Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Is G5 as fast as Core Duo?

JoeG4 said:
I used to have a Dual 2GHz G5 (the 970FX model, between the original dual processor and the last dual core versions)..

It was slower than my brother's 1.8GHz core duo imac for most tasks. As strange as that sounds, the dual G4s always felt just as fast at the same basic stuff..

That said, I'd definitely get a mini.
Click to expand...

Would a dual G4 run Tiger well? I had an iMac g4 and those things were very slow for me.

The thing is that while I am getting a new Mac mini I still prefer Tiger to Leopard and obviously, I won't be able to run that on the new mini..

I'm complicated.
 
Evgenij said:
Would a dual G4 run Tiger well? I had an iMac g4 and those things were very slow for me.

The thing is that while I am getting a new Mac mini I still prefer Tiger to Leopard and obviously, I won't be able to run that on the new mini..

I'm complicated.
Click to expand...

From my experience, dual g4's are quite speedy for most tasks and they run photoshop well as well. The only things that may be a bit slow is video rendering.
 
The new Mac mini would destroy any Core Duo iMac and especially a dual G5 in any performance-related task.

Don't forget, you are comparing 2005 tech (latest G5) to 2009 tech (current Mac mini).

And since you already have a monitor I don't know what is stopping you from getting the mini right now... :confused: Its clearly the best fit for your price range.
 
Might I suggest this model when its in stock again? Certainly the best value, and would help even the price. Good luck with your Mac buying experience:D
SG :apple:
 
eXan said:
The new Mac mini would destroy any Core Duo iMac and especially a dual G5 in any performance-related task.

Don't forget, you are comparing 2005 tech (latest G5) to 2009 tech (current Mac mini).

And since you already have a monitor I don't know what is stopping you from getting the mini right now... :confused: Its clearly the best fit for your price range.
Click to expand...

yeah the 2.26 would blow it out of the water
 
I have a Core2Duo 2.2Ghz, and my brother is giving me a G5 (I don't know the exact specs) with a 24" ACD. Should I keep my PC or go for the Mac? My PC has 4GB RAM(Max), a ATI 2600xt 256mb Graphics (Can I transfer this to the G5?) and hard drives (I know are swappable).


So yeah, benefits of going G5 vs my current rig?
 
eXan said:
The 2.0 is not much slower, unless you sit in front of the computer with a stopwatch and measure how many seconds less it takes to convert a movie for iPod.
Click to expand...

However you will have a free heate (not really free), although its not always a good thing. The G5 runs very hot. The acd is worth more than the pc, why is he trading?
 
blackhand1001 said:
However you will have a free heate (not really free), although its not always a good thing. The G5 runs very hot. The acd is worth more than the pc, why is he trading?
Click to expand...

?? the 2.26 and 2.0 minis run at the same temp. What are you talking about?
 
Evgenij said:
Would a dual G4 run Tiger well? I had an iMac g4 and those things were very slow for me.

The thing is that while I am getting a new Mac mini I still prefer Tiger to Leopard and obviously, I won't be able to run that on the new mini..

I'm complicated.
Click to expand...

A dual G4 would run Tiger just fine, but I still don't recommend it. PPC is really getting dated now, and intel-only is rapidly approaching for both the OS and 3rd party software. Also, the G4s max out at 2 GB RAM, which is really not a lot anymore. If you could get one cheaply, like a dual 1.25 or 1.42 for $250 or so, then that might be worth it.

Personally, even at that price point I'd still go for the mini because it's built on much newer tech, will be far faster at everything, take up less space, use less power, comes with a warranty, and will be supported for years.
 
The G5 is slower than or equal to a Core Duo. When the macbooks first came out I read an article, testing the speeds of each in certain apps. The macbook came out on top in many of the tests.

Id say look for a used mac mini, although a Powermac would be useful if you plan to expand its storage or graphics card etc. Just you might not be able to run 10.6
 
Unless you already have a powerPC mac or your getting one for peanuts (less than £100). It wouldn't be worth it.

