How's the love for G5s with a single 1.8 GHz cpu?

Discussion in 'PowerPC Macs' started by QSDP-User, Nov 19, 2015.

  1. QSDP-User macrumors regular

    QSDP-User

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2015
    Location:
    California, USA
    #1
    I've never used a PM G5.

    I browse the local craigslist & I think more & more PM G5s will be listed as time goes on.
    ...And for cheap depending on the seller.
    I've seen a 2.0 DP with 2 17" monitors going for $25!
    (Posted 8 Days ago...must be gone and seller never deleted it)

    I keep telling myself I don't need another PPC or any other type of PC added to my mothballed fleet.
    But I am curious about opinions on the 2003 PMG5 1.8 (PCI-X).
    I read a little about the 2004 PMG5 1.8 (PCI) with its lower motherboard specs (entry level G5 model).

    I saw a clean-looking PM G5 Single 1.8 for $49.
    Actually, I don't know if this one is a 2004 or 2003,
    unless one could tell by looking at photos.

    Anyway, right now, I'm not in the market for a G5,
    so I'm just trying to get a feel for the PM G5's less powerful siblings though not the 1.6 GHz model.
    Perhaps the single cpu models aren't worth it if cheap duals galore appear.
    But then that might make the singles even cheaper, lol.

    Thanks for any info.
     
  2. LightBulbFun macrumors 6502a

    LightBulbFun

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2013
    Location:
    London UK
    #2
    the Single 1.8Ghz one you posted is a 2003 First gen G5 PowerMac 7,2 its the best single CPU PowerMac G5 with 8 ram slots (its also rather rare since it was not made for very long)
     
  3. eyoungren macrumors P6

    eyoungren

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2011
    Location:
    Phoenix • 85037
    #3
    Well…funny you should ask. :D

    My boss bought a 1.8Ghz single G5 in February 2005. It came with 4GB ram and an 80GB hard drive. That G5 was my main machine until early 2013 when either the logicboard or CPU failed (no idea which). I replaced the entire damn thing for $60 at that point and it went back into service. My coworker is using it. The "new" logicboard/CPU is older than the one it replaced.

    So, since Feb. 2005 that G5 has been on and running at full power (our Macs here at work do not sleep) 24/7. The G5 (with my Mac Pro) does newspaper production work. Legals, Classifieds, Ad Design, Page Layout, flyers, scanning, email, web browsing etc.

    It's running Adobe CS4, QuarkXPress 8.5.1, Acrobat Pro 9.4.5 (with Enfocus Pitstop Pro 6), Suitcase Fusion 2 and Office 2004 (my coworker prefers 2004 over 2008).

    EVERY job, EVERY task, everything I have ever thrown at this machine it's handled exceptionally well. And apparently, it's the one model that turned out to be superior in build quality.

    PS. That 80GB hard drive is still going too. It's my secondary drive (for burning) on my Mac Pro.
     
  4. QSDP-User thread starter macrumors regular

    QSDP-User

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2015
    Location:
    California, USA
    #4
    Amazing.
    Thanks for the fast ID, LightBulbFun.
     
  5. QSDP-User thread starter macrumors regular

    QSDP-User

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2015
    Location:
    California, USA
    #5
     
  6. QSDP-User thread starter macrumors regular

    QSDP-User

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2015
    Location:
    California, USA
    #6
    Thanks for the input, eyoungren.
    8 years good service til logicboard replacement & back to being a workhorse.
    I read about the PM G5 logicboard failure percentage at lowendmac.
     
  7. eyoungren macrumors P6

    eyoungren

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2011
    Location:
    Phoenix • 85037
    #7
    Yeah. We were extremely fortunate.

    Except for that failure, the only other issue I had in eight years was a ram stick. That happened in the first year and was replaced free under Applecare.

    Hands down, it's right up there with the two 1999-2000 vintage G4s I have, as the best and most reliable Macs I've ever used.
     
  8. bunnspecial macrumors 603

    bunnspecial

    Joined:
    May 3, 2014
    Location:
    Kentucky
    #8
    One of these was my first PPC Mac. Nearly 100 Macs later, it's still trudging right along with everything I throw at it.
     
