Mac2004 said:
I'm fairly new to computers but why would anyone have to update their video card from a NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra to a ATI 9600? I have seen a lot of postings regarding this. So what you are all saying is that the video card that's currently in the 1.8 PowerMac G5 is crappy?? Why would a person need to upgrade this video/graphics card? I'm not a real big game player and I don't do video editing at this time. I plan on using my computer for Internet, email, AppleWorks, Word, accounting, web cam, etc. Would I need to upgrade to ATI 9600 if I get a new PowerMac G5 computer?
I plan on getting a new PowerMac next week but I need to know if I need to upgrade anything (hard drive, video card, etc.) I plan on getting the dual 1.8 and a new Apple 20" monitor. Is the 80GB hard drive sufficient??
I wanted to get an Imac but everyone tells me not to get one now. I can't wait until September either. Are the current ones any good?
Just to go back and answer the original question you asked...the reason you see people complaining about the GeForce FX 5200 card in the PowerMacs is that it's generally considered a fairly entry-level type of 3D graphics card in the computing community. It's more than fast enough for general desktop usage (things like web browsing, word processing, Photoshop and 2D graphics), but when it comes to playing graphically intensive games and doing heavy 3D graphics work like animation or modelling, it's an underperformer. Considering the relatively high price that even the entry-level G5 PowerMac sells for, some people (and understandably IMHO) think that an entry-level graphics card like the nVidia GeForce FX 5200 is somewhat misplaced in a pro-level tower.
The next graphics card up the Macintosh food chain, the ATI Radeon 9600, is a much stronger performer. It can achieve quite decent performance in newer 3D-intensive games like Unreal Tournament 2004 and other apps which make use of OpenGL a lot. In addition, it is only an extra $60 or $70 to upgrade a PowerMac G5 from the GeForce FX 5200 to the Radeon 9600 at ordering time. If you plan on playing
any kind of games whatsoever, or do any type of 3D work, you'd be mad to buy a G5 and not spend that extra little bit of cash on the Radeon 9600 upgrade.
So, are you ever planning on playing games? If you are definitely sold on buying a PowerMac (see the other replies in this thread as to why there might be more cost effective ways of getting the computer you need), then I would suggest that it is a no-brainer to pay the small upgrade charge and get the Radeon card. Maybe you'll want to play Call of Duty or Halo at some stage in the future. Maybe you'll want to play around with 3D graphics software. Maybe you'll just want the graphical eye candy coming up in Mac OS X 10.4 to run a little smoother

The upgrade from GeForce FX 5200 to Radeon 9600 is under $100. Do it.
As for hard drive size, 80GB is probably sufficient, since you don't sound like you are planning on doing anything disk-space intensive like video editing or running a database server anytime soon. 80GB will leave you piles and piles of space for your documents, music, photos and applications, even after Mac OS X and iLife take up their chunk of the hard drive. If you run out of space, the PowerMac has a second drive bay where you can easily add any standard Serial ATA hard drive (dirt cheap from just about any computer shop on the planet), or if you pick up something like an eMac, iMac, iBook or PowerBook, you can conveniently add extra external hard drive storage via the FireWire or USB2 ports on those machines (you can also do this with the PowerMac).
If you really can't wait until September for the new iMacs (and this isn't just speculation anymore...Apple has come clean and admitted that 'the next generation' of iMac will be out then, although what 'next generation' actually means is still anyone's guess), then yes, the current iMacs are decent machines, although some people (myself included) believe they are overpriced for what you get. Performance-wise, there is very little difference between an eMac and an iMac (and the eMac should be noticeably faster than the older 15" 1GHz iMac). IMHO the eMac and the iMac should be viewed as being performance-comparable with each other. The differentiator (again, only IMHO) between eMac and iMac is based on 1) do you need/want a flat panel LCD and 2) how much money do you have. If a flat-panel LCD is not a deal-breaker for you, then an eMac is a very good deal.
I mention this in my other post, but have you also considered a portable Mac (ie: an iBook or a PowerBook)? Your stated computing needs are comparatively lightweight...any system from the current Mac lineup will do a good job for you, I believe. An iBook/PowerBook could offer all the performance you need, with the added bonus of mobility. Something like a 15" or 17" PowerBook would also have enough screen real estate that you could not even need to consider an external display for your desk. Just something to think about...