Is this a good idea? Buying a Power Mac G5 to browse the internet with TenFourFox

[2aw]

After reading this amusing review of the Power Mac G5 http://women-and-dreams.blogspot.com/2017/11/apple-power-macintosh-g5-flame-on.html

I usually don’t use desktops anymore (laptops are much more convenient), but I have an extra monitor + keyboard + mouse set. Should I get a used Power Mac G5 (they can be gotten for a good price in the local classified if you wait long enough), upgrading to either 4 GB / 8 GB / 16 GB of RAM: https://everymac.com/actual-maximum-mac-ram/actual-maximum-power-mac-g5-ram-capacity.html and use it to browse the internet with TenFourFox?


According to the link above, the:
Fastest 2 x dual CPU G5 geekbench is 3316
Fastest dual CPU G5 geekbench is 2259
Fastest dual core G5 geekbench is 2082
Fastest single core G5 Geekbench is 1047 (is this too slow?)

Fastest iMac G5 Geekbench is 1106 https://everymac.com/systems/apple/imac/specs/imac_g5_2.1_20.html (is this too slow? Also see the lack of RAM on the iMac G5 compared to the Power Mac G5)


I would have a nicely designed aesthetic tower computer case and I theorize that a G5 with 4 GB, 8 GB, 16 GB of RAM (would even 4 GB work, is that still too low for the modern web? I have 16 GB on my MacBook Pro and I wouldn’t go any lower if I was buying a new laptop today) should be fast enough for TenFourFox.

1. What is the minimum G5 CPU I should get?
2. I think an SSD upgrade would be good too, they keep dropping in price.
3. What is the noise level of the Power Mac G5’s? I like my computers to be very quiet, would I be able to swap out the stock fans for quiet (or almost silent) ones?

What do you all think?

What can be improved on this idea?

 

[Amethyst1]

To be honest: I consider this to be a pretty terrible idea.

A Power Mac G5 consumes a lot of power/electricity under load… for a “lacklustre” web browsing experience: All browsers available for OS X on PPC are more or less outdated. TenFourFox development has been halted and it is outdated. Some websites may not work properly, some may need tricks and workarounds to work (more or less), some may not work at all.

It's not a question of being "fast enough for TenFourFox (or some other browser)". If a browser is too old to cope with a website because it doesn't support some feature(s) it uses, then having all the CPU power in the world won't help you. Moreover, electricity isn’t free ("performance per watt"). It’s quite expensive where I live so I may be biased against “power hogs”.

I’d much rather go for a classic Mac Pro (2008 or newer to be precise, so that you can run versions of OS X/macOS newer than El Capitan). Same aesthetic, affordable, much faster, much better performance per watt, much more modern OSes than a G5 — and, most importantly, modern browsers that will actually give you a "good" web browsing experience without needing to resort to all kinds of tricks and workarounds.

If web browsing is the job, the G5 isn't the right tool for that anymore, at least if you're going to be running OS X. Linux, on the other hand, gives you access to much more modern browsers. But Linux on a G5 isn't necessarily a walk in the park.

I apologise for the car analogy, but it's sort of like buying a classic Ferrari just to drive to the local supermarket for grocery shopping. Yes, it will do that but with much higher gas consumption, emissions and noise levels (which isn't necessarily a bad thing when it comes to Ferraris), and much less comfortable than a more modern car.

 

[eyoungren]

I have 16 GB on my MacBook Pro and I wouldn’t go any lower if I was buying a new laptop today) should be fast enough for TenFourFox.

1. What is the minimum G5 CPU I should get?
2. I think an SSD upgrade would be good too, they keep dropping in price.
3. What is the noise level of the Power Mac G5’s? I like my computers to be very quiet, would I be able to swap out the stock fans for quiet (or almost silent) ones?

What do you all think?

What can be improved on this idea?

If you would not go any lower in RAM, then…

1. You are limited to the 2.0/2.3 Dual Core G5 or the 2.5 Quad G5. All earlier G5s have a 4 or 8GB RAM limit. Only these last three models can use 16GB.

Note, that the last PowerBook G4 ever produced is limited to 2GB ram.

2. SSDs are fine. I have an SSD in my 17" PowerBook. You are limited to SATA 1 or 2 with the G5, so you'll need a SSD that is compatible.

