PowerMac G5 still useable today?

The time has come that I need to upgrade my computer. My little iBook just doesn't cut it anymore., I'm sick of waiting 45 minutes for a video to render in iMovie and I want to get into some gaming. I was checking Craigslist and Ebay for a used Mac that would fit my needs and my ever so limited budget and I'm leaning towards a PowerMac G5.

Now, to start off I know OS X 10.7 Lion is coming out fairly soon, and I know that the G5 maxes out at 10.5 Leopard. I'm not particularly worried about this, as I'm still running Tiger with no compatibility issues and I don't really care for the new applications such as the new iMovie. Although I am a tad worried about stuff such as digital cameras and other externals, as 99% are going to require an Intel Processor.

Hardware is my biggest issue, I really want the Quad Core G5, 2.5GHz model. The dual core just seems too slow for my needs, which is some moderate video editing and gaming. Another reason is that the Quad Core can take up to 16GB of ram instead of the Dual's max of 8. My iBook doesn't even know what hit it when I try to play even a moderately light game, never mind something that's considered "processor intensive"

I know the Quad Core is liquid cooled, and to me that's just a huge red flag. One leak and the computer fries itself. But, I really can't figure out what else I could do about it, there's at least a $200-$300 jump between early Intel Macs, and late PowerPC Macs that I've seen.

I checked MacTracker's Benchmarks and the Quad Core G5 is almost as powerful as other early intel Macs:

Quad Core G5: 3284

Mac Pro 2006, two 2.0 GHz: 3714

Mac Mini 2006, 1.66 GHz: 2094

And For kicks, my iBook G4 has a score of 689.

So, I Guess to sum it all up is, would a G5 be able to handle my needs, or should I want like a year and try to save up for an Intel Mac?

-Thanks ;D

MacDude121 said:

Hardware is my biggest issue, I really want the Quad Core G5, 2.5GHz model. The dual core just seems too slow for my needs, which is some moderate video editing and gaming. Another reason is that the Quad Core can take up to 16GB of ram instead of the Dual's max of 8. My iBook doesn't even know what hit it when I try to play even a moderately light game, never mind something that's considered "processor intensive"

I know the Quad Core is liquid cooled, and to me that's just a huge red flag. One leak and the computer fries itself. But, I really can't figure out what else I could do about it, there's at least a $200-$300 jump between early Intel Macs, and late PowerPC Macs that I've seen.

Click to expand...

I was pretty much in agreement with you until you said you wanted a "quad-core" G5. I definitely understand that a Powermac G5 would be a big upgrade from an iBook...and I definitely understand that not everyone has a huge budget.

If you had said that you were interested in a dual 1.8 or dual 2.0ghz Powermac G5...for $200-$250 bucks...I would say go for it. But a quad-core Powermac is going to be a good bit more pricey.

As far as the cost of a "quad" PM G5 & early Intel Mac's...I can tell you, you can definitely get a Core 2 Duo Intel Mac-Mini or a Core 2 Duo MacBook in the $350 range. And if you can get a 2.0ghz Core 2 Duo MacBook for $350...you can get an Intel iMac (since iMac's of the same vintage are usually less expensive than MacBook's).

Even if a "quad" PM G5 in benchmark tests out scores some Intel Mac's...you'll still much more appreciate the fact that you can run OS 10.6...and possibly 10.7...versus being stuck with 10.5.8.

HTH,

- Nick

pigoo3 said:

I was pretty much in agreement with you until you said you wanted a "quad-core" G5. I definitely understand that a Powermac G5 would be a big upgrade from an iBook...and I definitely understand that not everyone has a huge budget.

If you had said that you were interested in a dual 1.8 or dual 2.0ghz Powermac G5...for $200-$250 bucks...I would say go for it. But a quad-core Powermac is going to be a good bit more pricey.

