PDA

View Full Version : Better Performance - latestest Mini or G5 Dual 2.0?




hoya87eagle91
Dec 25, 2009, 12:07 AM
Hi looking for reliable data / experiance that tells me what is a faster or more productive machine for editing RAW photos in CS2 and editing video in i movie - A Powermac G5 dual 2.0 with 4G RAM (running leopard) or one of the newest Minis running Leopard and maxed out on RAM (4gs?)

I don't want to go Snow Leopard yet as the Powermac isn't SL compatible. I have that Dual 2.o G5 and am looking to upgrade but feel the current Mac Pros are Overkill for me and that the Mini might be a solid upgrade???



Eidorian
Dec 25, 2009, 12:10 AM
For Universal applications every dual core mini is going to beat the old Power Mac G5 2.0 GHz. You're going to be more limited by the hard drive speed than anything else.

63dot
Dec 25, 2009, 12:15 AM
I vote for the latest Mac mini.

I have a Mac mini, G4 1.42 GHz, with 32 megs of video RAM and it replaced my much older mac, which was a dual 500 G4 Power Mac with 16 megs of video RAM and a slower system bus. In 2005 the mini was a consumer machine and in 2000 the Power Mac was a pro desktop. But a lot happens in just a few years to the point a newer entry level machine is much more powerful than an older "pro" machine.

hoya87eagle91
Dec 25, 2009, 12:19 AM
hanks. So do you mean i will be limited by the drive speed of the Mini or by the G5? Ain't the G5 7200 RPM?

Eidorian
Dec 25, 2009, 12:20 AM
The minis still use 5400 RPM drives. The processors are going to smoke every G5 except for the quad. CS2 is also a PowerPC application so Rosetta is going to hurt.

djc6
Dec 25, 2009, 12:27 AM
Like Eidorian said, stick with the G5 if you're going to use CS2.

If you're willing to upgrade Photoshop, then I'd go for the mini:

http://www.primatelabs.ca/blog/mac-benchmarks/

Mac mini (Early 2009)
Intel Core 2 Duo P8400 2.26 GHz (2 cores)
Score = 3019

Power Mac G5 (Late 2005)
PowerPC G5 (970MP) 2.0 GHz (2 cores)
Score = 1801

This test only measures processor/memory performance, but the mini knocks the socks off of the PowerMac G5 2.0Ghz Dual Core.

hoya87eagle91
Dec 25, 2009, 12:46 AM
Thanks for the info everyone. I'll likely use something newer than CS2 soner or later, so looks like the MIni is the winner...and with the $ i save on a mini (vs an i mac or mac pro,) i can spend the leftover $ on a high quality monitor for accurate prints.

Badger^2
Dec 25, 2009, 02:47 AM
macworld has some tests on the new minis -- think their Pshop test score was 41 seconds, and a Dual G5 2.0 was 1:49.

I switched my studio from G5 Dual 2.0s (upgraded with faster drives and better video) to AL iMacs in late 2007.

Night vs Day.

iMacs smoked the G5s, doing everything 3-5X as fast, if not faster.

Be careful of falling into the "mini is cheaper" trap.

If you really are looking for something to smoke Photoshop or Aperture or Lightroom, you really would be way better off with an iMac with a dedicated video card. All of those apps are starting to rely heavily on the video card speeding up many of the processes.

And there are some hidden costs with the mini, like ram. Want to go to 8 gigs of ram in a mini? Sure, no problem, $450 please. Want to go to 8 gigs in an iMac. Sure, $100 please. Big diff.

And the iMacs have high-quality monitors already, but if you really didnt want to use the iMacs screen, not a problem, since the all support second screens. And we need to define "high-quality". You mean like a $1800 Eizo? Or more like a $600 Dell? Nothing cheaper would be acceptable in my book...

MacHamster68
Dec 25, 2009, 05:24 AM
you have already a g5 and want leopard then max out the ram and give it a better graphics card and job done usable for the next couple years without trouble
the powermac g5 is a pro computer the mini is a consumer thingy

so i would go for the powermac any day instead of a mini , but i`m a powerpc processor fan
the only thing that speaks for the mini is ..its cute
and for the price of a mini you can get at least 2 more powermac g5 , with your existing one it means you would have 3 and could hook them together for combined processing power working as one and that would be hard to beat
i just try that with a second g5 quad 2.5 i got in bits , when its finished i will link them together for combined processing power which will certainly fast enough for every day computing and will beat a mini too and all for the price less of a basic mini ;)