For what I bought my mac for, music, it's bearable now I have a dual CPU upgrade but the Geekbench score is only 749, a dual 2Ghz G5 manages 1684 which is nothing to get excited about when the most basic mac mini with only a core duo (1 core) CPU of 1.5Ghz can manage 1393 with the core duo 1.67 version scoring 2138!

A high score with a 1 core CPU means more RAW power, G4's are a joke for video encoding and playing flash content.

I'd look for one of the 1.83Ghz Core 2 Duo mac mini's on eBay.

Apple were selling them new for half the price of the top 2009 model when the new range came out (£325 vs £699). They sold fast and people are still having the cheek to be asking £400+ for a used version of the same model because they've added another 1Gb or RAM or £60 worth of hard drive.

Mac Mini's and Mac Pros seem to really hold their value
 
barkmonster said:
For what I bought my mac for, music, it's bearable now I have a dual CPU upgrade but the Geekbench score is only 749, a dual 2Ghz G5 manages 1684 which is nothing to get excited about when the most basic mac mini with only a core duo (1 core) CPU of 1.5Ghz can manage 1393 with the core duo 1.67 version scoring 2138!
Click to expand...
I beleive you mean a core solo, as a core duo has two cores:rolleyes: But it can be really confusing with a core 2 solo:p
SG :apple:
 
flopticalcube said:
Oddly enough, single core Core 2 chips do exist. MSI uses one in their MacBook Air clone.

BTW, that Geekbench score looks like the 1.66Ghz Core Duo. The Core Solo mini only came in a 1.5GHz flavor.
Click to expand...

It was, it breaks down like this:

Mac mini (Mid 2007)
Intel Core 2 T5600 1.83 GHz (2 cores) 2376

Power Mac G5 (June 2004)
PowerPC G5 (970FX) 2.7 GHz (2 cores) 2256

Mac mini (Early 2006)
Intel T2300 1.67 GHz (2 cores) 2138

Power Mac G5
PowerPC G5 (970) 1.8 GHz (2 cores) 1547

Mac mini (Early 2006)
Intel T1200 1.5 GHz (1 core) 1393

Power Mac G5
PowerPC G5 (970) 1.8 GHz (1 core) 1078
 
IMHO and I am noobish compared to many. The question of the G5 being as fast or almost as fast as a C2D is a bit irrelevant. After OS X 10.5 stops being supported, that will be the dead end to PPC. While the C2D based Mac will happily continue onto OS X 10.6 - which is the most important point; that's my contention.
 
MacAndy74 said:
IMHO and I am noobish compared to many. The question of the G5 being as fast or almost as fast as a C2D is a bit irrelevant. After OS X 10.5 stops being supported, that will be the dead end to PPC. While the C2D based Mac will happily continue onto OS X 10.6 - which is the most important point; that's my contention.
Click to expand...

Well, yes, of course you're right. It's just that remember, I am on a very tight budget so I want to get the best I can for the money.

After reading these replies I am going to place order for new Mac mini. Before that those Powermacs sure looked nice especially since there are $500 2.0Ghz 2GB of RAM models on ebay now.
 
Depends on what you do. Are you doing disk intensive things, processor intenstive things, or GPU intensive things?

For CPU benchmark google geekbench mac result
 
I have a C2D at 2.2Ghz and 4GB RAM, would it be profitable for me to go (down?) to a Power Mac G5 (the latest one) and upgrade RAM to 4-6GB? Am I correct in assuming that the latest Power Mac G5 was a dual core x2?


Well yeah, mainly would it be better for me (Oh yeah, going from Vista to [Tiger?])

I mean, I'm getting it for free, so yeah, I'll keep the G5 anyways, but for my main machine...
 
fireshot91 said:
I have a C2D at 2.2Ghz and 4GB RAM, would it be profitable for me to go (down?) to a Power Mac G5 (the latest one) and upgrade RAM to 4-6GB? Am I correct in assuming that the latest Power Mac G5 was a dual core x2?


Well yeah, mainly would it be better for me (Oh yeah, going from Vista to [Tiger?])

I mean, I'm getting it for free, so yeah, I'll keep the G5 anyways, but for my main machine...
Click to expand...

You might notice a small slowdown, but I'd have to say with those specs, the two are very comparable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back