Will Apple improve Rosetta until it's Retail?

[enzomusic]

Hi,

I'm just wondering if Apple will improve Rosetta's G4 emulation until it's final release (whenever it'll be).

At the moment I get a XBench result of

~60 Points (Native, Intel)

~20 Points (Native, Rosetta G4).

 

My friend's small mac mini gets ~40 Points

 

If companies will use Final Cut Pro, for example, would it'd be better to choose a Dual G5, or use the new Intel Macs and wait for the Final Cut Pro Intel binary? I'm a bit confused, cause G5's are a lot more powerful than the P4's.

 

Please post your opinion. It's be very interesting

 

Greetz

[enzo]

[Metrogirl]

Hi Enzo,

 

I think that any emulation will come with a speed penalty. It's probably only a matter of time, however, before everything OSX is available in native Intel format. Depends on how fast the software developers convert stuff - if it looks like there will be a shortage of native Intel stuff at the official release of the Intel Macs no doubt the Apple engineers will be trying to streamline their emulation as much as possible. Which means the answer to your question would be yes. If there's plenty of Intel software available, they'll probably just quietly slip development on Rosetta since it will be less important and the answer would be no.

 

I sort of have a problem with the idea that G5s are more powerful than P4s. Ounce-for-ounce they are a lot more powerful, as you say, but in the real world it's a difficult comparison because you have so many variables. Twin processors v. single CPU, dual core, optimised software, clock speeds... My 2x2.7 G5 is certainly faster than my single 3.4 HT P4 for Photoshop but I prefer the XP machine for other things where it seems to have the edge. If software is written badly it won't do well on any processor.

 

I have a feeling that a lot of the P4's bad press comes from the demands made on it by the bloated Windows OS. So much cr*p running in the background is bound to slow things down. Linux on P4 is pretty good. Running a properly optimised and native OSx86 on a P4 could be a whole lot faster.

Edited December 16, 2005 by Metrogirl

[enzomusic]

Hi Metrogirl,

thanks for your opinion.

 

I just hope that Logic will be available in x86 or rosetta will be improved.

Since I decided to switch to make music on OSx86 instead of in Windows I'm very impressed about the possibilities and programs for it. They are more polished, and easier to learn.

 

But the fact is, that in Windows the latency is high with cheap soundcards in comparison to Mac.

I'm impressed of that CoreAudio, cause in Windows with my SBAudigy2 i can reach a 5ms latency.

In OSX with my cheap onboard-card about 15ms!

(Tested with Vanguard Plugin on (XP) FLStudio and (Rosetta) Logic)

When I get my LowLatency soundcard which will be compatible with both OS's, I'll make a test and post it to this forum. Maybe someone's interested in that. Sounds kinda: Same card, same plugin, but whats the better OS... hehe...

 

Yeah, it really depends on what you want to do with your computer, you must choose the right OS.

My opinion: Windows for Audio ok, Mac perfect, Linux - never found any good programs to make music.

 

 

Greetingz

[enzo]

[Metrogirl]

Absolutely. Incidentally I solved my XP latency problems by using ASIO4ALL (http://www.asio4all.com) and I get excellent response with Cubase. I haven't tried any of the Mac power-audio applications purely because I can't justify buying them at the price they charge when Cubase on XP does everything I want.

 

I'd be very interested in your audio latency tests and I think many others will be too. I couldn't believe it when I discovered that XP had this huge delay between pressing the keys and hearing the note when 95, 98 and even my old 386 with W3.1 managed it perfectly!

 

I hope that now Yamaha have bought Steinberg they'll be more sensible about their upgrade policy. I know several (non-professional) musicians who originally bought Cubase but now use use pirate versions because they don't see why they should have to pay such a large whack every time there's an upgrade - particularly if they're forced into the upgrade by hardware/OS issues. Same goes for a lot of other software companies, come to think of it.

[cyrana]

(first, xbench is junk hehe)

 

Are the ASIO latency problems to do with XP per se, or cheap(er) sound cards?

 

Just wondering if they exist if you use some decent M-Audio, Terratec, etc. sound cards? I think it is more to do w/hardware and/or drivers than the OS. Still, I am a fan of CoreAudio and all that, so I think OS X is still the better platform.

 

Things will definitely get better on the emulation front, but who knows how far Apple will go on that. I'm sure we'll just keep seeing updates to Rosetta for a while, they rarely make something and then don't touch it again. But, we'll also see things in unibin format more frequently, until everything comes that way.

 

As Metrogirl said, a G5 is a right -fast- machine, but you can get equivalent-speed machines on x86, too.

Edited December 16, 2005 by cyrana

[bjr1028]

I would assume Apple would improve Rosetta somewhat, but I'd say they're much more concerned with getting companies to release universal binary patches.