Apple G5: Can You Feel the Power?

NewsFactor Network ^ | September 25, 2003 | James Maguire

[Timesink]

Apple G5: Can You Feel the Power?
   - NEWSFACTOR SPECIAL REPORT

By James Maguire
NewsFactor Network
September 25, 2003
http://www.newsfactor.com/perl/story/22364.html

Many computer manufacturers publish statistics about how fast their machines are, and each finds a way to present their box as the most powerful. Informed consumers understand that these vendor-provided benchmarks are best taken with a grain of salt.

In the case of the Apple G5, however, the statistics reveal a true speed demon -- even allowing for vendor spin. According to results on industry standard benchmark tests (presented by Apple), the G5 is not only faster than comparable machines, but quite a bit faster.

Could Apple, lagging Intel-based machines markedly with the G4 platform, actually have come from behind to produce the fastest desktop -- not just in advertising hype, but in reality?

Core Audience

As Apple product manager Todd Benjamin explains it, the G5's advanced performance is due to its origins as a high-powered IBM server workstation chip. "IBM has been using the 64-bit designs in their Power4 [server] and other workstation processors, and we were able to bring this technology down to the desktop for the first time," Benjamin told NewsFactor.

Apple offers software developers tools to optimize their products for the G5, or, as he put it, "get an incredible bang out of the processing capabilities in the G5 processor."

The software tweaked with these tools "will get much, much faster," on the G5 machines, he said. Adobe recently has optimized Photoshop for the G5, Benjamin noted, and Emagic has followed suit with its Logic audio software.

IDC analyst Allen Promisel is also impressed. He told NewsFactor the G5 will make "a significant difference" for Apple's core customers -- the power users and the professionals.

Benchmark Results

According to benchmarks published by Apple, a dual-processor G5 handled a Photoshop filter function 2.2 faster than a Pentium 4. In the same test, a Dell dual-processor 3.06 GHz Xeon machine performed just 1.2 times faster than a Pentium 4.

A battery of tests measuring multimedia performance yielded similar results. The dual G5 performed a video encoding function 2.1 times faster than a Pentium 4. The dual G5 handled 115 audio plug-ins simultaneously; the dual Xeon handled 81 plug-ins.

In a test of sci-tech computing, the dual G5 performed a genome sequencing function 6.9 times faster than a Pentium 4. The G5 "has multiple floating point units for working with long decimals, which is exactly what the scientific community wants," Benjamin said.

Three Myths

"The G5 is unbelievably powerful," Jupiter Research analyst Michael Gartenberg told NewsFactor. "If you're in the target audience that can take advantage of the horsepower, this is your dream machine."

But for Apple to reach a larger audience with the G5, it must dispel three myths, he said.

The first myth is that Apple does not have a sufficiently large library of software. "In just about any market you're in, you can find really great applications," he said.

The second -- a major issue for Apple -- is that their machines are not price competitive. Macintoshes, while not priced for the low end, are "certainly very competitive with other tier-one systems from other vendors -- and in some cases, coming in at a lower price point," Gartenberg said.

Open Standards

The third myth Apple must dispel is that Macintosh users must deal with a blizzard of proprietary technology, Gartenberg said.

As Apple moves forward with its new G5 platform, it continues to work toward standards-based products. For example, "things like Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, MPEG-4, just to name a few, are all core Apple standards," Gartenberg pointed out. "Yet they still get this nasty proprietary rap -- it takes a lot of education to overcome that.

"But in a market where a lot of organizations want alternatives to Wintel-based machines, Apple represents an untapped opportunity."

[Timesink]

Commence arguing!

[Timesink]

bump for bump lists

[Utilizer]

Can You Feel the Power?

Yep. Almost enough to make me go out and buy a Cyrix 386DX2-66 machine to beat it. Or an Amiga (circa 1989).

[LibKill]

Commence arguing!

Nanner, Nanner, boo-boo!

[zencat]

The problem is that the average user can get a 2.0GHz+ Compaq with 17" monitor at Wal-Mart for $498.

http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.gsp?product_id=2283651&cat=3951&type=19&dept=3944&path=0%3A3944%3A3951

[Ronin]

I would love to own this machine, but it is waaaay outside my budget.

