Mac Mini vs Power mac

Discussion in 'Mac mini' started by fattstrat, Sep 23, 2010.

  1. fattstrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    #1
    I figured that the new architecture would be much more efficient than the old, but it doesn't seem so.

    I would like anyones opinion who cares to share.

    We are thinking of replacing two G5s that have the same clock speeds and ram that comes standard on the latest version of the mac mini. (atleast if the price is right)

    I purchased one for testing (macmini), but it seems much slower than our old G5s when running similar loads... (CS4,font manager, mac:eek:ffice, and our design software).

    Any thoughts are much appreciated.
     
  2. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #2
    Do they have the same amount of RAM? Are they using same versions of the software?
     
  3. PowerGamerX macrumors 6502a

    PowerGamerX

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2009
    #3
    The new Mac Mini's will be faster at just about everything except maybe video encoding compared to a G5 Quad. And thats only if you're taxing all 4 cores, which many applications don't (most support only 2).
     
  4. ADent macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2007
    #4
    The drives on minis tend to be slow. So if it is slow to start an app or boot or such plan on getting 7200 rpm drives or eSATA hack.

    If it is slow at just running apps - I don't know. Each MacOS seems to suck more memory, so maybe try upgrading the test unit to 8GB.
     
  5. QuantumLo0p macrumors 6502a

    QuantumLo0p

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    #5
    They need more ram and either a Momentus XT or a SSD. The standard (notebook) hard drive is a steaming, pile of dog crap and needs to be swapped out asap. My old PowerMac's raid 0 file system was smokin and the only thing that surpassed it is an SSD or, even faster than a SSD, a SS card which neither the Mini nor an iMac can use.

    Graphics, overall, are a little better than my old PowerMac's card but sometimes there is a 20-30 second lag that is absolutely terrible. I think more ram would help this out a lot. I haven't done it yet but matched pairs for either 4GB or 8GB are planned.
     
  6. MaxMike macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2009
    #6
    Well wouldn't the mini pale in comparison to the PM G5 in terms of graphics intensive programs (Photoshop, probably your aforementioned design software, etc.) since it just uses an integrated chip instead of dedicated?
     
  7. WardC macrumors 68030

    WardC

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2007
    Location:
    Fort Worth, TX
    #7
    A 2.66GHz Mac Mini with 8GB of RAM and a good-sized SSD is a much faster machine on any day of the week than any G5 PowerMac could ever be.
     
  8. MattA macrumors 6502

    MattA

    Joined:
    May 15, 2006
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    #8
    This.

    I had a 1.6Ghz G5 Powermac with a Radeon 9800 Pro in it. The 2.0Ghz Mac Mini with 7200 rpm drive is faster in every single respect. Graphics included. The 9400m isn't really a bad graphics chipset at all, it's just not a fast one by today's standards.

    My Mini runs rings around my G5.
     
  9. Nichod macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    #9
    Not to mention that all new software seems to be moving to Snow Leopard. I'm one of those angry G5 users that expected his $3000 four year old machine to last. In the market for a new computer myself because of this. I've been researching the MINI and IMAC as well. Seems we have similar requirements fattstrat. The MINI really needs all the upgrades to be worthwhile from what I've been reading. The IMAC seems like a good alternative, except for the mixed reviews I've been getting on the screen quality.

    Any reason you focused on the MINI?
     
  10. PowerGamerX macrumors 6502a

    PowerGamerX

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2009
    #10
    My Mini works more than well enough, but one upgrade that is almost needed, more because of Snow Leopard than anything, is bumping up to 4gb of ram. It's so easy to upgrade there is no reason to not just order it off Newegg or something similar too. 4gb of ram eliminated any stuttering I had (which was usually the first 5 minutes of playing a game).
     
  11. QuantumLo0p macrumors 6502a

    QuantumLo0p

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    #11
    Yup, a SSD is much faster except for a ram drive which is quite limited in size. I am going to upgrade to a Momentus XT because I just can't come to grips upgrading to a large ssd in the Mini which makes absolutely no sense to me; if I did that then I would be in the market for full size desktop which could accept multiple drives.