Azrel
Dec 25, 2009, 05:57 AM
you have already a g5 and want leopard then max out the ram and give it a better graphics card and job done usable for the next couple years without trouble
the powermac g5 is a pro computer the mini is a consumer thingy

so i would go for the powermac any day instead of a mini , but i`m a powerpc processor fan
the only thing that speaks for the mini is ..its cute
and for the price of a mini you can get at least 2 more powermac g5 , with your existing one it means you would have 3 and could hook them together for combined processing power working as one and that would be hard to beat
i just try that with a second g5 quad 2.5 i got in bits , when its finished i will link them together for combined processing power which will certainly fast enough for every day computing and will beat a mini too and all for the price less of a basic mini ;)

As much as any geek admires the PowerPC architecture for being the only recent contender to x86, it's clear that those G5's are comparatively ancient machines. Performance of the Mini will be significantly faster than the PPC.

If you're buying this as a work machine, then the choice is clear.Mini.

If you're buying this for geek value, then the choice is the PPC.

MacHamster68
Dec 25, 2009, 06:40 AM
As much as any geek admires the PowerPC architecture for being the only recent contender to x86, it's clear that those G5's are comparatively ancient machines. Performance of the Mini will be significantly faster than the PPC.

If you're buying this as a work machine, then the choice is clear.Mini.

If you're buying this for geek value, then the choice is the PPC.

you make that sound like powerMac g5`s have only sentimental values and are not of any use any more :(


the mini is not meant to be a professional computer , its not bad for its size but its limited by its size

63dot
Dec 25, 2009, 10:30 AM
you make that sound like powerMac g5`s have only sentimental values and are not of any use any more :(


the mini is not meant to be a professional computer , its not bad for its size but its limited by its size

I had a dual 500 G4 running 9.2 and Jaguar, so does that make it better than the current iMac (a consumer machine)?. I also had a $4,400 dollar professional machine with 2 gigs of video RAM and RAM maxed out to 64 MB over the 4 megs it came with. You don't see me using that for anything. The 2 gigs of video RAM, at nearly $800 dollars, was an aftermarket addition to ramp up the less than 1 gig of video RAM that was stock for many 1990s era towers.

MacHamster68
Dec 25, 2009, 11:31 AM
yes i prefer your old dual 500 g4 over a new imac
like i said i`m a powerpc processor fan ,in my house you will not find intel not even as a gift i would take a i7 27" iMac (would sell it straight away to buy a TAM)

63dot
Dec 25, 2009, 11:37 AM
yes i prefer your old dual 500 g4 over a new imac
like i said i`m a powerpc processor fan ,in my house you will not find intel not even as a gift (would sell it straight away to buy a TAM)

Ten years ago, I would also call myself a PPC fan.

I am an Apple fan, and while I didn't originally like Intel, I think Apple's Intel powered machines are pretty decent.

Azrel
Dec 25, 2009, 01:53 PM
you make that sound like powerMac g5`s have only sentimental values and are not of any use any more :(


the mini is not meant to be a professional computer , its not bad for its size but its limited by its size

Well, if you're doing any serious work, then I would consider a Dual 2.0GHz G5 for purely sentimental value. :-(

I keep a PPC Mac around because I have some Altivec code kicking around. Other than that, it's all i7 goodness :-)

Pros:
You will get better CPU performance, an order of magnitude faster I believe.
Snow Leopard support and future OS support.
Smaller, quieter machine with Apple Care.
Well supported graphics chip with OpenCL, HD Video and other features.
Power Efficient.

Cons:
Less expandable (remember though, the G5 case only has 2 removable hard drives).
No upgrade Path for graphics (however, you will need to find a G5 compatible graphics chip).

joe.pelayo
Dec 25, 2009, 02:04 PM
What about the graphics? I am given to understand that graphics can be upgraded in the PowerMac, is that the case for the Mini as well?

I am not sure about it but, don't the Minis use Intel graphics (the worst)? I am not also sure about how graphics performance impact in the proposed software.

Assuming I am correct in the graphics part I just wrote, and that you already have the PowerMac, since you are sticking for a while with PPC I'd suggest putting a good graphics card in the machine and use it rather than spending on a (possibly hard to upgrade) Mini.

Thanks,
Joe.

