Powermac G5 quad 2.5Ghz vs 2011 Mac Mini?

[TA031]

I am sure the Mini will be faster.

Unless the mini is offered with a quad core CPU, it ain't gonna happen.

even the best graphics card you can get for a G5 is worse than the 320m in a Mac Mini (unfortunate but true).

http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu_list.php
GeForce 320M 330th
Radeon X1900 GT 134th

The 320m scores 309 vs the X1900's 791. So clearly you've got a major lack of knowledge on the subject.

Even the "Intel HD" GPU on the i-series CPU that will be used in the next mini scores only slightly better than the 320m (Intel HD 326score, 314th), but is still only a fraction of the power of the X1900.

 

[PowerGamerX]

Unless the mini is offered with a quad core CPU, it ain't gonna happen.


http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu_list.php
GeForce 320M 330th
Radeon X1900 GT 134th

The 320m scores 309 vs the X1900's 791. So clearly you've got a major lack of knowledge on the subject.

Even the "Intel HD" GPU on the i-series CPU that will be used in the next mini scores only slightly better than the 320m (Intel HD 326score, 314th), but is still only a fraction of the power of the X1900.

Yet you don't take into account that the PowerMac is running on 6+ year old tech and has slower ram, and an outdated processor regardless of how many cores it has. No doubt the G5 will be faster with native PPC applications but it can't run much in the way of new software. The graphics card may bench higher, but that doesn't mean the machine will perform better.

That said, benchmarks only tell part of the story with graphics cards and although you can throw benchmarks around they usually are only semi-accurate at the best. For example, Intel 3000 graphics bench higher in a lot of cases than the 320m, but in practice, it's usually worse.

All of this is pretty much irrelevant though because the OP will be able to do what he wants with either machine. If he needs legacy PPC apps he should buy the PowerMac and if he needs newer software he should go with the Mini.

 

[VanneDC]

Haha lol the x3000 intel cards are also a pile of cods wolup that I wouldn't piss on to put them out if they were on fire. Same as the 320m nvidia cards.. What a joke.

The mini's are great bosex, I've owned 2 the original and the c2d, and they exell as media players, but they do not function as a desktop for power users requiring any sort of graphic power. Thus its pretty useless comparing both systems..

 

[Tucom]

Haha lol the x3000 intel cards are also a pile of cods wolup that I wouldn't piss on to put them out if they were on fire. Same as the 320m nvidia cards.. What a joke.

The mini's are great bosex, I've owned 2 the original and the c2d, and they exell as media players, but they do not function as a desktop for power users requiring any sort of graphic power. Thus its pretty useless comparing both systems..

Right because they're some of the fastest integrated graphics out there and perform exceptionally well for the designated Mac Mini market? Maybe your piss would do disservice to the chips


Seriously, its like, I think, sorry to burst your bubble, but for the last time: The Intel machines are, and will ALWAYS BE (lol, seriously though) faster than *ANY* PPC machine, sans the older Core 1 Duos vs. a G5 Quad, but realize the G5's can only run legacy applications probably only as fast if not just marginally faster then the Intel machines running the latest and greatest Unix code.

Make sense? I think the G5s are still awesome machines for what they are, but the Intel machines are nothing short of better.

 

[VanneDC]

sure, i love my Macpro, and its much, much faster than my G5, but its not comparable to the G5 nor should it be (was that lol about BE about Be.inc? and its BeOS? anyhows, its a completely different system and arch, so not realy worthwhile examining what box is better, it may be better to discuss the pro's and cons of each system.

 

[Tucom]

Lol for there probably being no future PPC machines thus the Intel machines will always be faster (though it'd be cool to see a return of PPC I think, there were advantages and some superior aspects IIRC).


Nothing remotely new - except Serato Sracht LIVE - runs on PPC machines, thus its not really a matter of pros and cons (which can be relevant, but certainly not for Logic), but for the fact that Intel machines are faster, more futureproof, and far, FAR more power efficient and compatible.

Just wondering, what do you still use the G5 for?

 

[VanneDC]

The Mac Pro is in my studio, i use the G5 for daily nerding and playing doom3 and Kotor, and playing around with installs and crap.