3. I consider noise levels to be acceptable. However, I have Tinnitus, so fan noise is actually white noise to me. Let's just say the G5s are quieter than the PowerMac G4 MDDs, but not as quiet as the PowerMac G4s before that.

I agree with @Amethyst1. Get a Mac Pro. The experience is going to not be great on a G5. Remember in the other thread how I mentioned that the experience was getting bad with my Quad G5? That's the best model G5 Apple ever made, I had 16GB ram and a 2TB hard drive. I moved the web browser profile folder and the cache on to a RAM disk. And I still struggled with T4Fx.

 

[sailorMH]

@2aw
To use old powerpc is good idea only for nostalgy and for some old games.
If you like powerpc, do it. Otherwise not.
Powermac G5 dual ( or quad ) core is for sure better than dual processor G5 or iMac G5. But as @Amethyst1 said, they are power hungry.

If you want to use it daily, linux is must-have. Linux browsers are much more up-to-date than OSX, but they still lacks a lot of hardware acceleration ( because of big-endian missing code ). So compares to modern 4-core 2.5 Ghz computer are slower.
To have linux on powermac needs some experience or enthusiasm. But you can use current distro of Debian 11, with nearly everything you want.

With powermac you are also limited in graphic cards - for dual core G5 are the best for OSX Radeon X1900 or Nvidia Quadro FX 4500. With linux you can use cards upto Radeon Northern Island family - something like HD6870.

You can also try MorphOS system there. Very fast, with modern browser, but lacks many applications like Ofiice.

I enjoy my Powermac Quad, but it is not hobby for everyone. For daily use I have AMD64 linux.

 

[Certificate of Excellence]

Is this a good idea? Buying a Power Mac G5 to browse the internet with TenFourFox?​

No, it is not a good idea IMO. As already stated, your money is much better spent on a cMP 3,1 4,1 or 5,1 and catch that early Intel wave as folks ditch their cMPs for comparatively efficient Apple silicon. Performance will be magnitudes better the higher you go, the cMP is quieter, you get the advantage of a newer macOS/linux experience, i/o improvements, more drive bays and the aesthetic is almost identical. Now if you are dead set on a PowerPC mac, my thoughts are below but understand that your browsing internet user experience on a Powermac G5 will be inferior to any you would have with a cMP - even a 1,1 as they can be updated to El Cap, 32gb ram, SSD etc supporting a vastly more modern user experience with access to more recent browsers etc.

1. What is the minimum G5 CPU I should get? Dual core or quad core models only a1117/1177. More importantly, max the ram to 16gb.
2. I think an SSD upgrade would be good too, they keep dropping in price. Yes. They're so cheap nowadays, I'd buy two120gb+ and run them in software raid.
3. What is the noise level of the Power Mac G5’s? I like my computers to be very quiet, would I be able to swap out the stock fans for quiet (or almost silent) ones? Do not swap fans. These machines are elderly and known to run hot. Messing with their specifically engineered thermal zones is a bad idea IMO. A superior strategy forward IMO is to keep the internals clean & free of dust and repaste the cpu & northbridge with fresh thermal grease. Once tuned up and calibrated, the fan noise at idle is nominal to my ears.
4. One caveat about the quad core Powermac G5 is that it is liquid cooled and the cooler will eventually leak, so if you are considering that model, be prepared to replace the gaskets and coolant as a matter of maintenance/tune up alongside the repaste. Again, these G5s are elderly computers at this point so surfing the internet on one in 2023 in my view is akin to asking your grandpa to run a 10k in under 30 minutes without breakfast.
5. Best of luck to you either way you go

 

[eyoungren]

1. I think an SSD upgrade would be good too, they keep dropping in price. Yes. They're so cheap nowadays, I'd buy two120gb+ and run them in software raid.

*Chuckle*

My boot drive on my cMP 5,1 is 1TB and the other three bays have two 6TB HDDs and one 3TB HDD.

I also have a 2TB RAID enclosure attached. 2x 1TB HDDs.

 

[Amethyst1]

I'd buy two120gb+ and run them in software raid.

What’s the benefit?

 

[Certificate of Excellence]

Unsubstantiated bragging rights.

****

Ok, done with my sons homework lesson so can follow up on my response - The raid I mentioned is for whatever your preference is really - redundancy (1) or improved I/o speed(0). In my use case, I was looking for affordable performance so with my a1117 DC 2ghz G5, I filled the two hdd slots with two 120gb SSDs in raid0 as my boot drive and a 3Tb spinner out the back for storage/backups. It’s a cheap and snappy (for a PMG5 anyhow) boot drive solution.

