Mac G5 or Mac Pro, newbie

Hello all!

I'm considering getting a Mac G5 or Mac Pro as an introduction to Mac's, for learning and experimenting with. I currently use a (10 year old) Sony VAIO laptop as my main machine (Pentium M 1.2ghz/1GB RAM), which is running a (lightweight) version of Linux (LXLE - I converted to Linux over a year ago), and thought I'd try a Mac out.

I'm pretty much uneducated about Macs in general, having never owned one or really used one. I have been "playing with" computers since the days of Radio Shack Pocket Computers, Apple II family, TI-994A/C64/TRS-80 CoCc's and 8086-based PC's though (yeah, I'm old). Here's what I do know about them (the G5/Mac Pro specifically):

1. they run OSX, a Unix-based OS (more secure, better OS)
2. the G5 was the last of the PowerPC processors, the Mac Pro uses Intel processors
3. generally, hardware is not compatible with PC hardware, and Windows does not run natively (not that I really care - I try not to use Windows on my machines anymore)
4. upgrading is more difficult and costly than a typical PC

So, on to my questions:

1. I assume I could run Linux on them just as easily as I can a PC, and even dual boot with OSX?
2. where can I learn more about the actual hardware, and upgrade paths/compatibility with standard PC hardware?
3. when looking to purchase one (G5 or Pro), what common issues should I be looking for/aware of, and what specs are considered desirable?
4. I assume the power supply is Apple-specific, not a generic ATX-style PS (and not an external "brick" like on a Mac Mini)? What about the cord (so if I'm purchasing one, I'll want to get the cord with it), is it "special"?
5. What keyboard/mouse can I use, standard usb or Apple-specific?
6. Ditto for displays - VGA, DVI, or Apple-specific?

I've been looking on ebay at both G5's and Pro's, and for what I'm willing to spend, it seems I could go with either one (the Pro being at the high end of what I'm willing to spend). Remember, this is more of a learning/experimenting tool than a serious "get work done" machine, so I really don't need the "latest technology" or software (I am using a 10 year old laptop with Linux!). Everything I do at work I do on the (Windows 7) laptop they provide anyway. I use my "personal" computer for the "regular" things: surfing the net, YT videos, email, some music and video stuff, some basic "office" stuff, etc. I also like to play around with (amateur) programming, Arduino, hardware repairs/upgrades/modifications, etc. and I'm interested in electronics, "hacking" (hardware and software) and generally experimenting and learning.

Suggestions on what to look for or avoid as I enter the world of "Mac"? If it helps, I'm trying to keep my outlay to $100 max, but preferably less. I would like to purchase a complete, working system (just the computer, not a KB/Mouse/Display, so long as I can use the stuff I already have - VGA/DVI monitor and usb KB/Mouse). If I have to, I have some hardware I can swap in (PCI graphics cards, SATA HDD, DVD drive, etc) if they are of course "compatible".

Thanks in advance!

Can't answer all of your questions, but go for the MacPro. Being Intel it will allow access to more software. You can use any standard USB mouse/keyboard. The non Apple keyboards may have the odd keys in different places; e.g. the " and the @

The earliest MacPros will go up to 10.7 Lion(The G5 will only go to 10.5, Leopard). Anything after January 2008 will run Yosemite.

Monitor connections will be DVI, Dual Link DVI or Mini DisplayPort depending how old it is. You can get various adaptors to connect toDVI/VGA monitors.

MX372 said:

Hello all!

I'm considering getting a Mac G5 or Mac Pro

Click to expand...

Stop considering the G5. Seriously. Even for "just playing around." It's too obsolete to even consider, particularly if you're thinking of ever connecting it to the Internet.


Here's what I do know about them (the G5/Mac Pro specifically):

3. generally, hardware is not compatible with PC hardware, and Windows does not run natively

Click to expand...

Both of these are incorrect if by "PC hardware" you mean peripherals like printers, scanners, etc.

Windows runs ENTIRELY natively -- it's the entire point of switching to Intel chips, well that and the fact that Intel continues to improve their chips as compared to Motorola, which just throws its clients under the bus (not just Apple -- video consoles all ran on PPC until recently).

4. upgrading is more difficult and costly than a typical PC

Click to expand...

Very very much depends on what model you are talking about, and whether you are talking hardware or software. My 2012 MacBook Pro is highly upgradeable, and the current Mac Pro can have nearly every component other than the motherboard itself changed out. "Retina" devices, generally, are the least upgradeable Macs.

1. I assume I could run Linux on them just as easily as I can a PC, and even dual boot with OSX?

Click to expand...

Yes, but I'd suggest you not do this until AFTER you have learned how to use the Mac. You may find yourself in a different state of mind as many, many, many of us here did.

2. where can I learn more about the actual hardware, and upgrade paths/compatibility with standard PC hardware?

Click to expand...

Apple.com and iFixit.com would be the two chief sources, but the first thing you need to learn about Macs is this: whether they are upgradable or not, this is **NEVER** the reason someone should buy them. It is, indeed, anathema to their raison d'etre. The purpose of a Mac is to be a natural extension of yourself, not a "project" you need to "manage." Barring defects or neglect, they serve this purpose for customers for five + years before changes in general technology often force replacement (or in some cases upgrading). Macs are not hand-built motorcyles you can (or should) spend your weekends tinkering with: they are Ferraris you drive out of enjoyment of the experience.

