Must do a glossy lifestyle video of my Powerbook...adding remastered audio to Soft Cell's Sex Dwarf video....
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Another good for nothing Quad....
- Thread starter Dronecatcher
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I have a Quicksilver with a dual 1.8Ghz processor. When it was running, I ran Geekbench and it was scoring higher than the 1.6 and 1.8Ghz G5s and on par with the 2Ghz G5s.
So, yeah, no doubt your DA feels faster.
G4 -> G5 added full 64Bit support (aka >2GB of useable RAM) and faster memory bus, even those G4s with DDR didn't even come close to utilising it. Altivec was weaker in the G5 and everything else was on a similar level, so yeah finding applications/benchmarks where a G4 beats a G5 is pretty easy.
IIRC that's one of the reasons why apple kept using g4's in the powerbooks. There was enough of a parity between the g4 and g5 that it just wasn't worth the effort to try and finagle a g5 into a laptop, especially when the g4's had a clear energy efficiency advantage right from the get-go
I sometimes wonder, had A) PA Semi arrived earlier with its development and B) Apple didn’t buy them out in 2008, what a PWRficient-related 64-bit CPU in a laptop (like in a PowerBook) might have been like — to say nothing of multi-core, multi-CPU server gear.
I can tell you:
There is a thing called the X1000 and when it came out some fanboys where all over how much faster it was compared to anything else PPC, so a few benchmarks where done and Blender within Mint Linux was on par with my dual-1.8GHz Sonnet in a Quicksilver, despite it being really hampered with it's SDR memory that was "meh" even when it only connected to a single G4 at 733-900MHz.
So in a 2006/7 PB it would have been dual-core with no benefit in single core tasks over the 1.67GHz G4s in the 5.8/5.9 2005 PBs while falling short of what the early CoreDuo we actually got could do.
-> too little too late
The Core Duos had a 31-watt TDP though, so if a dual-core PA Semi chip had been at least somewhat competitive in performance yet better in terms of power consumption that would have been interesting.
A quick search on Wikipedia suggest that both the CoreDuo and PA6 were fabbed at 65nm so they shouldn't be that far apart. The CoreDuo is listed 151.6 million transistors for the whole chip while the PA6T only has 11 million 🧐 But this might be for just 1 core without cache and I/O.
But the real issue is (was) PASemi was a 1-trick pony and Apple needed someone who could provide a whole family of CPUs including chipset support. IBM was clearly not interested in anything but high end servers and Motorola had already entered their name-of-the-week phase. So it would have been Apple on it's own having to do it all like they do today with AS. Just 15 years earlier and with a dying ISA.
Sure PASemi kinda morphed into the Apple-Silicon team but it wasn't till the A12x (or maybe A10x) that they got to a point where entry level AS Macs would have been feasible and that was 10 years later.
But the real issue is (was) PASemi was a 1-trick pony and Apple needed someone who could provide a whole family of CPUs including chipset support. IBM was clearly not interested in anything but high end servers and Motorola had already entered their name-of-the-week phase. So it would have been Apple on it's own having to do it all like they do today with AS. Just 15 years earlier and with a dying ISA.
Sure PASemi kinda morphed into the Apple-Silicon team but it wasn't till the A12x (or maybe A10x) that they got to a point where entry level AS Macs would have been feasible and that was 10 years later.
Yeah, it's probably the spam algorithm deleting comments -- they disappear seconds later if you sit and refresh. I know because Action Retro probably doesn't have the patience and reaction time to keep deleting my responses when people ask what browser I use with Sorbet.
Personally, since BS Magnet brought up a PA Semi laptop earlier, I'm still interested in the Italian PPC Notebook thing and finally put forward my own money -- 3,25€ of it, they already have published PCBs and everything so if they aren't legitimate, they've put a lot of time and effort into it. Unfortunately it'll never run Mac OS outside of a VM, but you could always fork off a FreeBSD distribution to try to replicate it.
Personally, since BS Magnet brought up a PA Semi laptop earlier, I'm still interested in the Italian PPC Notebook thing and finally put forward my own money -- 3,25€ of it, they already have published PCBs and everything so if they aren't legitimate, they've put a lot of time and effort into it. Unfortunately it'll never run Mac OS outside of a VM, but you could always fork off a FreeBSD distribution to try to replicate it.
Last edited:
I've never used a Quad G5 but it is kind of sad when people claim their useless nowadays. While I don't have the quad-version of the late 2005 PowerMac G5, I have plenty of experience with the dual core models and I still consider them great machines. I'd say the late 2005 PowerMac G5 is that particular PowerPC Mac that has aged the best. It may not be very power efficient but it is still perfectly usable in 2022, especially with Linux. I also think that if you're not enthusiastic about those machines you're way better of using something else. I do recognize a pattern. Many people complain that they can't do this or that on a G5 (YouTube for example) because they do not look into workarounds. Also if some websites are broken one can get good results by using the mobile agent. An ethusiast will find ways to make it work and keep those G5s running. It is up to the user if it is practical. For me at least it is since I have so much fun restoring and tinkering with old Macs 
This forum is the only safe haven for PPC enthusiasts I find - other retro spaces like Facebook groups, Reddit and Youtube seem to be bickering zones for superficial, off the peg geeks looking for the latest trend.
