Thursday, April 14, 2006
Request a Comparison between any two Macs Computer Trade In Program
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Brandon,
Your comparison follows below ...
Johnny AppleSpeed
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Power Mac Dual G5/2.7GHz versus G5 Power Mac Quad Core 2.5 GHz
Power Mac Dual G5/2.7GHz - M9749LL/A - April , 2005
Power Mac Quad Core G5/2.5 GHz- M9592LL/A - October 2005
++ The processor & graphics card scores above are based on CineBench 9.5 (email us to request the actual point scores for these machines)
http://www.cinebench.com/
The game test was obtain by running EVO2 4X4
http://www.aspyr.com/games.php/mac/4x4/
I am not familiar with Digital Performer, but according to a Macworld review it is Multi-Process savvy and so should be able take advantage of the multiprocessors of these two machines. Whether it can take complete advantage of all the huge capacity of the Quad Core machine, I don't know ... but perhaps MOTU has this information. If you can run multiple processes at the same time within Digital Performer, or can run several copies of the software at the same time working on separate tasks, then there is little doubt that you can max out the processing capacity of the Quad machine. Running two QuickTime encodes at the same time, we were still unable to max out the processors of the Quad Power Mac (about 87%). If we had added a third encode we would have filled the processing capacity completely.
There is no doubt that the Quad machine will provide you with a more flexible platform, but will your workflow and applications take advantage of all that power. Another thing that our results show is that the hard drive on the Quad, when working on large files, is significantly faster than the 2.7 GHz machine ... this might be an issue in your work.
If you have follow up questions about these results contact us again
Disclaimer: Remember to treat all benchmark scores with caution, and do not rely on performance scores from us in making mission critical decisions. We endeavor to make the information we provide as accurate as possible, but make no direct or expressed guarantee that this is the case
On Apr 12, 2006, at 5:38 PM, Brandon wrote:
This message was sent from:
http://macreviewzone.com/html/reviews/guides/individual/comparison_request.shtml
------------------------- COMMENTS -------------------------
Quad Core 2.5GHz
vs. Power Mac G5 Dual 2.7 GHz
More specifically, the results with Digital Performer and the maximum number of recording tracks possible how fast do you want to go? 24 bit 192K. I'm a professional composer who has a slew of computers; all of them maxed out in Ram, Hard Drives, Graphics Cards, etc. Many projects require 100+ live audio tracks and plenty of internal plug-ins with multiple external effects. Each individual cue (segment of a long project) is several GigaBytes in size. I realize PhotoShop is where everyone is at, but... IOW, does Digital Performer recogize those juicy new cores? I'm also going to call my MOTU rep, but I thought you gentlemen might have some more "street" figures not based on advertisements. Thank you.
$3,488 - Closeout- 1 year -PowerMax
$75 mail-in rebate on RAM
Free Shipping
Can't Find It? Search store on M9592LL
= Current Model = Previous Model = Unavailable = Unknown/Delay = Installation Fee ($20 to $40)
Extras = Canadian Dollars
New, Closeout, OpenBox, Refurbished and Used
Note
We receive a small commission on computers purchased using the links above. Though this adds no cost to your purchase price it does help us defray the cost of running MacReviewZone and MacSpeedZone. Your support is appreciated!
Basic Stats
Power Mac - M9592LL/A
G5/2.5 GHz 2X Dual Core processor
1MB L2 Cache - Per Core
1.25 GHz Frontside Bus
512MB memory
NVIDIA GeForce 6600
256MB Graphics Memory
250GB Hard Drive 7200 rpm
16x SuperDrive
(DVD+R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)
Released 10/05 More Stats ...
This Section Updated Tuesday, October 9, 2007 
= Current Model
= Unknown/Delay
= Canadian Dollars 
