Dual 2.5 or Dual 2.7 still great deals?

asencif

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Dec 21, 2005
323
0
I am looking to get a new mac and got really excited about the Intel iMac, but now the excitement has died down a bit and tests are proving not much of an increase in comparison to the previous G5 iMac. A lot of apps are still not Univeral and it looks like the Powermac G5's will hold their own for a bit until possibly the Quad Intels come out. So is getting a Dual 2.5 at $2000 or a 2.7 at $2199 still a great value for the price?
 

jamesi

macrumors 6502a
Sep 13, 2005
595
0
Davis CA
ummm how about a no on that one. the G5s have already been proven to be slower than the upcoming intel chips so basically if you bought a powermac and then the intel versions came out you would feel very cheated. save the cash until the intel versions arrive. your benchmarks will thank you
 

BakedBeans

macrumors 68040
May 6, 2004
3,054
0
What's Your Favorite Posish
jamesi said:
ummm how about a no on that one. the G5s have already been proven to be slower than the upcoming intel chips so basically if you bought a powermac and then the intel versions came out you would feel very cheated. save the cash until the intel versions arrive. your benchmarks will thank you
I agree that you should wait - I think buying a powerPC would be a mistake at the moment.

as for the imac being slower - you might want to check out some user reviews (real people testing real machines)

like this one

RIGHT TIME FOR THE RESULTS

The Intel Mac arrived today at lunch. It is a 17 inch 512mb dual core. Compare to my G5 with 512mb - i took out the additonal stick to make the tests fairer.

First impressions are the Intel machine boots a fraction faster than the G5, I would conservatively put it at around 5 seconds faster, however not as fast as shown on a video doing the rounds on the net but indeed it is faster.

The first test I applied to the machine was to open photoshop and see how long it took each machine to fully open it.

The G5 machine opened this program in around 25 seconds
The intel machine opened this program in around 11 seconds.

Ilife 06 was placed on both machines and run.
The G5 machine opened this program in around 18 seconds
The intel machine opened this program in around 06 seconds.

I decided to test the machine using illustrator and a brochure I had put together which was 56 pages long with some very high res images in it.
The G5 machine opened the file after 16 seconds, and the Intel machine did this in 5 seconds, however the Intel machine allowed me to grab and scroll the document with no delay whilst the G5 machine was a bit more jerky.

I enjoy watching quicktime movie trailers on my Imac and found that whilst I could watch hi- res trailers there. I ran a test on The Xmen 3 HD trailer. The G5 Imac played up to 720p with no slowdowns or problems at all. When going to the next level 1080p trailer the G5 had problems even with 1gb system ram installed, the sound played but lost synch with the video as a lag slowly crept in. The intel machine played the 1080p with 512mb without a single hitch, the playback was fluid and uninterrupted.

Back to photoshop, and Indesign CS2 I found that Intel machine was on a par with the G5 but weirdly in certain functions the intel machine would blow the G5 away, certain brush and effects when applied suing the Intel would speed through instantly, where as the G5 would be 3-10 seconds behind in some cases.

Office proved to be very interesting as in my tests there was no difference at all, the load times varied by a second or two but nothing massively, and these would change around each instance, the only program I found to have what i would consider a noticable effect was Word. When a word docuemtn laden with images was opened on the Intel machine it did so with no delay, in the past there had been a 1-5 second delay but i had attributed this to down to the hard drive. Could this be due to the original powerpoint presentation being created on a Pc who knows.

One thing that is for sure is that the Intel machine comes with some nicer packaging, the manual, remote and documents come in a sexy slide box which was a plastic bag affair with my G5.

I cannot say enough about Rossetta, its like omni-present. If it is there and working you certainly dont notice, I will be interested to see how some of my game slike Roller Coaster Tycoon 3 run on the machine but generally across the board the Intel is either the same or faster. When native universal versions of the core mac programs appear like Adobe CS3 and Office I think we will see a huge speed jump!
if the intel is that much faster - think how blindingly amazing the powermacs will be
 

BornAgainMac

macrumors 603
Feb 4, 2004
6,457
3,472
Florida Resident
Wait. The fact that Steve Jobs mentioned they are going to replace the entire lineup says something about the Intel roadmap for this year alone. I bet next year's laptop could replace my current Powermac G5 in performance. Right now it seems to be around the same speed. And I have 8 GBs of ram.