Subsequently it is the same solution I leverage on my cMP 1,1 as well. With that of course I have a couple big drives in sled 3 & 4 for storage/backup (nothing out the back).

Wish I had taken the time to benchmark before & afters as that would be great for the detail oriented folks reading this. Suffice to say both boxes are quite snappy with this affordable solution.

If the inference was what is the benefit in relation to browsing & internet? Nothing really beyond app launches.

 

[theMarble]

1. What is the minimum G5 CPU I should get?
2. I think an SSD upgrade would be good too, they keep dropping in price.
3. What is the noise level of the Power Mac G5’s? I like my computers to be very quiet, would I be able to swap out the stock fans for quiet (or almost silent) ones?

1. The slowest G5 you can get is the Single 1.6GHz model. For multi-core apps, the Quad core 2.5GHz is the fastest, but for some apps that prefer faster cores than many cores, the Dual CPU 2.7GHz (which is what I have) is the fastest.

2. An SSD will do wonders to any system, although keep in mind this won't help very much with web browsing.

3. As I mentioned above, my G5 is the Dual CPU 2.7GHz model that is liquid-cooled. So this means it is one of the fastest G5's ever made, however it is much noisier than lower spec models. It is very loud when doing anything other than sitting at idle. I have already checked the LC system, no leaks or issues. Just a loud machine.

In my opinion, getting a G5 with the sole intention being to do web browsing on it in 2023, is just silly. They consume way more power than any more modern system, are much louder, and unless you are willing to dive into the Linux world, cannot visit many modern sites anymore.

I personally got mine as I wanted to see how much faster a G5 is over a G4, I wasn't planning to get such a high end config, but here we are (It came up for a very good price).

Browsing the web is doable, but it depends on how much time and effort you want to put in. Running InterWeb on Leopard (the successor to TFF now that it has been discontinued) can get you to many sites at a reasonable speed, such as the old Reddit and here on MR, but modern sites that have ads, lots of animations and live updating information slow it down to a crawl.

Linux can fix some of this, as you can run a much more modern web browser such as Arctic Fox or Firefox, however the simple fact is that these PowerPC machines are not suited for the modern web anymore.

If you are wanting an old Apple desktop, I highly suggest looking into a 2009/2010/2012 Mac Pro, which can once upgraded with a Metal-capable GPU and SSD can run modern macOS releases like Monterey and Ventura just fine. A 2012 Mac mini could also be another option.

 

[eyoungren]

I personally got mine as I wanted to see how much faster a G5 is over a G4, I wasn't planning to get such a high end config, but here we are (It came up for a very good price).

One of the reasons I stayed on my Quad G5 for so long is programs. InDesign, Photoshop and Illustrator CS4. With ID, I could (and still can) get current documents open (if saved out as IDML).

Large drives, 16GB ram and that G5 was quite capable of handling layout and content creation. In fact, I still revert back to Photoshop CS4 on my cMP in order to access a particular tool.

Office 2008, Acrobat 9, QuarkXPress 8, Suitcase Fusion 3…it was all a pretty good lineup. And the thing is that all these apps are still usable.

But web browsing? Just a hard no on that at this point.

 

[theMarble]

InDesign, Photoshop and Illustrator CS4. With ID, I could (and still can) get current documents open (if saved out as IDML).

Adobe apps have always been good in that regard. It depends on what tools and effects are in the file (if any), but I've gotten some of my current After Effects 2023 projects to open in CS6, and a few as far back as CS4.

 

[Amethyst1]

The raid I mentioned is for whatever your preference is really - redundancy (1) or improved I/o speed(0).

I know, but do you notice a difference between one SSD and two SSDs in RAID 0 for your use cases? Faster benchmark results is one thing, tangible real-world benefits is another, and there’s the increased risk of data loss.

Subsequently it is the same solution I leverage on my cMP 1,1 as well.

A four-lane AHCI PCIe SSD will be much faster than that and less of a failure point.

 

[theMarble]

I know, but do you notice a difference between one SSD and two SSDs in RAID 0 for your use cases? Faster benchmark results is one thing, tangible real-world benefits is another, and there’s the increased risk of data loss.

For a while, I ran a RAID0 array in my G5.

