“Ask any Mac expert which system they would sell their grandmother for and they will have the answer out before you can say ’64-bit processing’ – and it has been my great pleasure to have that very system for a test drive. Apple’s top-shelf Mac, the Power Mac G5, is some seriously impressive hardware,” Chris Oaten writes for The Advertiser.
Oaten writes, “The review machine’s specs were: dual-2.7GHz G5 processors with a 1.35GHz front-side bus per processor, 2.5GB PC3200 DDR 400 RAM (512MB RAM is standard, expandable to 8GB), 250GB HD, 512K L2 cache per processor, 16x SuperDrive (DVD+R DL -comdual-layer, DVDR/CD-RW), three PCI-X slots, and ATI Radeon 9650 video card with 256MB DDR video memory. Drool.”
“This G5 is the ultimate Mac on offer from Apple now. It is pricey, sure, especially so when you start adding in the BTO options, but its performance is top-notch and Tiger (OS 10.4) is absolutely rock-solid. It is hard to imagine any professional user of graphics and video applications being less than satisfied with the dual-2.7GHz G5,” Oaten writes.
Full article here.
Let’s not forget the dual 1.8 G5’s out there in the market…..
It doesn’t run Windows
You mean “Windows doesn’t run” Sputnik…
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”grin” style=”border:0;” />
“It doesn’t run Windows”
Thanks Sputnik, for pointing out the number one reason to buy a PowerMac G5, not Windoze! Oh, weren’t we doing a top ten?
WM = can
as in, can the crap.
To even have the thought of putting Windoze on a G5 is like considering taking a real pig to the prom.
And, uh, I had the first post!! Woo-Hoo!!
the real sputnik puts that dumb trademark at the end of his post.
imposter!!!
btw, mighty mouse sucks guys. stick with the kensington mouse. seriously.
Does the “grandma” get pro-rated depending on age?
and….
both of mine are dead, is there still some sort of value (to science)?
My mac runs windows!…not that im proud of that…sigh…
i just purchased the dual 2.7 after waiting for ever for a quad MP, and I’m more than satisified. I own a large format print shop and everything is zillion meg layered PSD or PDF files, and my workflow/productivity has gone through the roof with this machine. I’m very pleased.
Oh, fer cryin’… If you’re gonna “do” Sputnik, at least put the “(c)” symbol at the end. If you don’t, you’re not even trying.
Worst. Sputnik. Ever.
As for this review, it’s not exactly timely is it? Why not review the iPod Shuffle why you’re at it? I hear it’s really small and doesn’t have a screen.
Wow – they finally noticed that Apple released a dual 2.7Ghz G5 in April. These web journalists are really quick.
talking about PPC macs is sooooo passée
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
If IBM could make chips in a resonable timeframe, he’d be taking about the hyperfast 3.7Ghz Quad Powermac G5.
That machine is a beast.
Yawn…
Great. It’s fast. Faster than any other Mac. Kind of like reviewing a specific model car against the version with a smaller engine. It’s easy, requires little research, and has little opportunity to offend somebody else.
How does it compare to other computers running the same task? Here’s where you’ll get into murky water.
This is a start, zupchuck .
http://www.barefeats.com/dualcore.html
…and another:
http://www.digitalproducer.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=32744-1
Take notice of the price difference between the PM 2.7 and the Dell Precision Workstation 380. The PM was outpaced on just about every test by a machine that cost $1K less and had half the RAM to work with.
…and another:
http://www.digitalproducer.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=32744-1
Take notice of the price difference between the PM 2.7 and the Dell Precision Workstation 380. The PM was outpaced on just about every test by a machine that cost $1K less and had half the RAM to work with.
…and another:
http://www.digitalproducer.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=32744-1
Take notice of the price difference between the PM 2.7 and the Dell Precision Workstation 380. The PM was outpaced on just about every test by a machine that cost $1K less and had half the RAM to work with.
You know… apple is offering refurbished dual 2.5s… whish seems to be a step under (ONLY) the 2.7… and it’s 2200.
