PDA

View Full Version : How good is a Dual 1.8 G5 3.5gb ram ++




Appleboy1717
Feb 14, 2010, 01:33 PM
Hey all.
So, back again.
I upgraded the ram on my G5.
Fry's had 2x1gb corsair ram for $69.99 with $30 rebate.
So, how good is a dual 1.8ghz G5 with 3.5gb ram, stock 5200 card and 1.5tb storage. It seems to be as fast or faster just messing around online and itunes and stuff compared to my NEW 2.66ghz macbook pro???
How do these G5 processors manage to be so fast. I mean just because of the two cpusss.
I know they take way more power than say the macpro..like half actually but why not keep making them. What made them fast than the intels before??



Hellhammer
Feb 14, 2010, 01:35 PM
Even Mac Mini should be faster than G5...

Appleboy1717
Feb 14, 2010, 01:38 PM
Even Mac Mini should be faster than G5...

what? The G5 also runs 7200rpm drives...not sure if the mini does that.
It just sure did seem fast to me and was only like 25 points off on benchmark compared to my macbook pro.

chrismacguy
Feb 14, 2010, 01:45 PM
what? The G5 also runs 7200rpm drives...not sure if the mini does that.
It just sure did seem fast to me and was only like 25 points off on benchmark compared to my macbook pro.

It all depends on which model of mac mini you have, and whether youve upgraded the HDs. Id still take any Intel mac over a G5- purely for 10.6 and future compatability (even if I want a G5 too - just for OS 9 software).

Appleboy1717
Feb 14, 2010, 01:55 PM
It all depends on which model of mac mini you have, and whether youve upgraded the HDs. Id still take any Intel mac over a G5- purely for 10.6 and future compatability (even if I want a G5 too - just for OS 9 software).

Yes, 10.6 is nice and the intel programs
sorry I'm totally into input here. Wasn't getting mad.
As for mac mini. I'm not into small apples. I've had an iMac, 2 iBooks, and 3 macbbok pros all die for logic boards and all the desktops I've had or known people have had been very reliable. All of the ones I had ran hot, and the desktops have more air and run cooler. I like that fact if the g5 and it's a pretty solid machine.
But mainly curious on how it outran and 3ghx when released and Now being 6 years old still kicking very fast.

splitpea
Feb 14, 2010, 02:07 PM
It was all very technical stuff, but basically, a) it had a very fast bus, eliminating one of the major bottlenecks for CPU usage, and b) the PPC instruction set was more efficient than the x86 instruction set, taking fewer clock cycles to perform the same calculation in many cases. Plus OS X was apparently engineered to use dual CPUs more efficiently than XP could.

Those dual G5s were awesome computers when they were new, and even now, they run like modern computers and are almost competitive with the low-end of what's available new. I wouldn't buy one as a primary machine now simply because of the architecture switch, but the one you have still has a lot of life in it, is still just fine for consumer-level photo and graphics work, and should last several more years as a server or email/word processing/browsing machine.

arri
Feb 14, 2010, 02:12 PM
i had a dual 1.8 G5 with 3.5 gigs of RAM. i also have an hp 1.8 core duo laptop. the G5 was more responsive, and multitasked far, far better than the 3 year old laptop running win xp, better than my win xp quad 2.66 desktop too. but in Cinebench multicpu render the laptop would just barely beat the G5, 505 to 500. of course the G5 was a 2004 machine, and the laptop was 2007. the G5 actually seemed more responsive than my mac pro, but gets its a** kicked in renders of course. i used to click on a folder on the G5 and it would open immediatly. my mac pro will pause a second or two sometimes. it was also a space heater, but so is the 2009 Mac Pro with Radeon 4870 to a lesser degree?

splitpea
Feb 14, 2010, 02:19 PM
i had a dual 1.8 G5 with 3.5 gigs of RAM. i also have an hp 1.8 core duo laptop. the G5 was more responsive, and multitasked far, far better than the 3 year old laptop running win xp, better than my win xp quad 2.66 desktop too. but in Cinebench multicpu render the laptop would just barely beat the G5, 505 to 500. of course the G5 was a 2004 machine, and the laptop was 2007. the G5 actually seemed more responsive than my mac pro, but gets its a** kicked in renders of course. i used to click on a folder on the G5 and it would open immediatly. my mac pro will pause a second or two sometimes. it was also a space heater, but so is the 2009 Mac Pro with Radeon 4870 to a lesser degree?

