PDA

View Full Version : G4 dual or G5 single?




Cosmoza
Nov 8, 2008, 06:59 AM
What would be better idea to get as used computer??

Powermac Dual G4 1.6Ghz (Powerlogix CPU upgrade) 1.25Gb memory, Radeon 8500 AGP Superdrive USB2.0 PCI SATA Card 40+120Gb HD

Powermac Single G5 1.8Ghz 1.5Gb memory, GeForce FX5200 AGP, 160GB HD, Combo drive etc.

What would be difference on speed? Main use would be graphics design/multimedia and some database etc.

Money is an issue currently so can't opt for MacPro just yet..



iamcheerful
Nov 8, 2008, 07:41 AM
i would prefer to save up for an intel (not that i'm against the G4s or G5s).

bottom line, ask oneself what one needs are and work in tandem. but if you really want me to pick a machine between the two, i'll go with the G4s because they appear to be more stable so far. that said, i'm not familiar with G4 upgrades.

got to say this once more, weigh what you need the machine for, and how you will use the system. a simple example - will a dual may be more of an asset over the single G5 or will the single G5 ... note that this is non-conclusive. you got to really explore a bit more to determine your personal needs and preferences.

pablogott
Nov 8, 2008, 09:12 AM
I would go with the G5. It looks like a better graphics card, and it has a little more ram - those will probably impact your everyday computing more than the processor.

SmurfBoxMasta
Nov 8, 2008, 10:57 AM
The only way the G4 might be worth considering is if it was originally a last generation DP 1.25.......they had the fastest memory, FSB & AGP slots.....

because putting a DP 1.6 into a Sawtooth, DA or GE (if that was/is even an option) would result in marginal performance gains, due to their way slower subsystems.......

if it is indeed an upgraded MDD, then go for it. The dual cpus will enable faster, more efficient processing of graphics design and mm files (photoshop etc)

OrangeSVTguy
Nov 8, 2008, 11:06 AM
I'd go with the G5. It has a faster bus speed, 900mhz I do believe compared to the G4s 167mhz(assuming it was a dual 1.25ghz). It can support 4gb of memory compared to the 2gb of the G4. The FX5200 is the stock card which is pretty good though btw and is 64mb. Only thing is is that the G5 only holds 2x SATA drives but the G4(MDD) can hold 4x PATA drives but you have the SATA card in there which is only good for 2? maybe? Also is it a bootable SATA card? or is that 40gb the boot drive on the system bus? The G5 is also quieter and runs a lot cooler as the MDDs were horrible with cooling and known for being loud. IE Wind Tunnels.

If you go with aesthetics, the G5 is a million times better ;)

Cosmoza
Nov 8, 2008, 01:57 PM
Yes, sadly the G4 is actually 466mhz -> dual 1.66Ghz build up with upgrade prosessor. I've seen recently quite attracting prices for Dual G5's, still i can't get over the fact how much faster intel's are as well the software support now and later is and will be better.

I just don't want to get Mac mini or iMac and the Intel Macbook laptop i have, even it could be attached with some nice wide LCD to do what i need. I like more desktop tower for the job in hand, they just also, look ah so much better as well the room to expand with more hard drives.

Oh well, maybe just need to wait a bit and save up for Mac Pro. I would actually, after all, need to have bootcamp and run OS X + Vista/XP anyway (rather native than virtual). Not much options there then.

OrangeSVTguy
Nov 8, 2008, 02:37 PM
Yeah if you need to run Windows, just save up for an Intel Mac. Sadly the G5s architecture isn't supported with Parallels or VM Fusion :(

Pixellated
Nov 8, 2008, 02:48 PM
Even a Mac Mini will toast any G4 or G5.

nick9191
Nov 8, 2008, 02:54 PM
Even a Mac Mini will toast any G4 or G5.
Except in graphics performance, RAM expandability, HDD expandability, expansion slots, looks.

Cosmoza
Nov 8, 2008, 03:15 PM
Any news of MacPro been updated? More cores coming, earlier models coming down on pricing :cool:
I can wait till some late January 2009.

