Apple's dual processors... All Hype? or Cool Shite?

[pisces7378]

I got an e-mail a day or so ago from those shit-heads over at eMagic. It was one of those typical... "We value all of our customer regardless if they use Mac or PC... and we would like to invite you to join us on the Mac platform." They said that there will be an "Attractive offer" made from eMagic/Apple to help ease the financial shift over towards Mac.

Then I went and checked out the www.apple.com website and DAMN... Apple has come out with a new PowerMac G4. Now they are ALL dual processors. And they all have DDR RAM now, plus larger Hard Drives, faster system bus, a new front panel, and a higher compacity for RAM (2.0GB of DDR RAM!!!)

Now what I wanted to ask is... Is there really a huge advantage to using dual processors? I cannot believe that 2x 1.25gHz processors is faster than one 2.5gHz processor. There must be all kinds of task management, and perifferal sorting issues that would make dual processors kind of quirky.

I know that Apple is always talking about the Megahertz-Myth... that a 933mHz G4 processor is faster than a 2gHz Intel. (or whatever. What does this whole dual processor add to this argument? Are they trying to add the 2x 1.25gHz to try to equal the 2.5gHz of other processor companies just to satisfy those that are dying to have a higher digit to tell their friends?

Does dual processors matter that much for music apps? Or is Apple trying to target those doing more processor taxing apps like video etc...?

 

[Polaris20]

some of them have 2mb (!) of cache. Holy shit!! That's some nice gear. I'd definitely go Mac if I could afford it.

 

[ap]

I don't much about what you're asking except the "one apple equals two PeaChes" myth. Over in the Sonic community forum they've had some pretty nasty arguments about Apple vs PC. None of the hard core Apple people dispute the *fact* that for almost all apps including audio, an apple and PC of equal mhz will have near equal performance.

 

[pisces7378]

Hey AP... I just wanted to say that I am sorry that I never got back to you about that "project" that we were supposed to work on together. I downloaded your song with just you, the guitar and a little kays playing your song "Champion". I wrote a drum part for it in Logic Audio ages ago, but I was a bit to ashamed to send it on to you because I really didn't do the song justice.

To be honest (and not just trying to cover my ass) the song "Champion" is really fine the way it is. Any drums (or at least the drum part I stuck on it) can only weaken the song.

Styalistically I liked the song a lot. I think though for a drum part something on a sampler (like the exs24 which I do not have) would be a much better help than me tappin out some JV1010 drum parts like I have.

I would go through the song and listen to it and try to hear some hissing sizzlin' airy pulses standing in for high hats, and for the snare a very short quick "uhmm" sound, with a very sparce kick drum sound that has TONS of reverb, making the drums and toms sound as if they are playing in the Grand Canyon. But DEFINITLY if you do decide to go with this kind of drum set up, or any drum set up... scale the drums back and let the vocals and guitar parts stand out, especially during the "oooooooo" sections.

And for heavens sakes man.... add some kind of bass sounds. The song is top heavy. There should be maybe some kind of echo deep cello sound playing the bass notes of the guitar part (again scaled back, nothing IN YOUR FACE)... but the lack of low end bass sound makes the song seem incomplete....

BUT on the other hand maybe that is the sound you were going for and it adds to the "strong-vunerability" that the main character is trying to get across. That is up to you to decide.

I had some technical problems trying to get the drum part down. I couldn't get a fix on what speed you recorded the song. I also couldn't really lock the beginning of the song up with the downbaet of measure 1 so I just had to wing the drums with no ability to quantisize. My rythm is "pretty solid" so it sounds ok.

Anyway... think about what I said... but more importantly... do you have any more songs that are a bit more "drummer friendly"???

 

[Barometer]

In my experience dual processors on both platforms are hype unless you are using software specifically designed to take advantage of that architecture. Software designed to run on a single processor runs the same on a machine with one or two of them. Now I'm no expert on audio software, maybe someone can tell us if most audio apps are designed for one or two. Cost is the other factor. I'm sure most of us would love to get a fat G4, but most of us simply can't afford it. I built my P4 DAW for under $800 (not including the sound card) and I have no complaints about the computer so far

 

[c9-2001]

Dual G4 vs single 3gig P4....P4
Dual G4 vs Dual P4...P4
Dual G4 vs Dual AthlonXP....XP
Dual G4 vs Dual athlonMP...MP
Dual G4 Vs single AMD 3.4gig Hammer(no out yet).... AMD

the dual G4 is a nice system, but its no better than the Dual Pc's...

the Photoshop specs..BS...its on apples web site you think they're gonna have a pc close to their specs no... the 2.5gig P4 is the fastest chip out..in a few weeks the 3gig P4 will be out, and soon the 3.4gig Amd Hammer...with out a doubt i think the new power G4 is nice but its hyped, BAD...
i mean a frined of mine has dual 867... it can't handle what his 1.6gig P4 can under logic...

 

[ap]

In apple's defence somewhat, it does make a little sense to compare their machine to an off-the-shelf PC since an apple is basically off-the-shelf. Although many of us here have built machines every bit as good an apple costing twice(or even thrice?) as much, there is something to be said for walking out of the store with something ready to go.

Having said that, apple and emapple can both F***-off and die for all I care.

