10.4 vs 10.5 Performance on single core machines

sparty411

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Nov 13, 2018
311
229
I've seen it mentioned here before, that the performance hit taken when upgrading to 10.5 from 10.4, is marginal. In my personal experience, having compared the two recently, 10.4 is ENORMOUSLY quicker, and appears to have lower CPU overhead than 10.5. This can be observed when performing a CPU intensive task, such as using a script heavy website.

Am I mistaken?
 

eyoungren

macrumors Core
Aug 31, 2011
21,191
13,027
ten-zero-eleven-zero-zero by zero-two
Am I mistaken?
No. But speed is only one factor and if that's all you care about Leopard can be optimized to a certain extent. It won't ever be faster than Tiger, but it has other qualities.

Tiger is pretty rudimentary in regards to networking. In a mixed environment Finder can be unstable and printer sharing isn't that good. Attaching to a domain or connecting to a PC server requires disabling a mix of security features on the server. Passwords are transmitted in open text for instance.

When it comes to apps, Leopard has far more compatibility than Tiger. Leopard Webkit, which is a set of modernized frameworks for Safari and Webkit based apps works only on Leopard.

Now as far as browsers go, if you're still using Safari without LWK (Leopard Webkit) then you can expect poor performance, even on Leopard.

If you don't know about TenFourFox, that's a modern fork of Firefox that runs on PowerPC Macs (Tiger and Leopard). I have a series of tweaks that can enhance the performance of T4Fx. Since it's based on Firefox, the tweaks work on all platforms.

So, essentially it comes down to what your preference is really. If speed matters to you and compatibility doesn't, or you have an early G4 or G3 then use Tiger. But if you need to be as up to date as possible and need a system that can handle networking better then sacrificing some speed is worth the cost, especially if you can optimize things a bit.

Tiger versus Leopard is always something that divides the community, but it's really just a matter of what you need/want.
 

sawpits

macrumors regular
Feb 28, 2014
136
59
If you don't know about TenFourFox, that's a modern fork of Firefox that runs on PowerPC Macs (Tiger and Leopard). I have a series of tweaks that can enhance the performance of T4Fx. Since it's based on Firefox, the tweaks work on all platforms.

And if they don't know about TenFourFox (TFF) they need to download and install an older version first, before downloading and installing the newest version.
 

sawpits

macrumors regular
Feb 28, 2014
136
59
Why is that may I ask? To get familiar with it?

There was a security change and you cannot start with the newest version any more, won't let you access it. Cameron pointed this out some time ago. You get a "Secure Connection Failed" message. It might be possible if you keep refreshing the page, but an older version being installed will usually allow the newer version to be downloaded without that message.

Here is an explanation. I forgot that Cameron had mentioned that he had a downloader available.

https://tenfourfox.tenderapp.com/discussions/problems/8810-tff-fpr14-downloads-from-sourceforge-always-fail
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: eyoungren

sparty411

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Nov 13, 2018
311
229
Tiger is pretty rudimentary in regards to networking. In a mixed environment Finder can be unstable and printer sharing isn't that good. Attaching to a domain or connecting to a PC server requires disabling a mix of security features on the server. Passwords are transmitted in open text for instance.

If you don't know about TenFourFox, that's a modern fork of Firefox that runs on PowerPC Macs (Tiger and Leopard). I have a series of tweaks that can enhance the performance of T4Fx. Since it's based on Firefox, the tweaks work on all platforms.
My networking needs are quite basic, so I'm fine on that front. The extent of it, is using a shared printer on my LAN, and that works without a hitch.

As for TenFourFox, I've been using it with your about:config tweaks for a while now. However, I just discovered NoScript today, and it, in tandom with your suggested tweaks, has TFF running faster than I could have ever imagined it could. The difference between the stock configuration, and the way I have it set up now, is night and day. So, thank you for the advice! Your thread on TFF is extremely helpful.:)
 

eyoungren

macrumors Core
Aug 31, 2011
21,191
13,027
ten-zero-eleven-zero-zero by zero-two
My networking needs are quite basic, so I'm fine on that front. The extent of it, is using a shared printer on my LAN, and that works without a hitch.

As for TenFourFox, I've been using it with your about:config tweaks for a while now. However, I just discovered NoScript today, and it, in tandom with your suggested tweaks, has TFF running faster than I could have ever imagined it could. The difference between the stock configuration, and the way I have it set up now, is night and day. So, thank you for the advice! Your thread on TFF is extremely helpful.:)
Glad I could help.

Yeah, OS really depends on what you need. With just the basics Tiger will do fine. As much as I prefer Leopard over Tiger there are just some situations where Tiger is the better fit.
 

sparty411

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Nov 13, 2018
311
229
Glad I could help.

Yeah, OS really depends on what you need. With just the basics Tiger will do fine. As much as I prefer Leopard over Tiger there are just some situations where Tiger is the better fit.
In my case, I'm just trying to free up as many system resources as possible, so Tiger makes sense for me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: eyoungren

Project Alice

Suspended
Jul 13, 2008
737
407
Post Falls, ID
I run Leopard on everything that has a G4 or G5 in it. Personally I find the speed difference marginal. Tiger may seem more responsive in some cases but overall the difference is so negligible that I'd rather just use Leopard. It definitely helps if you have at least 768MB of ram. The really big killer in my opinion is the GPU. Leopard just LOVES a good GPU. Anything with a Geforce 4 or a Radeon 7500 will make system run Leopard a lot smoother. Add a core image card and its even better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AphoticD

XaPHER

macrumors regular
Oct 13, 2010
237
137
Nowhere to be found
I run Leopard on anything that has a core image-capable card (RIP mini), including G4s under 500mhz. I have a better experience with Tenfourfox on leopard than tiger and quicktime is also smoother. OpenGL games typically perform better with 10.5. The rest is otherwise pretty much comparable.

