :)
lazyrighteye
Aug 11, 10:50 AM
Using TimeMachine, Steve is going to release it two years ago.
That made my Friday... which may actually be a sad comment on things in my world. :D
That made my Friday... which may actually be a sad comment on things in my world. :D
arkitect
Mar 4, 03:41 AM
There is no risk of destroying society.
I never realised we had such power�
Earthquakes when we have sex and now getting married destroys whole societies.
;)
We are SO screwed!
http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_kysrpgpMw31qzkf1ao1_500.jpg
I never realised we had such power�
Earthquakes when we have sex and now getting married destroys whole societies.
;)
We are SO screwed!
http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_kysrpgpMw31qzkf1ao1_500.jpg
gus6464
Mar 22, 08:20 PM
If you meant the HTC View for Sprint (aka the Flyer), then I don't think it needs Honeycomb right away to become popular.
It'll start with Gingerbread, Sense and the Scribe pen technology, which is plenty to play and be useful with.
I'm looking forward to trying its ability to allow typed, drawn, and voice memos during the day, saved into Evernote. Latest demo video here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dVK-OTnxnp0). HTC is going out on a limb here, but I think it's a good one.
The Flyer is a good concept but I think holding it back is Sense and not necessarily Gingerbread. Sense has become too clunky and sluggish for it's own good and at the end of the day is it really needed? HTC should just concentrate on making apps that take advantage of the scribe pen than building everything around Sense. Android has evolved enough that there is no need for Sense, Motoblur, Touchwiz anymore. Make it optional not mandatory. I have seen way too many apps not work correctly just because of the damn UI layer that the manufacturer is running. It would be very easy to have all those UI's available on the app market and allow the consumer to make a choice. Differentiate your product by the hardware and build quality, and not some clunky, useless UI overlay.
It'll start with Gingerbread, Sense and the Scribe pen technology, which is plenty to play and be useful with.
I'm looking forward to trying its ability to allow typed, drawn, and voice memos during the day, saved into Evernote. Latest demo video here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dVK-OTnxnp0). HTC is going out on a limb here, but I think it's a good one.
The Flyer is a good concept but I think holding it back is Sense and not necessarily Gingerbread. Sense has become too clunky and sluggish for it's own good and at the end of the day is it really needed? HTC should just concentrate on making apps that take advantage of the scribe pen than building everything around Sense. Android has evolved enough that there is no need for Sense, Motoblur, Touchwiz anymore. Make it optional not mandatory. I have seen way too many apps not work correctly just because of the damn UI layer that the manufacturer is running. It would be very easy to have all those UI's available on the app market and allow the consumer to make a choice. Differentiate your product by the hardware and build quality, and not some clunky, useless UI overlay.
pmz
Apr 6, 10:30 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
I have a 13" ultimate of the current generation. The limiting factor for me is the graphics, not the processor. so going to sandy bridge with the intel 3000 would be a less appealing machine for my uses than the current model. It's really too bad the sandy bridge macs are tied to those garbage integrated graphics.
Since you have no clue how the sandy bridge airs will perform, I'll take your statement as FUD.
I have a 13" ultimate of the current generation. The limiting factor for me is the graphics, not the processor. so going to sandy bridge with the intel 3000 would be a less appealing machine for my uses than the current model. It's really too bad the sandy bridge macs are tied to those garbage integrated graphics.
Since you have no clue how the sandy bridge airs will perform, I'll take your statement as FUD.
greenstork
Jul 31, 12:49 PM
With the possible introduction of the iPhone, movie downloads, Leopard preview, and true video iPods, in addition to new Mac Pros and possibly other updated Macs with the Core 2 Duos, I'm putting my money on a product announcement tomorrow.
Steve's going to spend the keynote telling developers about what they'll be able to do with Leopard, it is a developers conference after all. I'll go out on a limb and say Mac Pros tomorrow or perhaps at the very least, new Xserves. There is every reason to just wait until August 7, but I'll chance my prediction for an update tomorrow. Who's with me!
Steve's going to spend the keynote telling developers about what they'll be able to do with Leopard, it is a developers conference after all. I'll go out on a limb and say Mac Pros tomorrow or perhaps at the very least, new Xserves. There is every reason to just wait until August 7, but I'll chance my prediction for an update tomorrow. Who's with me!