Hey Pisces, no sweat bro! Didn't expect to hear about that here. I'm just glad to hear from you. I actually did a drum part myself that I think works pretty well. And you're right about the bass. The song already had a bass line; I didn't include it in your mix cuz I thought it might prejudice any ideas you had. I had a friend who's a drummer come up with a part and then I played him my version. He said if he had heard my bass he would've come up with a different drum part, so maybe I had a screwy plan, but the bass wasn't meant to be final, it just went with *my* drums. Dunno for sure but, I'm standing by this procedure cuz I ended up making a hybrid of his and my drums, which is what I had in mind all along. I know the timing was a little off too, I wasn't looking for anything close to perfection, I just wanted some ideas from real drummers. I apologize if I wasted your time with a messed up track. I've since come up with several more cool songs and a band in the works with a good drummer. I'll definitely let you know when we make some progress.

BTW, if you know anything about V-drums or ddrums, how about helping me out in the drum forum. I'm hangin' out to dry over there!

 

[M.Brane]

IMHO the problem with PC's can be explained with a single word.......




















....Windows.

 

[shagfu]

Try looking here for some benchmarks of the latest systems.
http://www.barefeats.com/
Might be better off getting the last generation of towers at a lower cost.

I own two AMD systems and two Macs. Don't expect a Mac to outpace a nice/cheap home-built AMD system.

But I do enjoy using my Macs more than my PC's.

Choose the computer system/platform that best suits the software you want to use. If you can afford to keep your pc along with a new Mac, that might be an option. I find it useful to have both platforms to pick and choose on both platforms.

 

[wes480]

as far as the dual processor thing...

no, dual 1.25 isn't supposed to be "2.5" ghz. As far as G4 being as fast mhz for mhz...supposedly, like you said. I mean, personally I believe it...I've never owned an Apple but I plan on it someday.

the purpose of dual processors is really for multitasking. running more than one program at the same time, processors can split up the routines. So, you can have 2 programs running at 1.25ghz, instead of each of them taking half of the cpu power.

that's very idealized of course. from what i understand mac os x is pretty decent in general with multiprocessor use. as it should be, since it was built from a UNIX background - I've run a dual PC before with FreeBSD operating system...and it was neat...good with resources.

Furthermore, a lot of software applications are programmed to take advantage of dual processor systems. the most glaring example of this is ProTools, where plugins, and other things that take lots of processing power, share the processors...overall system runs smoother, etc. Not sure what software you are using, but it's worth looking into.

So...no, its not hype...but its not the end of the world either. A single CPU Athlon XP machine can do a hell of a basement studio...and no hardcore apple fan or anyone else will say differently unless they have some weird agenda. But, the PowerMacs have been coming down in price a lot eh....and, the gap between them and PCs as far as how much of the "same" hardware they share...is getting smaller.

good stuff all around.

 

[giraffe]

the "an apple of value x is faster than a pc of value x" thing used to be true, my old 333 g3 back in the day was nearly (close but not quite) as fast as a much newer 1gig athalon (spelling?) processor that a friend worked on. (equivalent ram)
but......
as time went on the difference decreased (Motorola failed to keep leading Intel and amd like they had at one time)
this difference (Motorola failing to perform like they promised) and price eventually led to the change to Intel processors.

is there a big difference now?
doubt it.

(fyi, me is a big mac fan)

 

[CoolCat]

the purpose of dual processors is really for multitasking. running more than one program at the same time, processors can split up the routines. So, you can have 2 programs running at 1.25ghz, instead of each of them taking half of the cpu power..

from another performance perspective pertaining to processors, HEAT is reduced.

I was just asking the same question the other day to a physics phd..
DUO-CORE...the CPU's keep getting faster and the heat keeps increasing due to the electrons ramming into each other in higher quantities creating more heat.

I worked Intel when they went to the fan thing, the first Pentium was 66mhz and was overheating. It was serious stuff... ideas about cooling, fans were a joke, gluing a fan to a chip HAHAHAAA..we thought, what a dumbass idea...why not tape an ice cube on it too!!we laughed at the designers HAHAHAHAAA... lets build an air conditioner in the case too, we dumbass joked ..... Even the CEO, Andy Grove, wrote everyone a email saying it was the end of the world or something, that we took this CPU business as far as it would go, the heat was too much...at 66mhz. it's over!! too much heat, 66MHZ is too fast!! HAHAHAHAAAA....its funny isn't it.

all I was saying was nothing, sorry I lost track..I was meaning to get over to the "How do I transfer my stuff to a new pc" thread...and stopped here somehow?

 

[altitude909]

I hope you both realize that your responding to a thread that has been dead for over 5 years (8-19-2002)

 

[CoolCat]

no i wasn't aware...its the poll thing, someone votes and its resurrected from the dead.

hahaa fhk.... another dead thread, trying to get one last grasp of mention before drifting off to...er....?.... wherever all these dead threads go?

 

[wreckd504]

2.5gig P4 is the fastest chip out..in a few weeks the 3gig P4 will be out

i read that 6 times, i thought i'd entered the twilight zone.

I hope you both realize that your responding to a thread that has been dead for over 5 years

riiight

 

[TerraMortim]

dual dual yes! dual is way better...if I throw on the system performance monitor in logic, you betcha both cores are often being used almost to their limit. A friend of mine who has a quad threw up logic's spm and what do you know it was using all 4 cores. It's just a nice thing to have.

 

[KonradG]

some of them have 2mb (!) of cache. Holy shit!! That's some nice gear. I'd definitely go Mac if I could afford it.

i knew to check the date on this as soon as i saw this one. lol i got 4mb of cache for each of the 4 processors in mine