G5 vs PC - performance and price/performance

Discussion in 'Pro Audio' started by Steve Jorgensen, Nov 9, 2003.

  1. Hi all,

    I already made my dual G5 computer purchase now, so this question is more out
    of curiosity than anything else, but...

    (no religeous debates, if y'all please)

    Before I bought the G5, I did some research, and it looked as if the G5 was
    not only price/performance competitive with PCs, but blew them completely
    away, thus turning the old G4 equation upside down. With a little more
    research, it looks like the Dual Athalon 64 systems might be in about the same
    price/performance ballbark and actually capable of somewhat greater
    performance for a bit more money.

    The only thing that makes the Mac seem like a clearly better deal than the
    equivalently performing (in pure CPU power terms) Athalon systems is that
    those systems don't include the cost of a DVD burner or Serial ATA drives (and
    SCSI drives are both too small and totally unaffordable), and they have 800
    MHz vs the G5's 1GHz FSBs.

    So, the only thing left to be curious about is that I can't find anything on
    the Web or on the manufacturer sites on whether any music software currently
    supports (or works fine unsupported on) Athalon 64s or Opterons. Anyone know?
    Steve Jorgensen, Nov 9, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  2. Correct, although Windows XP64 is near release. 64-bit PC's can run on Unix
    (the OS that MacOSX is based on anyway), or Linux.
    Peter Hewitt-Dutton, Nov 9, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  3. My understanding is that for decent 64-bit chips like the Athalon 64 and G5
    (not the Itanic), there is a benefit to the 64-bit data bus even running
    32-bit apps since it nearly doubles the memory bandwidth. This being a
    particular advantage for native A/V apps that must process streams of data,
    usually in linear order through algorithms running in the CPU.

    I still can't tell whether any audio apps are known to run on Athalon 64 or
    not, though.
    Steve Jorgensen, Nov 9, 2003
  4. Steve Jorgensen

    JR Guest

    If you have the dual G5 then why sweat it...my dual G5 running Logic 6
    Platinum is awesome...tins of track playback, tons of plug in power...I
    have not gotten over 10% cpu usage with 64+ tracks and 40+ plugs....all
    at 24/96....You may well get equal performance from a PC, at alittle
    more money, but will youir apps and plugs be available? If yes, then go
    for it, if no then there is no question....I tend to be Mac biased
    because the music software and plug in companies seem to do Mac first
    and then MAYBE PC second...Look at Logic, DP, Pro Tools, etc...Mac only
    in the first 2 cases and in the 3rd, ProTools PC plugs are lagging
    behind their Mac counterparts...so to me, the choice is clear...Then
    there is the OS...OS X is a much nicer environment in my opinion then
    Windows anything....Not having to deal with Windows issues keeps me
    working on music, not working on the OS....

    JR, Nov 9, 2003
  5. I'm not sweating it - I got the machine I wanted. I guess I just want to know
    more about the current state of affairs.
    Steve Jorgensen, Nov 9, 2003
  6. I'm a long-time Mac user, but I'll freely admit one can find routines
    which the Mac does faster and ones which a PC does faster. It has a lot
    to do with whether the code is optimized for the machines' architecture.
    Jonathan Roberts, Nov 10, 2003
  7. Steve Jorgensen

    Prodmac Guest

    To me its not a matter of performance anymore. I've been a loyal mac
    user for 10 years then bought a big Dual Athlon MP2000 blah blah blah. I
    chose the exact same computer as stated in the EQ magazine concording
    with all the newsgroups advices etc...All this with a UAD-1 card with a
    pair of amazing sounding Lynx Two cards.That move was a total failure
    for me. I couldn't stand the unreliability of native daws. (I used
    Nuendo) I am now back to Pro Tools HD with a G5 and couldn't be happier.
    I know...way more money but clients don't like computers crashing in
    front of their eyes. My 0.02$.
    Krubb (UAD-1 and 2 LynxTwo A for sale)

    Jonathan Roberts a écrit :
    Prodmac, Nov 10, 2003
  8. Steve Jorgensen

    Chris Smalt Guest

    I'm getting the impression that for VST plugins, this has been the other
    way around for the past few years. Many plugs look like ports, and
    don't seem to be very CPU-efficient on the Mac.

    Chris (Mac biased)

    Please remove the r from my address to reply by email
    Chris Smalt, Nov 13, 2003
  9. Steve Jorgensen

    5dot1 Guest

    I still can't tell whether any audio apps are known to run on Athalon 64 or
    SONAR 3 smokes on it. Stop by and ask around.

    5dot1, Nov 13, 2003

  10. Have you tried running the LynxTwo cards in the G5? If it worked, that
    would be awesome. Wouldn't it?

    Justin Ulysses Morse, Nov 14, 2003
  11. Steve Jorgensen

    BananaHead Guest

    I dunno. The guys on the Nuendo board are always talking about their
    Athalon bla bla whatever machine. But I don't know the specifics.
    You could log onto the board and post a quick question about it:


    I'm a mac guy so all that Athalon hyperthreading something-or-other
    don't compute.

    BananaHead, Nov 14, 2003
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.