I try to avoid running leo without core image GPU support.
 

Project Alice

Suspended
Jul 13, 2008
737
407
Post Falls, ID
I run Leopard on anything that has a core image-capable card (RIP mini), including G4s under 500mhz. I have a better experience with Tenfourfox on leopard than tiger and quicktime is also smoother. OpenGL games typically perform better with 10.5. The rest is otherwise pretty much comparable.

I try to avoid running leo without core image GPU support.
I agree with this, though I do run it on pre-CI computers, too. I generally have a dualboot on every machine of Tiger and Leopard. Mostly for classic, but sometimes it's nice on those non CI GPUs.

My dual 450MHz Sawtooth loves leopard with its Geforce 6200. Also my B&W G4 runs Leopard better than Tiger with a Geforce 5200.
 

AphoticD

macrumors 68000
Feb 17, 2017
1,744
2,194
Australia
You would hardly notice a speed difference between Leopard and Tiger on a G5 dual or single-core system. I haven't had much experience with dual G4 systems, but I can say that Leopard runs perfectly fast on my upgraded Sawtooth single-core G4 - on this system, the major speed boost happened in Leopard when I installed a Core Image capable GPU which brought it up to Tiger level speeds.

On an iBook G4 or PowerBook G4 12", Tiger runs notably quicker than Leopard. On the last generation DLSD model 15" and 17" PB G4's, I don't believe you'd notice much of a performance difference at all, particularly with an SSD upgrade.
 
Last edited:

sparty411

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Nov 13, 2018
311
229
You would hardly notice a speed difference between Leopard and Tiger on a G5 dual or single-core system. I haven't had much experience with dual G4 systems, but I can say that Leopard runs perfectly fast on my upgraded Sawtooth single-core G4 - on this system, the major speed boost happened in Leopard when I installed a Core Image capable GPU which brought it up to Tiger level speeds.

On an iBook G4 or PowerBook G4 12", Tiger runs notably quicker than Leopard. On the last generation DLSD model 15" and 17" PB G4's, I don't believe you'd notice much of a performance difference at all, particularly with an SSD upgrade.
The difference between the two seem quite obvious to me on my PB G4 12" A1104, but maybe it's just placebo. Anyhow, I do use Leopard more often than Tiger, regardless of my perception of responsiveness, due to its better software support. All of my machines have either an mSATA SSD, or a 7200 RPM HDD, and I honestly can't tell the difference between the two, likely because they're being bottlenecked by the IDE bus anyway.
 

Amethyst1

macrumors 6502
Oct 28, 2015
499
714
On an iBook G4 or PowerBook G4 12", Tiger runs notably quicker than Leopard.
I wonder if the last-gen iBook G4 is somewhat of an exception to that statement given its CI-capable GPU (I don't have access to mine right now so cannot check myself).
 

sparty411

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Nov 13, 2018
311
229
I wonder if the last-gen iBook G4 is somewhat of an exception to that statement given its CI-capable GPU (I don't have access to mine right now so cannot check myself).
I own the 1.42 GHz iBook, and it is utter molasses in Leopard, even with the Core Image capable GPU. It just doesn't feel nearly as fluid as Tiger.
 

z970mp

macrumors 68000
Jun 2, 2017
1,997
1,595
Digital Ocean
I own the 1.42 GHz iBook, and it is utter molasses in Leopard, even with the Core Image capable GPU. It just doesn't feel nearly as fluid as Tiger.
Did you do all the graphical tweaks, like QuartzGL, 2DExtreme, sheet displays set to very fast, etc.? ShadowKiller set as a startup application is helpful to have as well.

I'm just finishing putting Debian 8.11 on my 12", and pretty much everything is working apart from suspend. But if I can slot kernel 3.2 in, and get it to suspend that way, then that will be a very good OS indeed for these iBooks, especially given all the browser choices, SurfTube, etc...

I'll make a guide if it works. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Raging Dufus

sparty411

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Nov 13, 2018
311
229
Did you do all the graphical tweaks, like QuartzGL, 2DExtreme, sheet displays set to very fast, etc.? ShadowKiller set as a startup application is helpful to have as well.

I'm just finishing putting Debian 8.11 on my 12", and pretty much everything is working apart from suspend. But if I can slot kernel 3.2 in, and get it to suspend that way, then that will be a very good OS indeed for these iBooks, especially given all the browser choices, SurfTube, etc...

I'll make a guide if it works. :)
No, I haven't bothered with any tweaks. How are you installing Debian 8? Last I checked, all of the repo's were removed.
 

z970mp

macrumors 68000
Jun 2, 2017
1,997
1,595
Digital Ocean
No, I haven't bothered with any tweaks. How are you installing Debian 8? Last I checked, all of the repo's were removed.
The first time my iBook was on Leopard, it was borderline unusable it was so slow.

Then I visited this thread, and it was never slow again.

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/guide-leopard-speed-improvements.1723868/

Afterward, was it fast? No. Impressively snappy? Yes.

Though Debian is still faster. ;)

It's all in the Wiki. You've got to add the archive repos, not the ftp ones.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dextructor