TheKrillr
Aug 27, 08:19 PM
Are you sure that discount applies to the NEW Merom based Macs - I don't think so?
I would assume so. The promotion applies to the Mac Pros i believe, and thats new hardware.
I would assume so. The promotion applies to the Mac Pros i believe, and thats new hardware.
EagerDragon
Aug 26, 10:14 AM
I am sure the customer support is not good in non-US.
Unfortunately Apple is not maintainly a high quality of customer support service throughout the world. It seems Apple is neglecting the areas which is growing fast. This will certainly hinder the growth of Mac OS market share.
HEY MACRUMORS personnel, how about creating a poll that ask people that are unhappy with Apple support their region of the world and then share that with Apple and the media. Maybe we can get some fire under their butts and get these people some well deserved help and good service. Please Help!!!!
Most of these people pay more for their MAC thatn we in the US do, I would think they should get at least the same level of quality in service and in hardware. They are also part of our MAC family.
Unfortunately Apple is not maintainly a high quality of customer support service throughout the world. It seems Apple is neglecting the areas which is growing fast. This will certainly hinder the growth of Mac OS market share.
HEY MACRUMORS personnel, how about creating a poll that ask people that are unhappy with Apple support their region of the world and then share that with Apple and the media. Maybe we can get some fire under their butts and get these people some well deserved help and good service. Please Help!!!!
Most of these people pay more for their MAC thatn we in the US do, I would think they should get at least the same level of quality in service and in hardware. They are also part of our MAC family.
archer75
Apr 5, 04:56 PM
I'm hoping for new imacs too. And mini's. I just got a promotion at work and approval from the wife to pretty much buy whatever mac I want. Except for the high end mac pro.
janstett
Sep 13, 01:37 PM
The OS takes advantage of the extra 4 cores already therefore its ahead of the technology curve, correct? Gee, no innovation here...please move along folks. :rolleyes:
As for using a Dell, sure they could've used that. Would Windows use the extra 4 cores? Highly doubtful. Microsoft has sketchy 64 bit support let alone dual core support; I'm not saying "impossible" but I haven't read jack squat about any version of Windows working well with quad cores. You think those fools (the same idiots who came up with Genuine Advantage) actually optimized their OS to run in an 8 core setup? Please pass along what you're smoking. :rolleyes:
Sorry to burst your reality distortion field, but see my previous post. I ran a dual processor Pentium II NT setup ten years ago and Windows handled it just fine THEN -- back when Apple barely supported it with a hack to its cooperatively-multitasked OS and required specially written applications with special library support.
BTW my 2 year old Smithfield handles 4 processors fine (Dual Core Pentium Extreme with hyperthreading = 4 cores).
The only limit with Windows is they keep the low end XP home to 2 processors on the same die. There is probably an architectural limit on both OSX and XP and if it's not 8 it's 16. It's probably 8.
As for using a Dell, sure they could've used that. Would Windows use the extra 4 cores? Highly doubtful. Microsoft has sketchy 64 bit support let alone dual core support; I'm not saying "impossible" but I haven't read jack squat about any version of Windows working well with quad cores. You think those fools (the same idiots who came up with Genuine Advantage) actually optimized their OS to run in an 8 core setup? Please pass along what you're smoking. :rolleyes:
Sorry to burst your reality distortion field, but see my previous post. I ran a dual processor Pentium II NT setup ten years ago and Windows handled it just fine THEN -- back when Apple barely supported it with a hack to its cooperatively-multitasked OS and required specially written applications with special library support.
BTW my 2 year old Smithfield handles 4 processors fine (Dual Core Pentium Extreme with hyperthreading = 4 cores).
The only limit with Windows is they keep the low end XP home to 2 processors on the same die. There is probably an architectural limit on both OSX and XP and if it's not 8 it's 16. It's probably 8.
Highland
Nov 28, 06:49 PM
it's ridiculous for Universal to even be thinking this. NONE of the money would get to artists or anything like that. it would just go to the company.
Yep. I haven't seen any plans for any of the cash to be distributed to the Universal artists. This is appalling behavior.