    I hope my Mini's occasional severe graphics lag goes away when I add more ram. It has only happened during game play but a few times it was only corrected by restarting the game. I suppose i can't expect a whole lot from the 320m graphics that are an integrated mobile solution rather than a high power card. Someday integrated graphics will enjoy being king of the hill but that is not today.
     
  12. PowerGamerX macrumors 6502a

    PowerGamerX

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2009
    #12
    Don't worry, upgrading the ram did wonders for me on that issue. As long as you have at least 4gb, you'll be good to go. I've noticed this is consistent when gaming on Snow Leopard machines.
     
  13. QuantumLo0p macrumors 6502a

    QuantumLo0p

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    #13
    Wow! Update on my ram situation. Well, it looks as if the stock 2GB of ram was causing all my woes. The common momentary lag has totally gone away after installing 8GB. Obviously re-starting apps is fast but now there is plenty of ram to cache everything I had opened as well as keep the 320m graphics happy.


    When many people were saying the 320m graphics were way better than any G5 graphics, I didn't totally believe that. They seemed a little better than my old Powermac's 6800 graphics but after upgrading the ram they definitely pulled ahead. I wish people had told me the 320m graphics were dependent on ram usage and that the standard 2GB ram is woefully inadequate. I was under the assumption the graphics portion of shared memory was dedicated but apparently not and as such it suffers greatly when running a big app or multiple apps.

    Whew! What a relief this upgrade has brought. My Momentus XT will be here Monday and I can't wait to see what performance changes that will make.
     
  14. PowerGamerX macrumors 6502a

    PowerGamerX

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2009
    #14
    Yeah, well, 2gb isn't really enough for Snow Leopard anyway, but I agree, after upgrading to 4gb in mine, all the graphics trouble went away.
     
  15. QuantumLo0p macrumors 6502a

    QuantumLo0p

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    #15
    I totally agree. If there was more discussion about that initially it would have been much less painless I would never had posted as much as I did. This is my first computer that 2GB of ram is inadequate and, IMO, perhaps should have more ram as a standard configuration. I suppose Apple is trying to keep the entry price down but the argument could be made that, after upgrading, I could get into an iMac for a little more.

    Well, it is what it is and now I am a lot more happy after going with 8GB of ram; it is a totally different machine! Last night I cloned a Momentus XT and plan to swap it out this weekend. I think, other than a SSD, these upgrades should work well for quite a while
     
  16. James cuck macrumors newbie

    James cuck

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2010
    #16
    I'm not thrilled that the mac mini has only a core 2 duo, but what kind performance differences would I see between my G5 and the mini?
     
  17. PowerGamerX macrumors 6502a

    PowerGamerX

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2009
    #17
    Your G5 (if its a Quad) may perform video encoding faster if you used all 4 cores and the time appropriate software, but for everything else, the Mac Mini is going to be much faster. Especially where graphics are concerned.
     
  18. QuantumLo0p macrumors 6502a

    QuantumLo0p

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    #18
    I can't speak for older Minis but my mid-2010 graphics were not really any faster than my ancient dual 2.7 LC PowerMac's 6800 graphics due to the Mini's lack of ram; supposedly sharing is going on. After upgrading the ram the Mini definitely out paced my PowerMac. In standard form the Mini's lack of ample ram and the sloooow hard drive severely limit it.

    ONLY AFTER upgrading the Mini is when you realize its potential.
     
  19. PowerGamerX macrumors 6502a

    PowerGamerX

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2009
    #19
    For sure, I ran my Mini with 2gb for a while, and while fast for most things, games were just crippled. Up to 4gb, its great, no issues at all. I don't really notice the slow hard drive that much, but I don't do many things that require high-speed drives.
     
  20. Baby Mac macrumors regular

    Baby Mac

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2010
    Location:
    Kentucky
    #20
    Folks, the OP's "Last Activity: Sep 23, 2010 01:00 PM," 4-minutes after posting this thread. He hasn't even seen the 1st response. Let's move along...
     
  21. QuantumLo0p macrumors 6502a

    QuantumLo0p

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    #21
    I can't speak for everyone else but if there is useful discussion posted then I don't particularly care "to move along", thank you.
    ;)
     

Share This Page