This is what makes me nervous that even now I'd have to buy a high-end desktop (quad core iMac or Mac Pro) to get something new that's much of an upgrade over my 5 y/o PowerMac.

Appleboy1717
Feb 14, 2010, 02:48 PM
i had a dual 1.8 G5 with 3.5 gigs of RAM. i also have an hp 1.8 core duo laptop. the G5 was more responsive, and multitasked far, far better than the 3 year old laptop running win xp, better than my win xp quad 2.66 desktop too. but in Cinebench multicpu render the laptop would just barely beat the G5, 505 to 500. of course the G5 was a 2004 machine, and the laptop was 2007. the G5 actually seemed more responsive than my mac pro, but gets its a** kicked in renders of course. i used to click on a folder on the G5 and it would open immediatly. my mac pro will pause a second or two sometimes. it was also a space heater, but so is the 2009 Mac Pro with Radeon 4870 to a lesser degree?

Wow.
That's pretty impressive hearing it take down a duo and a quad and seem faster than a mac pro.
I feel you their. My MacBook pro with a 2.66ghz intel and 4gb and a 7200 drive seems slower/less responsive than the g5. Yes on benchmark the intel beats it, but for everyday use, thr g5 still holds it's own.

Appleboy1717
Feb 14, 2010, 02:50 PM
This is what makes me nervous that even now I'd have to buy a high-end desktop (quad core iMac or Mac Pro) to get something new that's much of an upgrade over my 5 y/o PowerMac.

That says a lot. Not too many computers that can make you not need to upgrade 5 years later...let alone last that long.
Yeah? The g5 is very warm. I had a space heater in my room and have yet to turn it on since I got the g5. I thought the mac pro would he cooler having less fans and half the watage.

chrismacguy
Feb 14, 2010, 02:52 PM
Wow.
That's pretty impressive hearing it take down a duo and a quad and seem faster than a mac pro.
I feel you their. My MacBook pro with a 2.66ghz intel and 4gb and a 7200 drive seems slower/less responsive than the g5. Yes on benchmark the intel beats it, but for everyday use, thr g5 still holds it's own.

Well much as I love defending PPC machines - Ive found my MacBook is ever-so-slightly faster than a Dual 2.0 G5 (Mine is a 2.1 MacBook - so thats about as close a comparison as I can make - they both had 4GB RAM). However I would still take a G5 as a Desktop to replace my ageing G4/450 xD

splitpea
Feb 14, 2010, 03:11 PM
Wow.
That's pretty impressive hearing it take down a duo and a quad and seem faster than a mac pro.
I feel you their. My MacBook pro with a 2.66ghz intel and 4gb and a 7200 drive seems slower/less responsive than the g5. Yes on benchmark the intel beats it, but for everyday use, thr g5 still holds it's own.

That's just... depressing. I'm going to be replacing the G5 (dual 2.0 / 4GB RAM / 256MB graphics) with an MBP this spring, for the sake of a) portability, and b) Intel, but it hurts to spend that much money for a questionable or incremental speed increase after so much time.

Honestly, I'm rarely waiting for my computer anyway except for opening large files... or batch conversions that run in the background anyway, so benchmark improvements aren't really a big deal to me. I'm much more concerned about graphics memory (current hardware struggles redrawing palettes with too many Adobe apps open) and general responsiveness.

Do you find the MBP feels faster than the G5 for graphics or media work (outside of benchmarks)?

Appleboy1717
Feb 14, 2010, 04:25 PM
That's just... depressing. I'm going to be replacing the G5 (dual 2.0 / 4GB RAM / 256MB graphics) with an MBP this spring, for the sake of a) portability, and b) Intel, but it hurts to spend that much money for a questionable or incremental speed increase after so much time.

Honestly, I'm rarely waiting for my computer anyway except for opening large files... or batch conversions that run in the background anyway, so benchmark improvements aren't really a big deal to me. I'm much more concerned about graphics memory (current hardware struggles redrawing palettes with too many Adobe apps open) and general responsiveness.

