Your Go-To Desktop PowerPC

Which Mac Desktop is your PowerPC of choice?


  • Total voters
    56

AphoticD

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Feb 17, 2017
1,741
2,188
Australia
It would have to be my Power Mac G5 dual-core 2.3 GHz, the same one I recently installed Mac OS X Server on. Even though it's not a quad-core, the Radeon X1900 and Intel 320 SSD make it run very smoothly on Leopard, without the troublesome LCS to deal with.
I totally agree. I think the air-cooled 2.3 was the pinnacle of G5 efficiency.

. o O (Would that statement be an oxymoron?)

I appreciate the DC every time I fire it up with it's satisfying engine rev.
 
  • Like
Reactions: eyoungren

redheeler

macrumors 604
Oct 17, 2014
7,397
6,965
I appreciate the DC every time I fire it up with it's satisfying engine rev.
The earlier dual-processor or single-core G5s do that, but sadly not any of the Late 2005 models I've had. I guess that's the price to pay for an overall quieter and better-calibrated Power Mac G5, though they still make that nice continuous growl the earlier models make when powered on ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: AphoticD

xdanieldzd

macrumors newbie
Apr 13, 2017
27
26
Germany
My top choice in desktops would be my G4 DA (aka the "Not-QS" in my signature because of the case), just by virtue of it being my fastest one.

Second would be my iMac G3 350 MHz, if its video output wasn't a bit iffy; I'm guessing the analog board is on its way out, or at least needs to be recapped. That's also why I haven't actually used it in quite a while.

Then third... well, I don't know. If I had one, I'd change my top choice to a G5 Dual of some type and bump G4 and G3 down by one. Otherwise, I guess it would have to be my 4400/200?

...but when it really comes down to it, like @weckart I would pick a PowerBook- either the AlBook or 3400c/200, depending on the OS I need.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AphoticD

AphoticD

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Feb 17, 2017
1,741
2,188
Australia
The earlier dual-processor or single-core G5s do that, but sadly not any of the Late 2005 models I've had. I guess that's the price to pay for an overall quieter and better-calibrated Power Mac G5, though they still make that nice continuous growl the earlier models make when powered on ;)
You're right. It's the non-DC models which rev up at power-on. Well my Late '05 DC does make a bit of a low whir soon after the chime, but I think it's the FX 4500, which winds down a few seconds later.
 

Orizence

macrumors 6502
Nov 10, 2014
286
66
I really enjoy my iMac G5, because so far its been much more stable than my old PMG5. But when I get a second monitor I might try to get my old G5 going again because that was such a fun machine to use
 
  • Like
Reactions: AphoticD

eyoungren

macrumors Core
Aug 31, 2011
21,176
13,009
ten-zero-eleven-zero-zero by zero-two
Time was I'd name my Quicksilver for this.

Again, one of the only models that attracted me. Of all the G4 case designs I believe it's the most beautiful. Unfortunately, beauty is only skin deep as I discovered over the last three years or so in trying to get everything I wanted to work.

Just because you can load every PCI slot doesn't mean Apple designed it for cooling and power.

So, now my go to is my Quad. I admit that I don't think they are as ugly as I once thought and I appreciate their power but the G5 was a system that based solely on design aesthetics I was attracted to.
[doublepost=1508438705][/doublepost]
It would have to be my Power Mac G5 dual-core 2.3 GHz, the same one I recently installed Mac OS X Server on. Even though it's not a quad-core, the Radeon X1900 and Intel 320 SSD make it run very smoothly on Leopard, without the troublesome LCS to deal with.
I also have a 2.3DC.

Very nice system.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AphoticD

redheeler

macrumors 604
Oct 17, 2014
7,397
6,965
I also have a 2.3DC.

Very nice system.
And I also have a Quad that I built using a dual-core and eBay parts last year; nice system but mine was having issues with overheating, so I swapped the SSD and X1900 back into the dual-core 2.3 GHz and it has been working great (originally it was only 2.0 GHz, but I upgraded it as well).

One of these days I'll have to troubleshoot the Quad, but I have absolutely no experience when it comes to liquid cooling on G5s or anything else. Only seen a couple videos on the subject.
 
Last edited:

Slix

macrumors 65816
Mar 24, 2010
1,070
1,277
I'd have to say iMac G3. I have more than a dozen of them, so... Haha, but I just love the feel of using them. Other than that though, if I want to get something done quicker, my 1.25 GHz MDD or my 500 MHz G4 are both common uses for me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AphoticD

bobesch

macrumors 65816
Oct 21, 2015
1,213
833
Kiel, Germany
Primarily and always I'd go first for the 'Books' for daily service.
I wish the Cube could be "Dummi-proof" RDP-connected to my Win08Server for daily service and by this for daily pleasure ... (shame on MS for their dropping PPC-support for RDP-Client-support for WinServer'08)
Same about the Gooseneck!
The MDD is gorgeous with multiple acrylic monitors and the soundsticks - thanks to Erik's inspirations (but it's not movable...)
The PM-G5 is kind of heavy-duty and last stand, if everything else PPC should fail.
The iMac G5 is the one-in-all music machine and "with Airfoil" the one to serve them all.
---
To be honest: my current and favorite daily driver is an early 2008 silverkey intel c2d 2.5GHz 15"MBP with antiglare screen! (Time to catch any occasion - prices are down!!!) Better than black-key late-2008 battery-door MBPs, which, I don't know why, suffer from a naughty battery-power-drainage...
It holds an ExpressCard/34 for USB3.0 and with a BassJump-USB-connected-Woofer the intel-Books offer a great music experience!
----
Finally 'my' most important 'unique' features of legacy Macs, that couldn't be met by legacy-c2d intel Macs, are ...
- all PPC: most virus-proof
- PowerMacG5/PowerBooksG4: dual-boot Tiger for Classic
- PowerMacs: MDD-G4 and lower: boot into os9
- iBook-G3: boot into os9
- PowerBook G4 Titanium and lower: boot into os9
All Tiger/Leopard and later stuff is able to run on the c2d 2008 MBP etc. too (AFAIK?)
I've set up a Leopard-Server virtual machine with VMware Fusion in combination with usb-modem to make use of 'PageSender FaxCenter' for sending fax to groups of people - to make the MacBookPro as handsome as the PowerBooks...
 
Last edited:

AphoticD

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Feb 17, 2017
1,741
2,188
Australia
Did these two threads get inspired by asking which machines were my favorite, or just coincidental? :p
Could be... Or perhaps it's purely academic :apple:

I am interested in which of these old Macs are most put to use. Not surprising that the G5 takes the cake, but I was expecting more responses for the iMac G4 considering people often collect them. Maybe they are more of a show piece than a go to Mac?

I get the impression that the MDD and QuirkSilver are the most loved Mac desktops, despite sitting in 2nd place.
 

RhianB

macrumors 6502a
Sep 3, 2016
857
961
505 USA
Yep - my fav is my DC1Ghz QSG4 (such a great box for its age & capability) but I get a lot more mileage out of my DC2.0Ghz PMG5 so it got the vote. I do try to give my QS some love every other week but truthfully, the G5 does most of the heavy lifting as far as PPC goes.
 

amagichnich

macrumors 6502
Feb 3, 2017
465
272
Stuttgart, Germany
I wish I had room and money for a DC MDD and G5 but as I only have two eMacs and one Mini my go-to desktop is the 1.25 eMac. It has a brilliant screen, good speakers and feels much faster than the Mini. Also it is nearly loudless thanks to some mods - can't say the same about the noisy 1.5 Mini :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: AphoticD

AphoticD

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Feb 17, 2017
1,741
2,188
Australia
Back when they were new, I found the top-end eMacs felt snappier than they should. In comparison to iMac G4s, they had twice the L2 cache which would have accounted for some of that speed.

Even though the top end Mac mini's specs outdo the final rev eMac, it doesn't make it a faster Mac.

Maybe the eMac's 7457 CPU had some speed advantage over the other G4 chips? Was this the only Mac to use this CPU?
 

redheeler

macrumors 604
Oct 17, 2014
7,397
6,965
Back when they were new, I found the top-end eMacs felt snappier than they should. In comparison to iMac G4s, they had twice the L2 cache which would have accounted for some of that speed.

Even though the top end Mac mini's specs outdo the final rev eMac, it doesn't make it a faster Mac.

Maybe the eMac's 7457 CPU had some speed advantage over the other G4 chips? Was this the only Mac to use this CPU?
2005 eMacs have a better GPU (Radeon 9600 vs Radeon 9200), as well as being able to take 2 GB RAM vs 1 GB, and that's a much bigger advantage than 80 MHz of CPU power.

Radeon 9600 is especially helpful running Leopard. Been a while since I booted up my eMac, but I do remember the performance in Leopard was decent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: z970mp and AphoticD

AphoticD

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Feb 17, 2017
1,741
2,188
Australia
Along these lines I'm interested to know what software people are using on these systems. Period contemporary software? Or today's contemporary software?
For the most part, the pre-Intel only versions of most commercial software I use are just as capable and in many cases, still compatible with the modern options.

A quick scroll through my usual suspects on Leopard reveals...

Photography and Design:
  • Adobe CS3
  • Aperture 2
  • Pixelmator 1
  • Acorn

Audio Production:
  • ProTools LE 7
  • Ableton Live 8
  • Reason 4
  • Reaktor 5
  • Guitar Rig 2
  • Absynth 3
  • (+More NI plug-ins)

Video Production:
  • Final Cut Studio 2 (FCP, Motion, LiveType, Soundtrack Pro)

Web Development:
  • Coda 1
  • Espresso 1
  • Transmit 4
  • TextWrangler
  • MAMP

Software Development:
  • Xcode 3
 

amagichnich

macrumors 6502
Feb 3, 2017
465
272
Stuttgart, Germany
Back when they were new, I found the top-end eMacs felt snappier than they should. In comparison to iMac G4s, they had twice the L2 cache which would have accounted for some of that speed.

Even though the top end Mac mini's specs outdo the final rev eMac, it doesn't make it a faster Mac.

Maybe the eMac's 7457 CPU had some speed advantage over the other G4 chips? Was this the only Mac to use this CPU?
7457? Everymac says 7447 - are they wrong?