LethalWolfe
Nov 8, 2008, 03:28 PM
I just don't want to get Mac mini or iMac and the Intel Macbook laptop i have, even it could be attached with some nice wide LCD to do what i need. I like more desktop tower for the job in hand, they just also, look ah so much better as well the room to expand with more hard drives.
Like another poster said, any G4 will get skunked by an intel-based Mac and even a first gen MB was typically as fast, if not faster, than a dual core G5 tower. I'd keep saving for a MacPro. Spending money on a G4 or G5 tower is just a waste, IMO.


Lethal

iamcheerful
Nov 8, 2008, 07:05 PM
Yeah if you need to run Windows, just save up for an Intel Mac. Sadly the G5s architecture isn't supported with Parallels or VM Fusion :(

i may be mistaken, but he probably has an intel mac already. i've copied pasted his Sig below for convenience.

Macbook 2.2Ghz 4Gb 120Gb Superdrive OSX 10.5.5,(Project) Powermac G4 (DA) 466mhz 768mb 40Gb CD-RW OSX 10.4 iPod 5G 30GB Nano 4Gb"

AlexMaximus
Nov 8, 2008, 07:57 PM
What would be better idea to get as used computer??

Powermac Dual G4 1.6Ghz (Powerlogix CPU upgrade) 1.25Gb memory, Radeon 8500 AGP Superdrive USB2.0 PCI SATA Card 40+120Gb HD

Powermac Single G5 1.8Ghz 1.5Gb memory, GeForce FX5200 AGP, 160GB HD, Combo drive etc.

What would be difference on speed? Main use would be graphics design/multimedia and some database etc.

Money is an issue currently so can't opt for MacPro just yet..


The single G5 was a crippled version thrown on the market in order to buy Apple more time to come up with some real power much later on.
Don't go for that one unless its a real strong dual or Quad G5.

On the G4's end you are really talking about upgrading your 466 baby, do you? Yours is an older model that has a 100 mhz FSB. Only the later QS had the 133 FSB and only the MDD 1,25 and the MDD 1,42 Dual had the 167 FSB.

An upgrade would speed up your machine big time, however I am not sure how much the small FSB would slow you down.
From my experience I have upgraded my G4 MDD 1,42 dual to the limit and I am very, very happy with it!! I absolutely favor upgrades because I know what I have and I keep my computers for a long time. I just love the G4's design- so for me the G4's are real "Classic Machines".
Since you already have SATA drives you should be fine.
However there should be one thing to be considered: To really run Tiger or Leopard even faster on you machine -you would need a graphic card that supports core image and quartz extrem.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Core_image


:apple:

Dustman
Nov 8, 2008, 08:03 PM
Yeah if you need to run Windows, just save up for an Intel Mac. Sadly the G5s architecture isn't supported with Parallels or VM Fusion :(

It's not really that they don't support the G5.. it's that Windows doesn't exactly support the G5.. Hence why Windows support on a mac at near native speeds was completely unheard of before the core duo was introduced. It's not Parallells' or VM Fusion's fault that a PPC processor can't run an intel/amd OS.

zmttoxics
Nov 8, 2008, 10:03 PM
You can always track down a copy of VirtualPC for Mac (VP7 would be what you need for a G5), and Q / Qemu. They are x86 emulators enabling the same effect as VMware but because its emulated it is much much slower.

OrangeSVTguy
Nov 8, 2008, 11:18 PM
....I would actually, after all, need to have bootcamp and run OS X + Vista/XP anyway (rather native than virtual). Not much options there then.
i may be mistaken, but he probably has an intel mac already. i've copied pasted his Sig below for convenience.
You think I didn't see that? He was asking about his decision between the 2 and what would run Windows or not. He wants a Tower that can run Windows...

You can always track down a copy of VirtualPC for Mac (VP7 would be what you need for a G5), and Q / Qemu. They are x86 emulators enabling the same effect as VMware but because its emulated it is much much slower.
I can't seem to find a copy of VPC but I tried Q Emulator and sadly it seems to run as fast as when I had it on my G3 iBook 900mhz. I was even running Windows 98. My PSP could run it faster:p

It's not really that they don't support the G5.. it's that Windows doesn't exactly support the G5.. Hence why Windows support on a mac at near native speeds was completely unheard of before the core duo was introduced. It's not Parallells' or VM Fusion's fault that a PPC processor can't run an intel/amd OS.
Parallels and VM Ware will not run on a G5 period. I can run Windows with other emulators like Q but it's ridiculously slow, not worth running it at all.

