G5 or Mini please help

Discussion in 'Buying Tips and Advice' started by Theclamshell, Nov 18, 2009.

  1. Theclamshell macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2009
    #1
    Hi,
    I cant decide iv been thinking for a while and idk what to do. Im looking at a dual 2.0 GHz g5 on ebay with 2.5gb of ram and a nvidia 6600 and origional disks and stuff. Im thinking i want to bid up to 400 i know the minis 430 in refurb store but i love the g5 towers and hate the minis, are the G5's reliable? i really want the g5 but i dont want it to fail within one month, what should i do?!?!?
     
  2. Badger^2 macrumors 68000

    Badger^2

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2009
    Location:
    Sacramento
    #2
    you know the best way to speed up a G5?

    put an Intel mini on top of it.
     
  3. js81 macrumors 65816

    js81

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2008
    Location:
    KY
    #3
    Don't worry about it failing... worry about it being a dog, especially when surfing any flash-intensive web sites. My G4 (yeah, I know, not a G5) PowerBook is quickly becoming useless...

    Get the newer model Mini with dual display ports and the 9400M graphics and you'll be set.
     
  4. Theclamshell thread starter macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2009
    #4
    would it really be that bad, i was mostly going to make it a garageband/imovie machine, mostly audio work.
     
  5. pukifloyd macrumors 6502a

    pukifloyd

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2008
    Location:
    Scottsdale
    #5
    i don't think G5 will do that work..or even mini

    it all depends on your usage...if you are going to do light work then mini should be ok...but for heavy work it won't be...

    if you want to do intensive work and will use the machine as your main computer then I would say you but something better...like MBP or iMac...
     
  6. Ace134blue macrumors 6502a

    Ace134blue

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2009
    #6
    A 2.53 mini will outperform a 13 inch macbook pro. Maybe even the top end macbook pro
     
  7. Badger^2 macrumors 68000

    Badger^2

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2009
    Location:
    Sacramento
    #7
    a MBP is just a mini in a laptop case

    so moving from a mini to a base MBP is not an "upgrade"

    and how does a 2.53 mini outperform a 13" 2.53 MBP? they are *exactly* identical? And then how would it outperform a "top end macbook pro" when the top end is a 3.06 and dedicated Nvidia 9600 GPU?

    Its almost as if you people are guessing?

    yes, an iMac is going to be an upgrade from a mini -- since you are getting a faster 3.06 chip and a faster 7200 RPM drive -- and move up a model with a dedicated GPU and the gap gets even wider -- but so does the cost.

    I moved from a Dual G5 2.0 like the one you are looking at with 6 gigs ram, Radeon 9600PRO/256 megs Vram and a fast 640 gig drive to a 24" 2.4 AL iMac -- and the iMac made the G5 look like it was standing still...

    you want a mini...
     
  8. ucfgrad93 macrumors P6

    ucfgrad93

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Location:
    Colorado
    #8
    Apple made the switch from PPC to intel in 2006. There is no way I would invest in a 3 year old dead technology. Go for the mini.
     
  9. brisbaneguy29 macrumors 6502

    brisbaneguy29

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Location:
    Brisbane
    #9
    The G5 is an obsolete machine now, so if your looking to buy it, make sure you go in with your eyes open and know that you will not be able to get any new software. That being said, I am sitting here on my Quad G5, and am very very happy with it. The Quads, especially the ones with the 7800GT graphics card are the ones to get. It will very happily do the things you want it to.

    It does not slow down on websites, it doesn't feel slow. I can have iTunes running, be ripping a CD at the same time, playing a movie on quicktime on one monitor while making websites, without any slow down at all.

    The truth is the mac mini is faster, no doubt, but quite frankly, I can't slow this one down.

    The Geekbench scores for a Quad G5 are 3200+. That is no slouch. See graph here.
     
  10. Badger^2 macrumors 68000

    Badger^2

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2009
    Location:
    Sacramento
  11. brisbaneguy29 macrumors 6502

    brisbaneguy29

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Location:
    Brisbane
    #11
    So my point that the Quad G5 is not totally useless is correct. Yes? One post said the G5 would be slow on websites etc, I disagree. I think 3200+ for a machine that is 4 years old is still not too bad. The machine still works and performs very well, it is the lack of software support that is the real issue. Leopard is the last OS you will ever be able to install on it, and very soon I would imagine Apple will stop updating / supporting things like Safari and mail. That said the current versions still work perfectly.
     
  12. LouisBlack macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2007
    Location:
    Balham, London
    #12
    But that is a quad and the quads come with a much higher price tag than the duals... especially the 2.0 dual processor model. And although they are still nice and fast in comparison to other G5s they aren't that future proof. Apple will stop supporting Leopard sooner or later and you will not be able to run the newest Safari or iTunes... ok, this might be in 3 years time or so but an Intel Mini will still be able to run everything.
     
  13. Little Endian macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2003
    Location:
    Honolulu
    #13
    The G5 is still very useful

    The Geekbench scores are not indicative of real world performance. The Scores are CPU and disk intensive only and don't take into account GPU performance and real world application performance.

    I own a Quad 2.5Ghz G5 tower with a Geforce 7800GT, 8Gb of RAM. The only machines that can clearly beat my 4 year old plus machine are the Mac Pro towers and newest core i5 or i7 imacs. Granted the Geekbench scores don't reflect it but in real world performance the Quad G5 holds up well against even the newer Core 2 Duo machines. Sure it is not faster in every scenario but it can still hold it's own. I have a 15" mid 2009 2.66Ghz MBP Unibody GB of RAM 9600M GPU to compare to my Quad G5 and they seem to be relatively even footed with the MBP beating the G5 in certain scenarios and the G5 beating the MBP in others.

