1. Welcome to the new MacRumors forums. See our announcement and read our FAQ

Expanding a PowerMac G5 on the el cheapo. [EFFORT REQUIRED]

Discussion in 'PowerPC Macs' started by TommyLee, Jun 10, 2008.

  1. macrumors regular

    #1
    i've done the ram (3 gigs!) and the hdd (400GB!), now i'm ready to stick some cards in my mac. since i ran out of usb ports 3 years ago, let's start there:

    1
    6 Ports USB 2.0 PCI PCI-X Card For All Mac G3/G4/G5
    the seller says it works on my G5, but what's the catch? will it slow down my machine? if it sucks, whats a good alternative?

    2
    i need to connect a second VGA monitor for business purposes, so i don't need any power gfx. will any of these cards work? if not, cane you recommend something?

    3
    Pro Tools :rolleyes: recommends i buy a FW HD for audio recording, but i already have a 250GB IDE HD. can anyone recommend an enclosure with 2 firewire ports?

    thanks and more to come...
     
  2. macrumors 68000

    disconap

    #2
    1--You can do this, but why not just get a powered hub? Costs about the same AND you'd have easier access to the ports.

    2--The Rage will. Doesn't your stock card have a second port? You can just get an ADB or DVI --> VGA adapter for around $20 or so on ebay.

    3--No on that, sorry. But I suggest FW800 if possible for ProTools, you'll notice a difference.

    Also, if your G5 is one of the first gen, you might want to consider picking up a SATA 300 card, as the originals only had SATA150. To be honest, with the bus speeds on the G5 you won't really notice a huge difference, but they're not too expensive if you can find them.
     
  3. macrumors 65816

    SmurfBoxMasta

    #3
    1) Get a powered hub & be done with it :p

    2) Do NOT buy a Rage card, period.....they were crap when they were new (11yrs ago) and still are :eek:
    Look around for Mac Radeon 9200. Not a high-end card by any means, but light years ahead of the Rages........

    2) FW800 or SATA II w/ pci card.....not only way faster than IDE, but also offloads the bus mastering, which frees up the cpu to do other things, like, maybe, encode your audio :D

    and using an IDE HD in a FW enclosure won't give you the spppeeed you're looking for :(
     
  4. macrumors member

    #4
    I will second this. My PC desktop is running an ATi Rage because I was too cheap to buy a real graphics card, and I regret the decision every time I try to do something as simple as watching a Flash animation.
     
  5. macrumors 68030

    iMpathetic

    #5
    Thirded.

    ... Considering Intel graphics can barely handle Flash sites....

    Dedicated non-crap graphics are a must.
     
  6. macrumors 65816

    #6
    Unnnless you're doing RAID, I don't see the need to upgrade from SATA, as it doesn't bottleneck any single drives yet, not even the Velociraptor (although that's pushing it).

    Even ATA/100 is just fine as long as you're got only one drive per channel, and the HDDs you have in there won't come close to saturating it (however, the ATA port on your G5 is actually meant for the optical drive, not for HDDs).

    As mentioned, stay away from the Rage 128... you at least want Quartz Extreme support, and the Rage 128 won't run it even with the PCI Extreme hack as the Rage5 core doesn't support arbitrary texture sizes, which is used by Mac OS X's OpenGL-based QE.

    The Radeon 7000 AGP is for a PC... they only made R7000 PCIs for Mac, though you could get one of those if you wanted.

    Do you have AGP slots in there, or is it a later PCI-E G5? If it's PCI-E, you don't have any PCI-X slots to speak of, and you can't use any PCI or PCI-X cards anyway.

    Speaking of flash, the last post reminded me... early Radeon cards like the Radeon 7000/7500 etc. don't handle flash well at all... something about little/no support with flash overlays, so I might actually steer away from that. I'm using an original Radeon Mac Edition and it absolutely blows for Flash sites... used to be you could run a Dual 1 GHz G4 next to a 300 MHz Celeron and the Celly would kick the G4's ass when it came to sites with flash because of issues with the Mac's graphics cards that were available at the time.

    I'd go for a GeForce 6600 or better.
     
  7. macrumors member

    #7
    Very true iMpathetic.
     
  8. macrumors regular

    #8
    and THAT'S where is get's confusing... i went to ebay and punched in GeForce 6600 and each one is different. (1) (2) (3)

    btw, very useful information in this thread. thanks ;)
     
  9. macrumors 65816

    zmttoxics

    #9
    Ha! The rage 128s weren't that bad. I remember upgrading to one because I needed a card with at least 16 meg video to play tribes 2 (might be 1, I cant remember).

    But I agree, it would be silly to spend money on one now.
     
  10. macrumors member

    #10
    Your Rage had 16MB of VRAM? Mine only has 8 :(
     
  11. macrumors 65816

    zmttoxics

    #11
    Ya man! I had a couple 8 meg cards too. They were great for HalfLife 1 and Quake 2, it was Tribes2 that killed the fun for me. I miss the days of buying video cards based on vram requirements... :(
     
  12. macrumors 68030

    iMpathetic

    #12
    That's because....... God hates you. :p

    So, they were the same model Rage? I think there were like 5 different versions.:p
     
  13. macrumors regular

    #13
    Does the current video card in the machine have 2 ports for monitors?
     
  14. macrumors regular

    #14
    Yea, but one's ACD
     
  15. macrumors 68030

    iMpathetic

    #15
    One's hooked up to an ACD?

    If you have two ports and only have one in use, you're fine on the video card front.
     
  16. macrumors 68030

    slughead

    #16
    the ATI 7000 works GREAT, but is super slow, I even had some playback issues with it.

    the 9200 is better, but slightly more
     
  17. macrumors regular

    #17
    no, it's hooked up to the VGA :/
     

Share This Page