Which PPC desktop gives the most bang for your buck?

Discussion in 'PowerPC Macs' started by SkyBell, Sep 14, 2013.

  1. SkyBell macrumors 604

    SkyBell

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    Texas, unfortunately.
    #1
    On a lark today, I was browsing eBay and craigslist among other sites for PPC desktop Macs, and comparing prices between models and their respective revisions.

    Just out of curiosity, in your opinion which model and revision of PPC desktop offers the most power and "usefulness" in todays world compared to how much it costs to buy one?

    (I've decided not to delve into G3 models; in my opinion, they're still great backup or secondary machines, but it would be a bit of a task to cope with one for everyday use. But if you disagree, please try to convince me otherwise. :))
     
  2. ihuman:D macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2012
    Location:
    Ireland
    #2
    Here it would be all the PMG4's and a few early PMG5's.
     
  3. cyberghoser1 macrumors member

    cyberghoser1

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2009
    Location:
    Athens, Hellas
  4. tampasteve macrumors 6502

    #4
    In terms of cost to power it would be the PMG4 733 Digital Audio or Quicksilver, IMO. One can get them on ebay for under $20 (plus shipping).
     
  5. wildaccept macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2013
    #5
    i think so.I would say and go for PowerMac G5 Quad. thank you[​IMG]
     
  6. Swampus macrumors 6502

    Swampus

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2013
    Location:
    Winterfell
    #6
    There are a lot of variables here that could alter one's point of view on the subject. A lot also depends on one's local market.

    Dual 2.0 GHz G5s in my area regularly sell for $100. Maybe the best bang for the buck in terms of CPU vs initial dollars spent? The quad G5s that I've seen lately usually start at about $350 (to be fair, the ones posted on Craig's List recently have all been very well equipped with maxed out ram, high end video cards, and huge hard drives). That said, winter is coming, so the price of the G5s might go up even more.

    It also depends on individual needs. For some PowerPC games, there may be no substitute for a high-end G5 with a nice video card?

    Also, the last sentence in OP implies that we're talking about something to be used as a primary machine. I own a G5 tower and I enjoy using it, but I honestly don't know if I would trust any G5 in that role. G4 models tend to be more dependable. I think I'd personally choose a dual CPU QS, dual CPU MDD, or a Sawtooth with a nice CPU upgrade.
     
  7. Colpeas macrumors 6502

    Colpeas

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2011
    Location:
    Prague, Czech Rep.
    #7
    Well, I was browsing the eBay the other day and I saw several Quads going below $200 in auctions. One of them that went for cca $160 even had 16GB RAM, which alone is worth almost as much as the entire system, IMO!

    Therefore, my advise would be: search the eBay for Quads, if you're lucky you'll be able to get one fairly cheap.
     
  8. SkyBell thread starter macrumors 604

    SkyBell

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    Texas, unfortunately.
    #8
    This post is more in the direction I was thinking - Of course you can buy a top-of-the-line Quad PM G5 and have the most power and expandability options - but suppose you are on a tight budget. You could afford such a machine, but don't feel comfortable spending that much.

    In my area at least, it's quite rare to see an iMac G5, let alone a PowerMac, go for under $150. This is more of Quicksilver-era PowerMac price territory. But, you can get a newer late-model eMac usually for $100 or less. If I were in this situation, It would be a tough choice between the two.

    iMac G4's tend to go for higher prices than near-identically spec'd Mac minis and eMacs; iBooks tend to be cheaper at comparable speeds to PowerBooks.

    You know, these questions that keep you up at night.:p
     
  9. Frost7 macrumors regular

    Frost7

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2012
    Location:
    Republic of Texas
    #9
    LOL

    Funny because it's true.
     
  10. gavinstubbs09 macrumors 65816

    gavinstubbs09

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2013
    Location:
    NorCal boonies ~~~by Reno sorta
    #10
    I scored a early 2005 dual 2GHz off ebay for $40 shipping and a $10 bid. I ended up having to drop $30 on a 9650 256MB card and another $5 on a clock battery. So in the end my G5 cost $85.

    I love my G5 dearly, but newer apps like Logic Pro X are forcing me to go get a 2008 Mac Pro or a newer mini with a quad i7.
     
  11. MysticCow macrumors 6502a

    MysticCow

    Joined:
    May 27, 2013
    #11
    Obviously the G5 towers are the most bang for the buck.

    Now if I were to go into G4 systems, I would probably get another 733 MHz Digital Audio or the equivalent Quicksilver model. They are surprisingly strong machines for ones as old as they are and I still use my DA at work.

    I would only get a G3 as an OS 9 machine nowadays, if at all, since I really have nothing that would require OS 9 anymore (but I do love Classilla, so maybe maybe...).
     
  12. SkyBell thread starter macrumors 604

    SkyBell

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    Texas, unfortunately.
    #12
    So far, it seems like most are vouching for PM G5's. Obviously, they are the most powerful PPC Macs, but I'm not entirely convinced they're top dog for value.

    Just real quickly on eBay, I found a dual 2 GHz PM G5 for $160 shipped. Not too shabby, but I was easily able to find a 1.25 GHz eMac for $90 shipped.

    Now, the PowerMac clearly blows the eMac out of the water in specs, and for some people it wouldn't even be given a second thought to spend the extra $ on the PowerMac.

    But, here's how I see it from my perspective; I'm not a power user, and either machine would fit my needs. I could get a whole lot more computer with the PowerMac, but for almost twice as much as the eMac. When the $70 difference between the two is nearly two full days of worth of pay at my job, I would be more inclined to go with the eMac.

