View Full Version : Dual 1.42s

Darth Mole
02-24-2003, 05:14 AM
Does anyone have any LW benchmark render times with these new machines?

I'd be keen to see the sort of improvement over my DP 800 - whether it's a straight GHz for GHz percentage improvement, or whether the new faster boards and RAM have any influence.

(Also, any bets on when LW will be updated next? It's been... a while...)

02-24-2003, 05:58 AM
I think the only people that can help you are at Apple. From my knowledge their wouldn't be any of these machines visible before the end of march, the same with Big Al, the 17" Powerbook. But maybe Apple proves me wrong.

02-24-2003, 07:28 AM
Its safe to say as long as apple stays at 167 bus dont expect any fast renderers.
If u r buying a new mac try and get a 1.25 and save some money.
No true DDR or 266 bus means all macs using this config are stop gaps.
This is coming from a guy having second thoughts of plunking down $4000AUS for a DP 1.25 with nvidia mx and 256 ram standard config!

02-24-2003, 09:54 PM
hey I can relate with that. My friend has a cheapo PC and I have a G4 867x2, we render the same scene out his is 218.8 secs & mine is 593.2 secs. What the hell is going on here. Today I realised that either Apple or Newtek need to pull their finger out and start looking at the real world. This is embarassing!

02-25-2003, 10:36 AM
More than embaressing its disgusting!
I simply cannot be bothered spending $4000aus for a system that I know will be soo slow.
Apple has failed big time and they have only themselves to blame for sticking with mootola.

02-25-2003, 11:27 AM

i won't get into the pc mac speed issue as that wasn't your original question, and we all know the answer to that. as far as my own experience i have a DP 533 at work and a DP 1.25 (the older OS 9 bootable) at home. they are both running X.2.3 and have 1.5 Gb ram. there are differences such as cache, system bus speeds etc.
in rendering the same scene (large) with raytraced shadows and reflections.... the DP 1.25 did it in 3 min 50 sec and the DP 533 did it in 7 min 30 sec. this seems to be consistent in other scenes i've tried. as well it just seams much snappier opening apps and booting up etc. that's my experience, hope this helps.


02-25-2003, 11:44 AM
A good general rule to processor upgrades is to hold off until you can buy something that is more than 2x your current speed (unless you are a trust fund baby). System bus and RAM improvements won't knock your socks off, and a processor that is 2x or less faster than your current setup won't either. With dual 1.42 being the top from Apple today, that means if you have something slower than a dual 800, there would be a noticeable improvement in your system speed.

The second question is value -- according to Moore's law faster and cheaper should be the rule. If you are paying the same 3K (USD) for a machine only 2x faster just over a year later, you are paying too much. In my mind, the cost-benefit of a dual 1.42 to replace a dual 800 doesn't work out. I will hold out for nothing less than dual 2 GHz processors, if such a thing ever comes from Motorola.

If you are looking for inexpensive rendering improvements, spend some time on eBay and pick up some old iMacs. Go to Marathon computer and get some rackmount cases to move them to, and for the same 3k you were going to spend on one dual processor, you should be able to set up 4 or more render nodes. Since LWSN renders faster than F10, you'll save time as well.

Darth Mole
02-25-2003, 01:52 PM
Thanks for the input - I've decided to hold on for the time being. Like mlinde says, it'd be mad to upgrade for anything less than a 2x increase in speed.

I did a 3x jump from my 500Mhz G4 to the DP800. Sadly, the jump to DP 1.42 would only be in the order of 1.5-1.75 x (depending on scenes, etc).

I'll bide my time for a dual 2Ghz - should that day ever arrive - or whatever IBM can come up with.

02-26-2003, 01:30 AM
So now that you have some money to spend, how about upgrading LW to version 8.5 ?
And i wouldn't count on IBM for processors, they are not better than Pentiums, need a lot of power and produce to much heat. Thats why i prefer to get Motorola's PowerPc, although they are at lower speeds.

02-26-2003, 07:51 AM
I would tend to agree with mlinde.
spend yer bucks on something that will help now.
i think youre gonna wait a llllloooooonnnnnnggggg time for a
2ghz powermac, if you ever see it? IBM or not
Even with my limited knowledge(and jonathan bakers excellent instructions)
i have managed to set up a small OSXrender farm here thats made a hellofa
there are many great deals on PD 800's867 /DP1000/DP1.25s through 2nd channel suppliers(like 1200/1500 bucks!)
you can get two or three of these for what 1 1.42 ghz is gonna cost?

Darth Mole
02-26-2003, 12:45 PM
LW 8.5? Ingo, you know something we don't...?

02-26-2003, 01:52 PM
Yes, dont buy a .0 version of LW, only the .5 versions are workable.

Ed M.
02-26-2003, 04:02 PM
[[[And i wouldn't count on IBM for processors, they are not better than Pentiums, need a lot of power and produce to much heat. ]]]

Um, we're expecting the PowerPC 970, have you been locked in a closet for the last 5 months? What IBM processors are you referring to that "aren't as good as pentiums because..."? I can't wait to hear the answer.

Ed M.

02-27-2003, 02:33 AM
Well we hope to see the 970 on the Mac, but as it looks right now there is only hope, wspwcially since we have seen a new motherboard design for the G4's a few weeks ago. And if you have seen the power specs of the 970 it clearly consums a lot of more power than the Moto PowerPc's, that means another bunch of fans to cool it.