Btw, Universal (unfortunately) own a pretty massive music catalogue. So if they did threaten to pull out of iTS, Apple might listen. You'd hope it's way too late for that though. I think iTS has enough of a head start that even Universal etc couldn't threaten Apple.
Yep. I haven't seen any plans for any of the cash to be distributed to the Universal artists. This is appalling behavior.
Btw, Universal (unfortunately) own a pretty massive music catalogue. So if they did threaten to pull out of iTS, Apple might listen. You'd hope it's way too late for that though. I think iTS has enough of a head start that even Universal etc couldn't threaten Apple.
Unspeaked
Nov 29, 12:10 PM
I'm certainly not on the record label's side on this, and I'm someone who almost never downloads anything online (not even free, MP3 of the week type tracks), but I think two important things we're glossing over are:
1 It is illegal to pirate music, regardless of whether or not a label gives their artists their fair share of profits.
2 Like it or not, most of the music on most people's portable music players is downloaded off of P2P. We "affluent" Mac users, who stay on the cutting edge of technology and come to places like MacRumors for heated exchanges about Apple news are not a typical cross section of music consumers.
I'd reckon most iPods are owned by the under 21 crowd, who've grown up with P2P as an ever-present option for music, and who swap songs with friends without thinking twice about it.
And as this generation gets older, things will only get worse for the labels, I figure.
On the other hand, at some point in time, this same generation will be in our courtrooms running the judicial system and in our capitol running our government, so it could be that some of these antiquated laws get modified for the digital age, but until then, refer back to Points 1 and 2 above and realize that despite how we may feel about the issue, it's illegal to download music freely and most people are doing it...
1 It is illegal to pirate music, regardless of whether or not a label gives their artists their fair share of profits.
2 Like it or not, most of the music on most people's portable music players is downloaded off of P2P. We "affluent" Mac users, who stay on the cutting edge of technology and come to places like MacRumors for heated exchanges about Apple news are not a typical cross section of music consumers.
I'd reckon most iPods are owned by the under 21 crowd, who've grown up with P2P as an ever-present option for music, and who swap songs with friends without thinking twice about it.
And as this generation gets older, things will only get worse for the labels, I figure.
On the other hand, at some point in time, this same generation will be in our courtrooms running the judicial system and in our capitol running our government, so it could be that some of these antiquated laws get modified for the digital age, but until then, refer back to Points 1 and 2 above and realize that despite how we may feel about the issue, it's illegal to download music freely and most people are doing it...
Macnoviz
Jul 22, 03:03 AM
So I read in this thread that Kentsfield and Clovertown ARE compatible with Conroe and Woodcrest sockets (respectively) (Cloverton or Clovertown?)
Hope for upgrading an iMac to Quad Core is kindled! At least if Apple releases Conroe iMacs.
BTW, In my opinion, one thing a person should never, ever say is some computer has too much power, and that it will never be needed. So when 128 core CPUs come out in ~10 years time, will we still be considering dual core CPUs as fast enough for our use?
I seem to remember that when the original DOS operating system was created, its RAM was limited. I can't remember exactly to how much, but it was decided that people would never use more than a few kilobytes of memory. Now we are arguing that Mac should provide no less than a gigabyte! Now we are moving to 64 bit processing, with its capability to address a few exobytes, or millions of Terabytes of storage, it seems impossible that we will ever need 128bit computing. But, no doubt, one day we will.
When we will be able to download our entire lives, and even conciousness into a computer, as is said to happen in about 40 years (very much looking forward to), I dare say it will take a lot of memory to do, and even more processing power to manage effectively, especially if we wanted to "live" inside computers, as we will no doubt want to do someday.
So as a conclusion to my most recent rant, Please, never tell me a computer is too powerfu, has too many cores, or has too much storage capacity. If it is there to be used, it will be used. It always is.
I agree with your point on never saying a computer is too powerful, although living in computers is probably not going to happen. Sounds a bit too Matrix-like for me.
Hope for upgrading an iMac to Quad Core is kindled! At least if Apple releases Conroe iMacs.
BTW, In my opinion, one thing a person should never, ever say is some computer has too much power, and that it will never be needed. So when 128 core CPUs come out in ~10 years time, will we still be considering dual core CPUs as fast enough for our use?
