G4DP1.25Ghz or G5SP1.6Ghz?

Discussion in 'Buying Tips, Advice and Discussion (archive)' started by Lain, Nov 5, 2003.

  1. Lain macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Location:
    The Wired
    #1
    If I were to buy one of those tomorrow (and I am), for doing graphic design work (Illustrator, InDesign, Photoshop, Flash...) which one should I get?

    Also, I think I should mention that this is my first Mac and I am hoping to keep it for a good few years...

    Thanx all
     
  2. edesignuk Moderator emeritus

    edesignuk

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2002
    Location:
    London, England
    #2
    I'd say the dual 1.25GHz, because I *think* those apps are all multi-threaded and will make good use of slightly slower dual CPU's over a faster single CPU.
     
  3. manitoubalck macrumors 6502a

    manitoubalck

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2003
    Location:
    Adelaide, Australia
    #3
    Agreed+ you can add a second internal optical drive or Zip drive, The G5 tower is some what limiting, Upgrade to the R9800 though, much much better than the GF Ti for everything.
     
  4. SoarEyes macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2002
    Location:
    Amsterdam
    #4
    1.6 definately. I bought one and without a superdrive (1600,- Euro) It’s almost the same price as a dual g4.
    Right now I can’t concieve of ever needing more power than the 1.6 g5 gives me. It’s very silent and love it’s looks.
    I did have some trouble with third party 2700hz ram, but when i used 3200hz dimms it went ok.
     
  5. zoetropeuk macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2002
    Location:
    Oxford UK
    #5
    G5 without a doubt

    Definitely the G5. The main reason is that in the coming years developers will be optimising apps for the G5's architecture and altivec implementation which is worlds apart from the G4.

    You will then start to find that yours app performance increasing on the G5 and exactly the same apps will slow down on the G4. I can't see any developers releasing two versions, one optimised for the G4 and the other for the G5.

    I agree that the G4 would be the best option for the next 6-12 months but after that you will be kicking yourself when friends and other forums users start posting benchmarks using fully G5 optimised apps.
     
  6. 1macker1 macrumors 65816

    1macker1

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2003
    Location:
    A Higher Level
    #6
    Go with the dual G4, in the new Mac World Magazine, it shows that the single processor G5's are not faster than the Dual G4's in most test. And only behind the G5's slightly in the test that the G5 actually win.
     
  7. zoetropeuk macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2002
    Location:
    Oxford UK
    #7
    If you read the original post he says that he wants to keep the mac for a few years.

    I don't think people realise that apps optimised for the G5 will run slower on G4's that are currently running apps optimised for the G4. OK, the compilers do help in creating an executable optimised for both but to truly notice a difference developers have to forget the G4 and optimise solely for the G5.
     
  8. psycho bob macrumors 6502a

    psycho bob

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2003
    Location:
    Leeds, England
    #8
    Only the latest versions (Adobe CS) of illustrator and Indesign support dual processors. Of earlier versions only Photoshop was taken down this road. Plus CS is optimized specifically for the G5.
    I plumped for a G5 rather than a dual 1.42 I would take a 1.6 over a dual 1.25. It is much quieter (important for design I feel). Depending on which version of the dual 1.25 it is the G5 also has newer technologies enabled as standard. The G4's that apple ship and provide to retailers now are stripped of just about everything they can be.
    What we need is a 64 bit OS and software then no G4 or pentium will compete. Heres hoping apple releases such an OS before Microsoft release Longhorn. Only then will the G5's true potential shine through.
     
  9. Lain thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Location:
    The Wired
    #9
    Xbench RAW data taken from
    http://xbench.com/ as at 5th November 2003
    and below results calculated in Microsoft XL by me.