  9. MacCubed macrumors 68000

    MacCubed

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2014
    Location:
    Florida
    #9
    Also I believe the later 1.8GHz G5s has a shorter motherboard than the earlier ones
     
  10. bobesch macrumors 6502a

    bobesch

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2015
    Location:
    Kiel, Germany
    #10
    I do like the design of the PM G5 - but I think the single-processor PM G5s are a bit outdated.
    Bulky, high power-consumption, loud...
    The 2x2.x or quads might be of another kind. But I wouldn't ever go for a single-core PM-G5.
    I've got a few iMac G5 used as "Fat-Clients" for RemoteDesktop/ScreenSharing - they're doing a good job.
    My only PM G5 2x2.0 is somehow heavy duty: loud fans, higher power consumption/less performance than an e.g.MB2008.
    Despite of it's aesthetic aspect it's a dinosaur of IT.
    The CubeG4 is the only one in the line of PowerMac that fits my needs of a "thin-client/RDP/ScreenSharing" and low power-consuption/low noise.
    Sorry about that...
     
  11. eyoungren macrumors P6

    eyoungren

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2011
    Location:
    Phoenix • 85037
    #11
    I would argue that the 1.8Ghz G5 SP is not loud. I used one for eight years. It was silent, still is.

    In comparison, the two G4s I have around here while not loud are far louder than the G5.

    Just my experience.
     
  12. bobesch, Nov 20, 2015
    Last edited: Nov 20, 2015

    bobesch macrumors 6502a

    bobesch

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2015
    Location:
    Kiel, Germany
    #12
    Ok, then 'my' G5 with it'S loud fan obviously is a bit worn off. (I've got a G4 MDD/Quicksilver which is loud too..)
    I do really appreciate the silence of my iBookG4-Clamshell, iBookG41.22 and MB2008alu - all upgraded to an SSD-Drive.
    A PM-G5-1x wouldn't be an option for me. Sorry about that - the case is so cool.
     
  13. 996085, Nov 20, 2015
    Last edited: Nov 20, 2015

    996085 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2015
    #13
    I have the PCI 1.8GHz model (9,1) and it's noticeably slow at many tasks. I used to own the original 2 x 2.0GHz model (7,2) and it was noticeably faster than the 1.8. Enough so I would recommend the dual core model over the single cores if the price isn't too different.
     
  14. QSDP-User, Nov 20, 2015
    Last edited: Nov 20, 2015

    QSDP-User thread starter macrumors regular

    QSDP-User

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2015
    Location:
    California, USA
    #14
    bobesch, I hear what you're saying about outdated.
    The thing is, I'm thinking of the PM G5 single 1.8 (PCI-X) as a compromise
    to the space heater/the max-cruncher.
    ...a PM G5 to play around with & maybe just appreciate as Goldilock's not-too-cold-but-not-too-hot.
    ...and playing the usual graphics card musical chairs when the on-the-cheap-eBay opportunity arises.

    Of course, all this made possible because the previous owners are (or will be)
    practically giving these vintage machines away (in good condition & not a fix-it nightmare)
    and maybe can't bear to see their machines die in e-cycle.
    I'm hoping that if a PM G5 is still running decent, then its logic board & PS are good.

    Now, for someone like me who's never even used a PM G5,
    this probably has more appeal.
    In the meantime though, I'll be casually browsing craigslist.

    I do want to hear opinions reflecting both positive & negative so I appreciate your input.
     
  15. QSDP-User thread starter macrumors regular

    QSDP-User

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2015
    Location:
    California, USA
    #15
    Yes, I read at everymac & lowendmac the specs of the PM G5 single 1.8 (PCI) and
    I thought the earlier 1.8 (PCI-X) would be the preferable, faster single cpu model to check out.

    Currently my fastest PPC is a Quicksilver 2002 Dual 1GHz which is still networked & Internet-ready.
    ...Leopard, Tiger & 9.2.2. I got a lot of older games in its Mac OS 9.2.2 drive.
    It is slow compared to my MacPro 1,1 3GHz Dual-Core.

    One reason I was inquiring about the single cpu models was
    that the power consumption/electric bill was less so than the duals.
    The noise factor of the PM G5 series seems to vary among users.
     