Do you find the MBP feels faster than the G5 for graphics or media work (outside of benchmarks)?
I do a lot of Photoshop, just have ye to do any on the g5. Just got it last week. I think it will be as I stalling things and doing applejack on the mbp was much faster, however photshop makes the MacBook pro hot as hell. Well anything that makes it think does actually, but photo and video really make it hot. Just for warning you on that one. It's snappy but hot. Not sure of how much faster it would be, but I'll check it out when I get back home tomorrow.

splitpea
Feb 14, 2010, 04:27 PM
I do a lot of Photoshop, just have ye to do any on the g5. Just got it last week. I think it will be as I stalling things and doing applejack on the mbp was much faster, however photshop makes the MacBook pro hot as hell. Well anything that makes it think does actually, but photo and video really make it hot. Just for warning you on that one. It's snappy but hot. Not sure of how much faster it would be, but I'll check it out when I get back home tomorrow.

Thanks, Photoshop is my most frequently used CPU-intensive app, so I'd love to hear your comparison.

Appleboy1717
Feb 14, 2010, 04:52 PM
Thanks, Photoshop is my most frequently used CPU-intensive app, so I'd love to hear your comparison.

I'll let you know.
Don't get me wrong. I love my MacBook pro. It's fast, great screen, small, a great computer. They Judy really heat up, and a ton when you do photo and video stuff.-

chrismacguy
Feb 14, 2010, 05:00 PM
I'll let you know.
Don't get me wrong. I love my MacBook pro. It's fast, great screen, small, a great computer. They Judy really heat up, and a ton when you do photo and video stuff.-

My MacBook is the same, which is why I have it sat on an Griffin Elevator stand when Im not using it on the move. Using it to do videos and photos on your lap is a bad idea - I think my record for my White MacBooks CPU temperature was 102 degrees C :eek: - but its normally 50-60 (All My G4s are like 20-30 degrees C).

Appleboy1717
Feb 14, 2010, 05:43 PM
My MacBook is the same, which is why I have it sat on an Griffin Elevator stand when Im not using it on the move. Using it to do videos and photos on your lap is a bad idea - I think my record for my White MacBooks CPU temperature was 102 degrees C :eek: - but its normally 50-60 (All My G4s are like 20-30 degrees C).

Yea, they get hot. I've actually had apple replace a few because they got too hot.
One the logic board died, one thr battery got fried (no clue but wouldn't hold a charge at all) and one the display died. That was all the first gen style before the unibody. Cool this is, I have the new 2.66 and paid for the original 2.16. Score!!! Like this one, a little cooler.
How do you like your 2.0 ghz g5?

Appleboy1717
Feb 14, 2010, 05:45 PM
Thanks, Photoshop is my most frequently used CPU-intensive app, so I'd love to hear your comparison.

Guess I should reply to the poster. Lol.
How do you like your 2.0 g5? Seems like similar specs to my 1.8. Thr 4gb of ram help it a lot??

Dane D.
Feb 14, 2010, 06:11 PM
It all depends on which model of mac mini you have, and whether youve upgraded the HDs. Id still take any Intel mac over a G5- purely for 10.6 and future compatability (even if I want a G5 too - just for OS 9 software).
No G5 ran OS 9, that OS ended with the MDD G4 models in 2004. It was the last unit to boot into OS 9. As for thinking a G5 is fast, they are not. We have a Dual 2GHz model with 4GB of RAM, and run CS4 apps. Sorry guys it is no match to the Intel units, even MacBooks blow it away in terms of real world usage. Nothing wrong with having it as a second computer. A plus if you live in cold climates is they produce a lot of heat.

splitpea
Feb 14, 2010, 06:15 PM
Guess I should reply to the poster. Lol.
How do you like your 2.0 g5? Seems like similar specs to my 1.8. Thr 4gb of ram help it a lot??

Oh, I love it. Really have gotten attached to it over the years. I upgraded the memory from 2.5GB last spring, and it does make a difference -- gives me just the right amount of breathing room. I also upgraded the graphics card as a BTO option for the original purchase, and I think that makes a difference too.

I use it for web development primarily. It's a dream for most web-type Photoshop work (graphics rather than photography; not very high resolution; tons of layers and effects); slow but usable for Illustrator (doesn't take much complexity to make it start to drag). The most demanding use it gets is typically building a complex Flash animation while also building graphics in Photoshop and Illustrator -- at which point the video memory is stretched and sometimes palettes fail to redraw properly. It always shows free memory, but can drag at context switching with all of that open.

