Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Thought I'd mention this little test I did. I get these HD videos from IGN.com in WMV format. My dual 1GHz G4 with the Radeon 9800 256MB graphics card cannot handle these files in realtime (via Flip4Mac of course). So I've been exporting them in Quicktime Pro to QT movie format. Takes a long time.

My 2GHz Macbook C2D can watch them in realtime, so I thought I'd do a test. I started the export on both machines at the same time and left the house.

I returned after an hour and expected them both to still be working on it. Turns out the Macbook had finished and had fallen asleep. The G4 was probably about 20% finished so I stopped it.

Not really a scientific test, but it illustrated just how much more powerful these Intel chips are compared to any PPC chip. They're faster, the run cooler, and they consume less power. The Intel switch was the best decision Apple ever made. As I and others have said, the worst Mini will way outperform the best PPC Macs in most - if not all - tasks.
 
^^^^
Back then, yes. When the Power Mac G4s were first introduced, intel just introduced Pentium III. A Power Mac G4 from that time would be far better than a Pentium III from the same era.
However, that was almost 10 years ago. Anything you buy today, PC or Mac, is almost guaranteed to be better than a G4.
 
hey, the g4s are still pretty good right now ;)

i'm still using my agp g4 (350 upped to 1.4) from early early 2000 for music recording, video editing, internet, word processing, and lots of graphics type work.

its not fast anymore, but with sufficient RAM it does a serviceable job...and it's over 8 years old.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.