Worth Upgrading Tiger to Leopard on a PowerMac G5?

Discussion in 'PowerPC Macs' started by fernande-mac, Aug 31, 2009.

  1. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Location:
    Midwest
    #1
    My system is a PowerMac G5 PPC Dual 1.8 GHz, 6 GB RAM, ATI Radeon X800 XT, Dual 160GB HD RAID, 23" Cinema Display.

    I am currently running Tiger 10.4.11 and my most commonly used applications are:
    - Quicken 2007
    - World Of Warcraft
    - Microsoft Office 2004
    - Vuze (BitTorrent)
    - iLife '06
    - Adobe CS2

    I don't have a "need" to upgrade to Leopard, but I would like to know if there is any benefit in doing so.

    The two benefits I have been able to find are:
    - Better OpenGL support (which improves WoW gaming experience)
    - Support for Java 1.6 (which helps Java development and potentially some browsers)

    The main disadvantages include upgrading some applications (at least iLife '09, and perhaps Microsoft Office 2008 and Adobe CS3), and some potential decrease in performance.

    Are there any benefits that people can think of? Or should I just stay with Tiger?

    Thanks!
     
  2. macrumors regular

    JRob65a6

    Joined:
    May 5, 2009
    #2
    I have a newr MacBook Pro and I switched and I must say I see a big difference in speed. I'm not sure about the older system but I would think you would notice a difference. Office is about the same but Photoshop, Fireworks, Dreamweaver, iwork, and iLife seem to be a lot faster.
     
  3. macrumors 68020

    noodle654

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2005
    Location:
    Never Ender
    #3
    I would totally move over to Leopard. I think you would see a nice increase in performance. If for some reason your not happy, go back to Tiger.
     
  4. macrumors regular

    JRob65a6

    Joined:
    May 5, 2009
    #4
    Also sleep, shutdown, and startup are a lot faster also.
     
  5. macrumors 68020

    gugucom

    Joined:
    May 21, 2009
    Location:
    Munich, Germany
    #5
    Disk utility is far superior and Time Machine is a nice add on. My G5s were allways great on Leopard. Tiger is too old fashioned for me.
     
  6. thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Location:
    Midwest
    #6
    Thanks for the prompt responses.

    So, you actually noticed an increase in performance? I had heard the opposite, so it is nice to know.

    Regarding the applications, are you saying that the "legacy" versions (e.g., MS Office 2004, Adobe CS2) ran faster after installing Leopard? Or that the new versions did (e.g., MS Office 2008, Adobe CS3, iLife '09)?

    Thanks!
     
  7. macrumors 65816

    Dr.Pants

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2009
    #7
    I've only used Leopard on my machine, and it works like a charm... I can't say that I've compared the two. OP, if you are worred about legacy applications (that won't work with Leopard but you need them), make a new partition toward the bottom of your HD, clone your current volume, and then install Leopard.

    Or at least, my advice on the matter.

    Even though the OS may have more overhead, I would imagine it allows for programs to run lighter... Or at least, my reasoning. I could be really :confused:
     
  8. macrumors 68040

    Eric S.

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2008
    Location:
    Santa Cruz Mountains, California
    #8
    Just be aware that if you need Classic for anything, it's not supported on Leopard.
     
  9. macrumors 6502

    wpc33

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2006
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    #9
    In my limited experience, Tiger is less demanding on any system, however, I love me some Leopard, and it thankfully runs really damn well on my 1.8 dual G5.
    My previous G5, a single 1.8 with a weak FSB of 667MHz, but with a 7800GS(best AGP) and 4GB RAM, it still choked constantly, CPU's throttled. I may had been better off running Tiger once I began to detest such a decent machine.

    Try it out!
     
  10. thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Location:
    Midwest
    #10
    Thanks for your helpful replies.

    wpc33, my main concern was whether my configuration was able to handle the performance demands of Leopard. You seem to have answered that question.

    Eric, I don't use Classic. So, I am OK on that side.

    Dr.Pants, as far as "legacy" applications, I am not aware of anything that I use nowadays that does not have a Leopard-compatible version. So, I do not see any reason to keep a Tiger partition around except for backup during the transition.

    My concern is whether I need to spend some additional money to get newer versions of my existing applications or if I can survive with "glitchy" behavior of the existing versions. Especially, Microsoft Office 2004, iLife '06, and Adobe CS2. I have found contradictory information about how well these applications behave under Leopard.

    Thanks!
     
  11. macrumors 65816

    300D

    Joined:
    May 2, 2009
    Location:
    Tulsa
    #11
    All G5's should use Leopard. The slower and non-dual G4s are the ones to avoid it.
     