Sadly, over the past year or so it's become a bit less reliable (kernel panics and trouble sleeping or waking). I've been told to reinstall the OS, but have so much custom-compiled software installed (using MacPorts) for my development server that it would take weeks to recompile, let alone figure out how I got it configured properly in the first place. ;) I'm also increasingly finding software I'd like to be able to use but that's only available for Intel.

Basically, I love this computer, and could make it work for another 2-3 years if I had to, but I'm looking forward to getting a laptop and being on Intel for the sake of compatibility.

No G5 ran OS 9, that OS ended with the MDD G4 models in 2004. It was the last unit to boot into OS 9.

The G5 runs Classic flawlessly, though.

chrismacguy
Feb 14, 2010, 06:17 PM
No G5 ran OS 9, that OS ended with the MDD G4 models in 2004. It was the last unit to boot into OS 9. As for thinking a G5 is fast, they are not. We have a Dual 2GHz model with 4GB of RAM, and run CS4 apps. Sorry guys it is no match to the Intel units, even MacBooks blow it away in terms of real world usage. Nothing wrong with having it as a second computer. A plus if you live in cold climates is they produce a lot of heat.

Actually I just meant Classic Support. The only software I have that ever needs me to boot into OS 9 is a very outdated version of Final Cut Pro, which Ive replaced with Final Cut Express 4. I just dont like the hassle of having to use SheepShaver which is a less elegant solution.

Appleboy1717
Feb 14, 2010, 07:02 PM
Oh, I love it. Really have gotten attached to it over the years. I upgraded the memory from 2.5GB last spring, and it does make a difference -- gives me just the right amount of breathing room. I also upgraded the graphics card as a BTO option for the original purchase, and I think that makes a difference too.

I use it for web development primarily. It's a dream for most web-type Photoshop work (graphics rather than photography; not very high resolution; tons of layers and effects); slow but usable for Illustrator (doesn't take much complexity to make it start to drag). The most demanding use it gets is typically building a complex Flash animation while also building graphics in Photoshop and Illustrator -- at which point the video memory is stretched and sometimes palettes fail to redraw properly. It always shows free memory, but can drag at context switching with all of that open.

Sadly, over the past year or so it's become a bit less reliable (kernel panics and trouble sleeping or waking). I've been told to reinstall the OS, but have so much custom-compiled software installed (using MacPorts) for my development server that it would take weeks to recompile, let alone figure out how I got it configured properly in the first place. ;) I'm also increasingly finding software I'd like to be able to use but that's only available for Intel.

Basically, I love this computer, and could make it work for another 2-3 years if I had to, but I'm looking forward to getting a laptop and being on Intel for the sake of compatibility.



The G5 runs Classic flawlessly, though.

yeah. My MacBook pro has been my primary machine, and my buddy owed me some money so he gave me the g5 and a 19" synchmaster. He owed me 300 so I got a pretty good deal since it cane with a 500 and a 1tb seagate 7200 drives.
I just use it when I'm at home for the web, homework, photoshop, and storing and watching movies and stuff.

Tel Fraser
Feb 15, 2010, 09:13 AM
I have two G5s both 2.0 dual one a 7,3 and the other a 11,2 they don't run Premiere and After fx cs4 but they do run Final Cut Studio 3 with ease. They're great and I have three other different systems to compare them to. It is true that advances will render them obsolete but I believe it won't happen until Apple part from intel (the ipad used an apple developed chip) as I believe intel as much as Microsoft are the great limiters of personal computing speed at this time. I think Apple are taking their eye off the ball Final Cut studio 3 was built as a Universal which suggests it wasn't a new build just an update. I've always thought Apple build a great operating system (with the exception of Snow Leopard which could easily be their Vista - as it seems to fufill no purpose and is bloated)and then just buy well for the rest.
Back to the G5s a 1.8 for software upgrading purposes it's already finished - unfortunately 2 dual is the new low - however if a system does the job why get rid of it just get more ram