    G5 1.6 Ghz – Original model

    Based on 72 available scores

    7% of systems scored between: 150-152.42
    22% of systems scored between: 140-149.xx
    32% of systems scored between: 130-139.xx
    39% of systems scored between: 120-129.xx

    Average G5 system score - 135.2

    G4 MDD DP 1.25Ghz – I presume that’s the current model :|

    Based on 223 available scores:

    2% of systems scored between: 170-178
    16% of systems scored between: 160-169.xx
    18% of systems scored between: 150-159.xx
    25% of systems scored between: 140-149.xx
    35% of systems scored between: 130-139.xx
    4% of systems scored between: 120-129.xx

    Average G4 system score - 146.1

    Keep in mind:
    That probably Xbench is not tuned to use all the bells and whistles in the G5.

    Perhaps if there were more scores available for the G5 the totals might be different.

    I removed the freaky scores like anything lower than 120 as clearly something is wrong with those systems – but there weren’t many.

    Personal conclusion:
    If I were to buy a G4 system it is most likely to score between 130-139.xx. If I were to buy a G5 system it is most likely to score between 120-129.xx

    It seems that a MAXED out G4 system can achieve a score in the high 170s. While a MAXED out G5 can achieve a score in the low 150s. BUT it is unlikely that I will find a MAXED out G5 as this point in time, as such the upgredability path of a G5 system could better.

    I wonder how much higher would the G4 scores be if the systems had standard video cards similar to the ones found in G5 systems? I suggest that a G4 with a similar video card as the G5 would score even better. However the upgrade path of the G4's 4X AGP slot's video card will probably not be long. I still need to keep in mind that Xbench is probably not fully utilising all the capabilities of the G5.

    ... benchmarks are not everything...

    I am interested in hearing your conclusions?
     
  10. markjones05 macrumors 6502a

    markjones05

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2003
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    #10
    i thought the new ati radeon 9800 didnt work on the g4. correct me if im wrong but im pretty sure u wont see a significant increase using that card on the g4. i was under the impression it was only ptimized for the g5.
     
  11. Lain thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Location:
    The Wired
    #11
    I dont think he was refering to the G4
     
  12. Thirteenva macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
  13. bousozoku Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    Gone but not forgotten.
    #13
    As much as I would suggest the 1.8 GHz or dual 2.0 GHz G5 machines, the 1.6 is not on my list. I'd rather have the dual 1.25 GHz G4.

    It will still be good for 2-3 years, most likely.
     
  14. jap4n macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2003
    Location:
    wellington, nz
    #14
    such a good question

    ive been thinking about this lately, as im due for a new computer :D

    but i think i'll go for the G5. this is because it has newer technology, and will more likely be still with me in 3yrs time. Even though 2x.1.25gHz @ 32bit vs 1x 1.6gHz @ 64bit; its quite hard to compare them - unless you have them both. :p and i aint rich

    i'd probably save for a couple of months and go with the single 1.8 rather than the 1.6 - because it looks to have better stuff.

    Umm.. the aesthetics arent really important for me, as i use my computer as a tool... not a fashion statement. cheese grater or beige.. doesnt matter as long as its fast (and is not a pc) :p)
     
  15. kzoonut macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Location:
    Colorado
    #15
    Not based on any facts - but if you can hold out, I think Jan will offer some G5 updates to the tower line. Of course, if you need it now - buy the dual, wait for the updates, sell the dual and upgrade then. I think the duals offer the best bang for the buck right now...
     
  16. sausages macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2003
    #16
    g4 = trash
    ttp://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=45982

    the difference between yer dual 1.25 and 1.6, is the 1.6 is a USEABLE COMPUTER

    the g5 computer is a machine hand crafted by god himself.
     
  17. markjones05 macrumors 6502a

    markjones05

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2003
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    #17

    lol you have no idea what your talking about.
     
  18. Lain.v2 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2003
    #18
    Re: such a good question

    I started my Mac search at an eMac 1Ghz, then stretched myself to a G4 1.25, then then a little more for a Dual G4 1.25 and now I am going the extra mile to possibly buy the G5 1.6.