  12. macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2009
    Location:
    Kyoto, Japan
    #12
    G5 & Leopard

    On my Power Mac G5 2.0GHz, MS Office 2004, Word and Excel at least, are the same as always, performance is OK, but the applications suffer from the same problems they have always had. Using Leopard will not cause any additional problems, at least in my experience, using Word everyday in a Work situation. Can't say much about Powerpoint or the rest as I don't use them. iLife '06 and CS2 - no idea, sorry.

    I would just try it, and decide for yourself. (Backup your Tiger installation by cloning to a USB or Firewire drive first) :cool:
     
  13. thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Location:
    Midwest
    #13
    Clone or Image

    This may be a side question, but it has been recommended to me to either create a clone of the disk with the Tiger installation, or a disk image.

    I have about 166GB worth of data and my external HD is 186GB (200GB minus overhead).

    Is there any advantage of having direct access to the clone disk vs. mounting a disk image that you open when needed?

    I have the impression that a disk image will use less space, but I am not sure how much I would save considering that the amount of space available in the external disk is not that much.
     
  14. macrumors 68040

    Eric S.

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2008
    Location:
    Santa Cruz Mountains, California
    #14
    Leopard runs absolutely fine on my PM G4 with 1GHz CPU (Sonnet upgrade) and 1.3GB RAM. The only thing I'm unhappy about is the lack of Classic.
     
  15. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Location:
    Southern California
    #15
    "Fine" is a relative term. Leopard runs like a turd on my 1.33GHz G4 with 1.5GB RAM, compared to how fast Tiger was.
     
  16. macrumors 68040

    Eric S.

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2008
    Location:
    Santa Cruz Mountains, California
    #16
    I guess "turd" is a relative term too. ;) It just depends on what applications one runs I suppose; for me the performance of Leopard is not noticeably different than that of Tiger. If it were really poor I would switch back, because the only compelling reason I find to run Leopard is Time Machine.
     
  17. macrumors 6502

    wpc33

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2006
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    #17
    For a tad of perspective on 10.4/5, I run Tiger on my PB(400MHz and 364MB RAM 64MB of VRAM) Terrifically.

    Here are my Pismo's specs . This thing oughta be a lame duck in today's world, but it runs Tiger better than my old single-1.8 PM G5 ran Leopard.

    PS: It's still a slow notebook, but it handles itself very well, which was my point.
     
  18. macrumors 65816

    Dr.Pants

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2009
    #18
    Well, I have a .dmg of Leopard (backup) that runs at 6.22 GB, wheras the install DVD is 7.03 GB used; so I would imagine there is compression somewhere (I could also be completely whacked ;))

    Personally, I clone my drives so that I can boot off of them if my main disc decides to die, which idk if one can do that with an image. They could expand the image, but that takes additional time, IMO.
     
  19. thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Location:
    Midwest
    #19
    Dr.Pants, good point about the ability to boot from the drive directly.

    This makes me wonder, though. I was planning to use that drive to be my Time Machine backup after the installation and migration of old data.

    If the machines dies, will the Time Machine backup help you boot the system? Or can it be used only to recover the HD content after you are able to restart the system (e.g., new HD, reinstall Leopard, etc.)?

    Is it better to have both a clone of the HD for booting purposes _and_ the Time Machine setup for individual file/folder recovery over time?
     
  20. macrumors 65816

    Dr.Pants

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2009
    #20
    Time machine is only backup, and thus one would have to get a new hard disc - it is nice, however, that Apple decided to put several tools on their install DVD; one can bypass the installer and format the new drive to HFS+ and then Restore from Time Machine.

    However, I mainly keep a Time Machine drive around so I can access old data if I have to; I clone drives just because I find it simpler and faster. I guess one could say Time Machine is backup, the Clone is merely redundant ;)
     
  21. thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Location:
    Midwest
    #21
    That's what I suspected. I guess I should look into another external hard disk. :)
     
  22. macrumors 65816

    Dr.Pants

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2009
    #22
    Try not to use USB, and instead opt for FW400 or FW800! :eek: I learned this out the hard way... Nothing like four hours for the initial time machine backup.
     
  23. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2010
    #23
    PowerBook g4 8whatever mhz

    Can i install leopard on my PowerBook G4 8-something mhz with 364 mb ram?
     
  24. macrumors 6502

    d88co88

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2009
    Location:
    MN
    #24
    It really does matter what the exact speed of your 8-something PowerBook G4 is.

    http://support.apple.com/kb/HT3759

     
  25. XaPHER, Nov 12, 2010
    Last edited: Nov 12, 2010

    macrumors member

    XaPHER

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2010
    Location:
    In the Underworld
    #25
    there's some way to install leopard even on an under 500 mhz g3, but only a g4 will correctly boot(i arleady manged to install it on a clamshell)
    but you'll need more ram
     

Share This Page