On 08 Aug 2006, at 5:27 PM, Tyler Turner wrote:
Tyler, are you a gamer, an animator, a 3D artist?
What do you need a
high-end video card for? Certainly not for Finale.
Actually, Finale is one of the applications where I'd
definitely prefer a high end video card to a second
processor. The video card definitely does make a
difference with Finale.
Do you have any evidence to support that assertion? Finale is not a
3D application, and there *really* isn't any significant difference
in 2D or video performance between a (relatively) low-end card like
the GeForce 7300 GT and a high-end gaming or CAD card.
Aside from that, I use various
graphic and video applications
Do any of them use 3D so heavily that you'd need something more
powerful than the GeForce 7300 GT? That's not a bad card by any
means. And as I said, you can always upgrade the Mac to the Radeon
X1900 XT, which is a 3D powerhouse. The only people who will need to
spend the big bucks to get the Quatro FX 4500 are architects and 3D
animators.
The point is
that in general a second processor is not going to
give me nearly as much boost as having a good video
card,
I'm *extremely* dubious of this statement, especially since most Mac
pro audio and video apps (not to mention the OS) have been optimized
for multiple processors for years. What is your evidence?
But I can't dump the unwanted processor that's costing
me so much more! Why does Apple have to only offer the
Core 2 Duos in sets of 2???
You mean Xeons, and you're acting like this is something new. The Pro
machines have been quad for years -- Apple was not going to replace a
quad G5 with a machine with fewer processors. And the quad
processors make a massive difference in any application optimized for
multiple processors -- which on the Mac program is basically any high-
end application.
If you put just one of
those things in an iMac or Mac Mini you suddenly have
a very legitimate low cost machine. Sticking with the
old Core Duos, they have a processor which doesn't
even keep up with the P4's.
Uh, no, that's not true. But of course Apple will eventually replace
the Core Duos with the next-gen Core 2 Duos, probably starting with
the Mac Book Pro. But have some patience -- the first Intel Macs only
just came out 6 months ago, and the Core 2 Duos only started
shipping, what, a month ago?
Yes it is. The new Xeons (Woodcrests) that Apple is
using are from the same processor line as the Conroes
I'm afraid you are incorrect, although Intel's confusing naming
scheme doesn't help matters:
The Core Duo is a 32-bit dual-core chip. It cannot be used in multi-
processor configs.
The Core 2 Duo is a 64-bit dual-core chip, but it, too, cannot be
used in multi-processor configs.
The Xeon 5100 series is a 64-bit dual-core chip which *can* be used
in multi-processor configs, which made it the only sensible choice
for the Mac Pro line.
You called the Xeon 5100's "the Xeon version of the Core Duo," which
is completely wrong -- the Core Duos are 32-bit and the Xeons are 64-
bit.
Cheers,
- Darcy
-----
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://secretsociety.typepad.com
Brooklyn, NY
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