Appleboy1717
Feb 15, 2010, 12:39 PM
I have two G5s both 2.0 dual one a 7,3 and the other a 11,2 they don't run Premiere and After fx cs4 but they do run Final Cut Studio 3 with ease. They're great and I have three other different systems to compare them to. It is true that advances will render them obsolete but I believe it won't happen until Apple part from intel (the ipad used an apple developed chip) as I believe intel as much as Microsoft are the great limiters of personal computing speed at this time. I think Apple are taking their eye off the ball Final Cut studio 3 was built as a Universal which suggests it wasn't a new build just an update. I've always thought Apple build a great operating system (with the exception of Snow Leopard which could easily be their Vista - as it seems to fufill no purpose and is bloated)and then just buy well for the rest.
Back to the G5s a 1.8 for software upgrading purposes it's already finished - unfortunately 2 dual is the new low - however if a system does the job why get rid of it just get more ram



Yeah, they may be out of date for some things, but for messing around, homework, some Photoshop and uploading videos and watching movies....it's fine for me. Think 3.5gb ram will make it pretty quick?

wpc33
Feb 16, 2010, 02:57 PM
I have never even had a computer fast enough to spoil me, and I have hated both my G5's.

Go to the quicktime site and try to play some HD on your PPC.
Not to mention the awfully loud old fans in this pig.

lannister80
Feb 16, 2010, 03:07 PM
Don't buy anything pre-Intel.

Just. Don't. Do. It.

Appleboy1717
Feb 16, 2010, 06:39 PM
I have never even had a computer fast enough to spoil me, and I have hated both my G5's.

Go to the quicktime site and try to play some HD on your PPC.
Not to mention the awfully loud old fans in this pig.

Yeah, I have a 1080 12gb blueray rip of james bond which plays..but really skippy.
However, I went to the quicktime HD gallery and my G5 with 3.5gb ram plays all the 720 and 1080P videos with ease. No problems or hangups at all.
It does get loud at times, but doesnt bother m too much, I listen to music all the time. Im stoked though, my buddy just gave me his 15" studio display so I have been dual screening with my 19" samsung. Runs great with the stock video card.

300D
Feb 16, 2010, 10:57 PM
Go to the quicktime site and try to play some HD on your PPC.

Must just be your machine. Mine has no issue playing 1080p in QT without dropping frames.

Appleboy1717
Feb 17, 2010, 01:02 AM
Must just be your machine. Mine has no issue playing 1080p in QT without dropping frames.

Yeah, maybe. QT is fine here too on the apple site, but what about a third party 1080P video through say VLC?

300D
Feb 17, 2010, 01:03 AM
Ah, you mean illegally copied movies downloaded over the internet? I wouldn't know.

Appleboy1717
Feb 17, 2010, 01:12 AM
Ah, you mean illegally copied movies downloaded over the internet? I wouldn't know.

Blueray rip converted.
Does anyone know how to turn off an apple display?
I am running a 15" studio and a Samsung synchmaster. When I am watching something I would like to shut off the studio, but i can only seem to dim it??? what gives?

Kabir8
Feb 17, 2010, 02:35 AM
Dual 1.8 G5 here
4GB RAM

Running v. 10.5.8

Everything runs just as smoothly as day 1, but that was 5 years back, and computers are much faster today.

I can use photoshop just fine, but if I am getting into larger res files 20+MP with many layers, just moving around in the image can be a hassle. Exporting, and applying filters in Final Cut 6 and Photoshop CS3 takes a lot of my patience.

I am trying to edit 1080p Video, but I can't get it to playback smoothly without skipping because the GPU is too slow/out of date. I have to convert the file before trying to edit it, and conversion takes hours!

Can't run Windows since I'm Power PC, and newer products won't even be compatible with this processor.

I can't afford to waste all that time and add all that frustration to my life.
I am about to get a iMac i7.
Thought about the Mac Pro, but I would rather try out the simplicity the iMac can bring to my setup.
:apple:

Appleboy1717
Feb 17, 2010, 01:40 PM
Dual 1.8 G5 here
4GB RAM

Running v. 10.5.8

Everything runs just as smoothly as day 1, but that was 5 years back, and computers are much faster today.

I can use photoshop just fine, but if I am getting into larger res files 20+MP with many layers, just moving around in the image can be a hassle. Exporting, and applying filters in Final Cut 6 and Photoshop CS3 takes a lot of my patience.

I am trying to edit 1080p Video, but I can't get it to playback smoothly without skipping because the GPU is too slow/out of date. I have to convert the file before trying to edit it, and conversion takes hours!

Can't run Windows since I'm Power PC, and newer products won't even be compatible with this processor.

