Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > PowerPC Macs

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Dec 25, 2009, 01:07 AM   #1
hoya87eagle91
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Better Performance - latestest Mini or G5 Dual 2.0?

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???
hoya87eagle91 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 25, 2009, 01:10 AM   #2
Eidorian
macrumors Penryn
 
Eidorian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Cuidad de México
Send a message via AIM to Eidorian
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.
__________________
Core i5 750 / 16 GB RAM / 500 GB SSD / GTX 970 / Windows 8.1
13" Retina MacBook Pro
Eidorian is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 25, 2009, 01:15 AM   #3
63dot
macrumors 601
 
63dot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Platte
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.
63dot is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 25, 2009, 01:19 AM   #4
hoya87eagle91
Thread Starter
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
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?
hoya87eagle91 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 25, 2009, 01:20 AM   #5
Eidorian
macrumors Penryn
 
Eidorian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Cuidad de México
Send a message via AIM to Eidorian
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.
__________________
Core i5 750 / 16 GB RAM / 500 GB SSD / GTX 970 / Windows 8.1
13" Retina MacBook Pro
Eidorian is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 25, 2009, 01:27 AM   #6
djc6
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Cleveland, OH
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.
__________________
Mac Mini (Mid 2011) 2.3Ghz Core i5/8GB/512GB Crucial m4 SSD + 500GB HD w/HP ZR24w LCD
15" Retina MacBook Pro (Mid 2012) 2.6Ghz Core i7/16GB/500GB
iPhone 5S 16GB Space Gray / iPad 3 64GB black Wi-Fi

Last edited by djc6; Dec 25, 2009 at 01:35 AM.
djc6 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 25, 2009, 01:46 AM   #7
hoya87eagle91
Thread Starter
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
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.
hoya87eagle91 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 25, 2009, 03:47 AM   #8
Badger^2
macrumors 68000
 
Badger^2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sacramento
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...
__________________
27" 2.93 iMac/24 gigs/1 TB+24" Dell 2405
24" 2.4 iMac/4 gigs/640 gig+20" Dell 2405
20" 2.4 iMac/4 gigs/320 gig+20" Dell 2001
20" 2.13 iMac/3 gigs/320 gig+20" Dell 2007
Badger^2 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 25, 2009, 06:24 AM   #9
MacHamster68
macrumors 68040
 
MacHamster68's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
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
__________________
DANGER POST MAY CONTAIN SARCASM
Intelligence does not need Intel inside,
All it needs is good sense outside.
MacHamster68 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 25, 2009, 06:57 AM   #10
Azrel
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacHamster68 View Post
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.
Azrel is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 25, 2009, 07:40 AM   #11
MacHamster68
macrumors 68040
 
MacHamster68's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Azrel View Post
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
__________________
DANGER POST MAY CONTAIN SARCASM
Intelligence does not need Intel inside,
All it needs is good sense outside.

Last edited by MacHamster68; Dec 25, 2009 at 07:49 AM.
MacHamster68 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 25, 2009, 11:30 AM   #12
63dot
macrumors 601
 
63dot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Platte
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacHamster68 View Post
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.
63dot is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 25, 2009, 12:31 PM   #13
MacHamster68
macrumors 68040
 
MacHamster68's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
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)
__________________
DANGER POST MAY CONTAIN SARCASM
Intelligence does not need Intel inside,
All it needs is good sense outside.

Last edited by MacHamster68; Dec 25, 2009 at 12:36 PM.
MacHamster68 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 25, 2009, 12:37 PM   #14
63dot
macrumors 601
 
63dot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Platte
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacHamster68 View Post
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.
63dot is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 25, 2009, 02:53 PM   #15
Azrel
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacHamster68 View Post
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).