  16. 996085 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2015
    #16
    The original single 1.8GHz PCI-X PM G5 (7,2) is preferable to the 1.8GHz PCI PM G5 (9,1) that I have. In fact the 1.8GHz PCI is probably the second lowest end configuration G5 of the series (with the original 1.6GHz PCI PM G5 (7,2) being the lowest end...but then the 1.6GHz model has a faster bus than the 1.8GHz PCI model). The original single 1.8GHz model has several advantages over this one:
    • Faster bus speed (900MHz versus 600MHz)
    • Twice the RAM capacity (8GB versus 4GB)
    • PCI-X versus PCI slots
    All else being equal I'd go with the original single 1.8GHz PCI-X system.

    Having said that the dual 2.0GHz PCI-X PM G5 (7,2) I had was notably faster in just about everything than this system. Keeping an eye on Activity Monitor I see the CPU is pegged...a lot. With the dual processor system the second CPU really seemed to help out...even with non-CPU intensive tasks (such as writing this...I've got Activity Monitor running and the CPU usage is averaging about 75%). Perhaps it's because this system is on the low end of PM G5 offerings for the single CPU variants...maybe the original single 1.8GHz PCI-X system will be faster. Given the price differences between a single and dual system my recommendation would be to go with the dual. It just felt so much faster (despite this system having an SSD and the dual system having a spinner HD). The dual CPU systems aren't really any more expensive. In fact I picked up the dual 2.0GHz system for $65 last year.

    As for noise all of the G5 PMs I've had have been quiet. Perhaps as they age they're becoming noisier as the fan bearings wear. Or it could be those that are noisy have a lot of dust in them requiring the fans to spin at higher speeds (I keep my cleaned out as I'm a strong believer heat is one of the primary reasons for a system reaching an early EOL).

    If you have any specific questions feel free to ask.

    Configuration:
    • Single 1.8GHz
    • 2GB RAM
    • 64GB SSD
    • ATI Radeon 9600 XT
    • OS X 10.5.8
     
  17. QSDP-User thread starter macrumors regular

    QSDP-User

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2015
    Location:
    California, USA
    #17
    Great info on user-experience for single 1.8 (PCI), pl595, thanks.
    Gets me to wondering about comparative PMG5 benchmarks.
    Probably G5 benchmark threads galore in the forum here.
    ...with different RAM/vid card configs, etc.
    I think I'll take a look & see how any single 1.8 (PCI-X) rates.

    Dronecatcher posted a recent DIY benchmark thread.
    Though looking at it, it involves a 5 sec 1080p file.
    That seems like a pretty high-end starting point
    (though I don't know how well lower-end PM G5s handle 1080p).

    And you're right about potential prices between used singles & dual -
    both of which will only go down as time goes by.
     
  18. 996085 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2015
    #18
    My experience shows the CPU utilization is what is impacting the feel of the system. If there's any specific benchmark you'd like me to run let me know. I'll do so if it doesn't cost anything or involve a lot of setup time.
     
  19. QSDP-User thread starter macrumors regular

    QSDP-User

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2015
    Location:
    California, USA
    #19
    Here's the aforementioned benchmark setup Dronecatcher made available to this forum:
    http://forums.macrumors.com/threads/diy-benchmark.1862039/

    On a related note, I've been looking at various posting titles via search & "similar threads".
    "What's the best G5 this & that"
    I'll be reading threads all day. :p
    ...hey look, bunnspecial really likes his G5 single 1.8 for crunching compared to most of his G4s. ;)

    Gotta see if the Classic environment with older games is an option.
     
  20. eyoungren macrumors P6

    eyoungren

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2011
    Location:
    Phoenix • 85037
    #20
    It's an option if you stick to Panther or Tiger. Leopard killed Classic.

    And of course, no G5 can ever boot into OS9.
     
  21. QSDP-User thread starter macrumors regular

    QSDP-User

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2015
    Location:
    California, USA
    #21
    Got it, thanks!
    ..and of course, the Classic OS wouldn't benefit from duals :(
     
  22. lawrence_talbott macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2015
    #22
    I have a 2.3 dual-core PM G5 that I've had for about a year. When I got it, this machine tended to ramp up in noise whenever it did anything related to web browsing or compiling, so earlier this year I replaced the thermal paste on the CPU. It made all the difference in the world--it's very quiet doing just about anything now. Not surprising considering that this 10-year old machine probably had its original thermal paste from the factory, and when I replaced the paste, there was very little left of the original. Temps are lower--and more consistent across the two cores--than before. This also results in an energy savings, of course.

