How fast is a Quad 2.5GHz PowerMac G5?

Discussion in 'PowerPC Macs' started by EnderBeta, Feb 11, 2017.

  1. EnderBeta macrumors 6502

    EnderBeta

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2016
    #1
    For reference I have a 2012 Mac Mini 2.3GHz i7, Late 2015 iMac 5K 4GHz i7, Early 2015 MacBook Pro 13" 2.5GHz i5, a Core i7 5930K gaming machine I built and even though I don't have it put together right now I have a Core 2 Quad Q9650 (four cores 3GHz from the Core 2 Duo days).

    I figure the G5 2.5GHz quad setup is probably not as fast as my more modern machines but is it safe to say it is as fast as my Core 2 Quad Q9650 processor?
     
  2. EnderBeta thread starter macrumors 6502

    EnderBeta

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2016
    #2
    Looks but no responses.... thanks for the help everyone.
     
  3. Zobrien macrumors member

    Zobrien

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2017
    Location:
    Tennessee
    #3
    I don't think it is, as the G5 was produced before the Q9650.. so the Q9650 not only has a higher clock speed, but it is probably more efficient as well.
     
  4. bunnspecial macrumors 603

    bunnspecial

    Joined:
    May 3, 2014
    Location:
    Kentucky
    #4
    The Quad is still quite useable with software reasonably optimized to run on a G5, but most of the computers you list will leave it in the dust-your Core2Quad included.

    I have a first generation Mac Pro that has been upgraded to the specs of a Mac Pro 2,1. It has dual quad core 3.0ghz processors, along with 16gb of RAM and an SSD. Even in its stock config(dual dual 2.66) it was faster than a Quad at most things, and with the current processors its no contest.

    There are some VERY specific cases where a Quad MIGHT outperform it, but that's grasping at the straws. The best example where I've seen it myself is with Photoshop CS2 in OS X. CS2 is PPC native, and it pretty well leverages some G5-specific instructions. Rosetta doesn't emulate a G5, so for certain computationally intensive tasks in CS2 a Quad is faster than Mac Pro 1,1(I've seen it first hand-specifically when I'm applying lens correction filters to high resolution scans of 4x5 film, which are on the order of 800 million pixels). There again, though, that's a fringe use case, and for most everything else the Mac Pro is faster. Heck, when using CS3 or later for the same task, the Mac Pro rips the Quad to shreds since CS3 is universal.
     
  5. KawaiiAurora macrumors 6502

    KawaiiAurora

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2016
    Location:
    Europa
    #5
    I think you must keep in mind that you're using computers that are a minimum of 11(ish) years old when using PowerPC. Raw performance isn't really the no1 concern tbh. PowerPC machines feel snappy even with lower end hardware but you can't really compare them to PC hardware. A Pentium 4 @ 3.06GHz should rip my 400MHz Sawtooth to bits but my Sawtooth still runs snappier than the Pentium 4 computer with Linux. You won't be doing 4K video encoding but it's still good for stuff that's ligther. Just don't expect tooo much out of an old PPC mac.
     
  6. Eriamjh1138@DAN macrumors 6502

    Eriamjh1138@DAN

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2007
    Location:
    BFE, MI
    #6
    The Quad is the fastest PPC ever produced, but its advantage is that the OS hasn't been upgraded to contain all of the speed-sucking eye candy and internal features newer OSes have, like Sierra has with Siri, etc.

    Benchmark and raw performance, the quad was bested by the Mac Pro within a couple years if not sooner.

    What matters is that it does what YOU NEED it to do.
     
  7. MagicBoy macrumors 68040

    MagicBoy

    Joined:
    May 28, 2006
    Location:
    Manchester, UK
    #7
    Nowhere near.

    GeekBench 2 scores :
    Quad G5 - 3316
    Q9650 - 5200
     
  8. MysticCow macrumors 6502a

    MysticCow

    Joined:
    May 27, 2013
    #8
    The quad is fast, but not as fast as any current Intel offering. Kind of sad, because those G5's really had some degree of potential to them. However, technology marches forward and PowerPC did not march with them, so we now have Intel Macs.

    You'll have a decent experience with a G5 PowerPC. If your last PPC was a G4, prepare to be shocked by how nice the G5's really were. If you're coming from about anything else, you'll be disappointed save for the nostalgia value.
     
  9. Eriamjh1138@DAN macrumors 6502

    Eriamjh1138@DAN

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2007
    Location:
    BFE, MI
    #9
    Remember that the computer only needs to feel fast enough for what you do. Browsing, emailing, ripping and editing audio, etc. I doubt anyone here is trying to do 4K stuff. It just didn't exist when the PPC was finally dropped by developers. What's frustrating is we probably CAN do more with our old machines, but the developers have left us behind.

    Strip out the modernized services, and the G5 is no slouch, but for crunching real hard numbers, it's been surpassed several times over.
     
  10. Daniël Oosterhuis macrumors 6502a

    Daniël Oosterhuis

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2016
    Location:
    Black Mesa Research Facility
    #10
    You expect an answer in three hours in a niche computer forum to a very vague question? I mean, what defines "fast"? Snappy interface? Raw performance? Video playback? I'm sorry, but maybe you should ask clearer questions and gain some patience. When working with PowerPC Macs, patience is key, so it'll do you very well!
     

Share This Page