I can't afford to waste all that time and add all that frustration to my life.
I am about to get a iMac i7.
Thought about the Mac Pro, but I would rather try out the simplicity the iMac can bring to my setup.
:apple:

Gotcha.
I like the iMacs. my parents have one of the intel ones, and the display is nice and it quit.....I just don't like them.
First of there is the upgrade parts...but my main reason for not liking them is the same for the mac mini and the laptops. They die faster than desktops because they run hotter.
I have had a couple laptops and a couple iMacs die from lpgic boards and all the desktops I have had laster forever. If you feel them or a laptop...they are always hot. Plus, down the road when they are out of date (seeing they last that long) you can't upgrade them much.
Personally, get a used mac pro:)

Max(IT)
Feb 17, 2010, 02:36 PM
Hey all.
So, back again.
I upgraded the ram on my G5.
Fry's had 2x1gb corsair ram for $69.99 with $30 rebate.
So, how good is a dual 1.8ghz G5 with 3.5gb ram, stock 5200 card and 1.5tb storage. It seems to be as fast or faster just messing around online and itunes and stuff compared to my NEW 2.66ghz macbook pro???
How do these G5 processors manage to be so fast. I mean just because of the two cpusss.
I know they take way more power than say the macpro..like half actually but why not keep making them. What made them fast than the intels before??

No way your G5 could be as fast as a Core2Duo 2.66 Ghz.
But a 7200rpm desktop hard drive is noticeably faster than a 5200rpm notebook hard drive, so in operation like booting or loading application it can seem faster.
But in computation a Mini is waaayyy faster than your G5.

Kabir8
Feb 17, 2010, 05:15 PM
Gotcha.
I like the iMacs. my parents have one of the intel ones, and the display is nice and it quit.....I just don't like them.
First of there is the upgrade parts...but my main reason for not liking them is the same for the mac mini and the laptops. They die faster than desktops because they run hotter.
I have had a couple laptops and a couple iMacs die from lpgic boards and all the desktops I have had laster forever. If you feel them or a laptop...they are always hot. Plus, down the road when they are out of date (seeing they last that long) you can't upgrade them much.
Personally, get a used mac pro:)


I have never, and probably will never buy a used computer.
I placed my order for my iMac i7 yesterday.
I never thought I would order an iMac or ever own one, it just never appealed to me. But the more I looked at it, and realized the space and clutter, and boxes, and gear saved, I just had to try it out.

I love the Mac Pro and its power, but I would then have to make sure its fully loaded, buy dual screens, adapters, bigger desk, etc. etc.
I just wanted a change. I want to simplify

As a filmmaker/photographer, processing power, and graphic capability is at the top of my list, but for the amount of work I am getting now, an iMac will get the job done, and if I am working at a production house, they will have machines for me to use regardless.

Until my work demands it, I won't go for the Mac Pro, especially since an upgrade is coming soon.
And I would rather spend $3k today rather than $5K-$6K.
I can always return it if I hate using the iMac for some reason, but I think I will be very happy.

AZREOSpecialist
Feb 17, 2010, 05:44 PM
I switched from a PowerMac G5 dual 2.5 GHz (single core each) to a 3.33 GHz quad core Mac Pro. The performance difference is quite simply ASTONISHING. There is just no comparison. The Mac Pro is much faster and much more responsive. There is no comparison.

Appleboy1717
Feb 17, 2010, 09:56 PM
I have never, and probably will never buy a used computer.
I placed my order for my iMac i7 yesterday.
I never thought I would order an iMac or ever own one, it just never appealed to me. But the more I looked at it, and realized the space and clutter, and boxes, and gear saved, I just had to try it out.

I love the Mac Pro and its power, but I would then have to make sure its fully loaded, buy dual screens, adapters, bigger desk, etc. etc.
I just wanted a change. I want to simplify

As a filmmaker/photographer, processing power, and graphic capability is at the top of my list, but for the amount of work I am getting now, an iMac will get the job done, and if I am working at a production house, they will have machines for me to use regardless.

Until my work demands it, I won't go for the Mac Pro, especially since an upgrade is coming soon.
And I would rather spend $3k today rather than $5K-$6K.
I can always return it if I hate using the iMac for some reason, but I think I will be very happy.

Yes, well I said used because I did not know your price range. Let us all know how the iMac is when you get it.

