PDA

View Full Version : My PPC Mac is faster than...




keremtezcan
Dec 6, 2012, 12:23 PM
My Power Mac G5 Dual 2Ghz is faster than my Late 2011 MacBook Pro 2.8Ghz!:apple:



simsaladimbamba
Dec 6, 2012, 12:25 PM
Ah, good to hear, as I was about to post the opposite, but then again, "fast" is subjective and can mean many things, and I wouldn't have gone into as much detail in my post as you have, but then again, I am an arse.

ChrisMan287
Dec 6, 2012, 12:25 PM
PPC fo' life :cool:

dukebound85
Dec 6, 2012, 12:28 PM
My Power Mac G5 Dual 2Ghz is faster than my Late 2011 MacBook Pro 2.8Ghz!:apple:

I must have duds. My computers tend not to move around. I always try having speed contests by making a little track and have them race but I think Apple keeps sending me dead computers, as they never move.

Apple needs to treat their computers better. Is there a PETC organization I can write to? Computer mills need to go.

GermanyChris
Dec 6, 2012, 12:38 PM
My Power Mac G5 Dual 2Ghz is faster than my Late 2011 MacBook Pro 2.8Ghz!:apple:

In what way?

My i7 Hack benches at 18,000 my quad was 3800 or so…

How are you comparing?

keremtezcan
Dec 6, 2012, 12:52 PM
Just general usage. Although I have a lot more stuff and junk loaded on the MacBook, it is just slow to open finder right after booting up, and just generally slow. It has Mac OS X Mountain Lion, however I run Windows 8 on it. (So that I have Mac OS X and Windows available.) Windows runs fine, but my Power Mac G5 is just as fast as early Mac Pros at basic tasks, opening browser tabs, booting up, opening apps etc.

simsaladimbamba
Dec 6, 2012, 12:58 PM
Just general usage. Although I have a lot more stuff and junk loaded on the MacBook, it is just slow to open finder right after booting up, and just generally slow. It has Mac OS X Mountain Lion, however I run Windows 8 on it. (So that I have Mac OS X and Windows available.) Windows runs fine, but my Power Mac G5 is just as fast as early Mac Pros at basic tasks, opening browser tabs, booting up, opening apps etc.

Probably due to more RAM and faster HDD.
Spec your 2011 MBP with 16 GB RAM and an SSD, and it will be faster than that G5.

keremtezcan
Dec 6, 2012, 01:13 PM
My MacBook Pro has 8 GB RAM, my G5 has 6.5. My MacBook Pro has a 750GB Apple Hard Drive, my G5 has a 150 GB Apple Hard Drive and a 350 GB other hard drive.

blanka
Dec 6, 2012, 02:06 PM
Guess your G5 has a 7200rpm 3,5 inch HDD, and the MBP a 5400rpm 2.5 inch. That makes everything disk related go 2-3 times as fast on the G5. Add the bonus off a more light-weight OS, and it will cause your impression of a faster speed.

My Core2Duo 3Ghz also feels much snappier than a i5 quad in many disk related things.

keremtezcan
Dec 6, 2012, 02:09 PM
Probably has to be correct. Thanks.

GermanyChris
Dec 6, 2012, 02:21 PM
Now I'd like to see numbers..

a 7200RPM drive from '04 is not faster then a 5400 2.5" from '11

Your G5 is in no was faster than your MBP nor a 1,1 but it is much cooler….

keremtezcan
Dec 6, 2012, 03:03 PM
Although it isn't very likely, it could because it had a non-apple hard drive when I bought it from Ebay. My OS is installed on it because it's a larger HD than the Apple HD. It is a Late 2005 G5.

MisterKeeks
Dec 6, 2012, 03:23 PM
I have an early 2011 MBP Quad i7 @ 2.3Ghz, and it beats a dual 1.8 cold.

GermanyChris
Dec 6, 2012, 04:28 PM
It matters not one iota..