    I need to buy something now for now and the future.

    All of this because most Graphic Design studios assume that if you dont know mac, you dont know jack!
     
  19. manitoubalck macrumors 6502a

    manitoubalck

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2003
    Location:
    Adelaide, Australia
    #19
    If I buy a computer today I can buy lets say Photoshp 7 and FinalCut Pro 4, etc.

    This outlay is expencive, one which I would not wish to repeat too often. Todays mac programs are optimised for the TwinG4, so unless you wish to upgrade your programs every time a new one is released I would as I said before go the Dual G4, plus it's more expandable.
     
  20. manitoubalck macrumors 6502a

    manitoubalck

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2003
    Location:
    Adelaide, Australia
    #20
    Re: Re: such a good question

    Read my sig. A Dual 2.0GHz Opteron will beat a Dual 2.0GHz G5, in all audio/video compression and framerate tests.

    This is based on the fact that a 3.0GHz P4 is only slightly slower than a Dual G5 (www.apple.com) and faster in some cases, and the single AMD 64 FX is faster than the 3.2GHz 800FSB P4 in all tasks. Hence I would assume that a Twin 2.0GHz Opteron system should out preform Twin 2.0GHz G5.

    Go the AMD FX51 over the 1.8G5 for similar or less money and way more preformace, upgradeablity and expandablity if your into graphics.

    Just a thought,
     
  21. Lain.v2 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2003
    #21
    Re: Re: Re: such a good question

    I appreciate it, but I am into finding a job in graphics.
     
  22. Sun Baked macrumors G5

    Sun Baked

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
    #22
    Benchmarks are synthetic numbers as are PEAK FP scores.

    Look back at some of the threads from people switching from the dual G4s to the G5 1.6 or 1.8 -- quite a few were very happy with the machine.

    And there's www.barefeats.com test on the FW800 drive that say that they perform just as well as the internal ATA drive.

    So the G5 isn't less expandable than the G4, just a tad more expensive because you'll need FW800 cases.

    And it doesn't sound like you're going to be maxing out the PCI slots anytime soon -- so thats a wash.

    ---

    Though if you are making the "stretch" to buy the machine.

    PLEASE think of getting a CRT, non-Apple LCD, or keeping your current monitor and give you self some room on the purchase.
     
  23. manitoubalck macrumors 6502a

    manitoubalck

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2003
    Location:
    Adelaide, Australia
    #23
    All but Final Cut Pro are avaliable cross platform, Adobe After FX, Macromedia whatever, 3d Studio MAX 5, etc... if you go to an interview and they ask what compter you use? Tell them the software you're familiar with.

    If they discriminate for using x86 over PowerPC or visa-versa the company is not woth working for in the first place.

    I would buy the best computer for the money, unless it's Final Cut that you need to use.
     
  24. manitoubalck macrumors 6502a

    manitoubalck

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2003
    Location:
    Adelaide, Australia
    #24
    When I talk about expandablity I'm talkinhg about internal exadablity. eg internal optical, removable storage and harddrives. Not external periferals.

    Good point about the monitor though, apple display prices are way too inflated.
     
  25. Lain.v2 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2003
    #25
    I have stripped out all the options possible, no modem, no superdrive. I will be using my own CRT monitor. hehe I even asked the guys at the apple stores if I can buy the box without RAM... but no luck... but Its understandable.

    With regards to graphic designers and macs, I have sent out a few (10+) portfolio CDs made on and to be used in a PC to companies looking for designers. Not even 1 call for an interview. Sure it is a daunting thought that my work is crap and thats why nobody wants to see me. But facts are that most jobs advertised look for Mac experienced designers. I am serious about finding a job so I want to make sure that I appear as employable as possible and as reluctant as I am to spend money a Mac (versus a PC), I am kinda excitied by it.

    I will show you below a post from here - http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=41377

    sorry I dont know how to post a direct link to the post I am refering to, but here it is:

     

Share This Page