PDA

View Full Version : G5 or Intel? PPC concern with Snow Leopard




Clipse79
Jun 15, 2008, 08:36 PM
Looking to finally go to mac desktop. Had a older laptop that I got rid of that was not being used but my dilema is with the rumour that snow leopard maybe dropping ppc support should I look for a Intel based machine? I guess I should add i`m looking into something a year or two old like a iMac....

Just looking for feedback....



kabunaru
Jun 15, 2008, 08:38 PM
Even though I like PPC a lot, I will say, get an Intel Mac. Intel is the future and the way to go.

dukebound85
Jun 15, 2008, 08:40 PM
is there any reason to go ppc now? all major apps are universal

Tallest Skil
Jun 15, 2008, 08:40 PM
If the developer seed is any indicator, it's Intel only. Get an Intel Mac.

cherry su
Jun 15, 2008, 08:43 PM
Intel. The iMacs are quite nice.

TwinCities Dan
Jun 15, 2008, 08:47 PM
I also vote Intel :)

KurtangleTN
Jun 15, 2008, 08:51 PM
Looking to finally go to mac desktop. Had a older laptop that I got rid of that was not being used but my dilema is with the rumour that snow leopard maybe dropping ppc support should I look for a Intel based machine? I guess I should add i`m looking into something a year or two old like a iMac....

Just looking for feedback....

The iMac I got in Oct/Nov (can't remember exactly, late Oct or early Nov) is the 17 inch white Core 2 Duo iMac. 2 Ghz, Bluetooth model (not the other 17 educational one without it)

It cost $850, IMO a much better deal than the mini. It was refurbished so check out the refurbished store, I'm sure the new Aluminum ones are a good deal and the white ones are probably even better.

Clipse79
Jun 15, 2008, 08:55 PM
Thanks guys!

CWallace
Jun 15, 2008, 09:58 PM
Even if Snow Leopard does end up having PPC support, things like "Grand Central" are designed for multi-core CPUs, which the PPC is not. So you'll want to choose an Intel CPU to take advantage of these future technologies.

Sweetfeld28
Jun 15, 2008, 10:14 PM
Even if Snow Leopard does end up having PPC support, things like "Grand Central" are designed for multi-core CPUs, which the PPC is not. So you'll want to choose an Intel CPU to take advantage of these future technologies.

Maybe, i am wrong about this; but the Last Three G5s were 'Core' machines. The G5 2.0 GHz, and 2.3 GHz, were both Dual Core G5s. While the last G5 was a Quad Core at 2.5 GHz. Therefore, Apple could/should support them.

These last G5s did in fact have Dual Cores, but they were one core per chip. Were as Intel has two Cores per chip. [ie. Core 2 Duo].

But like i said, i could be wrong?

MacHappytjg
Jun 15, 2008, 10:58 PM
a little off topic but, too bad mac didn't go with amd or something better

CWallace
Jun 15, 2008, 11:13 PM
a little off topic but, too bad mac didn't go with amd or something better

Considering Intel's current line-up clubs AMD's like a harp seal and AMD's next series of CPUs (Kuma and Phenom FX) have been canceled, I for one am glad Apple stayed far away from them.

Ed Stroglio at Overclockers.com was dead-on when he said AMD should rename their CPU line to "Vaperons".

greg555
Jun 15, 2008, 11:24 PM
Considering Intel's current line-up clubs AMD's like a harp seal and AMD's next series of CPUs (Kuma and Phenom FX) have been canceled, I for one am glad Apple stayed far away from them.

Ed Stroglio at Overclockers.com was dead-on when he said AMD should rename their CPU line to "Vaperons".

I read overclockers.com too and agree that Apple would be in trouble if they had switched to AMD rather than Intel.

Greg

Darkroom
Jun 16, 2008, 01:30 AM
you should get an intel mac for sure. if cost is a problem, there are plenty of cheaper refurbs available on the apple store online. Snow-Leopard *might* end up being intel only, so you don't want to miss out on that. also, if it means anything to you. the first white intel Core Duo iMacs (Jan 2006) are 32-bit only, while every intel iMac after September 2006 are Core 2 Duo 64-bit.

MacHappytjg
Jun 16, 2008, 01:13 PM
I read overclockers.com too and agree that Apple would be in trouble if they had switched to AMD rather than Intel.

Greg

i didnt know this but amd is still better, i hate my intel mac it makes me so mad goes slow as ****...

aross99
Jun 16, 2008, 01:26 PM
i didnt know this but amd is still better, i hate my intel mac it makes me so mad goes slow as ****...

And you think it would be better with an AMD CPU?

jnc
Jun 16, 2008, 02:07 PM
Make it a 24" white iMac.

AlexisV
Jun 17, 2008, 05:14 AM
a little off topic but, too bad mac didn't go with amd or something better

The Intel Core series has been the fastest consumer CPU line available for some time now.

The days of AMD Athlons whipping Pentium 4's are in the past now I'm afraid!

CWallace
Jun 17, 2008, 07:55 AM
i didnt know this but amd is still better, i hate my intel mac it makes me so mad goes slow as ****...

