has anyone a/b'd performance of a g3 vs. a g4

[Sugarite]

Gee really? I had no clue. I guess I was too busy pointing out how every other incremental advance in system bus speeds resulted in no appreciable improvement. Of course, you have some information to indicate why this particular jump to 133MHz would be of particular importance, and you're just pretending not to have the faintest idea about what you're talking about, right?

Get a clue folks, read Apple's page specifically on G4's at http://www.apple.com/powermac/processor.html There is NOTHING mentioned anywhere that indicates any improvement over G3's except factors directly related to altivec (Velocity Engine).

In the meantime I'm through with this thread. I've tried to make a point and help you guys out, but I get the feeling most of you are more interested in how "l33ty" your G4s are and convincing yourself that you didn't throw money out the window.

[Slaterman]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Sugarite:
... If Digi kept up with updates to reflect changes in hardware, ProTools would be altivec enabled. Since they don't....<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I thought that was worth repeating....

Ted (owner of a dual533G4 purchased specifically to support my DIGI001)

[Notefarm]

Wow that's alot of very good, very usefull information, sounds like Sugarite knows his stuff, I for one say thanx, I learnt a bundle.

Cheers
Notefarm [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img]

[ June 13, 2001: Message edited by: Notefarm ]

[Shawn Parr]

I just wanted to drop a quick note about memory performance. Between 604 macs, G3's and G4's, there is not just bumps in the bus speed, but different revisions of memory controllers. Each one gets more efficient at moving data around, plus it has a higher clock rate.

I currently have an 8600 with a G3 upgrade running at 400Mhz. I put my 001 in a B&W 300 to use it for a show and it absolutely spanked my 8600 for performance and stability.

Your memory bandwidth does have some impact on the CPU meter in PT. I also experimented with interleaved/non-interleaved RAM (on the 8600). With RAM interleaved I had about 20% more space left on the CPU meter in PT. This is attributed to the fact that the machine measures 32 MB/s RAM transfer rate non-interleaved, and 49MB/s transfer rate interleaved.

So to cap it up, newer more efficient chipsets in the newer machines do make a difference, hence people with G4 466s that feel their machines edge out G4 500s.

[Sugarite]

Arg! I just can't leave this thread alone...

Ok, let's assume there is an appreciable improvement from the motherboard changes (I have yet to notice any but...), and that a new 466MHz G4 edges out a 500MHz G3 by say a D-verb plug and a few EQ's. For the same price as the G4/466 you can get a G3/500 plus a UWSCSI card and drive (freeing up cpu usage from the ATA interface) plus a TCE M-One reverb unit. Who's got more mixing power now?

Sorry if I seem bitchy, but fact is that Digi and Apple are currently unable to implement the benefits of the hardware and software they themselves have designed, yet still expect us to pay full price for, and I find that rather irritating. What's even more annoying is that it takes someone like me ranting on a BBS in order for their paying customers to become aware of the problem. And they gave these people an Emmy... [img]images/icons/rolleyes.gif[/img]

The sad thing is that an altivec-enabled ProTools would be a HUGE improvement on a G4, probably double the speed just like it does for Photoshop, and then this dark age in audio will be forgotten by all except those who realize that their DP G4's have depreciated by 50% before they even started to really use them.

[guitates]

OK--Sugar--Where is or does "used market"
exist?? I have never seen a B&W G3 even advertised with 500mhz...Almost all B&W G3's I have seen are 400 or 450, and they are at least $1000+ for Refurbished...

Also, you seem to ignore the comment about interleaved and non interleaved ram...what about this?? 30+ vs 48+ ram transfer rate is quite substantial, wouldn't you agree??
A recent article in Macworld sugested that RAM and Hard Drive--was more criticle than CPU...

Also, IF you had ever read the PTLE/.001 literature, you would see that the .001 does NOT want to share the PCI bus with a SCSI card, or any other cards for that mater, so why would you think that you would be better off by Not using the internal ATA drive??

I will say that your argument about saving $ by going with a G3 vs G4 is a reasonable point, but,--the ata internal bus will give you as much performance as a SCSI PCI card/drive....If you had 48 tracks then the SCSI would make a difference--but Not with the >001
[img]images/icons/confused.gif[/img] [img]images/icons/confused.gif[/img] [img]images/icons/confused.gif[/img]

[ June 18, 2001: Message edited by: guitates ]

[domsound]

...I think sugarites got a point though....
Who knows if digi will altivec pt le in the G4 generation of macs, if we had that then we would consider needing their tdms even less - as we would have suffcient cpu power to get jobs done easy, digi would not want that...they like to keep us crippled...the technology is blatantly available for them to altivec pt le, they just probably dont feel like giving us that power right now...cos expensive tdms are much better and more neccessary for pro audio than host based systems arent they.....

[ June 16, 2001: Message edited by: domsound ]

[guitates]

Absolutly--I agree with sugar that altivec would be a big Bone for the mac/.001 community.

Question--Does TDM actually have altivec, I thought you hinted that it might. [img]images/icons/cool.gif[/img]

[Sugarite]

Guitates>> Interleaving ram produces a good kick to the ram throughput speed, but can conflict with G3 upgrade cards (so I hear). I haven't dealt with many PPC's with the ram interleaving option as well as a G3-upgrade.

The 001 hogs the PCI bus sure, but there's plenty of bandwitdh left for retrieving audio data (only 3.3mb/s for 24 tracks 24/48). SCSI has the advantage of not using up cpu cycles to transfer data. ATA controllers require that the processor oversee the transfers, SCSI controllers monitor the transfers on their own, which is why they're more expensive and more suited to servers etc. I'll probably be getting a U2W SCSI rig shortly so I can be more specific on its benefits.

And PT TDM does not use altivec. Now that TDM systems can use RTAS plugs as well, I doubt there's cause for Digi to delay on altivec for marketting purposes, which just leaves incompetence...

[guitates]

Sugarite--That was an excellent reply, thank you..., but where can I get a B & W G3/500 mhz--Stock???

Upgrage card?? Then where can I get the B&W and upgrade for $700??

I'll take 10 of em'... [img]images/icons/cool.gif[/img]