Faster than G5 PowerMac?

[egil]

I need a new laptop. I wonder if the MacBook Pro is fast enough to replace my PowerMac G5 2x1,8Ghz (ca 1,5GB RAM)? I think it would be easier to have only one computer. If I sell the G5 I might still get some money for it. Which MacBook Pro will be equalent to my G5? (I use it mainly for still images/photoshop). Any idea?

 

[Kash]

I remember reading some tests a little while ago that with the release of the Core2Duos, the Intel processors had finally become faster than the G5 while emulating PowerPC applications. Now, if the Intel based Macs are faster than the G5 at running emulated software, then they are most definitely faster at running native code. Heck, when Apple first stuck Intel processors into its computers, it was claiming a 2-3x performance increase. To top that off, the latest processors are easily 15-30% faster than the original CoreDuos.

I would have to say a Macbook Pro could easily beat out the G5 in several areas. Only performance hit I can see on a notebook compared to a desktop is the slower hard drive.

 

[tiger2]

Hi

well i have a G5 powermac 2.3 with 2 gig of ram and also have the macbookpro 2.16 and i use logic pro and ableton heavily i would say that the macbook isnt far behind the powermac and my macbook is the older version not the core 2 duo

 

[gilesjuk]

The Core 2 Duo is a fabulous processor. Remember it was Apple who put out many myths about the PPC vs Intel performance, as soon as they moved to Intel Apple were saying how much faster Intel are.

Having two cores on one chip has its advantages and disadvantages, firstly the cores can swap information without going to main memory. But the memory access can be slower overall. However the memory buses are faster these days.

There's not many applications around that don't have Intel versions, so it's a good time to switch over.

 

[Benjamindaines]

Yes the C2D is faster than my Dual 2.0 G5. The only thing that is slower is the video card and the hard drive (I went with the 4200RPM 200GB)

 

[Prise]

To echo everyone else, for the personal computer market, Intel CPUs have been faster than Power PC chips for quite some time. Prior to Apple's conversion, Intel had beaten the Power PC in just about every benchmark test.

Moving forward with programs running natively on Intel's chip architecture, you would only see the performance gap widen relative to the Power PC. With the need for Rosetta emulation becoming less of an issue, I'd imagine the new MacBook Pros should compare very favorably performance-wise to your G5.

 

[gilesjuk]

I liked PowerPC, however Motorola were concentrating on the embedded market and only IBM were really developing PPC for computers (but servers not desktops).

Bit of a shame that we're down to having most computers on one architecture.

 

[egil]

OK, it seems like I can sell the G5 then. Thankyou all for your help!

 

[Prise]

I liked PowerPC, however Motorola were concentrating on the embedded market and only IBM were really developing PPC for computers (but servers not desktops).

I remember when Power PC was once the most advanced personal computer CPU on the market. When first introduced, they were really heads and shoulders above the chips Intel were making.

I agree that it's too bad IBM and Motorola never focused on the personal computing market, otherwise we may see better CPUs as an alternative to Intel's architecture.