In terms of performance, of course the benchmarks were way higher (given that the drives I used were low end models), and while I could see a slight increase in day-to-day performance (especially while copying files), to me it wasn't worth hogging 2 SSD's up in one system, when one of them could be used in another machine.

 

[Certificate of Excellence]

I know, but do you notice a difference between one SSD and two SSDs in RAID 0 for your use cases? Faster benchmark results is one thing, tangible real-world benefits is another, and there’s the increased risk of data loss.

Very true. If you’re DDing the PM, redundancy would be preferable Id think - why risk data loss for a murky performance gain. Now this can be mitigated with adequate external storage & backups but if you don’t have an external storage solution, the two hdd bay limit is problematic. In my case it was about fun - maximizing cheap performance and taking the PM as far as I could. With the low cost of SSDs nowadays, I see little reason not to.

You’ve read my mind on the 1,1 although I had a bunch of free to me SSDs at that time so it was one of those spend money or don’t scenarios. At that time lunch money won out lol 🙂 I believe I notice improved, snappier function but to your point the difference while visible on paper is murkier anecdotally. It is unfortunate that the 1,1 does not boot nvme but adding a sata3 card for 600mb transfer would be a nice bump & Im pretty sure the drives I have in there now are Sata3 being downgraded to sata2 so 300mb xfer. Still, I’d not hesitate to do a SSD raid again in either the PMG5 or cMP considering their low cost and ease of installation/setup. The ROI is worth it IMHO.

 

[scarlett7447]

Honestly, despite what everyone else is saying, if you can tolerate waiting *a lot* for pages and content to load and you are ok with the fact that it is going to consume way too much power for the performance you're getting, then by all means go for it. Keep in mind this doesn't really compare to an Intel machine from that time, those still have a lot more support and are generally more usable for web browsing.
I have a 3,1 Mac Pro and while it's still very fast, I find myself using my 2.3 GHz Power Mac G5 more often than it. I have 8 GB in mine and think it's enough. I've never seen it use more than 2 or 3.

Let's just say the G5s are quieter than the PowerMac G4 MDDs, but not as quiet as the PowerMac G4s before that.

Are you talking about the liquid-cooled one? Both of my Late 2005 air cooled units are much, much quieter than any of my G4 and G3 Power Macs. I can't hear the fans at all, except if I put my head very close to the machine.

 

[Certificate of Excellence]

LOL Fundamentally, being into PowerPC macs is an unending exercise in patience.

 

[B S Magnet]

Honestly, despite what everyone else is saying, if you can tolerate waiting *a lot* for pages and content to load and you are ok with the fact that it is going to consume way too much power for the performance you're getting, then by all means go for it. Keep in mind this doesn't really compare to an Intel machine from that time, those still have a lot more support and are generally more usable for web browsing.

For its many faults (including a failing U3/backside which gets too hot too easily), I love my mid-2004 DP G5 — especially because I paid the nice price of gratis for it and a 20-inch ACD in 2014 (the previous owners, who’d been using it as a doorstop[!!!!] and had had it given to them by the original owner, dubbed that G5 “Enron”). I do virtually no web browsing on it, most because I don’t enjoy web browsing on a desktop as much as on a laptop, but it still does 24/7 duty as a file server. For a while, until I kept hitting that U3/backside overheat thermal problem causing shutdowns, I was even testing it out as a working Nicecast streaming audio server.

If one knows how to mitigate energy consumption (namely, running at either reduced or automatic processor mode in Energy Settings), and the ACD is sent to sleep after, say, more than 10 minutes of doing nothing, the power consumption really isn’t exceptional for its time and its class of computing.

Of course, I’m always humbled by remembering how its highest Geekbench 2 scores were in the low 1800s range, whereas my slowest Intel Mac in daily use, my early 2008 A1261 MacBook Pro, manages just over 4000 in the same (and yes, runs a slight bit cooler, too).

 

[eyoungren]

Are you talking about the liquid-cooled one? Both of my Late 2005 air cooled units are much, much quieter than any of my G4 and G3 Power Macs. I can't hear the fans at all, except if I put my head very close to the machine.

Yeah, the Quad G5 is primarily what I used from February 2017 to May 2020. I do have a 2.3DC and a 2.7DP though. The 2.3DC was always quiet, but I only used it for a short amount of time so I can't really speak to exactly how quiet it was.

