So...for Tiger or Leopard (Haven't decided which way I want to go), which machine would provide the better experience in your opinions?
The MDD is the final 2003 1.25ghz single CPU. The G5 is the cut-down single 1.8ghz "iMac in a tower case".
Jump to content
Posted 25 October 2016 - 02:58 PM
Whichever unit is not giving you problems. The G5 runs hot and is more prone to failure, but is newer so with SATA and faster bus speed probably feels quicker. I dont do anything heavy with my PPC's these days so I dont see much difference. You may depending what your doing with them.
Lots O' Macs, but now thinning the lots.
Posted 25 October 2016 - 03:04 PM
Neither machine is super reliable, TBH. The 2004 1.8GHz was one of the least reliable G5's, but the MDD's on average aren't much better.
If you don't need more than two disks or one optical drive, and you don't care about running OS9 natively I'd pick the G5 though. Most of the failures on the SP 1.8 2004 seem to be ancillary components:
Edited by TheWhiteFalcon, 25 October 2016 - 03:05 PM.
Posted 25 October 2016 - 03:37 PM
Posted 25 October 2016 - 03:41 PM
exactly, ram slots on those seem to blink out pretty regularly. All the G5 towers boards are so long that when that board gets hot it flexes against itself and all the solder seems to crack over time. limited success on reflowing them, was not even worth the effort.
Lots O' Macs, but now thinning the lots.
Posted 25 October 2016 - 03:54 PM
Any way to mitigate that if you do get a working unit?
Posted 25 October 2016 - 03:58 PM
Posted 25 October 2016 - 11:38 PM
Posted 26 October 2016 - 03:11 AM
Tiger will run pretty nicely on either machine, and Leopard will run pretty well on both too I would imagine. The G5 advantage is of course the MUCH faster system bus, double the RAM, and more graphics card & SATA HDD options. If I were to pick, I'd of course go G5 in this situation. Now if that is a dual 1.25 or 1.42 G4, things may be a little different.
Quad G5 2.5, DP 2.7 G5, MBP 2.6 & 2.16, Dual 2.0 G5, MDD DP 1.42 & DP 1.25, 17" Powerbook 1.67 HiRes, 12" Powerbook G4 1.5, TiBook 1GHz, 667 & 867, iMac G3 500, Cube 500 & 450, B&W G3 450 & 350x2, EVERY Clamshell iBook, Beige G3 350, PDQ 233, ++
Posted 26 October 2016 - 05:42 AM
Get both and benchmark 'em!
There used to be talk about late G4s being faster and feeling faster than early G5s, and that would be a perfect opportunity to test them.
But, it ultimately depends on what you want to do. I believe that G5 also has a higher RAM ceiling, and so if you're going for OS X, that's the no-brainer.
But, the MDD is really probably where you want to be for OS 9. The only better configuration I can think of for any work that's CPU-heavy in OS 9 is the fastest single-upgraded QuickSilver you can get, which will run 1.5GB of RAM and should be easier to get and set up and waste less hardware (aka entire second idling CPU) than the faster MDD configs.
Posted 26 October 2016 - 03:27 PM
Well, I've got both up and running. The G5 is running Leopard, the MDD has Tiger. G5 has the max 4GB RAM, but I'm stuck using a crappy old PCI video card from a B&W because I don't have a single card that'll work in the AGP slot on the G5. The MDD is pretty maxxed out. Only 1.7gb ram, but the BTO Geforce 4 video card.
I need to come up with a usage scenario before I can really decide which to keep around I think.
Posted 27 October 2016 - 01:43 AM
Don't care what anyone says, that G5 is going to be a much more enjoyable experience as far as performance is concerned. Especially with web browsing, you will see a stark difference.
The only time you're going to really get ahead of a Single G5 system, with a Single G4 (Even the latest), is if you're pushing atleast a 1:1 or higher clock speed. My 2Ghz PowerBook G4 was still only about ~20-30% faster overall than that 1.8Ghz G5. That thing was what I would consider just tolerable for a modern browser experience.
Edited by asaggynoodle, 27 October 2016 - 01:45 AM.
Posted 04 November 2016 - 04:47 PM
Given that 1.8 to 2.0GHz is a 10% increase in clock speed, if you had a 2GHz G4 and it was "only" 20-30% faster than a 1.8GHz G5... that's honestly extremely impressive.
Almost impressive enough to suggest that perhaps Apple should have NetBursted the G4 and just gunned for higher frequencies. If this is true, a dual 3GHz G4 would have been an utter powerhouse, relative to Power Macintoshes and PowerBooks that actually shipped, of course.
It would be interesting to see a comparison, although a lot of things like "browsing the web" will be subjective unless you run a few tests:
All three of these on browserbench.org would be neat to see on both the G4 and G5, probably under TenFourFox since I'm not 100% sure that, say, the versions of Safari on 10.4 and 10.5 will even run all of these tests.
All of that said, not 100% sure if "web browsing" is a particularly good task or use case, for security and performance reasons.
Perhaps you can run some DNG conversions or Gaussian blurs or Cinebench on them as well.
Posted 20 December 2016 - 09:38 PM
Edited by ianj, 20 December 2016 - 09:43 PM.
Crashing into the HSF Limitation Wall since 2015.
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users