MacHamster68
Dec 25, 2009, 02:10 PM
the mini hmm you cant upgrade graphics card , you are limited in the amount of harddrive space (only one drive fits in )

10 years ago that was 1999 , sadly back then i had the privilege to own a intel pc with windows 95 on it :rolleyes:.. loved the blue screens ;) so much i changed to windows nt

no the new intel mac`s are decent machines ,
but for me apple lost that "think different ":(
as everything in them you can find now in ordinary pc`s too
and more and more people dont even bother any more
to boot into osx and use mainly windows on them now
and i find that worrying
a lot of companys developing programs dont even bother
any more to develop version for osx
as they know people can run windows on mac`s without trouble
so its not worth the effort any more to develop programs
for a small percentage of people still using osx
....is the clock ticking for osx

Eidorian
Dec 25, 2009, 02:14 PM
The Mac mini sports the 9400M G. The best you can get for the Power Mac G5 is a flashed 7800GT or a X1900XT.

To be honest even for the Intel Mac Pros the GPU upgrade options are limited. If you want to live on the edge you can always try some of netkas' drivers to support more video cards.

hoya87eagle91
Dec 25, 2009, 02:53 PM
ok lots of good ideas suggested here. Thank you. I forgot to say that I have to buy something because we have a new family member coming to live with us for a year that needs computer access, so i either 1) give them my dual 2.0 G5 and Dell monitor and I get a new setip , or 2) i keep the Powermac and get something for them that I can use in a year (desktop & monitor or a macbook that i really won't want)

So What I'm angling for is HD home video editing and accurate and fast photo printouts after large file photoshop precessing. I know that some video editing with my Flip HD cant be done on a Power PC- based Mac unfortuntely.

I was going to drop about $1500 - $2K FOR a Mini + a high quality monitor like NEC or Eizo, or keep the Dual 2.0 G5 and just buy a NEC/ Eizo monitor for it. Imacs w/ glossy screens are out. Can't work on any glossy screen.

Eidorian
Dec 25, 2009, 02:57 PM
I'm debating as well as to who is getting my MacBook Late 2007 once I'm done with it.

The Mac mini will be fine since and an improvement over what you have. 4 GB or RAM and a faster hard drive might be all you need from the base models. I'd wait for the machines to be updated one more time or if it's really necessary a refurbished one.

160 GB + 2 GB of RAM on the entry model is depressing for 2009.

MacHamster68
Dec 25, 2009, 05:07 PM
ok you have to remember it needs the most expensive ram on the market ddr3 , ok on the other hand we in the uk should get 2 gb more then the usa as we pay more then 100 ($160)more for the base mini and no we are not all members of the royal family or millionaires ,and live in castles , some people here in the uk still work to earn a living and are lucky if they can afford a shared flat

Badger^2
Dec 27, 2009, 01:45 AM
You have more answers in the other post you have.

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=839569

Have you even *looked* at an iMac in any location besides the Apple store or a Best Buy? (two of the worst places to do so with crappy indirect flourescent lighting).

Did you even read those 2 threads (there were a lot more if you just look) where "professional" photographers were using glossy screen iMacs and loving them? So How do you know you cant work on them, when they can?

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=33945286

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=33962659

Come on hamster, you cant do "pro" work on a mini cause its too limiting? then a MB "Pro" is "too limiting" too? They pretty much share the same interior workings. mini will take 8 gigs of ram and 1TB internal drives. Heck, last year Macpros only shipped with 2 gigs ram and a 320 gig drive, where is the "pro" in that. Dunno why Im even debating these points with someone who thinks a Dual 500 is better than an i7. Hey, Ive got a Dual G4 1.25 that will OS 9 BOOT, fastest OS 9 Mac ever made. Yours for only $1900. Free shipping. :rolleyes:

Look at my last post in your other thread, bang for buck, longest usage, best color, future proof choice you can really make...

Max(IT)
Dec 27, 2009, 01:00 PM
you make that sound like powerMac g5`s have only sentimental values and are not of any use any more :(


the mini is not meant to be a professional computer , its not bad for its size but its limited by its size

Late 2009 Mini with 4 gb of RAM and a Scorpion Blue 500gb hard drive is waaaay faster than a PowerMac G5, professional computer or not.
Huge difference

Max(IT)
Dec 27, 2009, 01:08 PM
What about the graphics? I am given to understand that graphics can be upgraded in the PowerMac, is that the case for the Mini as well?

I am not sure about it but, don't the Minis use Intel graphics (the worst)? I am not also sure about how graphics performance impact in the proposed software.

Assuming I am correct in the graphics part I just wrote, and that you already have the PowerMac, since you are sticking for a while with PPC I'd suggest putting a good graphics card in the machine and use it rather than spending on a (possibly hard to upgrade) Mini.

Thanks,
Joe.
The last MINIs use Nvidia 9400M, not Intel, and it's a graphic chipset better than what you can have on a PowerMac G5, integrated or not.
BTW he' going to use Photoshop, so he need cpu power, fast memory and hard drive, not a graphic card ...