Mac & PC Guy said:” Take notice of the price difference between the PM 2.7 and the Dell Precision Workstation 380. The PM was outpaced on just about every test by a machine that cost $1K less and had half the RAM to work with.”
I’m not sure where the author (Charlie White) got his numbers from but the G5 is actually less money than the Dell. Of course, the article is lean on info regarding the hardware (always a red flag when comparing Windows machines to Macs). But I notice that the Dell is configured with 2 Gigs of RAM while the Mac has 4 (and was probably specced from the Apple store). If you spec the same 2 Gigs from Datamem ($238) you get a PowerMac Dual 2.7 with 2.5 Gigs of RAM for $3237. Meanwhile, if you go to the Dell site and spec the Precision 380 3.2 Gig exactly the same as the Mac (2 Gb RAM, single 250 Gig HD, remove the $9 floppy drive, add 1394, remove the $29 extra speakers, add the 256 mb video card) you come up with $4104.
Also, look at the innards of the Dell. What a load of steaming dog poopy. I’ve thrown together better looking machines in my basement than that! The author calls it “uncluttered but messy”. What the heck does that mean?
Other problems with the Dell. Despite being marginally faster than the G5 on most tests, it is intended as a multimedia producing machine. Who, in their right mind, would pay that much money for a machine that cannot run the industry standard Final Cut Pro? Is it worth the extra couple of CPU cycles to cut yourself off from arguably the most elegant and cost effective digital video editor currently available?
Finally, is the OS that the Dell runs designed for graphics and video? Hardly. That is what Vista is supposed to be for. Win XP is a highly unstable platform for serious video and graphics work. It WILL BSOD on you in the middle of your editing session and for some reason, always just before a crucial deadline. Win XP has none of the built-in image and video strengths that we now find in Tiger with CoreImage and CoreVideo.
Finally, I note that the author had to “tweak” quite a bit to get the Dell to perform to the final standards he published. How about if we divide the time it took to configure both the Mac and the Dell into the overall speed ratings? The Mac would run flawlessly out of the box and would be editing on a project long before the Dell was even properly recognizing the 1394 card and the SATA controller. Do the nanoseconds of speed benefits of the Dell outweigh the configuration time, the reboot after BSOD time, the pulling your hair out because you’re using Premier instead of FCP time?
Yes, it is great that Intel is coming up with a nice processor for this machine but it looks like it would be better used in something other than the Precision 380.
-B
Well, I am certainly happy with my new 2.7 GHz Powermac. It screams. Of course, this too shall pass so I am gonna enjoy my brief time in the sun at the cutting edge while it lasts.
Beeblebrox has it exactly right.
Anyone can measurebate…it doesn’t prove a thing.
: )
Beeblebrox,
Not to pick a fight, but not everyone uses FCP. Avid Express still has a rather significant market. From the review of the 380 I read, performance wasn’t marginally better, but significantly better (although they could have done a better job of normalizing common components for a more fair price comparison). The Boxx 7400 was even faster (and admitedly more expensive). And I’d like to see Avid Express in the results, too.
http://www.digitalvideoediting.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=32744
http://www.digitalvideoediting.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=32744-1&afterinter=true
http://www.digitalvideoediting.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=32951-1
I will completely agree with you on the OS end, though. I’d rather have the platform I can depend on (even if a little bit slower) than the hot-rod that’s down half the time.
I’ve been doing video production/editing since before NLE’s were available. I got an Avid as soon as they had a reasonably priced system. When Final Cut Pro came out, I switched. The transition was painless. I gained more than I lost and haven’t looked back.
The main reason for the switch? Avid became a pain in the butt company to deal with. They had been customer oriented… then, after going public, it was all about more dollars for shareholders. All software and support went a la cart. I had to pay top dollar for an NLE system that always seemed to be in beta version. Crash, crash, crash.
Avid is loosing market share. Many deserted in the past when it looked like Mac development was going to be dropped. Those leaving now leave for the better value. Those who still prefer Avid are enjoying better pricing, thanks to Final Cut Pro.