ok i have one of the last models PowerMac G5 2.3ghz dual core! , and i dont find my iMac intel core duo 1.83ghz a lot faster , despite if i look on pure benchmarks the g5 is definitely slower , but real life and benchmarks there is often a big gap , as i even think my iMac g3 is without doubt still usable for every day tasks , ok i run tiger on m PPC Macs ,just because i fancy sometimes to play a OS9 game in classic and for me tiger is still the greatest OS from apple as it has classic support and even runs on intel Mac's (sadly no classic there), no doubt for some leopard has advantages , just not for me
the main thing is really the question how objective or subjective you are ,mean if you really are looking with the stopwatch on every task and already are close to a nervous breakdown if a app was bouncing more then once , a task took 0.5 sec longer then in the MacBook ,
or if you just dont care as long as the work gets done in a acceptable time then you will be pleased with the performance of a PowerMac G5 , as they are still great Mac's and far from slow really ,always remember the G5 DP models and later DC run with quiet a high system bus something often gets overlooked in the spec sheets when compared
According to Apple-published SPEC CPU2000 benchmarks, and independently tested by Veritest, the Power Macintosh G5 destroys comparable Windows PCs. In "SPEC rate" tests, the Power Macintosh G5/2.0 DP (PCI-X) was 95% faster than a Windows PC with a single 3.0 GHz Intel Pentium 4 processor and 42% faster than the Windows PC with dual 3.06 GHz Intel Xeon processors.
Some claimed that Apple's benchmark testing was rigged, but the Power Macintosh G5 systems trounced the comparative Windows PCs in a series of real world application tests as well. In an Adobe Photoshop "45-filter function test" the original Power Mac G5 models -- the Power Macintosh G5/1.6 (PCI), G5/1.8 (PCI-X), andG5/2.0 DP (PCI-X) -- were 1.5 times, 1.7 times, and 2.2 times faster, respectively, than a Windows PC with a single 3.0 GHz Intel Pentium 4 processor. In similar testing, the dual-processor Power Macintosh G5/1.8 DP (PCI-X) was 76% faster than a Dell Dimension XPS with a single 3.2 GHz Pentium 4 processor.
According to Apple-published benchmarks, the "June 2004" Power Mac G5 models -- the Power Macintosh G5/1.8 DP (PCI), G5/2.0 DP (PCI-X 2), and G5/2.5 DP (PCI-X) -- continued to smoke similarly priced Intel-based systems. In a series of 45 Photoshop filters, these models were 66%, 82%, and 98% faster, respectively, than a 3.4 GHz Pentium 4-based Dell Dimension XPS, and 48%, 63%, and 75% faster, respectively, than a dual 3.2 GHz Xeon-based Dell Precision 650.
The lower-end, and less expensive Power Macintosh G5/1.8 (PCI) -- introduced October 19, 2004 and discontinued October 19, 2005 -- still is faster than comparable Intel-based systems. In the same series of 45 Photoshop filters used to test the "June 2004" models, the Power Macintosh G5/1.8 (PCI) was 20% faster than a 3.4 GHz Pentium 4-based Dell Dimension XPS.
The "Early 2005" Power Mac G5 models -- the Power Macintosh G5/2.0 DP (PCI) andG5/2.3 DP (PCI-X) and G5/2.7 DP (PCI-X) -- again, according to Apple-published benchmarks, are 59%, 78%, and 98% faster than a 3.6 GHz Pentium 4-based Dell Dimension XPS Gen4, and 38%, 56%, and 72% faster than a dual 3.6 GHz Xeon-based Dell Precision 670 in a series of 45 Photoshop filter tests.
Not surprisingly, given that Apple decided to transition to an Intel-based architecture prior to their introduction, the company did not release benchmarks that show the "Late 2005" Power Mac G5 models -- the Power Macintosh G5 Dual Core (2.0), Dual Core (2.3), and "Quad Core" (2.5) -- continuing to trounce comparable Intel-based systems.
in my opinion the PowerMac G5 's are the best buy if you need a affordable ,with expandability and still fast Mac even by today standards ,most even late 2005 models sell for less then a mini core duo 1.83
