Question for Quad Owners

[pl1984]

So, I have a couple of PowerMac G5 systems. One is the single 1.8GHz version and the other is a dual 2.3GHz version. On both of these systems browsing the web, with JavaScript enabled, can be a slow experience. The modern web utilizes, IMO, too much background scripting.

Currently I am working on my Linux 18.04 LTS system which itself is hosted on a Linux 16.04 LTS system running on my 32 thread Z620 with 64GB of RAM. The 18.04 system was running a bit sluggish so I bump the number of threads from 2 to 4. With this doubling of processing power it now runs as I would expect.

So, my question to quad owners is: Do you notice an appreciable difference when browsing the web with a quad than with a dual processor based system?

 

[eyoungren]

I haven't noticed any difference between T4Fx on my Quad and any other browser on the MacPro I use at work.

However, keep in mind I used a highly tuned prefs file for my copy of T4Fx.

Realistically (other than LWK or Roccat) there is no other browser that can handle the modern internet. We are dealing with systems that are 11 years older or more and the browsers aren't much younger.

If you deal with T4Fx at all you might want to look at the thread in my signature. It's had some success for people. Not bragging, just stating a fact that what I've done has been able to help.

 

[pl1984]

Thanks E. I am more interested in the relative performance between a dual and quad core system. My Linux system saw a marked improvement going from 2 to 4 cores. I was wondering if the same could be said of the G5 systems. One thing I know is if I disable JavaScript a G5 has more than acceptable performance on the web. Unfortunately too many website require JavaScript.

 

[Hrududu]

Depends really. I do far more browsing on my quad G5 than any other, but the dual 2.7 G5 is actually pretty darn good too. I think that high clock speed and 1.35GHz system bus make it quite speedy. I’ll be totally honest, it’s been a minute since I’ve done much browsing on the dual 2.0 system.

 

[1042686]

I don’t own a quad but I do own 1/2 a quad -in that my 2.0ghz dual core pmg5 is noticeably faster than my 2.0ghz dual cpu pmg5 - haven’t benchmarked the two but the difference iirc is significant.

 

[LightBulbFun]

Sadly in my experance a lot of the PowerPC software (TFF included) often struggle to use 2 cores let alone 4 cores of my G5 Quad

and as such while in SOME cases the Quad really pulls ahead a lot of the time it ends up feeling like any other G5 because a lot of software just sadly dosent use the cores.

 

[Hrududu]

Sadly in my experance a lot of the PowerPC software (TFF included) often struggle to use 2 cores let alone 4 cores of my G5 Quad

and as such while in SOME cases the Quad really pulls ahead a lot of the time it ends up feeling like any other G5 because a lot of software just sadly dosent use the cores.

That’s a major reason I was upset with the end of Stainless. Each tab/window with its own memory and CPU process made it an awesome browser for the QC G5.

 

[torvan]

That’s a major reason I was upset with the end of Stainless. Each tab/window with its own memory and CPU process made it an awesome browser for the QC G5.

I agree totally regarding Stainless. I reviewed it for LowEndMac (review at http://lowendmac.com/2014/stainless-browser-light-and-efficient-but/) and loved it compared to TFF and Safari. I wish it had continued.

 

[pl1984]

Thanks for all of the responses. The reason I posed the question is the modern web utilizes significant CPU resources to run all of the scripts. In my Linux example an increase in CPU thread count from two to four resulted in a system which is significantly more responsive.

This got me to thinking the performance issues with the G5 might be the result of lack of CPU core (or thread) count instead of merely not having the grunt necessary. When I browse the web (with JavaScript enabled) on my 1.8GHz I can see the CPU is 100% utilized. The same applies to my dual 2.3GHz G5 but I do notice the 2.3Ghz system is more useable. Thus I was wondering if two additional processors might break through the performance bottleneck (as it did with my Linux example). Sadly it appears as if that's not the case.

Anyone with a quad willing to provide feedback on what the CPU utilization is on a website which uses JavaScript? Perhaps even MacRumors itself?

 

[Hrududu]

My go-to browser is Leopard Webkit, but I fire up TenFourFox about 30% of the time. ON MacRumors, WebKit generally fluctuates between 120-185% CPU usage while loading a page, and TFF will typically go from about 120-215% CPU load while rendering a page.

 

[pl1984]

My go-to browser is Leopard Webkit, but I fire up TenFourFox about 30% of the time. ON MacRumors, WebKit generally fluctuates between 120-185% CPU usage while loading a page, and TFF will typically go from about 120-215% CPU load while rendering a page.

Thank you for this feedback. From the percentages it appears as if the load consumes at least one full CPU and up to a full second CPU. Thus a single processor would be taxed at all times and a dual processor would be sluggish part of the time. That would replicate my experiences. How does the system feel? Does it remain responsive?