just how fast are g5 powermacs?

mak

macrumors member
Original poster
Feb 19, 2005
41
0
hi,

being a non g5 dual powermac user i just wanted owners to give an idea to myself and others on how fast these beasts really are?

you can give everyday examples on how their speed enables things to get done quickly and how long it takes to do certain tasks.

feedback on the following would be great:

photoshop manipulation/filters/touching up etc
video rendering/encoding/format conversion etc
maya/3d rendering etc
sound/music encoding etc

you can give feedback on other programs/tasks where the powermac simply make your work just that little bit easier becuase of its power.

i currently use a mac mini and would just like to have an idea on how slow my machine really is and therefore see how the powermac could aid my work etc.

thanks,
 

yellow

Moderator emeritus
Oct 21, 2003
15,925
1
Portland, OR
Just a note.. Powerbooks and iBooks are faster then Mac Minis. Pretty much anything you purchased right now would be faster then a Mac Mini.
 

Capt Underpants

macrumors 68030
Jul 23, 2003
2,859
3
Austin, Texas
yellow said:
Just a note.. Powerbooks and iBooks are faster then Mac Minis. Pretty much anything you purchased right now would be faster then a Mac Mini.
What the? They're exactly the same machines...

Same Processor, same RAM, same HD (same RPM, that is...), and same video card (same as the iBook). How can the mac mini be any slower than the iBook? The Mac mini may be slower than the Powerbook, because of it's small increase in processor speed and better GPU, but that's understandable.

I'd like to see benchmarks that back up your claims.
 

zen.state

macrumors 68020
Mar 13, 2005
2,182
4
yellow said:
Just a note.. Powerbooks and iBooks are faster then Mac Minis. Pretty much anything you purchased right now would be faster then a Mac Mini.
you have no idea wehat you're saying. macworld magazine says the 1.25 mini is 10% faster than the 1.2ghz ibook. the 1.25 mini is EQUAL to the speed of a 1.33ghz ibook. http://www.macworld.com/products/apple/ look at the speedmark results.

do you just make up stuff in your head and tell it as truth?
 

bellang

macrumors member
Jun 22, 2005
90
133
I believe it depends on what model.

I know the PowerBook system bus speed is faster than the iBooks, so this would account for a performance difference (as well as the CPU & GPU).

Also, depending on the mini, and reading other threads, its seems like the 80GB Mac Mini has a HDD rpm of 4200 compared to the 5400rpm in the latest powerbooks.

Just my 2c.....
 

yellow

Moderator emeritus
Oct 21, 2003
15,925
1
Portland, OR
You're right.. the mini is faster then the iBook. I don't deal with low end macs too often, I thought the iBooks had been speed bumped beyond what it's languishing at currently. No need to be so snippy.

So, to continue with the exception of the iBook, ever current Mac is faster then the mini. A G5 (even an iMac) is significantly faster then a mini in real-world use.

I don't put too much stock in becnhmarking. I take it for what it should be, a vague representation. Frequently real world use is quite different.
 

kwajo.com

macrumors 6502a
Jul 17, 2002
895
0
Bay of Fundy
well I switched from a 1.5GHz powerbook to a dual 2ghz G5, and the difference is huge in some applications and barely there in others. if you encode video, work in photoshop, open a dozen apps at a time, etc. then the G5 will destroy the mac mini, but if you spend a lot of time looking at web pages and getting email and doing basic things in iLife then the difference isn't worth the cost differential. for me it was worth it, it has saved me hours of waiting doing video work, but it's not for everybody
 

zen.state

macrumors 68020
Mar 13, 2005
2,182
4
yellow said:
You're right.. the mini is faster then the iBook. I don't deal with low end macs too often, I thought the iBooks had been speed bumped beyond what it's languishing at currently. No need to be so snippy.

So, to continue with the exception of the iBook, ever current Mac is faster then the mini. A G5 (even an iMac) is significantly faster then a mini in real-world use.

I don't put too much stock in becnhmarking. I take it for what it should be, a vague representation. Frequently real world use is quite different.
it almost seems like you have an agenda against the mini or something? they are great computers and totally serve the purpose they were meant to.
 

AlBDamned

macrumors 68030
Mar 14, 2005
2,626
0
kwajo.com said:
well I switched from a 1.5GHz powerbook to a dual 2ghz G5, and the difference is huge in some applications and barely there in others. if you encode video, work in photoshop, open a dozen apps at a time, etc. then the G5 will destroy the mac mini, but if you spend a lot of time looking at web pages and getting email and doing basic things in iLife then the difference isn't worth the cost differential. for me it was worth it, it has saved me hours of waiting doing video work, but it's not for everybody
This is spot on. The Powermacs with Dual Processors are blazingly fast, as they need to be with pro apps. God knows how fast a DP 2.7 is, but using a DP1.8, there's little or no lag opening big (70-150MB) jpegs, tiffs etc in photoshop and the difference in video encoding between the G4 PB and the PM is ridiculous (4 hours vs 1 hour for a single layer DVD as a rough guide). However, if you just want a web-surfing, photo editing, word processing mac, then the PM range is probably overkill. RAM is obviously important whatever you get though and the RAM that comes stock with the PM range is slightly pathetic IMO. You need at least a 1.5 gigs in a PM if you're really serious (I'm not!!).
 

yellow

Moderator emeritus
Oct 21, 2003
15,925
1
Portland, OR
zen.state said:
it almost seems like you have an agenda against the mini or something? they are great computers and totally serve the purpose they were meant to.
It almost seems like you have an agenda against me. I am great and totally serve the purpose I was meant to.