As far as the cost of a "quad" PM G5 & early Intel Mac's...I can tell you, you can definitely get a Core 2 Duo Intel Mac-Mini or a Core 2 Duo MacBook in the $350 range. And if you can get a 2.0ghz Core 2 Duo MacBook for $350...you can get an Intel iMac (since iMac's of the same vintage are usually less expensive than MacBook's).

Even if a "quad" PM G5 in benchmark tests out scores some Intel Mac's...you'll still much more appreciate the fact that you can run OS 10.6...and possibly 10.7...versus being stuck with 10.5.8.

HTH,

- Nick

Click to expand...

Hmm, so maybe I should try to get my hands on a dual instead huh? Now that I think of it, I have seen some quad core G5's go for $400 on Ebay. That's out of my price range. I really don't want a Mac Mini. There's just something about having a computer that's only slightly bigger than my cable modem that I just don't like. ;P I really want a new desktop not laptop, but the early Intel iMacs max out at 2.0GB of ram, that alone pretty much says no go to me.

The reason I wanted the quad core was because it has a 1000 point difference in benchmarks over the Dual Core. How noticeable do you think this would be performance wise?

MacDude121 said:

Hmm, so maybe I should try to get my hands on a dual instead huh? Now that I think of it, I have seen some quad core G5's go for $400 on Ebay. That's out of my price range. I really don't want a Mac Mini. There's just something about having a computer that's only slightly bigger than my cable modem that I just don't like. ;P I really want a new desktop not laptop, but the early Intel iMacs max out at 2.0GB of ram, that alone pretty much says no go to me.

The reason I wanted the quad core was because it has a 1000 point difference in benchmarks over the Dual Core. How noticeable do you think this would be performance wise?

Click to expand...

I think that it would be "wiser" to get a dual-cpu Powermac G5 for around $200-$250...rather than spending $400 on a quad-core PM G5. You can do better with that $400 & get an Intel Mac.

As far as the 1000 point benchmark score difference...well it probably should be noticeable...especially if you're doing some video rendering. But $400 is a lot to spend on a 5-6 year-old non-Intel computer. And...rendering on a dual PM G5 will still be a lot faster than on your iBook.

Also remember...if you get a Core 2 Duo Intel computer...that's 2 processors. If you're going to spend around $400...I say try to get an Intel Core 2 Duo iMac. Otherwise...spend $200-$250 on a 1.8 or 2.0ghz Dual-cpu PM G5.

HTH,

- Nick

pigoo3 said:

I think that it would be "wiser" to get a dual-cpu Powermac G5 for around $200-$250...rather than spending $400 on a quad-core PM G5. You can do better with that $400 & get an Intel Mac.

As far as the 1000 point benchmark score difference...well it probably should be noticeable...especially if you're doing some video rendering. But $400 is a lot to spend on a 5-6 year-old non-Intel computer. And...rendering on a dual PM G5 will still be a lot faster than on your iBook.

Also remember...if you get a Core 2 Duo Intel computer...that's 2 processors. If you're going to spend around $400...I say try to get an Intel Core 2 Duo iMac. Otherwise...spend $200-$250 on a 1.8 or 2.0ghz Dual-cpu PM G5.

HTH,

- Nick

Click to expand...

Thanks Nick, I'll keep an eye out and see if I can find a deal on a G5 or early Intel Mac, then go from there.

Thinking of Getting a Power Mac G5

Hey guys I am actually new in the Mac world. Somewhat I am very familiar with the OS And highly computer savvy but what confuses me is that old mac's didn't have Intel so a lot of applications don't work with it. Well from what application Requirements say. I was thinking about getting a Power Mac G5 Dual 1.8 GHz /3.0 GB /250 GB. But my concern is it compatible with new Itunes, Safari ETC. I am buying it for my family room just for my parents and my little sister use. So important uses are Web browsing, Music Youtube, and DVD play back. Can this system handle those type of operations and is it very slow fast or descent?

Thank you in advanced.