G5 2.5 verses a top end PC desktop or laptop

jamief · Post by **jamief** » Sun Aug 15, 2004 9:48 pm

Bill Jobs wrote:whats being a dick is responding to a thread and not answering the original posters question.
jamief the answer is xtra very simple. you sound like you want to know if
mac laptops are faster than pc laptops yet, the answer is no they are not, not the one you're getting, not the fastest mac available. there are still pc laptops that can outperform the fastest mac desktops, no need to even bring the pc desktops into the picture as the fastest ones are much faster than their pc laptop counterparts, so your money , no matter how much you spend will not get you a mac that is more powerful than a pc.

that said. this has hardly anything to do with music and if the only reason you're thinking of switching over to a pc is because you're tired of waiting
on the delivery date of your mac, then that's a big mistake. .. in my humble opinion I think there is something else going on deep down inside you and that you're just trying to use the delivery date as an excuse, surely you know it's not a good reason to switch platforms. if you want to change to a pc don't sweat it, just do it, granted alot of people might want to give you some grief but so what they're turds and don't understand that
your computer is just a tool and a competent person can run either platform with little problem.

personal opinion: if I was you , i'd get two laptops instead, a pc laptop and an ibook.

-::mic-minimal::

Well i have 450 gig worth of mac os files that i have to think about assimilating into a pcworld which i dont look forward to tackling. Also i have been thinking of switching for along time as with a pc you get a lot more for your money. That my deep personal issues mic-minimal

hivemind · Post by **hivemind** » Sun Aug 15, 2004 10:15 pm

geez, i don't think you'll be able to hit the ceiling on your dual 2.5 . not with Live4. besides, who needs 40 tracks with reverb on each? lol nobody, i hope.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Sun Aug 15, 2004 10:37 pm

thats also my point hivemind, there doesn't seem like any good reason to switch, i mean unless you just desire to go about asimulating 40tracks, i'm
a mainly pc user as thats what i have right now, but have had macs and am planing to get the new series of laptops when they come out. I just don't get the big deal jamief, the mac you ordered will cover what you need and then some. btw i wasn't trying to insult you talking about some deeper reasoning I just thought there must be some other reason that you wanted to go pc.
just trying to help, if i didn't do a good job sorry about that.

tribalogical · Post by **tribalogical** » Mon Aug 16, 2004 7:11 am

hey, jamief....

do you remember this test?

http://www.moar.net/cubasetest/results. ... erformance

it simply wouldn't run on my old G4 867 Mhz box. It barely gags by on my 15" 1.25Ghz Alu powerbook...

A small while back, the dual 2Ghz G5s were at the top of that list, then the newer Dual AMD Opterons took over (along with a single 3.2Ghz Athlon or two). The G5 2Ghz is now what, 13th on the list? But that's still quite admirable with only a 33% CPU usage on the test....

If you ever actually use that much *stuff* in a single project, you're much more the compositional madman than I'll ever be!

Something else to consider: the dual 2.5Ghz brings more than a bump in CPU speed (roughly a Ghz in total, across the two CPUS). It also adds a faster FSB (1.25Ghz per CPU), and other system architecture-based speed enhancements...

I think it's fair to expect that the new 2.5Ghz duals will clock in much higher up the list, possibly even topping it again for a time...

How does that translate to other apps? Well, certainly it depends, on a case by case basis, how each app utilizes CPU and other system architecture. But it should be a spectacular performer regardless.

I guess it's important to reinforce this idea: Macs are no longer way behind the performance curve (as they were before the G5 was released). They are keeping pace admirably so far. It remains to be seen what the next-gen of CPUs bring, but as we all know now, 90nm processes are causing unexpected problems for all the chip makers... heat, performance, etc. all not what was expected.

So, my point? Well, I think you'll do just fine with a G5 dual 2.5Ghz machine. Its performance will blow you away, and you won't have to deal with Windows and all that that implies (security being the high point on my list). Will it be the fastest 'puter out there? Maybe not, but it won't be off by much. Will the extra buck for the bang be worth it? Depends on your personal tolerances for Operating Systems and environments, I guess.

For me, there's no question that Mac is the way to go, even if it isn't the absolute fastest+cheapest combination out there...

hope this offerred something of value to your consideration!

peace,
tribalogical

Frank Hoffmann · Post by **Frank Hoffmann** » Mon Aug 16, 2004 7:53 am

ryst wrote:dirtstyle,

Quick question. I remember when you did the test you said the Live meter was near 100%, correct? I emailed Ableton and they said that the Live does support dual processors but one is used for audio and the other is used for the GUI. They also informed me that CPU meter is for audio processing ONLY. So I am confused now. Where was your CPU meter in LIVE 4 when you had 40+ tracks and lots of plugs?

