|
Powering Digital Media Production ... |  |
|
|
 |
|
|
Powering Digital Media Production ... | |
|
|
|
| The
System Debate: Is the Mac OS X the next great UNIX? |
|
|||||
|
|
More input on the viability of the Mac with OS X as a high-end graphics workstation: Let
us know whether you agree or disagree at jdawson@digitalmedianet.com.
>>David has
some strong facts, with recent developments they become stronger. Alias|wavefront
just announced Maya is set for its OS X debut early next year. In fact
they showed off a working beta just recently. Also rumors have it that
dual Mac G4 systems are just around the corner. And my last point, the
migration of Apple towards OS X. Official support for the aging Mac
OS ends with system 9.x, after that apple cements its OS lead with a
full mature Unix system; OS X. (I look at it this way, you can get a
new Mac G4/5 next year with a mature Unix core, superb graphics and
a economic price or get the same performance from a SGI(Unix/NT) box
at 2-3 times the cost.) >>Yes, your questioner should wait for the next generation of platform to come out before making a new investment ... But IMHO the advice you gave him will not represent the best long-term value nor return-on-investment. He will be very well-served to take a serious, objective look at Apple's Mac OS/X running on a G4e instead of a Wintel box. Not only is OS/X by any objective measure going to be the best platform for content-creation, but the hardware for the new PowerMac's will simply leave Wintel stuff so far behind that media creators will be at a serious competitive advantage if they sink their cash into an ever-aging architecture. It is worth noting that the *current* first-generation G4 PowerMacs are already 2X faster than PIII's (at the same clock speed); and the second-generation G4e (avail early this fall) will increase that gap to 3X AT THE SAME CLOCK SPEED - except that the 2nd gen G4 unlike the 1st gen G4 is designed to be *manufactured* at the _SAME_ clock speeds as Intel/AMD chips. This clocking parity therefore delivers another 1X improvement over current PowerPC speeds. So roughly speaking, a new (UMA2) PowerMac should be outpacing a Wintel box by as much as 4X for heavy-duty number-crunching. Moreover, IBM has demonstrated state-of-the-art manufacturing technology for the Power Architecture (which they use in their Big Iron) capable of supporting 3000-4000 Mhz ... which is 2X anything Intel can do in the foreseeable future - so this gap is only going to grow bigger over time! (note: AMD's speeds dont really count for the purposes of comparison since they licence their manufacturing process from Motorola, who also created the vector processor in the G4). Now for the kicker: OS/X -in addition to supporting legacy apps (Mac OS 9) and very cool nexgen COCOA apps (OpenStep/Java)- also has a BSD unix core (running on top the core microkernel). And this means that the porting cost to bring heavy-duty media unix tools (like Maya) over to OS/X are negligible. In other words, the Mac platform is positioned to have better hardware than Wintel *and* a more plentiful supply of Unix ports than Wintel. Your reader really needs to know this important shift in "marketecture" since he has the luxury of waiting till the end of this year (let's say) to make his purchase. Regards:dlf Below is the response I sent to a reader wondering whether he should wait for the next processors covered in our new Future Focus columns. If you have differing opinions from me, or want to add your own two cents, drop me a line at jdawson@digitalmedianet.com >>For an animation system, the most important features to consider are a very good graphics accelerator (with lots of texture memory), at least 256MB of system RAM, and a good fast hard drive, or two. Granted, the speed of the processor doesn't hurt, but for a system in the $5,000-$6,000 dollar range, your best investment will be the graphics card and the memory. If you go with something like the Intense 3D Wildcat 4110 this will mean a cost somewhere around $2,000. For a less expensive choice, a card like the 3Dlabs Oxygen GVX210 for just over $1000 or the Elsa GLoria II with the new NVIDIA Quadro GPU for under $1,000, may also serve your needs (see the Buyer's Guide to graphics cards on the site for other options). In either case, you will have to be creative to equip a top-of-the-line dual-processor system on your budget. Given this, I would suggest picking up the fastest Pentium III, Pentium III Xeon or Willamette-based machine available at the time you decide to purchase (assuming you do it later this year). Optimally, it should be using the Intel 840 chipset with RDRAM. When you are ready to buy, just do it. By the time the Itanium is available and universally supportable, people will tell you to wait for the next version, the McKinley, because it is supposed to be even better. By all accounts implementation of the Itanium is going to proceed cautiously. It may take awhile for all software and hardware developers to have available drivers which make the best use of the new 64-bit processor. And it's not likely to be cheap, especially at first. If you wait for a Willamette machine, of which production versions may not be seen until at least November or December of this year (and more likely 1st quarter of 2001), you will get a very fast set of processors, fast RAMBUS RAM and a new set of SIMD instructions which are designed to speed up multimedia processes (such as animation). You may still run into some lag with developer drivers, etc. but since the Willamette is not a whole new instruction set like the Itanium, these hassles are likely to be fewer. Let's look at a sample configuration of a current 733MHz Pentium III machine, with the new Intel 840 chipset: Base system with one processor, 256MB RDRAM, one 9GB Ultra 160 9GB hard drive, an ELSA GLoria II graphics accelerator with 64MB onboard RAM, and a 19 inch monitor: around $4500 - $5000, depending on manufacturer. Don't get me wrong, this system may very well serve your needs. Depending on the quantity and quality of the animation you will be doing, and your level of patience, for under $6,000 you could currently get a very good machine. And, this price won't really change with the introduction of faster processors. The trend is usually that the price of older processors goes down as the new ones come in at the top pricing. Add an additional processor: add $1,000 Add another 256MB RDRAM: add another $800-1000 Add a 21-inch monitor: add another $500 Add an Intense 3D Wildcat 4110 graphics card: add $2,000 Add another 9GB SCSI hard drive: add $400 Now we are up to around $10,000 for a system which would serve you very well for a long while (in computer terms), until proven Willamette, Itanium, or McKinley-based machines are available for a reasonable price. Hopefully this has helped you understand that although new processors are on their way, and they will ultimately mean faster processing for animation as well as other processes, if you want a system this year, you should probably stick to current processing technology and spring the extra cash on animation-specific needs like a good accelerator and lots of RAM and storage. >>Hello,
Jacqui Dawson If you have ideas on what else you would like to see covered here, or if you have a workstation story to tell, talk back to me - jdawson@digitalmedianet.com or visit the DCC Workstation WWUG Forum. |
|||||
|
© 2002, Digital Media Online, All Rights Reserved
|
|||||||