I seem to remember that when the original DOS operating system was created, its RAM was limited. I can't remember exactly to how much, but it was decided that people would never use more than a few kilobytes of memory. Now we are arguing that Mac should provide no less than a gigabyte! Now we are moving to 64 bit processing, with its capability to address a few exobytes, or millions of Terabytes of storage, it seems impossible that we will ever need 128bit computing. But, no doubt, one day we will.
When we will be able to download our entire lives, and even conciousness into a computer, as is said to happen in about 40 years (very much looking forward to), I dare say it will take a lot of memory to do, and even more processing power to manage effectively, especially if we wanted to "live" inside computers, as we will no doubt want to do someday.
So as a conclusion to my most recent rant, Please, never tell me a computer is too powerfu, has too many cores, or has too much storage capacity. If it is there to be used, it will be used. It always is.
I agree with your point on never saying a computer is too powerful, although living in computers is probably not going to happen. Sounds a bit too Matrix-like for me.
AtHomeBoy_2000
Aug 5, 05:38 PM
BitTorrent is great if you're using a cable modem or DSL with almost equal upload/download ratios.But I'm using a Satellite..Downloads are great but the uploads are only 256k
Nothing wrong with leaching if you have to ;)
Nothing wrong with leaching if you have to ;)
Liske
Aug 17, 02:42 PM
I have a new 3.0 Intel- just letting you know they are not as close as Rob's test under real world performance. Adobe camera raw really screamed on my G5 and is noticibly slower and a bit buggy on my new Mac Pro. Start up is alot slower, etc, etc. He only tested MP aware processes which isn't the whole picture.
The Photo Retouch artist test puts the Mac Pro 3.0 about 33% slower than the quad G5- but I think that test is skewered to the G5s liking. I think it's somewhere in the real world realm of 12% slower than my G5 quad. Not quite as good under Rosetta [5%?] that Rob posts, but not quite as bad as some other tester's results. The finder and other apps are noticebly faster, even against the fast quad.
I went for the mac pro as a web designer able to run windoze now. CS2 gets some but not alot of excersize. Other comparisons- the storage is awesome, super easy, super quiet. This machine is about 75% the noise of my G5, add the quiet firmtek 2 drive SATA i ran with the quad, and the Mac Pro is about 50% quieter. [By the way if anyone needs a 2 drive firmtek external SATA II case with PCIe card and cables, it is looking for a new home now. It was a great case for the g5 and is about 6 months old- http://www.amug.org/amug-web/html/amug/reviews/articles/firmtek/2en2/]
My 2 cents!
mac Pro 3.0
3bg ram
2 x 2 drive stripe raids
Std graphics card.
The Photo Retouch artist test puts the Mac Pro 3.0 about 33% slower than the quad G5- but I think that test is skewered to the G5s liking. I think it's somewhere in the real world realm of 12% slower than my G5 quad. Not quite as good under Rosetta [5%?] that Rob posts, but not quite as bad as some other tester's results. The finder and other apps are noticebly faster, even against the fast quad.
I went for the mac pro as a web designer able to run windoze now. CS2 gets some but not alot of excersize. Other comparisons- the storage is awesome, super easy, super quiet. This machine is about 75% the noise of my G5, add the quiet firmtek 2 drive SATA i ran with the quad, and the Mac Pro is about 50% quieter. [By the way if anyone needs a 2 drive firmtek external SATA II case with PCIe card and cables, it is looking for a new home now. It was a great case for the g5 and is about 6 months old- http://www.amug.org/amug-web/html/amug/reviews/articles/firmtek/2en2/]
My 2 cents!
mac Pro 3.0
3bg ram
2 x 2 drive stripe raids
Std graphics card.
emotion
Jul 20, 08:32 AM
I have a question.
If Kentsfield is a relation of the Conroe part (ie. Core 2 Duo) then will it be capable of being configured in a pair to create a "octo" core machine?
Surely that will require a Xeon class processor (like a quad version of the Woodcrest)?
edit: quad version of Woodcrest is Clovertown.
If Kentsfield is a relation of the Conroe part (ie. Core 2 Duo) then will it be capable of being configured in a pair to create a "octo" core machine?
Surely that will require a Xeon class processor (like a quad version of the Woodcrest)?
edit: quad version of Woodcrest is Clovertown.
No comments:
Post a Comment