Max(IT)
Feb 18, 2010, 07:42 AM
I have never, and probably will never buy a used computer.
I placed my order for my iMac i7 yesterday.
I never thought I would order an iMac or ever own one, it just never appealed to me. But the more I looked at it, and realized the space and clutter, and boxes, and gear saved, I just had to try it out.

I love the Mac Pro and its power, but I would then have to make sure its fully loaded, buy dual screens, adapters, bigger desk, etc. etc.
I just wanted a change. I want to simplify

As a filmmaker/photographer, processing power, and graphic capability is at the top of my list, but for the amount of work I am getting now, an iMac will get the job done, and if I am working at a production house, they will have machines for me to use regardless.

Until my work demands it, I won't go for the Mac Pro, especially since an upgrade is coming soon.
And I would rather spend $3k today rather than $5K-$6K.
I can always return it if I hate using the iMac for some reason, but I think I will be very happy.

Good luck with your iMac, and let us know if they finally fixed the problem with the display

Sipheren
Feb 18, 2010, 07:50 AM
I love my G5, the only thing that gives it a hard time is HD Flash, but you can get around it using HTML5 on youtube.

But as much as I love the G5, I can't wait to replace it with a nice new MacPro :)

Appleboy1717
Feb 18, 2010, 12:23 PM
I love my G5, the only thing that gives it a hard time is HD Flash, but you can get around it using HTML5 on youtube.

But as much as I love the G5, I can't wait to replace it with a nice new MacPro :)

Yeah, I can see how it can lag there, but they are still a very descent machine.
Hey, how does you 360gb time machine work?? With the 2tb of drives......how is that enough.

Sipheren
Feb 18, 2010, 02:49 PM
Yeah, I can see how it can lag there, but they are still a very descent machine.
Hey, how does you 360gb time machine work?? With the 2tb of drives......how is that enough.

I only use the TM to backup the System partition (100GB). The rest isn't backed up at this stage, I really need to grab a 2TB drive and back it all up...

Appleboy1717
Feb 18, 2010, 02:56 PM
I only use the TM to backup the System partition (100GB). The rest isn't backed up at this stage, I really need to grab a 2TB drive and back it all up...

do it. i lost the hard-drive in my macbook a few months back. luckily I had backed it up like 2 days prior.

Sipheren
Feb 18, 2010, 03:24 PM
do it. i lost the hard-drive in my macbook a few months back. luckily I had backed it up like 2 days prior.

Thats lucky, I haven't had a drive go yet, fingered crossed I wont. I will defiantly be making a backup very soon.

Appleboy1717
Feb 19, 2010, 12:26 PM
Thats lucky, I haven't had a drive go yet, fingered crossed I wont. I will defiantly be making a backup very soon.

No kidding. I always back stuff up all the time. Way too nervous of losing stuff.

Appleboy1717
Feb 21, 2010, 01:00 PM
No kidding. I always back stuff up all the time. Way too nervous of losing stuff.

Hey all. just reporting back.
I'm pretty happy with this computer. Once I upgrated to the 3.5gb of ram it really sped things up. Then my buddy hooked me up with an apple studio display (15) so I can dual screen with my 19" Samsung which is really fun. I really like it.
Any other upgrades anyone recommends to speed it up anymore?

Appleboy1717
Feb 21, 2010, 01:07 PM
Hey all. just reporting back.
I'm pretty happy with this computer. Once I upgrated to the 3.5gb of ram it really sped things up. Then my buddy hooked me up with an apple studio display (15) so I can dual screen with my 19" Samsung which is really fun. I really like it.
Any other upgrades anyone recommends to speed it up anymore?

What about overclocking video cards?? I'm not too worried about my 5200fx because if if fails I would just replace it (planning on it anyway) but is there a way I could overclock it?

Sipheren
Feb 21, 2010, 02:36 PM
Get a 9800PRO, flash it, then download this. (http://thomas.perrier.name/)

OrangeSVTguy
Feb 21, 2010, 04:48 PM
What about overclocking video cards?? I'm not too worried about my 5200fx because if if fails I would just replace it (planning on it anyway) but is there a way I could overclock it?

You can just throw that card on ebay for $50+ and use that to buy the 9800 Pro PC card like mentioned above and have some money left over.