Yes.. the Mini does what it's intended to do. Be an entry level Mac. I'm sure it excels at that.
Perhaps I just get a little annoyed reading thread after thread of "I bought my Mini and it can't do this", "I got this Mini and it's slow doing this".. The original poster wants to know if a G5 is better than his mini, if it'll perform x, y, and z faster, and how much faster. Did you read that? Though it's pretty hard to fully quantify that speed differences between a Mac Mini and a G5, but all I can say is just about everything Apple puts out is faster then a Mac Mini. You know.. the entry level Mac. End of discussion.
 

Lacero

macrumors 604
Jan 20, 2005
6,639
2
mak said:
feedback on the following would be great:

photoshop manipulation/filters/touching up etc
video rendering/encoding/format conversion etc
maya/3d rendering etc
sound/music encoding etc

you can give feedback on other programs/tasks where the powermac simply make your work just that little bit easier becuase of its power.
I'll compare my Powerbook 1.33Ghz machine, and pretend it's like a mini, which would be close.

Anyway,

For photoshop manipulation/filtration, etc, it's nearly instantaneous. The more RAM the faster it'll be.

For video rendering, I'll assume in FCP, it's about 3-4 times faster to render. For DVD encoding, it's real-time for single pass VBR and 2x for 2-pass VBR encoding.

Don't know about Maya rendering, but it should be must faster 3-5x than the mini.

Sound an music encoding (to MP3?) would be 30-50x fast. Or was that decoding? I'm unsure, but you won't need to get out of your seat.
 

mad jew

Moderator emeritus
Apr 3, 2004
32,194
6
Adelaide, Australia
Calm down zen.state, yellow serves all prestated yellow requirements, there's no denying it. :)

Just because you bought a mini and you're happy with it doesn't mean yellow is wrong in saying they're the slowest machines next to the iBooks. Lets face it, there's not all that much in it, they're both pretty slow.

As for the original question. I've noticed my 1.8GHz iMac is about five times faster at converting music in iTunes compared to my 800MHz iBook G4. But on the plus side, I can surf the 'net outside with my iBook. Yay! Happy times. :)
 

Ryan T.

macrumors 6502a
Jun 13, 2005
599
27
Rochester, NY
I've used the DP machines. They're ridiculously fast.

Right now I have a SP 1.6 G5. It's as fast at opening apps, and doing almost every "everyday" job. However, it's about (go figure) two times slower doing alot of the pro stuff such as applying photoshop filters, encoding audio, etc.

Still a very fast machine though, and faster than my 1.5GHz Powerbook I used to have. That could have a lot to do with the 800MHz v 167MHz FSB though.
 

iGary

Guest
May 26, 2004
19,583
0
Randy's House
For Photoshop filters, actions and batches, they are INCREDIBLY fast. I mean almost instantaneous with some filters.

For rendering video they are INCREDIBLY fast.

I don't play games, so I cannot comment.

Web surfing, e-mail, Office etc...most of the speediness is the SATA drives and the vid cards.

For processor intensive activities, they are some of the best and most-capable machines built.
 

iGary

Guest
May 26, 2004
19,583
0
Randy's House
mad jew said:
iGary, are you reading the future again! How many times have you checked the order status since logging on to MacRumors today? :D
6 times. :eek:

It still says "Shipping 7/19/05" but it's "Preparing for Shipment" today.

Anxiously awaiting a "shipped e-mail."
 

zen.state

macrumors 68020
Mar 13, 2005
2,182
4
mad jew said:
Calm down zen.state, yellow serves all prestated yellow requirements, there's no denying it. :)

Just because you bought a mini and you're happy with it doesn't mean yellow is wrong in saying they're the slowest machines next to the iBooks. Lets face it, there's not all that much in it, they're both pretty slow.

As for the original question. I've noticed my 1.8GHz iMac is about five times faster at converting music in iTunes compared to my 800MHz iBook G4. But on the plus side, I can surf the 'net outside with my iBook. Yay! Happy times. :)
my mini is MUCH faster than the other mac in my sig. and thats all that matters to me :)
 

Chrispy

macrumors 68020
Dec 27, 2004
2,126
1
Indiana
If you are going to be doing heavy video work then go with the G5. It is not that PCs are not fast enough to do the work (the new dual core Pentiums and AMDs are great processors) it is just that the operating system (windows) is not great at dealing with such a large load. I had terrible luck with G5 PowerMacs but I know I am a unique case. I do very minimal video work and web design so I just decided to save some money and get a PC desktop. However, I am using the money I saved to replace my 500MHz iBook with a nice new one :D If video is your game then by all means go with a DP G5 Powermac!
 

stylum

macrumors member
Jan 19, 2002
62
0
SoCal
i know carrara it´s not very mainstream but may help..
My DP 2.5 with the gt card took 3:50 hr
to render a 640x480, 22 second long, 50% global illumination, 1 light, and 2.5 million polygons, in H.264 movie.

my .02
 

AlBDamned

macrumors 68030
Mar 14, 2005
2,626
0
kingjr3 said:
Car or LCD? :D

Car! The the thing is, they both do the job, drive me around ok, one in a bit more comfort. However, trying to compare them to the new BMW in the drive is totally pointless.... People who don't know about cars just say - well they both get you from A-B ok, right?

My Answer - just drive the three and you'll see the cheap, underpowered, old fashioned Asian cars for what they are.

It's no good anyone telling you - you have to find out for yourself.