I have two options, both at the same price: to buy a dual 2.0 GHz Power Mac with 3.5 GB of DDR RAM, or a dual 2.3 GHz with 1.5 GB of DDR RAM. Which one, do you think will be faster out of the two? They both have 160 GB hard drives.
Thanks in advance,
J
PowerMac, Mac OS X (10.4.11)
There were 4 different G5 2.0 GHz, & only one 2.3 GHz model, yet very little difference in speed between the bottom & the top...
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/powermac_g5/specs/powermac_g5_2.0_dp_pci.h tml
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/powermac_g5/specs/powermac_g5_2.3_dp.html
Perhaps more important...
I would not let RAM quantity sway me to much in the face of other factors. RAM is still relatively cheap to add later. But, unless you have a pressing reason to run older software fast, the G5s are not very fast by today's standards.
These are performance comparisions between the generation of G5 I believe you're looking for, and a current entry-level Mac Mini, from MacTracker's database program:
If your heart is made up that you need a G5, that's great, and I would go for speed assuming all other factors except RAM are equal. You can get more RAM.
Oh, a big factor is original disks. I think a used Mac should be considered "defective" unless sold with its original set of system install/restore disks. Ask for them. If one computer has them and the other doesn't, I'd go for the one with disks as the speed difference between 2.0 and 2.3 isn't huge./
Please know I am not an "old Mac hater." I own a bunch of old Macs that still work and tend to run them long after most people would scrap them. I love our G4s but I had to move to an Intel Mac to get performance I needed. I could hardly use these forums on several G4s running either Tiger or Leopard once Apple changed the forum software in April 2011. 😟
Thank you very much guys for your helpful answers. We already have two Intel iMacs at home and one G5 iMac, and I was just looking for a cheap-ish Mac (not worried about the G5 incompatibility with Intel software) to manage a bunch of media, and to run some medium-heavy applications on. Allan, the only trouble with buying new RAM later is that it adds £30 or so to the cost of the machine, and I'm on a fairly tight budget (is £130 good for those macs?). The same company are selling both these machines, and they are being sold on because of an IT infrastructure changeover, so unfortunately, as a company they cannot sell on the disks as they probably didn't purchase a set of disks with each machine. So, its all down to whats more valuble, 2GB of Ram or 0.3 of a GHz?
Thanks,
J
I think its brilliant; people still using and recycling old tech. I had an eMac not too long ago, but it CRT started to fail so I set out on a project to put in an old LCD monitor instead, but after I had finished it wouldn't boot, so it had to be scrapped 😟.
RAM can be found used on eBay or other.
Best machine for the money, with discs, is the only way to go.
Without discs, you are looking at big money to purchase a retail OS disc; often times costs more than the machine.
Dual 2.0 or dual 2.3? Which is newer? Either a Late 2005? PCIe graphics?
Big difference between an AGP graphics and PCIe graphics machine.
Assuming they are both Early 2005 machines, I'd take the 2.3 and put min 4 GB RAM (total) in it.
Still, no discs, don't pay over £40-£50.
£130 is too high, regardless of RAM, if no software discs are included.
Thanks japamac - I should have mentioned this, my fault - but I do already have the OSX Leopard disc anyway, so that doesn't matter to me. Is £130 too high? Lots of others on eBay seem higher, and I definitely haven't found any for under £60. Both are AGP x8 graphics and mid to late-2004.
J
I do already have the OSX Leopard disc anyway, so that doesn't matter to me.
As long as you are aware of the short comings of such and have an avenue to install an OS, that is important.
Many people come here after the fact, asking about OS discs, and are chagrin to find that the discs sell for more than the machine did.
That said, if your Leopard disc is not a black, retail disc, well, then you have NO disc. The gray, OEM discs won't work.
Lots of others on eBay seem higher
If like auctions here, they aren't selling, either.
If you consider the price to be acceptable, possibly not too high.
Without discs, with the original, pathetically small hard drive, existing RAM, likely the standard, inconsequential Radeon 9600 Pro graphics card, there is nothing that really sets the machines apart.
Given the age, the history of and the potential failures/problems of the G5, I would try for £100 (or less).
I definitely would go for the 2.3 GHz machine, as, one, it is faster, and faster counts, and, two, it has PCI-X rather than standard PCI that the DP 2.0 GHz machine has.
The Early 2005 2.3 GHz machine has better architecture.
It also has 8 RAM slots, whereas the Early 2005 2.0 GHz machine has 4.
There were two earlier DP 2.0 GHz machines, either with 8 RAM slots, but both were yet underspec'd as compared to the 2.3 GHz machine.
Both had reliability issues as well.
The first 2.0 with the weak 64 MB Radeon Pro and the second with the miserable Geforce FX 5200 were both laughable in the graphics department.
The current RAM is really inconsequential.
I see some good deals on used, G5 RAM on the net.
Even new isn't too expensive.
The DP 2.0 machine is a "run of the mill" machine for the era.
The 2.3 had one of the better reliability ratings:
Thanks japamac. I do indeed have the black retail version of Leopard. From the looks of what everyones saying I think I will go for 2.3GHz and I'll buy some more RAM at a later date. Thanks everyone for your helpful advice!
J
Allan, the only trouble with buying new RAM later is that it adds £30 or so to the cost of the machine,
Ah, I see now. Not knowing where you were located before, I was thinking N. American RAM pricing. The £ sign tipped me off!
Buying advice for Power Mac G5?