Appleboy1717
Feb 24, 2010, 02:41 AM
You can just throw that card on ebay for $50+ and use that to buy the 9800 Pro PC card like mentioned above and have some money left over.

I wanted something with adc cause I have a studio monitor and so I would need a card with dual dvi and an adaptor (not cheap) or a dvi and adc card. I ended up fixing the 5200 and overclocking it a little, and it works fine for everything I do. I barely game, but it will play call of duty and halo on the highest settings, and it drives my screens perfectly well.

doctoree
Feb 25, 2010, 09:01 AM
I think every MacMini from 2006 and newer is faster or much faster. And while being much faster its also MUCH more power efficient and less noisy. The latest MacMini can be equipped with 8 GB of Ram, so RAM shouldn't be a Problem and when Apps with OpenCL support finally come out, speed and efficiency will increase even further.

Appleboy1717
Feb 27, 2010, 11:22 PM
I think every MacMini from 2006 and newer is faster or much faster. And while being much faster its also MUCH more power efficient and less noisy. The latest MacMini can be equipped with 8 GB of Ram, so RAM shouldn't be a Problem and when Apps with OpenCL support finally come out, speed and efficiency will increase even further.

Yes, but there is still no graphics card in the mac mini which makes a little limited, but I will admit that the intel has made a mark..I have a MBP so I am not against intel or anything, but I do like my G5

goMac
Feb 28, 2010, 01:59 AM
Yes, but there is still no graphics card in the mac mini which makes a little limited, but I will admit that the intel has made a mark..I have a MBP so I am not against intel or anything, but I do like my G5

Yes there is. It has a 9400m.

Appleboy1717
Feb 28, 2010, 02:11 AM
Yes there is. It has a 9400m.

Yes, but thats integrated. not stand alone

OrangeSVTguy
Feb 28, 2010, 08:12 AM
Well I just switched over to Intel yesterday trading my 2.3 DC G5 with 4.5gb for a new 2.26 Mini with 2gb and the performance is very noticeable and I'm still running off my USB 2.0 drive until I get a faster 500gb for the Mini.

The Mini is near silent and the only thing I hear is my USB drive. With 2gb of memory, the 9400m has 256mb of memory and even though it's integrated, it's still more powerful than the 6600with 256mb that was in the G5. I still miss my G5 but I just wanted something smaller and quieter since I have this in my room.

Appleboy1717
Feb 28, 2010, 12:41 PM
Well I just switched over to Intel yesterday trading my 2.3 DC G5 with 4.5gb for a new 2.26 Mini with 2gb and the performance is very noticeable and I'm still running off my USB 2.0 drive until I get a faster 500gb for the Mini.

The Mini is near silent and the only thing I hear is my USB drive. With 2gb of memory, the 9400m has 256mb of memory and even though it's integrated, it's still more powerful than the 6600with 256mb that was in the G5. I still miss my G5 but I just wanted something smaller and quieter since I have this in my room.
Yes, my 2.66 macbook pro with 4gb ram is pretty snappy, I will admit. The G5 is not that bad though, and for its age, I think it holds it own pretty well.
I have heard a lot about the mac minis and people liking them. Sorta like a laptop without a screen, and nice a small. How do they hold up on the heat issue?

Max(IT)
Feb 28, 2010, 01:38 PM
Yes, but there is still no graphics card in the mac mini which makes a little limited, but I will admit that the intel has made a mark..I have a MBP so I am not against intel or anything, but I do like my G5

Sure, but the 9400M is way faster than a 5200 and even faster than a 9800Pro

Max(IT)
Feb 28, 2010, 01:41 PM
Yes, my 2.66 macbook pro with 4gb ram is pretty snappy, I will admit. The G5 is not that bad though, and for its age, I think it holds it own pretty well.
I have heard a lot about the mac minis and people liking them. Sorta like a laptop without a screen, and nice a small. How do they hold up on the heat issue?

What heat issue are you speaking of ?

Appleboy1717
Feb 28, 2010, 04:48 PM
What heat issue are you speaking of ?

Well, it isn't really an issue, I just noticed that a lot of apple laptops and iMacs logic boards seems to go and they always run pretty warm wheras desktops have a pretty nice airflow and always seem to last longer. Also, do the mac minis come with 7200rpm drives?
They are a great little computer for the money though, don't get me wrong.