    And, to actually pertain to the question of the thread, the eMac is probably around the same age as the G5, and the specs though different, aren't really too far off. I would say that the eMac is of better value for my money than the G5.

    Am I looking at this the wrong way?
     
  13. cyberghoser1 macrumors member

    cyberghoser1

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2009
    Location:
    Athens, Hellas
    #13
    You are in love with eMacs, thats for sure ;)
     
  14. SkyBell thread starter macrumors 604

    SkyBell

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    Texas, unfortunately.
    #14
    Well, yes. :p But my bias aside, they honestly seem to be the PPC desktop model that seems to average out above all the others in power for the price.

    iMac G5's still seem overpriced, PM G5's cost more than all the others; PM G4's seem to go for as much as G5's. :eek: iMac G4's still command a premium for their design, and G4 Mac mini's seem to suffer from the same issue as well.

    eMacs? It isn't a hard task by any means to find them going for less than Mac mini's do, and with higher specs at that.
     
  15. gavinstubbs09 macrumors 65816

    gavinstubbs09

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2013
    Location:
    NorCal boonies ~~~by Reno sorta
    #15
    For a period of time when I owned a 1.6GHz iMac G5 and a 1.33GHz G4 mini I'd rather use the mini. For some reason that seemed to run Leopard better and was quieter (of course ;) ). I bought both of them for sub-$100
     
  16. Dane D. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2004
    Location:
    ohio
    #16
    I look at this in software terms. If running OS 9.2.2 and 10.4, not needing to do video editing or other FPU hungry tasks, than the most cost effective is a G3. I'm typing this on a aftermarket cpu 1.1GHz G3, runs great and costs nothing to operate. I think IBM says it uses 9 or 10 watts at full speed. I run Adobe CS2 suite just fine.

    Opt for a G4 and software options open up. It can crunch video editing just fine. Our eMac 1.25GHz does that. I can't tell much difference between G3 and G4 until FPU hungry software is used.

    G5, I would pass on these. Generate lots of heat and the performance is not that great for the electric used.

    Having a PowerPC for home use currently and using the latest (Intel) at work, Intel wins. PowerPC is cheap computing now.
     
  17. rabidz7 macrumors 65816

    rabidz7

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2012
    Location:
    Ohio
  18. cyberghoser1 macrumors member

    cyberghoser1

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2009
    Location:
    Athens, Hellas
    #18
    I took the initiative to look on ebay for eMacs, well, very interesting prices, I might go for one, they are really cheap. Well I expect the shipping has to be half the price of the computer, but hey for less than 200$ why not.
     
  19. G51989 macrumors 68030

    G51989

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2012
    Location:
    NYC NY/Pittsburgh PA
    #19
    Pretty much no, a well optioned out Quad still goes for 300-400. Same amount of money can net a brand new PC which is far more capable.

    The G4s are the best bang.
     
  20. rabidz7 macrumors 65816

    rabidz7

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2012
    Location:
    Ohio
    #20
    A G4 is unusable for normal computing without a dual 7448 upgrade, which will cost more than a Quad. A Quad running Debian 7.10 with a 7800GT unlocked to 7800GTX(w/nVclock) will be just as usable as a new PC.
     
  21. Intell macrumors P6

    Intell

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2010
    Location:
    Inside
    #21
    Except it's about 8 years old and full out outdated technology that can hardly do anything modern.
     
  22. G51989, Sep 22, 2013
    Last edited: Sep 22, 2013

    G51989 macrumors 68030

    G51989

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2012
    Location:
    NYC NY/Pittsburgh PA
    #22
    Expect that 400 Dollar Gateway is far more usable, brand new, can run new software, and is more reliable. And is multiple times faster. A single core of an quad core APU A6 for example is faster than a Quad G5. And it has 4 cores, its intergrated GPU is also far faster than a 7800.

    If your on PPC, your not doing much besides tinkering.

    Also, G5s use a ton of power, and are not reliable.

    You can get a great G4 for under 80 dollars, and spend a little on upgrades, and have a great hobby machine.

    I have a co uple G5s, and PCs flew past them in performance almost a decade ago. They cant compete with even the lowest end PCs on any level.

    So to the OP, if you want to tinker with PPC, and have a cool reliable machine. G4s are typically the way to go, I have several as well. Much more reliable than my G5s have been.

    Also, if your just doing basic stuff and old school gaming, a decent G4 will do just fine.
     
  23. Goftrey macrumors 68000

    Goftrey

    Joined:
    May 20, 2011
    Location:
    Wales, UK
    #23
    I'd personally go for a dual-core 2.3 G5. Where I am (UK) they seem to give the best balance between performance, reliability & straight up value.

    But you seem to have an unhealthy addiction to eMacs :p - so in that case go all out on a 1.42 w/ a 9600 & 2GB RAM. Stick a nice boot drive in there (if you dare) and enjoy!
     
  24. G51989 macrumors 68030

    G51989

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2012
    Location:
    NYC NY/Pittsburgh PA
    #24
    Yes, the Dual 1.8s, Dual 2.0s and 2.3s are still rather cheap. And a decent bang for the buck, if you can find one locally, otherwise shipping makes it totally not worth it.
     
  25. rjcalifornia macrumors 6502a

    rjcalifornia

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2012
    Location:
    El Salvador
    #25
    Exactly. Either a MDD G4 or an iBook G4. Although OP seems to want an eMac. I always wanted an eMac. I also always wanted an iMac G4, and I got one. Still in love with it.
     

Share This Page