I am so glad Apple didn't come out with a Celeron Mac with built-in graphics on the motherboard. They are focusing on the high-end for now. It probably makes Intel happy and perhaps Apple will get that special treatment I was predicting.
 

BakedBeans

macrumors 68040
May 6, 2004
3,054
0
What's Your Favorite Posish
DeSnousa said:
Also think about when we see better optimisation for the Intel chips.
Bongo.

BUT, the dual G5s are still AWESOME machines, fast fast fast, and they will last you quite a long time. If you use pro apps then there is no reason not to get it - if you can wait for the intel, you will get a much faster machine for you money
 

plinkoman

macrumors 65816
Jul 2, 2003
1,144
0
New York
something to keep in mind:

would the intel iMacs really have been that much faster if they were replacing dual-core G5's as opposed to a single-core G5?

also look at the major improvement in the intel iMacs gpu, which could account for some of the benchmarks, and the limited clock speed of the core duo.

call me crazy, but i'm willing to bet the powermac still comes in on top. when you double the amount of cores in a computer and double the power of the gpu, then you end up with benchmarks saying its doubly as fast...
i don't see the core duo being any faster clock per clock then the G5. I'm sure that will change once intel releases merom and conroe and woodcrest based chips, but suffice to say, a dual 2.7 G5 will kill any intel iMac with ease.
 

asencif

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Dec 21, 2005
323
0
I think a this moment the Powermacs still come out on top, but later this year the Intel PM's will top them. It appears that what helps the Intel iMacs in those tests are it's faster Ram and PCI-E X1600. Will this card be released AGP 8x for PM's?
 

iGary

Guest
May 26, 2004
19,581
2
Randy's House
Both the dual 2.5 and dual 2.7 are great machines.

I've processed over 60,000 images since August of this year on my dual 2.7 and it has never skipped a beat. Those are 12MP images, BTW, no small files, to say the least.
 

p0intblank

macrumors 68030
Sep 20, 2005
2,548
2
New Jersey
BakedBeans, thanks for posting that quote. That review was awesome and really gave me a good idea of what to expect from the iMac's performance. All these so called "benchmarks" are giving false ideas. :(
 

devman

macrumors 65816
Apr 19, 2004
1,235
4
AU
The dual 2.5 and 2.7 are great machines and it will be some time before Intel versions eclipse them in a significant way. The G5 is "current" and competitive and has a good FSB speed. The biggest differences in performance are in the laptops where the G4 systems have really lagged the rest of the market for some time now.

As always, this comes down to what you need now. If you need a machine now, then a dual 2.5/2.7 is a good buy. If you can wait - then you'll have to wait till the 3rd quarter.
 

lopresmb

macrumors 6502
Apr 29, 2005
289
0
depends on when and what you are doing. Powermac G5's are still great machines, and as iGary said will get the work done if that's what your doing. AND, they will run all the PPC Apps NOW at full speed, you might need 6 months to get almost all pro apps Universal.

So, even though you might not want an Intel YET, having used a DUO iMac, they really do FEEL a lot faster (starting and using universal iLife apps mostly). Honestly the iMac Duo feels snappier in most cases than a quad:eek: Now when you get to rendering, filtering, compositing, ect, that will probably not be the case.

Just some thoughts...
 

Sunrunner

macrumors 6502a
Nov 27, 2003
599
2
devman said:
The dual 2.5 and 2.7 are great machines and it will be some time before Intel versions eclipse them in a significant way. The G5 is "current" and competitive and has a good FSB speed. The biggest differences in performance are in the laptops where the G4 systems have really lagged the rest of the market for some time now.

As always, this comes down to what you need now. If you need a machine now, then a dual 2.5/2.7 is a good buy. If you can wait - then you'll have to wait till the 3rd quarter.