Well Nehalem will bring the two advantages AMD has - integrated memory controllers and a more effective multi-CPU interconnect - to the Intel platform, so at that point, Intel's superiority will be complete.

MacHappytjg
Jun 17, 2008, 09:28 AM
The Intel Core series has been the fastest consumer CPU line available for some time now.

The days of AMD Athlons whipping Pentium 4's are in the past now I'm afraid!

well i guess i only can rember my p4 which well is infested with virses but its just something i dont like about intel i cant explain it my macbook always sits on my desk shut off with my emac always on doing everything and it seems so much faster, and i dont have to always force quit with it as much as my macbook

Littleodie914
Jun 17, 2008, 09:37 AM
well i guess i only can rember my p4 which well is infested with virses but its just something i dont like about intel i cant explain itNot to start any wars here, but to even imply that you had more viruses on a PC because it was running on an Intel chip is pure ridiculousness.

As for the OP, PPC is unfortunately a thing of the past. Maybe check out the last white iMac revisions?

QuantumLo0p
Jun 17, 2008, 09:45 AM
I say leap frog both Power and Intel. Instead opting for a Neural Net Processor which is, of course, a learning computer.
;)

MacHappytjg
Jun 17, 2008, 09:45 AM
Not to start any wars here, but to even imply that you had more viruses on a PC because it was running on an Intel chip is pure ridiculousness.

As for the OP, PPC is unfortunately a thing of the past. Maybe check out the last white iMac revisions?

no i didnt say i had virses on my pc cause it was an intel thats like wtf how would that make it have more virses lol anywhos theres something i dont like about intel, the only thing i sorta like it for is boot camp, but w.e im gunna have to live with it espically if im gunna get a mac mini

tdhurst
Jun 17, 2008, 09:53 AM
Unless price is a MAJOR concern, you don't do many cpu intensive tasks and you can find a SCREAMING deal, there's no reason to go PPC at this point.

If you're still running classic applications (unless it's in a pro environment, of course), may god have mercy on your soul.

Auradjinnz
Aug 13, 2009, 04:13 PM
is there any reason to go ppc now? all major apps are universal

I plan to make my PPC G5 a dedicated music server or Jukebox as it were.
Also use it for the "guest" web access - browser.

I guess I can name it the Brickhouse Music Warehouse :apple:

txnoob
Aug 13, 2009, 05:09 PM
well i guess i only can rember my p4 which well is infested with virses but its just something i dont like about intel i cant explain it my macbook always sits on my desk shut off with my emac always on doing everything and it seems so much faster, and i dont have to always force quit with it as much as my macbook


Ever consider reinstalling the OS and adding some memory to your Macbook. Because I have a 1.25Ghz G4 eMac a 1.6Ghz Hackintosh netbook which is about the equivalent of a core solo mini, and a 2.0 Ghz C2D Mini as in sig. Each one is a progressive step forward. Your Macbook should not be slower than your G4. It has nothing to do with the processor if it is.

MacHappytjg
Aug 13, 2009, 05:50 PM
Ever consider reinstalling the OS and adding some memory to your Macbook. Because I have a 1.25Ghz G4 eMac a 1.6Ghz Hackintosh netbook which is about the equivalent of a core solo mini, and a 2.0 Ghz C2D Mini as in sig. Each one is a progressive step forward. Your Macbook should not be slower than your G4. It has nothing to do with the processor if it is.

Lol how long ago was that i dont even own my macbook anymore. :p

MTI
Aug 13, 2009, 08:24 PM
The G5 iMacs (and the G5 Power Macs) fill an important niche' . . . a relatively high performace OS X 10.5 platform for way less money than a used Intel iMac or even a Mini.

These "hand me down" platforms are still useful for the majority of consumers, so I wouldn't be so quick to drag them off to the landfill.

donuttakedonuts
Aug 14, 2009, 12:02 AM
The reason amd has canceled all their newest processors is because they are coming out with something new.
the new processor will have 64 cores. it will run at 1 thz (terahertz!) It will have 1 tb of L2 cache. it will fit into a new socket, and use new motherboards to support it's power. The temp of this processor will be 35 c on average.


Behold, the new Quadrilliom processor.

It will come out in 2075 and be obsolete then.

MTI
Aug 14, 2009, 12:05 AM
The reason amd has canceled all their newest processors is because they are coming out with something new.
the new processor will have 64 cores. it will run at 1 thz (terahertz!) It will have 1 tb of L2 cache. it will fit into a new socket, and use new motherboards to support it's power. The temp of this processor will be 35 c on average.


Behold, the new Quadrilliom processor.

It will come out in 2075 and be obsolete then.

Finally! A processor that might be able to handle Windows .DLL files! Hurrah!

SnowLeopard2008
Aug 14, 2009, 12:29 AM
The G5 iMacs (and the G5 Power Macs) fill an important niche' . . . a relatively high performace OS X 10.5 platform for way less money than a used Intel iMac or even a Mini.

These "hand me down" platforms are still useful for the majority of consumers, so I wouldn't be so quick to drag them off to the landfill.

But the problem is, Apple is.

zmttoxics
Aug 14, 2009, 11:21 AM
Hooray, another year old thread dug up... :rolleyes: