Quicksilver 2002 vs. MDD 2003?

[superpantoufle]

Hi all,

I have a PowerMac G4 Quicksilver that I love. It once was an original 867 MHz, but a couple of years ago I swapped its motherboard with a dual 1.0 GHz from a damaged Quicksilver 2002. It has 1.5 GB of Ram, and its original 20 GB hard drive plus a 320 GB. It runs Leopard pretty well, and screams with Mac OS 9.2.2. I use this machine as my "backup Mac" whenever I forgot my MacBook Pro in the car or elsewhere. And since it's installed on my "Vintage Mac" desk, I often use it to check something on the net while working with the collection. It also hosts a complete backup of my data. It is in great cosmetic condition, and I have the original packaging, mouse and keyboard, CDs, manuals, etc.

Apart for the huge noise it makes, it's still a really nice machine to work with, and it's not that slow for light work!

Now a couple of weeks ago I spotted a MDD on our local auction site. It was sold as defective because it didn't have Ram nor HD installed. I took the bet and bought it quite cheap. I bought 2 GB of Ram for it, and swapped the hard drives from my Quicksilver. It sure isn't defective! : It is the single 1.25 GHz model ("MDD 2003"). It isn't in bad condition, but it has a lot of scratches on the sides.

My plan was to switch to the MDD as my "backup Mac", hoping it would be more powerful, and sell the Quicksilver. But now I saw the MDD is only the the single 1.25 GHz (and the Quicksilver is a dual 1 GHz), I'm less sure what to do. Apart for the clock speed, is there significant differences between those models that could help me decide?

Thanks in advance for your experience!

 

[Trash80toHP_Mini]

I got my Dual 1 GHz QS'02 for the express purpose of running 9.2.2 in native mode. I blew X right out of it and don't intend to ever load it. IIRC, the ONLY Mac that's faster and runs OS 9 in native mode is the QS'02 Dual 1.25 GHz. I don't think the MDD series will run 0S 9 w/o doing so under X, but I could very well be wrong.

The Dual 1.25 MHz/OS 9 Box might have been MDD, but I don't think so. :?:

 

[Unknown_K]

In OSX a dual 1Ghz QS should be faster then a single MDD 1.25ghz system. You should be able to get a dual CPU for the MDD cheap on ebay. As far as selling the QS, they are not worth much these days so keep it as a spare, MDD seem to blow up their power supply for some reason.

I own a couple QS units (867, 1.25Ghz Sonnet upgraded one) and since I need OS9 native booting machines they are probably the last powermac I will be adding to my collection.

 

[theos911]

If you upgrade the CPU, go with the 1.42GHz dual. That way you can get the speed of the fastest MDD ever, without giving up OS 9.

The MDD came in three revisions:

2002(FW 400):

G4/867 MHz dual,

G4/1.0 GHz dual,

G4/1.25 GHz dual

NO OS 9 January 2003(FW 800):

G4/1.0 GHz single,

G4/1.25 GHz dual,

G4/1.42 GHz dual

June 2003(FW 400):

G4/1.25GHz single

G4/1.25GHz dual

Your model and cpu are in green. You can swap your cpu for any in blue, the bold being the fastest. This is a common way to get the faster (or dual if originally single) cpu and still be able to boot OS 9.

Hope this helps

 

[ClassicHasClass]

If you're lucky, you might even find one of the Sonnet dual 1.8GHz 7447A MDD CPU kits. The downside is that they (as I found out) have no L3 cache, so for some tasks they are not as fast as they could be, but in strict CPU benchmarks they are quite fast. Virtual PC 6 in OS 9 runs really fast with it!

 

[Trash80toHP_Mini]

I just checked out the specs on EveryMac:

There's only one native mode 9.2.2 Mac faster than my Dual 1 GHz Quicksilver 2002.

This was the Apple Power Macintosh G4 1.25 DP (MDD), intro'd August 13, 2002 and produced until January 28, 2003.

2003 release MDD Models could ONLY run OS9 under X in classic mode, so the Dual 1.42 GHz MDD cannot be classified as a Native OS 9.2.2 Mac.

This is all according to EveryMac, so YMMV.

While the 2002 MDD Models might be faster because of the basic architecture change, I'd need to see some benchmarks.

I'm not currently in the market for any "wind tunnel Mac" and I think I'll stick with what I've got in the QS '02 Dual 1 GHz. :approve:

 

[theos911]

There are two revisions of 2003 MDD's. There are Januarys and Junes. The Januarys could not boot OS 9, the Junes could. Yes, it was a weird move on apple's part. They needed to get rid of parts and decided to release one last OS 9 mac. (Like how the Yikes used lots of B&W G3 parts that were left over) (Kinda funny to note: two years before the intel transition they were stilling selling OS 9 machines :lol: )

There's only one native mode 9.2.2 Mac faster than my Dual 1 GHz Quicksilver 2002.This was the Apple Power Macintosh G4 1.25 DP (MDD), intro'd August 13, 2002 and produced until January 28, 2003.

...and the Apple Power Macintosh G4 1.25 DP (MDD), intro'd June 23, 2003 and produced until June 9, 2004 . They are literally the same. The bus speed is only different if you had an 867MHz Dual MDD 2002. (The 867's having a 133 bus. The others having 167MHz.)

The Power Macintosh G4/1.25 (MDD 2003) is a re-released version of the Power Macintosh G4/1.25 DP (MDD) (M8573LL/A) -- due to demand from users who still needed to boot MacOS 9 -- but configured, by default, with a single processor, less RAM, a smaller hard drive, and a DVD-ROM/CD-RW "Combo" drive instead of a DVD-R/CD-RW "SuperDrive". It also sold for a much lower price, US$1299 instead of US$3299.
It was released on June 23, 2003 along with the original Power Macintosh G5 models and discontinued on June 9, 2004 when the Power Macintosh G5 (June 2004) series was introduced.

Please note that this model also could be custom configured with dual 1.25 GHz PowerPC 7455 (G4) processors.

~http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/powermac_g4/stats/powermac_g4_1.25_mdd.html

 

[superpantoufle]

Wow, thanks all for those details answers!

I haven't made it clear in the original post, but running 9 natively is a must! To that extent, when I bought the MDD without knowing which one it was, I was indeed lucky it was the MDD 2003 and NOT the FW800.

What I learned in your answers is the QS 2002 dual 1 GHz is nearly the fastest stock Mac running 9. That confirms my doubts: I think I'll keep my faithful Quicksilver and continue to happily use it. I don't know yet what I'll do with the MDD. Either keep it around just in case, or sell it. I don't intend to make profit or anything, but I shouldn't get less from it now it has Ram and HDD than what I bought it for a couple of weeks ago!

Thanks again!

 

[theos911]

the QS 2002 dual 1 GHz is nearly the fastest stock Mac running 9.

Yes, nearly. Fastest stock is 1.25GHz Dual. Fastest using apple parts is 1.42GHz Dual. Then there are third party upgrades, but that is classichasclass's department.

 

[Trash80toHP_Mini]

Edit that to:

the QS 2002 dual 1 GHz is nearly the fastest stock Mac running 9 natively.

My bad, or are you saying I can replace my Dual 1 GHz QS 2002's processor with the Dual 1.42 GHz processor?

Is this only possible for the MDD's Dual 1.25 GHz processor?

The Apple Power Macintosh G4 1.42 DP (FW 800) is a Classic Mode Only* box.

The Power Macintosh G4 (Firewire 800) series is similar to the "Mirrored Drive Doors" series that it replaced -- both share an identical case design complete with "mirrored drive doors" and the same bus speeds (133 MHz or 167 MHz) and RAM (PC2100 and PC2700), for example -- but the "Firewire 800" models have faster optical drives and add a single Firewire 800 port along with support for onboard AirPort Extreme (802.11g) and Bluetooth 1.1.

It looks like MDD switched to the Classic Mode Only* Xserve architecture at the Firwewire 400/800 cusp.

My guess is that the Procs are not compatible across the architecture void . . .

. . . but I'm sometimes wrong about my ASSumptIons! :-/

I did my "fastest Native 9 Box" research a few years back, but ISTR that a Dual 1.25 GHz Box was the limit.

 

[Trash80toHP_Mini]

What I learned in your answers is the QS 2002 dual 1 GHz is nearly the fastest stock Mac running 9. That confirms my doubts: I think I'll keep my faithful Quicksilver and continue to happily use it. I don't know yet what I'll do with the MDD. Either keep it around just in case, or sell it. I don't intend to make profit or anything, but I shouldn't get less from it now it has Ram and HDD than what I bought it for a couple of weeks ago!

Now that it has been "almost" fully equipped and TESTED, you should be able to sell it for more than it was worth than when you bought it.

I spotted a MDD on our local auction site. It was sold as defective because it didn't have Ram nor HD installed.

Pull some RAM, or not, install a new HDD with a legal OS on it and then list it as: Tested/new RAM & HDD installed.

 

[trag]

I haven't tested it, but my reading indicates that all the MDD and G4 Xserve CPU modules are interchangeable, provided you pay attention to the bus speed (133 MHz vs. 167 MHz) issues.

If the modules ran in machines with the same bus speed, then there are no issues.

Whether the CPU module came off a motherboard which supported booting OS9 is not relevant. It's the motherboard that contains that compatibility/incompatibility, not the CPU module.

Another nice option for the MDD is the XServe dual 1.33 GHz G4 module. There's a seller on Ebay with new service parts for $75, which seems a bit steep considering that they don't include the heat sink.

 

[Trash80toHP_Mini]

There's a 133 -> 167 MHz Bus Speed Bump seems to have occurred between the QS 2002 and the MDD series, so my earlier question about my QS 2002 is a NO GO! :-/

But now that I know the 1.25 MHz Native 9 machine was a 167 MHz Bus FW400 MDD, it's probably significantly faster than the Dual 1 GHz QS 2002.

The FW800/Xserve architecture MDDs and Xserve CPU models would very likely be interchangeable. However, I wonder if the earlier, QS architecture, Native 9 167 MHz Bus FW400 MDD CPU modules would really be interchangeable with the Xserve architecture MDD modules?

Dunno . . . :?:

 

[theos911]

To recap: the firmware in the FW800 board is the only thing that cannot boot OS 9.

Take its (1.42 Dual) CPU and put it in a machine that has a 167 bus AND can boot OS 9 (The '02 MDD and/or the June '03 MDD) and it will boot OS 9 at that speed.

So no, trash, your QS could not get the 1.42 GHz as-is. It is possible, but not exactly trivial.

 

[ClassicHasClass]

The CPU modules between the Xserve of that generation and the MDD are interchangeable, although the mounting hardware differs. The Sonnet MDD/Xserve Encore/MDX upgrade had extra parts for the Xserve; the base electronics and CPU board are the same.

 

[Trash80toHP_Mini]

I was mistaken, some of the low end MDDs only had a 133 MHz System Bus.

Methinks I'll be watching for a pair of Wind Tunnels (MDDs) to create the fastest possible Native 9 Box, even if it sounds like one of those awesome Indy Turbine Cars back in the day!

. . . just for $#!^$-n-giggles! }

 

[MacJunky]

So no, trash, your QS could not get the 1.42 GHz as-is. It is possible, but not exactly trivial.

Random tangent:You can use a Sawtooth or Gigabit Ethernet CPU in a Digital Audio. The bus underclocks without a touch of an iron and the CPU runs at full speed.. Even though ASP will lie to you and say something wrong, a bench session at various jumper speeds proves things.

Anyway, back on topic.