The Logic Off Topic list

> Hi Matt,
> 
> I think we aren't at odds here at all.
> 
> I was just comparing the likely impact of the various changes. It seemed at
> the time I wrote the above that a 150% increase in memory bandwidth would
> be the biggest improvement. That's all I was saying.
> 
> Now reports at  http://mosr.com/ indicate that the CPU can't exploit this
> bandwidth anyway.
> Bit of a bummer I would have thought.
> 
> You are quite right about dual procs I am sure. By all reports dual
> processors  have benefits in Logic -- snappy graphics updates and general
> responsiveness are better than that observed with a single processor  of
> the same speed when the Audio system is fully loaded. PC users were waiting
> for Logic on WinXP/2000 to support dual processing for the same reasons.
> 
> However,  when trying to evaluate what the impact of the new Mac models is,
> the offer of dual processors is not new  -- you can already get them. The
> price point where they kick may well be lower.
> 
> Perhaps the report card should read:
> 
> "Could do better"
> 
> If you want some light entertainment read the link below. I don't think the
> recently unveiled new models are quite what these guys had in mind when
> they were prognosticating late last year.
> 
> Enjoy:
> 
> http://www.architosh.com/news/2001-11/2001a-1130-appleg5.phtml
> 
> Regards,
> Murray

No worries Murray ;-)
It was interesting also that the DDR implementation/bus speed issue seemed
to represent half of its potential, and my first thought (which seems to be
have been squashed) was that it may have had something to do with two
processors using the bandwidth. I think you would know what i might be
getting at here.....multiplexing type of thang......... But it appears not
to be the case. (I don't know the techy details of what I am trying to
describe)
I'm rambling now.....
Cheers


=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Matt McKenzie-Smith
PO Box 10395
Adelaide BC 5000 
South Australia

+618(0)82938282
+61(0)416 197 883
mattrixx@...