Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Power Mac G5 dual core vs. Intel Core Duo
- Thread starter jwp333
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I would say that it depends on the app. My buddy has a 2.0 dual core Powermac. We have tested some iphoto, imovie, quicktime, and photshop tests. My imac was faster in some and his Powermac was faster in some. Generally one or the other won by a sec or two. The imac will definitely hold its own. (universal apps that is.)
It's one of those questions that's nearly impossible to answer right now.
There's a ton of variables that come into play, such as rosetta, graphics cards and other stuff.
I know for a fact that the core duo can walk away from the g5 in certain areas, but on the other hand, the g5 can do the same to the core duo.
So, unless you can tell us what programs you're thinking about, no one would be able to give you an accurate answer.
There's a ton of variables that come into play, such as rosetta, graphics cards and other stuff.
I know for a fact that the core duo can walk away from the g5 in certain areas, but on the other hand, the g5 can do the same to the core duo.
So, unless you can tell us what programs you're thinking about, no one would be able to give you an accurate answer.
Over all i would say the Dual G5, simple because it can run PPC apps at full speed, when th e Core Duo is slower. ANd when it was Univeral Apps, the Intel might win but the G5 is hold its own.
Of course the exact Specs of each machine and we would be able to tell ya betters, and what Apps
Of course the exact Specs of each machine and we would be able to tell ya betters, and what Apps
As others have said, it depends on whether the app is an UB. So if everything you use is an UB, then I would say that the Intel Core Duo will be faster than the dual-core PowerPC G5 (but not by a large margin). 
It's not really a fair comparison. The Intel chip is a mobile one, not a desktop one, and so is concentrating highly on low power consumption and heat output per watt.
When we see the desktop and server Intel chips arrive later this year then the Intel's will easily steal the show. That the mobile chips can already give the G5 a run for its money is an extremely encouraging sign IMHO.
When we see the desktop and server Intel chips arrive later this year then the Intel's will easily steal the show. That the mobile chips can already give the G5 a run for its money is an extremely encouraging sign IMHO.
Core Duo 2.0GHz VS. Power Mac G5 Dual-Core
Hi, Ive been reading the posts and I need to know wich one of these tow computers to buy, I use Final Cut Pro, DVD studio Pro, Motion, Shake, After Effects, basically anything to do with video or film images. And I dont know wich computer to buy, I had my money on the Power Mac G5, but the iMac Core Duo offers a lot for a cheaper price so I really dont know.
(sorry for my spelling and grammar, Im from Mexico so my english may be a little of)
Thanks.
Hi, Ive been reading the posts and I need to know wich one of these tow computers to buy, I use Final Cut Pro, DVD studio Pro, Motion, Shake, After Effects, basically anything to do with video or film images. And I dont know wich computer to buy, I had my money on the Power Mac G5, but the iMac Core Duo offers a lot for a cheaper price so I really dont know.
(sorry for my spelling and grammar, Im from Mexico so my english may be a little of)
Thanks.
For some benchmarks, a dual 2.16 intel barely beats/is close to a dual 2 powermac G5 (now we aren't talking a dual core powermac but 2 processors, both single core).
I'd rather have a PowerMac G5, they have so much power left in them, the Intel Towers aren't even out...I hate when people compare a consumer computer to a professional computer. I don't want to deal with Rosetta mess and have all my adobe apps run slow as a turtle on the Intels. If Adobe went universal right now, I still wouldn't get an iMac, I'd rather wait for the towers.
I'd rather have a PowerMac G5, they have so much power left in them, the Intel Towers aren't even out...I hate when people compare a consumer computer to a professional computer. I don't want to deal with Rosetta mess and have all my adobe apps run slow as a turtle on the Intels. If Adobe went universal right now, I still wouldn't get an iMac, I'd rather wait for the towers.
The only tests I've done are in Cinema4D (which is universal binary). At work I used a PowerMac G5 Dual 2.5 GHz with 4gigs of RAM to render a still image that took 6min. 41sec. I then rendered the same file on my home machine, a 2GHz Intel CoreDuo iMac with 2gigs of RAM finishing in 5min. 35sec.
Conclusion: Intel finished more than a minute faster! Which really adds up when doing video.
Conclusion: Intel finished more than a minute faster! Which really adds up when doing video.
Those intel towers are going to be soooo fast...we'll be thinking "Why would we NOT switch to intel??" instead of saying PPC is the best...
Based on actual real-life tests, I would say the iMac.
Macworld says the Dual 2.0 is still faster.
I'd go with the iMac. It's cheaper, and it's the future.
Good luck!
Macworld says the Dual 2.0 is still faster.
I'd go with the iMac. It's cheaper, and it's the future.
Good luck!
I would say the Intel Mac, for one.. all software companies are putting out universal versions. In a few months everything should be fully supported. Your better off getting an iMac Intel over a G5 powermac right now, unless you want to upgrade to an Intel Mac later on.
I went ahead and got myself a 20" iMac Intel. Very happy I did too. I had a g5 imac shipped to me and I returned it before opening it.
I went ahead and got myself a 20" iMac Intel. Very happy I did too. I had a g5 imac shipped to me and I returned it before opening it.