Spinners cannot saturate the bus of SATA 1 or 2 ..

Your MacBook is no kidding faster the the PM, but the PM looks WAY cooler!!!

rjcalifornia
Dec 6, 2012, 05:53 PM
My Power Mac G5 Dual 2Ghz is faster than my Late 2011 MacBook Pro 2.8Ghz!:apple:

My xbox is faster than the Power Mac G5 and the Macbook Pro 2.8 combined :cool:

MisterKeeks
Dec 6, 2012, 07:31 PM
My xbox is faster than the Power Mac G5 and the Macbook Pro 2.8 combined :cool:

At what? Turning on? completely different beasts for completely different things.

Jessica Lares
Dec 6, 2012, 07:49 PM
My PowerPC Macs are faster than my Newton eMate. :D

throAU
Dec 6, 2012, 09:00 PM
My Power Mac G5 Dual 2Ghz is faster than my Late 2011 MacBook Pro 2.8Ghz!:apple:

No it's not.

Go rip a DVD and get back to me tomorrow when it finished.

wobegong
Dec 6, 2012, 09:10 PM
No it's not.

Go rip a DVD and get back to me tomorrow when it finished.

Amen.

My MBP 2.0Ghz i7 finishes encodes, goes to the gym, goes on a trip to the beach, lies back and reads a book and may go take in a film at the cinema, meanwhile back in the office the G5 is still plodding through that encode the MBP finished hours ago but it should be done by the next morning.... ;)

skateny
Dec 6, 2012, 09:23 PM
Amen.

My MBP 2.0Ghz i7 finishes encodes, goes to the gym, goes on a trip to the beach, lies back and reads a book and may go take in a film at the cinema in the time it will take my G5 to do the same thing....

My iBook writes screenplays for major Hollywood studios.:D

Jessica Lares
Dec 6, 2012, 09:58 PM
Amen.

My MBP 2.0Ghz i7 finishes encodes, goes to the gym, goes on a trip to the beach, lies back and reads a book and may go take in a film at the cinema in the time it will take my G5 to do the same thing....

It would take even longer since you'd have to be lugging it back and forth. :o

wobegong
Dec 6, 2012, 10:59 PM
It would take even longer since you'd have to be lugging it back and forth. :o

No the G5 stays in the office like a schoolboy on detention still working on that encode, the MBP skips out early having finished so quickly and then goes and does all those things :rolleyes: while the G5 is still working on that encode ...

I love my G5 but you have to be realistic ;)

justperry
Dec 6, 2012, 11:06 PM
My PB G4 1.67 is faster than a snail but slower than a Ferrari:rolleyes:

rjcalifornia
Dec 6, 2012, 11:40 PM
At what? Turning on? completely different beasts for completely different things.

I use Linux, and it is way faster than those things combined

keremtezcan
Dec 7, 2012, 01:37 AM
It looks like the G5 is faster than the MacBook Pro at basic things, like booting up or browsing finder etc, but the MacBook Pro is faster at harder things like video editing etc. However when I start the MacBook Pro up it is incredibly slow probably because of all the junk stuff installed on it. But I don't want to reinstall OS X because Ill lose Office 2011 etc.

Starfighter
Dec 7, 2012, 01:44 AM
No it's not.

Go rip a DVD and get back to me tomorrow when it finished.

Why rip a DVD (and wait forever) when you can download it in three minutes? I just don't understand this ripping business...

rjcalifornia
Dec 7, 2012, 02:32 AM
Why rip a DVD (and wait forever) when you can download it in three minutes? I just don't understand this ripping business...

Ripping DVD's is so retro, I mean DVDs are cheap...

mentaluproar
Dec 7, 2012, 02:42 AM
It's the OS. I have a 700 MHz G4 running tiger that I keep around for funsies and it feels much faster than my 2011 Mac mini running mountain lion. Work smarter, not harder.