    Since the newest PM G5 is 9 years old, it's not surprising that they have a reputation for being noisy today. I think that in many cases, simply applying new thermal paste would bring loud ones back to factory noise levels, which in my experience is a whole lot quieter than the "wind tunnel" MDD PM G4 I bought in 2002. My PM G5's noise level is actually comparable to a tower Mac Pro most of the time.
     
  23. 996085 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2015
    #23
    Here you go:

    1.8GHz single CPU PCI PM G5, 2GB RAM, 64GB SSD, OS X 10.5.8:

    File: test.mp4

    Saturday, 14:33:16: Export Stream started
    Saturday, 14:33:30: Encoding
    Saturday, 14:33:55: Encoding
    Saturday, 14:34:59: Encoding
    Saturday, 14:36:13: Encoding
    Saturday, 14:37:26: Encoding
    Saturday, 14:38:39: Encoding
    Saturday, 14:39:52: Encoding
    Saturday, 14:41:06: Encoding
    Saturday, 14:42:19: Encoding
    Saturday, 14:43:32: Encoding
    Saturday, 14:44:45: Encoding
    Data rate 4.68 Mbps (4.55 video, 0.13 audio)
    Saturday, 14:44:57: Movie completed

    Just for grins:

    2.93GHz 24 thread Z600, 48GB RAM, 1TB spinner, Windows 7:

    File: test.mp4
    Saturday, 14:54:38: Export Stream started
    Saturday, 14:54:51: Encoding
    Saturday, 14:55:08: Encoding
    Saturday, 14:56:04: Encoding
    Saturday, 14:58:25: Encoding
    Data rate 640 kbps (512 video, 129 audio)
    Saturday, 14:59:01: Movie completed

    I have no idea what these numbers mean. Doesn't appear this application takes advantage of multiple core systems.
     
  24. QSDP-User, Nov 21, 2015
    Last edited: Nov 21, 2015

    QSDP-User thread starter macrumors regular

    QSDP-User

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2015
    Location:
    California, USA
    #24
    Hmmm, my guess is that number-wise
    1st test took 00:11:41 mins
    2nd test took 00:04:23 mins

    Back at the DIY thread a poster named Beavix had these results:
    G5 DP 1.80 GHz Leopard: 00:05:51
    G4 DP 1.25 GHz Leopard: 00:09:33
    G4 1.67 GHz 17" PowerBook Leopard: 00:16:25
     
  25. 996085, Nov 22, 2015
    Last edited: Nov 22, 2015

    996085 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2015
    #25
    Everything appears to be in line. Here is the benchmark with a single G4 933GHz Quick Silver, 512 MB RAM, OS X 10.4.?:

    File: test.mp4
    Sunday, 06:51:04: Export Stream started
    Sunday, 06:51:39: Encoding
    Sunday, 06:52:37: Encoding
    Sunday, 06:54:51: Encoding
    Sunday, 06:57:21: Encoding
    Sunday, 06:59:52: Encoding
    Sunday, 07:02:19: Encoding
    Sunday, 07:04:42: Encoding
    Sunday, 07:07:04: Encoding
    Sunday, 07:09:34: Encoding
    Sunday, 07:12:04: Encoding
    Sunday, 07:14:34: Encoding
    Data rate 4.68 Mbps (4.55 video, 0.13 audio)

    Time to complete: 00:22:49

    And my 2.7GHz Core i7 MacBook Pro, 16GB RAM, 768GB SSD, OS X 10.9.5:

    File: test.mp4
    Sunday, 07:37:32: Export Stream started
    Sunday, 07:37:34: Encoding
    Sunday, 07:37:37: Encoding
    Sunday, 07:37:46: Encoding
    Data rate 4.79 Mbps (4.67 video, 0.13 audio)
    Sunday, 07:37:48: Movie completed

    Time to complete: 00:00:16
     

Share This Page