Cosmoza
Nov 9, 2008, 01:55 AM
I do have an Macbook (late 2007, santarosa) but for larger tasks datawise, i might endup needing several HD's and better graphics card(s) later on. I'd rather keep the laptop for other use (take it along to work/educational tasks) that's why i thought to go for the Tower design wich i can setup to be the main machine at home for all tasks around (running OSX+XP/Vista+Linux etc).

G4 i have, 466, is a project one i got. I do have new DVD+-RW drive waiting to be installed, as well Ati Radeon 9800 PRO (flashed fully working) for it was well. For HD's, i have few 40Gb's (later can upgarde).

And what came to the Dual 1.6Ghz (powerlogix) G4, that is an used computer i am been offered to buy/trade. It's built on similar G4 466mhz DA model originally but with PCI ATA-card to get support over 128Gb drives as well. I am wondering how well the orignal DA powersupply will cope the Dual 1.6 with Radeon 9800 Pro and few harddrives? Scary.

So the "dialemma" between this matter is rather funny. I do have mackbook wich i could attach to larger 20-24" LCD (need to buy one), and attach external keyboard as well (have one older Apple clearplastic model). The power would be there, as well the possibility to run Windows over bootcamp (work/studies needs windows sadly a lot), BUT. It would not just feel nice. I don't trust laptop HD's so much (ok, there is timemachine and so on) nor this models GPU is not that powerfull.

Running XP or Vista on G4.. even dual, i don't think that would be in long-term afterall, possible anyway. Same for G5's then i guess.

So it starts to look like my choosing must be done between Macbook, Mini and MacPro. Or just basicly running OSX on Macbook and Powermac G4, Linux on laptop and XP on PC (it needs some update to run Vista if needed). Sucks bigtime this way.

Cosmoza
Dec 14, 2008, 01:00 AM
So that things wouldn't make more sense :D ..i came across lots of used and new parts (mostly for free/donations) and bought one desktop..

G4 Powermac DA 466Mhz, 768mb SDRAM PC133 (3x256mb), 160+40GB HD (128Gb visible on OSX), DVD-+RW (new), Ati Radeon 9800 Pro 128Mb (Club3D, flashed from PC-card), OSX 10.5.5 -- total cost: 0€
- Put it toget just for the fun, not much money involved and seems to run 10.5 amazingly well with Radeon 9800 Pro! Only would like to upgrade the RAM to max. 1.5Gb, but 512mb SDRAM (low-density) modules are quite expensive (would double the G4's actual value LOL)

G5 Powermac 1.8Ghz (single, 2003 model), 512mb RAM, 160Gb HD, Superdrive 4x, GeForce FX 5200 Ultra 64mb, 10.4 -- cost: 200€ (about 270usd).
- Could not resist the offer.. Keep until can afford MacPro later on.

I'll get the Ati Radeon 9800 Pro from G4 (no taping pins 3 and 11 needed on G5) and put it on G5. Speeds up nicely i think and get some more RAM, 2Gb should be fine, maybe even 4Gb - who knows. Oh and Airport Extreme card is needed with an Antenna, that's about it then.

I think i am hardware geek/collector. Still looking to buy G4 Cube someday! But no matter what, always can find user for older Mac-hardware if need to get rid of some of them. Not been a problem so far.. (have owned dozen old macs over the years).

opeter
Dec 14, 2008, 04:13 AM
I would not buy any of these. Off course it's your money.

wpc33
Dec 14, 2008, 09:34 PM
I wouldn't buy any of these, either, and I OWN a 1.8 G5. It's okay...I guess..:p

Despite your graphics limitations, run your Macbook. Attach pretty much as many drives as you wish via FW400, and you WILL notice a difference...A difference you won't notice, or be thrilled with by the expenditure of a new, old, tower.