Some clarification about multiprocessor support in Live. You can never come over 100% because the audio engine of Live doesn't support multiple processors yet. But there are several things working at the same time in Live and in the operating system. On a double processor Mac you can drive audio to almost 100% without experienceing drop outs. This with the user interface being still responsive. In this case one processor is almost exclusivly used for audio processing. That is what you can expect at the moment.

Frank

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Mon Aug 16, 2004 7:55 am

You should also remember that as OS X matures, the CPUs will give more bang for the buck. OS X is becoming more and more 64 bit optimized.

PC sucks, no doubt. Of course you'll get some fast shizzle but that's been the case for years. Nothing new at all in anyone's book. Now, when Longhorn comes out expect some major @$#% ups and incompatability issues for about a year. Apps will need to be re-written, new drivers, and remember what Intel/AMD gives to the world, Microsoft takes away with every new OS release.

Apple is the opposite of that.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Mon Aug 16, 2004 8:02 am

Going from XP to Longhorn will be like going from Win95/98 to XP.

SkeptikTank · Post by **SkeptikTank** » Mon Aug 16, 2004 8:46 am

Frank Hoffman writes that Live doesn't use two processors (yet). That explains why I can get approximately double the performance in Logic compared to live. 6 or 7 instances of Reaktors Blue Matrixes compared to 3 in Live. Makes me think that I might try to run reaktor standalone and route the audio the hardware way, or via jack. And see if that makes more performance possible

hivemind · Post by **hivemind** » Mon Aug 16, 2004 1:01 pm

SkeptikTank wrote:Frank Hoffman writes that Live doesn't use two processors (yet). That explains why I can get approximately double the performance in Logic compared to live. 6 or 7 instances of Reaktors Blue Matrixes compared to 3 in Live. Makes me think that I might try to run reaktor standalone and route the audio the hardware way, or via jack. And see if that makes more performance possible

maybe if your cpu's were 2*2GHz instead of 2*2MHz...

check your sig, i think it needs a small correction

but i would think that running it standalone, barring routing latencies and stuff, would probably make better use of your second processor. try it! or lend me your g5 and i'll try it!

dirtstyle · Post by **dirtstyle** » Mon Aug 16, 2004 3:16 pm

well, sorry about all my claims with power in live and my dual g5. mr. hoffman cleared that one up. i just can't wait till live actually does support dual processors. still no problems because i'm not doing sets with 40 tracks personally, but i'm willing to try for fun!

ultrasource · Post by **ultrasource** » Mon Aug 16, 2004 4:19 pm

"whats being a dick is responding to a thread and not answering the original posters question."
true. accept my sincerest apologies for my lack of forum etiquette. AdamJay, the only reason I ask is because I am temped to add a pc laptop to the mix and can't find your setup for under a grand. if you could be so kind as to guide me in the right direction. Thanks....

ryst · Post by **ryst** » Mon Aug 16, 2004 9:45 pm

Frank,
Thanks for the clarification. Now the question becomes....WHEN can we see Live supporting dual processors? If I can get great performance from my upcoming dual 2.5ghz now, then that means when dual processors are supported that might keep me from needing to upgrade my computer for a long time!

anonymouse · Post by **anonymouse** » Mon Aug 16, 2004 10:08 pm

here's what I'm ordering today:

laptop with:
pentium m 755 2 GHz, Intel 855 PM 2MB L2 Cache
ddr 2gb sdram
NVIDIA® QuadroTM FX Go1000 128MB DDR
15.4" UltraSharpTM Wide Aspect WUXGA 1920 x 1200
60GB 7,200 RPM hdd
4x usb 2, firewire

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Mon Aug 16, 2004 10:46 pm

Don't hold your breath on dual audio support, the abletons like that one processor is strictly graphics.

AdamJay · Post by **AdamJay** » Mon Aug 16, 2004 10:46 pm

anonymouse wrote:here's what I'm ordering today:

laptop with:
pentium m 755 2 GHz, Intel 855 PM 2MB L2 Cache
ddr 2gb sdram
NVIDIA® QuadroTM FX Go1000 128MB DDR
15.4" UltraSharpTM Wide Aspect WUXGA 1920 x 1200
60GB 7,200 RPM hdd
4x usb 2, firewire

how much did it set you back?