Lets not forget the 64-bit nature of the G5s and the overall bandwidth of the dual-G5 setup. Apple will have to do some serious scrambling to match those numbers with upcoming intel versions, let alone surpass them.
 

decksnap

macrumors 68040
Apr 11, 2003
3,068
70
If you want to sit around and wait for Intel versions of apps and for the Intel Powermac... that's one option. But currently, the dual G5s still trounce the newly released dual-core Yonahs that are in the iMac and Powerbook.
 

asencif

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Dec 21, 2005
323
0
Test Results

I am definitely leaning towards just getting a Dual 2.5 model. If ATI releases an x1600 for these models then it can perform even better. It seems the test results of the Intel iMacs show that the simpler apps run faster on it and it also boots faster which is probably because of the EFI. However, once you load the G5 up with Ram the performance is a amazing and a lot of tests have shown it to trounce the iMac for iTunes encoding and heavy photoshop work. Not sure how iLife 06 runs on the 2.5 or 2.7 models though. I imagine well since most of Apple's products, although Universal are still better optimized for PPC.
 

BakedBeans

macrumors 68040
May 6, 2004
3,054
0
What's Your Favorite Posish
asencif said:
I am definitely leaning towards just getting a Dual 2.5 model. If ATI releases an x1600 for these models then it can perform even better. It seems the test results of the Intel iMacs show that the simpler apps run faster on it and it also boots faster which is probably because of the EFI. However, once you load the G5 up with Ram the performance is a amazing and a lot of tests have shown it to trounce the iMac for iTunes encoding and heavy photoshop work. Not sure how iLife 06 runs on the 2.5 or 2.7 models though. I imagine well since most of Apple's products, although Universal are still better optimized for PPC.
Photoshop is running through rosetta an emulation layer - so wont run natively yet.

however when it is native i would thin the performance wont be 'much' faster (if at all) that the dual 2.0/2.3 G5. the 2.5 and 2.7 are just stunning machines- the imac will be no slouch though
 

asencif

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Dec 21, 2005
323
0
Longevity

I have thought about the longevity of the Intel iMac....Yes it's Intel and the future for the mac, but PPC has to be supported for at least another 3 years since there are tons of Macs out there in Big companies that don't upgrade often. Also, an Intel PM to me would have an even greater value and long term value. The Intel iMac looks like a great system and yes it is amazing, but it is the first one made. The Rev B/C Intel iMac will probably be even 2x faster than this by the end of the year. You can't upgrade the Intel iMac either or change the Video Card. It's just a matter of what one needs now and for how long you want it before the next upgrade. I'm thinking I can get a great value by buying a 2.5 or 2.7 for under $2300 which will last me till the Intel Quad PM arrive and most software is Universal. The Intel iMac is very tempting indeed, but more will come with even greater temptation which actually makes me want to wait on the Intel side.
 

maxvamp

macrumors 6502a
Sep 26, 2002
600
0
Somewhere out there
jamesi said:
ummm how about a no on that one. the G5s have already been proven to be slower than the upcoming intel chips so basically if you bought a powermac and then the intel versions came out you would feel very cheated.

To tell the truth, the current Intel chips have already been proven to be slower than the upcoming Intel chips.

Max.
 

QCassidy352

macrumors G4
Mar 20, 2003
10,959
3,552
Bay Area
ChrisA said:
It's simple:

(1) If you need a computer NOW you have to buy what is available NOW

(2) If you don't need a computer buying any computer is a waste of money
Only problem with that is the definition of "need." Almost any of us could do what we need on an early G4 tower/powerbook... it will just take longer than with a more modern system.

So if you've been using a powermac G4 400 mhz for 5 years and it's god-awful slow, do you "need" a new one?
 

skunkworks

macrumors member
Jan 11, 2006
49
0
Actually if you really need a powermac you should buy a used one at least you can save some money. Even ati's x800gpu on older powermacs is sufficient. There are some great deals on ebay for used dual processors. Having said that by september you willl have your dream machine if you can wait that's when the new intel 64 bit cpus come out.
 

mnstr_trd_sd

macrumors regular
Feb 24, 2004
143
0
san diego, ca.
twoodcc said:
to me the intel imac will last longer than a PPC machine, but that's just me. and the intel imac is cheaper.
How is that? The PPC was designed to outlast the imac especially in expandability. You want it to go faster, add upt to 16 Gigs of ram even another "internal" hard drive. How much could you add to and Imac?

Do you honestly believe that the the new Intel Imac is way faster then the latest quad processor G5's? I don't. Especially in video, 3D animation, rendering and compositing. Whoa! It starts up faster, that's not what I need.

Granted the new Intel macs are cool and apple is going in the right direction, but there's just way too much hype out there, it's like every one "needs" these new macs will blow everything away rather then just seeing it for what it is, another step up revision.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.