Pretty much cant afford my mac pro to have downtime due to me stuffing or corrupting it due to playing games/crap on it

I used to do my work on the G5 Quad (long sold), and it was good, but the Pro is soo much faster.

funnily enough ive just revieved my fx4500 in the mail today and now just need the power cable and a lend of a x86 box to mod the bios to mac.. Then hopefully a few more frame rates in kotor and Halo.

what do you use yours for?

 

[thunng8]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

Haha lol the x3000 intel cards are also a pile of cods wolup that I wouldn't piss on to put them out if they were on fire. Same as the 320m nvidia cards.. What a joke.

The mini's are great bosex, I've owned 2 the original and the c2d, and they exell as media players, but they do not function as a desktop for power users requiring any sort of graphic power. Thus its pretty useless comparing both systems..

Right because they're some of the fastest integrated graphics out there and perform exceptionally well for the designated Mac Mini market? Maybe your piss would do disservice to the chips


Seriously, its like, I think, sorry to burst your bubble, but for the last time: The Intel machines are, and will ALWAYS BE (lol, seriously though) faster than *ANY* PPC machine, sans the older Core 1 Duos vs. a G5 Quad, but realize the G5's can only run legacy applications probably only as fast if not just marginally faster then the Intel machines running the latest and greatest Unix code.

Make sense? I think the G5s are still awesome machines for what they are, but the Intel machines are nothing short of better.

Have you got an benchmarks to back that up? I did an benchmarks last year that for the apps I use, the g5 quad is faster than a 2.66ghz core 2 duo.

 

[TA031]

Yet you don't take into account that the PowerMac is running on 6+ year old tech and has slower ram, and an outdated processor regardless of how many cores it has. No doubt the G5 will be faster with native PPC applications but it can't run much in the way of new software. The graphics card may bench higher, but that doesn't mean the machine will perform better.

Try playing common games across them, like Halo's Universal version. A G5 with an x1900 can run at 1920x1200, max details and 4xAA with 30+fps. A 2011 Mini isn't playable at that resolution with any AA turned on.

 

[VanneDC]

the quad ***** all over the mini with that crappy video card in Halo, kotor or any other game (that can run on the quad)

 

[Tucom]

the quad ***** all over the mini with that crappy video card in Halo, kotor or any other game (that can run on the quad)

And the Mini **** all over a Quad because its running on the newer, faster Intel chips and can run BioShock, Portal 2, and any Valve games


The Mini was never designed to be a gaming machine, but here I'll sell my 360 to get a G5 for Halo I kid, but yeah the G5's still got muscle of course and currently the G5 I have is the most powerful Mac in the house overall, but I'd sell it in a heartbeat to get the new Mini with the ATI chip which would **** *ANY* G5 in all areas. Sad in a way, lol, but true.

 

[thunng8]

I kid, but yeah the G5's still got muscle of course and currently the G5 I have is the most powerful Mac in the house overall, but I'd sell it in a heartbeat to get the new Mini with the ATI chip which would **** *ANY* G5 in all areas.

Yeah, the just released 2011 mac Mini with ATI graphics is impressive .. if only the Mac mini server with quad core cpu had the ATI graphics cards as well .. that would've been truly amazing performance for such a small footprint.

 

[Tucom]

Yeah, but there's other solutions from HP and Dell that are marginally (well, 2-4 times larger, but still super small relatively) but offer full blown PCIe2 graphics chips with 2GBs of graphics memory..but then again the build quality and fit and finish isn't nearly as high, but there are other options out there, though they aren't Macs

 

[TA031]

and can run BioShock, Portal 2, and any Valve games

On low settings.

Sad in a way, lol, but (not) true

Corrected.

 

[Tucom]

On low settings.


Corrected.

Ok are you suggesting a PPC machine will be faster than a new i5? An i5 or even a newer Core 2 Duo will leave a G5 in the dust more or less (at least an i5), and the new Radeon GPU in the new Mac Mini I'd bet is close than not if not as powerful as the 7800GTX one could get for a G5.


Forget the aspect of newer drivers too?

 

[MovieCutter]

TA031 is one particular poster who finds it amusing to quote people and change their statement to fit his/her agenda. I for one think any i5 or i7 would stomp a G5 Quad given all the various bus and speed bottlenecks.

 

[thunng8]

Ok are you suggesting a PPC machine will be faster than a new i5? An i5 or even a newer Core 2 Duo will leave a G5 in the dust more or less (at least an i5), and the new Radeon GPU in the new Mac Mini I'd bet is close than not if not as powerful as the 7800GTX one could get for a G5.