Last edited by Azrel; Dec 25, 2009 at 03:07 PM.
Azrel is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 25, 2009, 03:04 PM   #16
joe.pelayo
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Mexico City
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.
__________________
iMac 27-inch (late 2012). Core i7@3.4GHz, 16GB DDR3, GTX 680MX 2GB, 1TB HDD. OS X 10.8.3.
joe.pelayo is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 25, 2009, 03:10 PM   #17
MacHamster68
macrumors 68040
 
MacHamster68's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
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 .. 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
__________________
DANGER POST MAY CONTAIN SARCASM
Intelligence does not need Intel inside,
All it needs is good sense outside.

Last edited by MacHamster68; Dec 25, 2009 at 03:24 PM.
MacHamster68 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 25, 2009, 03:14 PM   #18
Eidorian
macrumors Penryn
 
Eidorian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Cuidad de México
Send a message via AIM to Eidorian
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.
__________________
Core i5 750 / 16 GB RAM / 500 GB SSD / GTX 970 / Windows 8.1
13" Retina MacBook Pro
Eidorian is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 25, 2009, 03:53 PM   #19
hoya87eagle91
Thread Starter
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
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.
hoya87eagle91 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 25, 2009, 03:57 PM   #20
Eidorian
macrumors Penryn
 
Eidorian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Cuidad de México
Send a message via AIM to Eidorian
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.
__________________
Core i5 750 / 16 GB RAM / 500 GB SSD / GTX 970 / Windows 8.1
13" Retina MacBook Pro
Eidorian is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 25, 2009, 06:07 PM   #21
MacHamster68
macrumors 68040
 
MacHamster68's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
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
__________________
DANGER POST MAY CONTAIN SARCASM
Intelligence does not need Intel inside,
All it needs is good sense outside.
MacHamster68 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 27, 2009, 02:45 AM   #22
Badger^2
macrumors 68000
 
Badger^2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sacramento
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.

Look at my last post in your other thread, bang for buck, longest usage, best color, future proof choice you can really make...
__________________
27" 2.93 iMac/24 gigs/1 TB+24" Dell 2405
24" 2.4 iMac/4 gigs/640 gig+20" Dell 2405
20" 2.4 iMac/4 gigs/320 gig+20" Dell 2001
20" 2.13 iMac/3 gigs/320 gig+20" Dell 2007
Badger^2 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 27, 2009, 02:00 PM   #23
Max(IT)
macrumors 601
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Italy
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacHamster68 View Post
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
__________________
Mac Mini - Macbook Pro 15" - MacBook Air 11"
Nexus 7 - 32Gb
iPhone 5S 16Gb - iPad Air 16Gb
Nokia Lumia 1520 - 32Gb
Max(IT) is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 27, 2009, 02:08 PM   #24
Max(IT)
macrumors 601
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Italy
Quote:
Originally Posted by joe.pelayo View Post
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 ...
__________________
Mac Mini - Macbook Pro 15" - MacBook Air 11"
Nexus 7 - 32Gb
iPhone 5S 16Gb - iPad Air 16Gb
Nokia Lumia 1520 - 32Gb
Max(IT) is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 27, 2009, 02:13 PM   #25
Badger^2
macrumors 68000
 
Badger^2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sacramento
latest versions of Photoshop use the power of the video card to help speed up many actions.
__________________
27" 2.93 iMac/24 gigs/1 TB+24" Dell 2405
24" 2.4 iMac/4 gigs/640 gig+20" Dell 2405
20" 2.4 iMac/4 gigs/320 gig+20" Dell 2001
20" 2.13 iMac/3 gigs/320 gig+20" Dell 2007
Badger^2 is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > PowerPC Macs

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Mac mini performance Jogi Mac mini 8 Apr 25, 2014 06:09 PM
iMac Dual Display Performance & GPU question Tibits iMac 0 Feb 9, 2014 10:27 AM
Retina iPad Mini Has 1.3 GHz A7 Processor With 5X the Performance of the Original Mini MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 129 Dec 2, 2013 11:29 AM
Retina performance, dual monitors Forkjulle MacBook Pro 2 Jul 25, 2013 08:47 AM
Dual-band Airport Express / Extreme improving AirPlay performance? mobile23 Apple TV and Home Theater 4 Aug 27, 2012 07:41 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:03 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC