What is the best PowerMac G5?

Discussion in 'PowerPC Macs' started by lucasfer899, Jan 23, 2013.

  1. macrumors 6502

    lucasfer899

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2012
    Location:
    London
    #1
    Hey all.
    I need some help here,

    So, I'm rockin' 3x 20" Alu ACD's, and a very powerful custom built PC.

    However, I want a workstation, for doing school work, playing the odd, low-end game on.

    For this, I want the most powerful PM G5 Quad core..
    And I also want to know which is the best graphics card I can put in this PM also, will I need multiple graphics cards to run all of my displays?
    Also, need info on ram, such as can it be any old DDR2 ram, or does it have to be special mac stuff?

    Thanks alot!

    (Storage is not of a concern, I have a big nas box.)
     
  2. macrumors 6502a

    Zotaccian

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2012
    #2
    Any Mac Pro will beat Quad G5 in CPU speed and app compatibility (for modern apps). I haven't checked prices but before purchase, make sure you know what you are paying for.
     
  3. macrumors 601

    GermanyChris

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2011
    Location:
    Here
    #3
    What is it you expect the quad to do that the PC doesn't?
     
  4. macrumors 65816

    rabidz7

    #4
    A late 2005 quad is the most powerful. Any desktop ddr2 will work in its 8 slots. It can take 16GB of ram in 8 2gb modules. The best vid card is a flashed 512MB 7800 GTX. There is one on ebay, make sure it is mac flashed. do not use any ebay filters to find it. the card is incredibly rare. Every xpansion slot is pci express, so no pci or pcix devices.
     
  5. macrumors 603

    mrkramer

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Location:
    Somewhere
    #5
    If you want a mac and don't want to spend too much money why not just turn your PC into a hackintosh? The G5s are old and you'll be disappointed by the performance. Also I'm pretty sure the quad G5s were liquid cooled which weren't the most reliable.
     
  6. thread starter macrumors 6502

    lucasfer899

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2012
    Location:
    London
    #6
    My PC uses AMD FX 8350. No hackintosh available for AMD.

    Thank you very much.
    I will look out for all that you have said :)

    Nothing. I want a desktop workstation, of which is a mac.

    I think I'll look out for Mac Pro 1,1 and upgrade the socket 771 xeons.
    Only if I can find one at the right price.
     
  7. macrumors 65816

    rabidz7

    #7
    I have the same cpu and its a hackintosh. I used ways that I cant discuss here. Google amd hackintosh.
     
  8. thread starter macrumors 6502

    lucasfer899

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2012
    Location:
    London
    #8
    Hmm, thanks.
    Not really into the whole hackintosh scene anyway tbh.
     
  9. macrumors 68000

    MisterKeeks

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2012
    #9
    Strangely enough, the Quad was a pretty reliable machine despite the LCS. Here is part of an article from LowEndMac (yes, they actually have articles :)).

    The Quad has a 17% failure rate, tying for 2nd.
     
  10. macrumors 65816

    cocacolakid

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2010
    Location:
    Chicago
    #10
    So the person who wants to start selling brand new Power PC Macs that IBM would somehow make isn't even using a Power PC Mac.
     
  11. macrumors 65816

    rabidz7

    #11
    Yes I am.
    Power Mac G5 quad, 2.5 GHz, 16 GB RAM, 1 Tb HDD,
    128 Gb SSD, 512 Mb 7800 GTX, 32" monitor
    :eek:Osx Mountain lion via cpu emulation on linux:eek:
    Geekbench= 4700
     
  12. macrumors 68000

    MisterKeeks

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2012
    #12
    Get me the Linux GeekBench on that. :rolleyes: Boot times would be nice as well.
     
  13. ybz90, Jan 28, 2013
    Last edited: Jan 28, 2013

    macrumors 6502a

    ybz90

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2009
    #13
    How do you get 4700 on Geekbench? I recently acquired the exact same PowerMac and with a fresh install and SSD, it gets just north of 3500. My instinct was that 64-bit gives a bump to scores over 32-bit, but since you're using some kind of "CPU emulation", the performance degradation should eliminate that many times over.

    Speaking of which, would you care to elucidate? I can't imagine any sort of CPU emulation that would result in an even remotely usable system, let alone one that can score 4700 on Geekbench.

    I'm not calling you a liar, but to me, this does not look right. Things don't add up at all. Please feel welcome to correct me, I would be eager to find out how you squeezed that kind of performance out of the G5 machine, since as I mentioned, I just got one myself.

    EDIT: Oh wait, you're this guy - http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1525892. Should've figured as much. If it looks like BS, sounds like BS, you get the idea.
     
  14. macrumors 68000

    MisterKeeks

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2012
    #14
    32 bit tops out at 3614. 64 bit tops out just above 3700. This one is from a user here (Nameci).

    So, I agree. 4700 is impossible on a G5.
     

Share This Page