Forget the aspect of newer drivers too?

How many times do i need to say it? The fastest Core 2 duo available in a mac mini does not beat a G5 quad.. I did quite a few benchmarks last year

 

[Tucom]

How many times do i need to say it? The fastest Core 2 duo available in a mac mini does not beat a G5 quad.. I did quite a few benchmarks last year

Only if there are apps that are SMP compatible, otherwise processor per processor, the C2D will beat the G5.


Faster memory, faster processors, and now, faster or as fast GPU, and that Macs the Quad faster? It doesn't.

Plus, how fast can a G5 run the latest version of iLife 11

 

[iThinkergoiMac]

This discussion is now pointless. There is a small question about which is faster: C2D Mac Mini or Quad G5. There is absolutely no question whatsoever about which is faster: i5 Mac Mini or Quad G5. The G5 is, in practice, generally slower than a C2D Mini, and technically/theoretically faster than a C2D Mini for some specific software.

The new Core i5 Mini stomps the G5 in every way (with the possible exception of the GPU) and the high-end Mini has a faster GPU as well.

Again, there is absolutely no question at all about which is faster: the i5 Mini is faster, hands down. OP, you should get the new Mini, forget about the G5. Your wallet will thank you as well, considering how little power the Mini uses compared to the G5.

 

[thunng8]

This discussion is now pointless. There is a small question about which is faster: C2D Mac Mini or Quad G5. There is absolutely no question whatsoever about which is faster: i5 Mac Mini or Quad G5. The G5 is, in practice, generally slower than a C2D Mini, and technically/theoretically faster than a C2D Mini for some specific software.

It is not technically/theoretically faster .. it IS faster for some software. In fact, for the software I use, the G5 quad is undoubtedly faster .. and they are not some obscure software .. they are quite widely used software. I just had issues with some people's comments that any Core 2 duo would leave the G5 quad "in the dust".

The new Core i5 Mini stomps the G5 in every way (with the possible exception of the GPU) and the high-end Mini has a faster GPU as well.

Again, there is absolutely no question at all about which is faster: the i5 Mini is faster, hands down. OP, you should get the new Mini, forget about the G5. Your wallet will thank you as well, considering how little power the Mini uses compared to the G5.

Yes, no doubt about it, the new 2011 Mac minis are great.

 

[Nameci]

For those who are after processor speed, get yourself a life, buy the latest intel macs and leave the old stuff to us.

 

[adcx64]

For those who are after processor speed, get yourself a life, buy the latest intel macs and leave the old stuff to us.

Agreed.

 

[iThinkergoiMac]

It is not technically/theoretically faster .. it IS faster for some software. In fact, for the software I use, the G5 quad is undoubtedly faster .. and they are not some obscure software .. they are quite widely used software. I just had issues with some people's comments that any Core 2 duo would leave the G5 quad "in the dust".

For most people, the latest C2D Mini (the one originally in question) generally does leave the Quad G5 in the dust. Apart from PPC native apps that are built to take advantage of the specific technologies in the G5, apps will run faster on that Mini.

It's not fair to say that ANY Core2 Duo will beat the G5. Those 1.4 GHz C2Ds in the previous MBA generation are certainly slower than the Quad G5. However, in nearly all respects (especially if you're using current software) the latest C2D Mini does beat the G5.

 

[Nameci]

Almost anything current intel will beat the PMQG5 in numbers with a large margin. What more can you ask for a 6-year machine? Despite the fact that the PMQG5 has a 1GHz+ FSB, we must take into consideration the memory clock speed as well. Latest intel mac mini's were at 1+GHz, while the lowly PMQG5's were at 533MHz. Do we see the big difference?

As I have said if you want speed go for intel and leave the old stuff to us. There is no contest. But give the PMQG5 some respect.

 

[thunng8]

For most people, the latest C2D Mini (the one originally in question) generally does leave the Quad G5 in the dust. Apart from PPC native apps that are built to take advantage of the specific technologies in the G5, apps will run faster on that Mini.

Please provide some real world benchmark figures or just keep silent. I provided some numbers that show the G5Quad was quite a lot faster than the Mac mini Core 2 Duo. They were all the latest versions and were universal binaries, so not some obscure highly optimized software only for PowerPC.