The 2.7DP on the other hand came with some sort of cooling issue. It will idle with some noise. I can use it for light tasks but it will lock up if I do anything heavy with it. It doesn't really spin fans up so I can't get a read on it.

The one G5 I had the most experience with was a 1.8Ghz single processor G5 at my old job. But it was either on the floor or located far enough away that I didn't notice any noise.

 

[floral]

Not a mac user, but by browsing the forums and with some common sense I can tell you this is a bad idea. PowerPCs are ancient, heavy and weak in terms of performance, not to mention the battery life is pretty bad. You would be much better buying an early Intel in exchange for a moderately higher cost, as they are very upgradable and can be patched to support newer OSes, and if you're dedicated enough, a Mac from 10-12 years ago can rival one from just 3 years ago.

PowerPCs can still be used for stuff like web browsing and email, but it's pretty hindered.

 

[Boyd01]

I also think this is a very bad idea, unless you are some kind of Mac collector. If you want a desktop Mac for web browsing, a used Mini would be a much better option. The 2012 Mini was a great machine with upgradeable RAM (16gb max) and SSD, but no longer supported beyond Catalina. They are very cheap now.

2014 Mini supports up to Monterey and has an upgradeable SSD but soldered RAM (16gb max). Also very cheap today. 2018 (Intel) Mini has upgradeable RAM (requires disassembly though) up to 64gb but soldered SSD. These are clearly the best vintage Mini's at the moment, but not as cheap. They support Ventura and will possible support the next version of MacOS.

I loved my G5, but it died in 2007 and I moved on to Intel after that, which was a big improvement in performance. Still have a dead PowerMac G4 and PowerBook G4 in the closet, these old Macs were great in their day but just don't interest me now.

 

[B S Magnet]

2014 Mini supports up to Monterey and has an upgradeable SSD but soldered RAM (16gb max).

This being the PowerPC forum, a few folks here would consider Monterey, Ventura, and Big Sur to be a bug, not a feature.

 

[AphoticD]

The G5 is a fun idea, but really not practical for comfortably browsing if your expectations are for a modern web experience.

If you just want a cheap solution to put your monitor, keyboard and mouse to good use, I would recommend a little Mac mini. The 2009 models are mostly cheap (even sub $50) and can be easily upgraded to 8GB of RAM and an SSD. You could install up to El Capitan natively, or use dosdude1's Catalina Patcher, which I can confirm works great on my 2009 mini. OCLP will support more recent macOS, but Catalina is still fully supported at this time for browsers and (some) security patches.

The i5 2011 model minis are quite affordable - I use one myself as a daily driver on a hiDPI display (I wouldn't recommend a HiDPI setup on the 2009 mini). 2012 is even better, but the prices are still higher due to the native Mojave/Catalina support IMO.

As others have pointed out, PowerPC and even modest expectations of a modern web experience do not exactly go hand in hand. There are plenty of tweaks and workarounds to satisfy the tinkerer though.

 

[Amethyst1]

2014 Mini supports up to Monterey and has an upgradeable SSD but soldered RAM (16gb max).

...and only dual-core CPUs.

The i5 2011 model minis are quite affordable - I use one myself as a daily driver on a hiDPI display (I wouldn't recommend a HiDPI setup on the 2009 mini).

Speaking of HiDPI, neither the 2009 nor 2011 mini will do 4K at 60 Hz. For 4K at 60 Hz, you need a 2018.

 

[m1maverick]

I know, but do you notice a difference between one SSD and two SSDs in RAID 0 for your use cases? Faster benchmark results is one thing, tangible real-world benefits is another, and there’s the increased risk of data loss.

IMO one would not as the SATA interface for the G5 is limited to 1.5Gbps or, in rough terms, 150MB/sec. Any modern SSD should be able to achieve this speed. A two SSD RAID 0 configuration would be bottlenecked by the SATA interface.

If there is a PCI-X based RAID card then that might work. I have a quad Z-Turbo drive configured as 4 x 512GB (2TB total) which has a benchmark read speed of 10.1GB/sec (whereas the individual drives benchmark at 3.4GB/sec). Needless to say a three times increase in speed is noticeable when working with large files.

 

[Certificate of Excellence]

I also thought about a mini but Op does speak to the asthetic of the tower - not that the asthetic of a mini is bad. I am a big fan of the small form factor.