    The G5 can be expanded to 16GB of RAM, the GPU is upgradable and there is room for two internal drives with room for up to Six internal drives from third party vendors. Granted you are looking at a Dual 2Ghz PowerMac G5..... compared to a mac mini Core 2 Duo running at 2.26-2.53 Ghz in this particular case the mac mini will be faster than the Dual 2ghz G5 in every way possible, unless you upgrade the GPU in the G5 to a 7800Gt or Radeon X1900 in which case the G5 would hold it's own or even beat the mini in graphics intensive situations. But then again if you still have some useful older apps that are not UB then they might again run faster on the G5 also with the G5 you still have classic support if needed and more expansion options.

    In your particular case i would get the mini or opt for a Power Mac G5 that is either Dual 2.5 or 2.7Ghz or Quad 2.5 with an upgraded GPU. The G5 is a very reliable machine and I have not had any problems with my Quad and at work we have some older G5 towers that are well over 5 years old with no problems and they still have at least another year or two before I would call them obsolete. The G5 when introduced in 2003 was really light years ahead of it's time as it absolutely crushed anything that Intel or AMD had on the market at the time. Remember this was before Dual core CPUs had become mainstream and almost the entire Power Mac G5 line was Dual CPU or Dual Core CPU. Even after the switch to Intel in 2006 it took a couple of years before mainstream machines like Mac mini, Macbook, and imac were able to beat the G5 towers in performance. Remember the switch to intel was most motivated by the lack of an appropriate CPU for Apple's portable machines the desktop sector was not lacking by any means.

    Also of note Flash on my G5 with Leopard runs better "Less CPU demand and smoother" than my Snow Leopard MBP.
     
  14. Pak^Man macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2008
    Location:
    Columbus, OH
    #14
    Based on what?? Seriously, how can a 2.53 Mini outperform a 2.8 or 3.06 MBP..... if you have a real valid resaon I'll get a Mini today!
     
  15. seb-opp macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2008
    Location:
    London/Norwich
    #15
    I use my 1.8 CD macbook for what the OP wants to do and its fine. He wants to use Garageband and iMove so rendering time/best performance clearly isn't a huge issue. He is clearly in the 'consumer' market so shouldn't need a 'pro' spec machine.

    OP: Get a mac mini. Uses less energy than a powermac so cost of ownership will be lower, much quieter than a G5, Supports Snow Leopard and is more powerful.

    The mini might not be as expandable, but then again, the G5 actually isn't as expandable as you'd think: there's only two HDD bays and doesn't support many graphics cards. The new minis can allegedly support 8GB ram, so the G5 doesn't really have an advantage there either. Also, supposing you purchased a G5, would you really want to upgrade a machine that doesn't support the latest OS?
     
  16. Theclamshell thread starter macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2009
    #16
    thanks for all the help guys, i ended up getting a dual core 2.3 g5 with 4 gb ram/ 10k drives geforce 256 and a superdrive it was 400, im very happy with it
     
  17. MacMini2009 macrumors 68000

    MacMini2009

    Joined:
    May 22, 2009
    Location:
    California
    #17
    You didn't listen to any of us. I think you will regret your decision in the future.
     
  18. Theclamshell thread starter macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2009
    #18
    i know................ i just love the G5
     
  19. ouimetnick macrumors 68020

    ouimetnick

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2008
    Location:
    Beverly, Massachusetts
    #19
    I think he chose the G5 because its more like a Mac Pro. My brother uses his mac for Mail, safari and itunes, yet he had to have the MacBook Pro 15inch. It got stolen 7 months later. I told him to buy a macBook as it was a waste of money to buy a MacBook Pro. He said it looked cooler and like the aluminum, so he spent $1999 on a new one. This happened in March of 2008, so a Aluminum MacBook wasn't around.

    OP, you will be upset that the machine can't run snow leopard. It will last you 2 years or less before it becomes really obsolete. A mac Mini would have been a better choice. it has a better CPU, and uses new better faster technology.
     
  20. ouimetnick macrumors 68020

    ouimetnick

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2008
    Location:
    Beverly, Massachusetts
    #20
    You probaly like the Power Mac G5 because of its cool looking enclosure. You most likely put style before power. I really like the looks of the PowerMac G5 rather than the Mini. But I would have chose the mini because of power.
     
  21. Theclamshell thread starter macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2009
    #21
    you two got it right, idc about sl or it becoming obsolete, for me a machine is obsolete when it no longer does what i want it to do. Considering i still us my clamshell for internet sometimes im not worried. Plus i have a quad core desktop lol
     
  22. ouimetnick macrumors 68020

    ouimetnick

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2008
    Location:
    Beverly, Massachusetts
    #22
    So it sounds that you did chose it because of the cool aluminum chassis?
     
  23. dazey macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2005
    #23
    My 2 pence, buy a G4 or an intel. The G5 was a failure, I bought my G4 MDD after the G5 came out and at that time the G4 was still quicker than the G5 for most things! The G4s are cheaper and reliable. G5 was the reason apple went to Intel!
     
  24. Theclamshell thread starter macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2009
    #24
    mostly that and i wanted expandability also, this can have a 512mb graphics card and 16 gb of ram to the poster above, i already bought a G5 but yes i love the G4's and they were definitely reliable
     
  25. SkyBell macrumors 604

    SkyBell

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    Texas, unfortunately.
    #25
    For a reason I, to this day, cannot figure out, people always seem to underestimate the power of a G5, and overestimate the requirements for apps. G5's work well as mid-end machines these days, and they have way more power then the average computer user needs.
     

Share This Page