Last edited:
These are the kind of people who can not accept being proven wrong. They believe a certain way and try to control everything around them. Reality is something to be bent to their will so it reflects what they believe.
So, they have an axe to grind for one reason or another. Workarounds have the unfortunate effect of disproving their assertions. See above.
PS. I know these types. I have been told point blank that unless I believe what they want me to believe and ignore reality, I am unwelcome.
I think this is the key thing to keep in mind when watching these types of videos. Enthusiasts, of anything, can do a lot. Look at what the demo scene people are doing with 8-bit computers these days. Things the original designers likely never envisioned. But I would not recommend a non-enthusiast to buy one.I've never used a Quad G5 but it is kind of sad when people claim their useless nowadays. While I don't have the quad-version of the late 2005 PowerMac G5, I have plenty of experience with the dual core models and I still consider them great machines. I'd say the late 2005 PowerMac G5 is that particular PowerPC Mac that has aged the best. It may not be very power efficient but it is still perfectly usable in 2022, especially with Linux. I also think that if you're not enthusiastic about those machines you're way better of using something else. I do recognize a pattern. Many people complain that they can't do this or that on a G5 (YouTube for example) because they do not look into workarounds. Also if some websites are broken one can get good results by using the mobile agent. An ethusiast will find ways to make it work and keep those G5s running. It is up to the user if it is practical. For me at least it is since I have so much fun restoring and tinkering with old Macs
IMO since the G5 quad is a quad processor configuration many non-enthusiasts may mistakenly believe it's a buy and use system. After all there are many, many capable quad core systems out there that can do just that. After watching the video I did not get the impression the creator was anti-PPC but rather he was targeting the non-enthusiast for the video. In that context, while technically some of the comments may be in error, the overall message was this is not a computer for the non-enthusiast.
Or, Occam’s razor, they’re just being lazy af and are accustomed to having other people do stuff for them, rather than going out and finding how to do it/fix it/improve it themselves.
Lamentably they have entered here with attempts to troll but thankfully its been isolated occurrences.
Yes, they have their confirmation bias set and do not wish to be presented with any evidence that could force them to reconsider their position.
There's also a sense of entitlement amongst such people. Going out and finding how to do it/fix it/improve it themselves is too much. You must do it for them because that's your purpose in their lives, apparently. I believe in helping those around me so that they are informed and empowered enough to eventually proceed without requiring me to constantly hold their hand - unless it's a particular issue which would require specialist knowledge. What good does it do them to be trapped in a Groundhog Day loop where they're perpetually asking for help with the same problem?
On a side note, I've seen Winbox users come in here and rant that Macs are difficult to use etc and when you offer them the resources which would no longer make Macs difficult for them to use, they ignore the assistance and cease posting.
I often get the impression on Reddit that people ask obvious questions because they want a conversation rather than answers - I don't mind that so much but the people who go there to sharpen their claws and project are tedious.
That's something I've encountered within the digital cesspit known as the YouTube comments section. I thought it extremely telling that the other day someone replied to me on there with "genuine question" added to their message because they were acutely aware of the relentless trolling that ensues during attempts to have an intelligent exchange.
I think that goes both ways, yanno? The content creator may very well consider the quad impractical. I do not, you obviously don't and I'm sure countless others here do not as well - but the content creator sure does and as such, it is his prerogative to create a video stating that pov - as incomplete as it may be. If anything that clearly opens the door for someone in the know to drop a quad+64b linux or Sorbet crushing it in 2022 vid. I've been running Sorbet on my DC2ghz A1117 and it navigates most of what the web has to offer pretty well - a quad would only be better while sucking down the electricity like a real boozer. Anyhow, that would be a fun video to watch I'm sure and subsequently probably helpful for someone who had a Quad and wanted to use it (especially if they are not a dyed in the wool old mac nerd.) If anything that would probably make them one lol.I've never used a Quad G5 but it is kind of sad when people claim their useless nowadays. While I don't have the quad-version of the late 2005 PowerMac G5, I have plenty of experience with the dual core models and I still consider them great machines. I'd say the late 2005 PowerMac G5 is that particular PowerPC Mac that has aged the best. It may not be very power efficient but it is still perfectly usable in 2022, especially with Linux. I also think that if you're not enthusiastic about those machines you're way better of using something else. I do recognize a pattern. Many people complain that they can't do this or that on a G5 (YouTube for example) because they do not look into workarounds. Also if some websites are broken one can get good results by using the mobile agent. An ethusiast will find ways to make it work and keep those G5s running. It is up to the user if it is practical. For me at least it is since I have so much fun restoring and tinkering with old Macs
Even more vindicating would be a G4 crushing it video. I know for sure a G4 can still do revenue work -- KDP and Fiverr both work, KDP only needing 10.4Fx and Fiverr needing LWK. At least, I'd make a G4 video if tasked so -- not that I dislike G5s, but the Quads especially are kind of... boring in a good way? They're functionally speaking entirely modern computers ppc64 architecture notwithstanding. I'd spend the whole video just snarking out the idea that a quad-core 64 bit computer stuffed with 16GB of RAM, a Radeon X1900 XT (or newer card), and an SSD couldn't handle the Internet or music playback or production.
Last edited:
They would be boring, in a good way, if they didn’t have that pesky liquid cooling system prone to failure in ways which air-cooled systems lack.