While you stroll through your tasks with the excellent 'book, you can save up for a first-gen MacPro, which will be even cheaper and easier to find, as time goes on, and the next gen is released.:cool:

Cosmoza
Dec 16, 2008, 11:21 PM
I'll use the G5 for time being and recycle the G4 somehow for someone in need of such (just take the Radeon 9800Pro to G5) and later build the G5 for my father so he can get rid of PC's totally. Airport extreme card already bought from local eBay equilevant. Now need the aiport antenna (wonder if normal antenna from PCI-WLAN card fits to it?).

Just need to figure out how to mirror the macbook screen to 4:3 LCD 17" monitor, giving out some graphics errors on 1280x1024@75hz.

Firefly2002
Dec 17, 2008, 04:01 PM
The G4 will be faster in most tasks. The FSB improvements of the G5s did surprisingly little to improve clock-for-clock performance.

If you can, though, go for a Dual 1.8.

California
Dec 19, 2008, 04:17 AM
...and even a first gen MB was typically as fast, if not faster, than a dual core G5 tower.


Lethal

Actually, not true. My brand new 2.4ghz al macbook with 4 gigs of ram versus my 2.0ghz dual core G5 tower with 3 gigs of ram?

Essentially equal. In fact, the macbook stutters on some video files that run smooth as silk on the G5.

I just got a broken Quad G5 and I can't wait to fix it up.

zmttoxics
Dec 19, 2008, 07:16 AM
Actually, not true. My brand new 2.4ghz al macbook with 4 gigs of ram versus my 2.0ghz dual core G5 tower with 3 gigs of ram?

Essentially equal. In fact, the macbook stutters on some video files that run smooth as silk on the G5.

I just got a broken Quad G5 and I can't wait to fix it up.

Lies. My 2.16 macbook with 4 gigs of ram destroys my 2.0 G5 with 6 gigs of ram.

I want to see some benchmarks (like geekbench).

Cosmoza
Dec 21, 2008, 12:54 AM
Great. Just great. The Ati Radeon 9800 Pro 128b (flashed PC card) seems to be dead somehow. Giving out graphics errors even i lowered the speed of GPU and mem to -25% still the same. I'll put the GeForce back... too bad, really.

Looking for At Radeon X800 XT (AGP)!

Cosmoza
Dec 21, 2008, 11:10 PM
Lies. My 2.16 macbook with 4 gigs of ram destroys my 2.0 G5 with 6 gigs of ram.

I want to see some benchmarks (like geekbench).

My Macbook (2.2/4Gb/santarosa) gives about 3000 points on Geekbench 2.2, and Powermac G5 1.8Ghz/512mb about 1000 so there's quite a leap.

California
Dec 22, 2008, 07:15 PM
Lies. My 2.16 macbook with 4 gigs of ram destroys my 2.0 G5 with 6 gigs of ram.

I want to see some benchmarks (like geekbench).

"Lies" not really. Different perception, probably.

I usually use my ancient but beloved copy of Word X (can't stand 2004/2008); final cut pro and online. I don't stress it out that much but I cannot tell the difference between macbook and G5. Could also be that the G5 has a faster hard drive; that really sped things up for me. I'll let you know when i get a 500 7200.4 in the macbook. A lot of the geekbench scores are for things I rarely use.

smchan
Dec 22, 2008, 07:34 PM
I think i am hardware geek/collector. Still looking to buy G4 Cube someday! But no matter what, always can find user for older Mac-hardware if need to get rid of some of them. Not been a problem so far.. (have owned dozen old macs over the years).

I hope my wife doesn't see this. I have an attic full of Apple & Apple-related relics that she wants me to throw out. They include Apple II+, IIc, & IIe, Mac IIcx (my first Macintosh) & IIfx both with System 6, and a NeXT.

At least I got rid of my Taligent books. :-)

Sam

Cosmoza
Dec 23, 2008, 05:53 AM
My Macbook (2.2/4Gb/santarosa) gives about 3000 points on Geekbench 2.2, and Powermac G5 1.8Ghz/512mb about 1000 so there's quite a leap.

I just need to get some more memory to run Aperture 2 and i guess, CS4 won't run either? That's interesting to compare. Lightroom 2 is very lightweight coding so it seems to run well even on 466mhz G4.