I have always used Macs in the past, but now have a nice Dell at home. It it wasn't for Windows XP, which is an absolute horror to work with, I would be pretty happy with it.

[martin_fierro]

[Agnes Heep]

A Lamborghini beats a Tercel hands down. For some strange reason, though, I don't think I'll be buying one any time soon. Especially since the speed limit tops at 65 around these parts.

[avg_freeper]

"In just about any market you're in, you can find really great applications," he said.

You can not find critical software for structural analysis or design for Apple systems. No Patran/Nastran/FE software. No ADAMS, Midas, or other dynamic system modeling software. No MSC at all. Matlab/Simulink is available but requires much more effort to model a system. No CATIA or Pro/E.

Mac OS X / Apple computers are not a viable choice for structural engineering.

[GOP Jedi]

The G5 also dispels the "Mac is more expensive" claim:
http://www.macsonly.com/arch00309.html#9231

From what I gather, it isn't cheaper than the typical computer, but it is a good bit less expensive than competiing brands of comperable power.

[ryanjb2]

I don't trust a single benchmark coming out of Apple. They have a long history of questionable benchmarks and outrageous claims. Just look at the rediculous ads they have put out in the past. No one in the PC world cares that you think your chip is faster. The hardware is overpriced, and you can't build your own Mac. AGP? DDR SDRAM? PCI? USB? Fast memory buses? These are PC technologies being used in Macs. After all this innovation, good old Steve still has the nerve to get up on stage and run his bogus benchmarks.

Everyone knows that the P4 beats the G4, and when the Athlon 64 and Pentium 5 hit they will again be at the top.

[Bobibutu]

1. It depends on what your outcome is. Ya wanna crunch numbers get a pc. You like to work on computers get a pc. Ya wanna "compute" - get a Mac.

2. Macs tend to "run" longer than PCs - My 7600/120 upgraded to 300 still pulls the load.

My 7100/80 still pulls the load .. minumal PM - OK I use Disk Warrior once in a while. And I run "Permissions" now and again on my Ti 667.

I can't remember when I had to re-boot - on 9.2 or OS X.

3. It cost less to run a network of Macs than PCs.

I am a retired IBM Field Engineer - circa 1964

Sorry - I love Macs - Beowulf clusters? Any preteen can set one up on a Mac - takes a PHD on PCs.

[rdb3]

Sweet machine. But far too expensive.

101 things that the Mozilla browser can do that Internet Explorer cannot.

[Southack]

What specific horrors have you been slammed with while running XP? Inquiring minds want to know!

[Bobibutu]

Well there are Yugos and BMWs - witch do you prefer?

[observer5]

How about a computer that WORKS, what a concept. But most of you guys wouldn't know about such a thing. Too bad...

[Resolute]

You make a good point. I have corresponded with Apple employees on this very subject. Unfortunately they seem to regard the structural engineering market as too small to warrant much attention (unfavorable risk/reward assessment). Which is somewhat ironic in a way, since vendors of the programs that you named, seem to regard the Apple user base as too small to warrant much interest on their part. It appears to be one of those "catch 22" scenarios, in which both parties fear to make a commitment without a guaranteed outcome, which in turn makes the feared negative outcome all the more likely. Personally I believe that Apple has missed the boat, because engineers influence more computer purchase decisions, than say, doctors, lawyers, or artists. When is the last time that someone asked a doctor, lawyer, or artist about a tech purchase? Then again, when was the last time someone asked a engineer about a tech purchase? (Oh, that would be today, at my job.) Another irony is that Apple fancies its market to include artists. Almost every engineer that I know has the soul of an artist, albeit usually a structured, orderly kind of artist. In my opinion, one of Apple's biggest blunders has been to blow off the tech market. What is more tech than computers and modern software?

[Frohickey]

You can not find critical software for structural analysis or design for Apple systems.

Sap One is complete and very fast structural analysis software with superb modelling tools. Okay, its not my career field, but here is something I found just by doing a google search. Not saying its world-class software, but there is at least one.

[quidnunc]

I just got a Mac G5 1.8GHz and it was the easiest computer to set up that I have ever used.

It has OS 10.2.7 and so far that's been very stable.

[Senator Pardek]

$3000 - Lol...

That price is soooo 12 years ago...