Snow Leopard was just the right balance of features and performance. Rosetta worked, all my hardware worked, it was lightweight, etc.

seveej
Dec 7, 2012, 06:31 AM
Just general usage.

this is somewhat interesting.
I've also made the experience that perceptual responsiveness is not so much based on a geekbench score as we'd like to think.
For instance my ol' MDD (see sig) seems just as snappy in most tasks as my MBP, even though every factor (except the OS) should favour the MBP (CPU, ram, sdd, gpu).

Crazy enough, the basic responsiveness of finder seems to be problematic, as even windows explorer (win XP, virtual) seems more responsive.

But anyway, a geekbench score is not directly related to responsiveness. Geekbench measures how fast your rig will go (which you can exhibit by ripping and converting a DVD), but is not directly related to how fast your rig will turn (switching programs; browsing files etc.).

A part of the problem is snappiness vs. smoothness. Snappy means producing results without wait, smooth means creating a transition between states (with the best intention of clear visualization), which nevertheless creates a hiatus of imperfect resource utilization.

I've seen no data about how much smoothness is built in to Mac OS iterations post-tiger, but I do suspect that Lion (and ML) has a lot of "smoothness" because it just does not feel snappy. A year ago I switched from an i7 iMac (GB: 9717) to a i7 MBP (GB: 9518), to make the new machine faster I installed an SSD. In benchmarks, the new machine was in fact 13% faster than the old (the power of SSD), but perversely it did not feel so. In fact it felt decidedly sluggish. The only possible explanation: Lion (vs. SL).

To continue using the car-analogy: some cars are made for the open road and will take you across the country in no time, while other cars are more suited for traffic in the city.

The crazy aspect of "snappiness" is that a 20% difference in speed has a profound impact on the user experience if the difference materializes when the user is interacting with the machine, and conversely is less acutely annoying when you've asked the machine to do a strenuous task (encoding/rendering etc.) And are already more or less "hands-off".

----------

Why rip a DVD (and wait forever) when you can download it in three minutes?

4.6 GB in 180 seconds?
That's close to what my high-paid ISP promises, but of course only if the pipe's thick enough all the way.

I'd like to know if there's a normal consumer anywhere who can get a sustained real data rate of 200 Mbps across a sea or ocean. More typically a 4.6 gigabyte download (to northern Europe) from the USA takes around 3 hours. I' ve been told, they could be a lot faster, but that the ocean cable operators offer (consumer-oriented) service providers only low priority and limited bandwidth.

Remember, even clouds are at specific spots.

Jethryn Freyman
Dec 7, 2012, 11:15 PM
My G5 obliterates a current MBA in GPU intensive games; it's the other way round when it's CPU based. I also get a free heater and emergency cheese grater, though, too.

drorpheus
Dec 8, 2012, 12:30 AM
No it's not.

Go rip a DVD and get back to me tomorrow when it finished.


There was a thread on this a few weeks ago, it takes 1hr 20min to rip a 1hr 45min dvd on my dual 2.3 g5. Your MBP takes how long 5min?

Intell
Dec 8, 2012, 09:20 AM
My G5 obliterates a current MBA in GPU intensive games; it's the other way round when it's CPU based. I also get a free heater and emergency cheese grater, though, too.

Your card and the Intell HD 4000 are actually very close in terms of performance. With the Intell GPU only being 56 points behind the ATI FireGL X3. Not exactly an obliteration. And depending on exactly which core you have and what ATI X800 ROM it has flashed to it, you may have worse performance than the HD 4000 as some ATI X800's have up to 100 points worse performance. The GeForce 8800M is something that could claim that with a point difference of 202 points.

http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/video_lookup.php?gpu=Intel+HD+4000

throAU
Dec 9, 2012, 09:49 AM
There was a thread on this a few weeks ago, it takes 1hr 20min to rip a 1hr 45min dvd on my dual 2.3 g5. Your MBP takes how long 5min?

About 15-20 from memory.