Badger^2
Dec 27, 2009, 01:13 PM
latest versions of Photoshop use the power of the video card to help speed up many actions.

Max(IT)
Dec 27, 2009, 01:16 PM
latest versions of Photoshop use the power of the video card to help speed up many actions.

Not in all the situations and not so much. Cpu's power is much more relevant

Badger^2
Dec 27, 2009, 04:39 PM
heres what it does straight from Adobe.

I expect that list to be a lot longer with CS5.

http://kb2.adobe.com/cps/404/kb404898.html

Max(IT)
Dec 28, 2009, 07:21 AM
heres what it does straight from Adobe.

I expect that list to be a lot longer with CS5.

http://kb2.adobe.com/cps/404/kb404898.html

thank you, I know that list pretty well ;)

The 9400G M is a GPU, an a decent one, and support OpenGL.

eRondeau
Dec 28, 2009, 07:51 AM
Imacs w/ glossy screens are out. Can't work on any glossy screen.

Oh come on!!! There is absolutely nothing wrong with the iMac's "glossy" screen! The screen of my 24" iMac is beautiful to look at, the colours are gorgeous, anyone who has ever seen it is stunned by its quality. I have never been in any way distracted by reflections in the screen, EVER. To me it sounds like a new iMac is the perfect computer for your needs.

300D
Dec 28, 2009, 11:22 AM
The mini has a much faster CPU, but the 9400M doesn't even hold a candle to an X1900 or 7800GTX

Max(IT)
Dec 28, 2009, 08:18 PM
The mini has a much faster CPU, but the 9400M doesn't even hold a candle to an X1900 or 7800GTX

the 9400M is faster than what you think, and in Photoshop there is almost no difference between a X1900 and a 9400M.

300D
Dec 28, 2009, 10:38 PM
and in Photoshop there is almost no difference between a X1900 and a 9400M.

Thats because the faster CPU is making up the difference.

hoya87eagle91
Dec 29, 2009, 12:37 AM
Oh come on!!! There is absolutely nothing wrong with the iMac's "glossy" screen! The screen of my 24" iMac is beautiful to look at, the colours are gorgeous, anyone who has ever seen it is stunned by its quality. I have never been in any way distracted by reflections in the screen, EVER. To me it sounds like a new iMac is the perfect computer for your needs.


it must be a hang up of mine. All I see is my reflection when looking at dark areas. It's like framing a great photo behind non-reflective museum glass - you don't know how you got by with anything else until you use it.

tomacintosh
Dec 29, 2009, 04:59 AM
I don't know why there's still even a discussion about it. The Mac mini is clearly the better option in comparison with a Dual G5 2.0GHz.

Someone mentioned the G5 is a Pro machine, and the mini is just a Consumer product. Well yeah, the G5 was a Pro system, 5 years ago. It's label won't carry it to be as quick all-round as today's Mac mini's.

You could stay in the past, with an old G5 and old software, or visit the present/future with a Mac mini. If you really are nostalgic about the G5 then maybe you've already decided that's your choice? If that's the case then you'll be letting your heart make the decision, because anyone with anything up top will say Mac mini everyday.

Max(IT)
Dec 29, 2009, 02:57 PM
Thats because the faster CPU is making up the difference.

Nope. That's because the 9400M G is better than you think and Photoshop it's not a 3d game ....

300D
Dec 29, 2009, 10:52 PM
Nope.

Incorrect. Perhaps one day you will actually understand how computers work.

Badger^2
Dec 29, 2009, 11:00 PM
it must be a hang up of mine. All I see is my reflection when looking at dark areas. It's like framing a great photo behind non-reflective museum glass - you don't know how you got by with anything else until you use it.

How would you know?

You dont even own one.

And please for the love of Steve Jobs please do not tell me "thats how it looks in the Apple store". You dont have 20' ceilings with banks of florescent lights in them. And. That. Makes. All. The. Difference. In. The. World.

Max(IT)
Dec 30, 2009, 06:15 AM
Incorrect. Perhaps one day you will actually understand how computers work.

I could say the same thing of you ... or maybe you won't

Lot of teachers in this forum :rolleyes:

hoya87eagle91
Dec 30, 2009, 01:12 PM
How would you know?

You dont even own one.

And please for the love of Steve Jobs please do not tell me "thats how it looks in the Apple store". You dont have 20' ceilings with banks of florescent lights in them. And. That. Makes. All. The. Difference. In. The. World.

My dad has one