3. when looking to purchase one (G5 or Pro), what common issues should I be looking for/aware of, and what specs are considered desirable?

Click to expand...

See above. Do not even remotely consider a G5.

It should be fairly obvious to say you want the absolute latest one you can afford, with as much RAM as possible, I personally would not even look at one that couldn't run the latest OS version, so that puts you in the 2009 or higher bracket. There's no point in spending money on something very old and then liking the experience and having to immediately figure out how to buy a better one. Buy the better one.

4. I assume the power supply is Apple-specific, not a generic ATX-style PS (and not an external "brick" like on a Mac Mini)? What about the cord (so if I'm purchasing one, I'll want to get the cord with it), is it "special"?

Click to expand...

Generally, yes.

5. What keyboard/mouse can I use, standard usb or Apple-specific?

Click to expand...

You CAN use any USB keyboard. You will eventually WANT to use an Apple-specific one because the keys are in the right place.

Ditto for displays - VGA, DVI, or Apple-specific?

Click to expand...

Apple only makes one display that's not built-in, so you can use any monitor you like. I'd strongly suggest a high-quality, well-reviewed one -- don't go cheap on monitors, eyes are expensive to repair.

Remember, this is more of a learning/experimenting tool than a serious "get work done" machine, so I really don't need the "latest technology" or software (I am using a 10 year old laptop with Linux!).

Click to expand...

Linux lets you cheat on stuff like that; the Mac really doesn't. I appreciate what you're saying here, but you DO want something that can run the level of technology that was around circa 2012 if possible, even for playing around. See my point above about throwing good money after bad if you try to go too old/cheap on your first machine.

Suggestions on what to look for or avoid as I enter the world of "Mac"? If it helps, I'm trying to keep my outlay to $100 max, but preferably less.

Click to expand...

Oh okay, never mind. I thought you were serious. That'll teach me to read the whole post before replying.

Ohh Chas think he got you until that $100 max. reared its ugly head!

It is a great response too mate if the thread was genuine.

Your $100 limit will not get you a very good Mac of any kind! Sorry.

Also like Chas stated, the G5 is so old. No even semi recent software will run on one. Find the lowest cost Mac Pro on ebay and go with that.

Also you stated Windows will not run on any Mac??? That is not true at all. ALL Intel Macs run windows just fine and even natively if one wants it!

@chas_m - I appreciate your response, since you took the time to respond to each question individually, but, although it seems you read my post, it doesn't seem you really understood my post. Here's what I mean:

I thought I was pretty clear about why I was considering a Mac, and it wasn't because I was looking for a "better" computer than what I already have, nor for an "alternative" to Windows (or Linux), nor for a "different" or "better" experience. Simply, something to tinker with and learn, based on my interests (as indicated, computers, hacking both hardware and software, electronics, etc.). It seems that you gave me answers based on why/how you use a Mac, which honestly doesn't interest me at all (BTW, I read your sticky in this forum before I posted, and although it is likely good advice for 90%+ of the computer users out there, I fall into the other 10%). I hope that nothing I saw here will offend you, because as I said up front, I do appreciate your taking the time to respond thoughtfully. However, I think your idea of what a computer is for and how to use it is vastly different from mine.

For work, my employer gives me a laptop running an enterprise version of Windows, and mostly MS products to use to complete my work.

chas_m said:

Stop considering the G5. Seriously. Even for "just playing around." It's too obsolete to even consider, particularly if you're thinking of ever connecting it to the Internet.

Click to expand...

The G5 doesn't seem obsolete to me, based on it's specs, as compared to my "daily driver" (the Sony VAIO laptop, circa 2005, with 1GB RAM maxed out running at 1.2ghz, remember?). For learning and experimenting, nothing is really obsolete, and hence my price point. I could spend $100 eating out and have nothing to show for it at all, so I'm not afraid to drop $100 for something someone else feels is useless. As a matter of fact, if I can watch YT videos, DVD's, play music and surf the web with it, then it does everything I "need" a computer to do. It does everything MOST computer users need a computer to do (recreationally speaking, not "work" related). But I *suppose* that is debatable.....

chas_m said:

Both of these are incorrect if by "PC hardware" you mean peripherals like printers, scanners, etc.

Click to expand...

No, I meant things like PCI cards, HDD's, Optical drives, RAM sticks, power supplies, etc. For those peripherals you mentioned (likely USB) only correct drivers/software would be needed, and that's a software issue not a hardware issue. Again, for my purposes, that could result in a learning opportunity (coding drivers for a piece of hardware), and that's how I view it.

chas_m said:

Windows runs ENTIRELY natively -- it's the entire point of switching to Intel chips, well that and the fact that Intel continues to improve their chips as compared to Motorola, which just throws its clients under the bus (not just Apple -- video consoles all ran on PPC until recently).

Click to expand...

On the Intel chips yes, but not on the PowerPC (IBM design, not Motorola - the 68000-series chips in older Mac's were Motorola). Again, being able to run Windows would not be a requirement, just an added "bonus".

chas_m said:

Yes, but I'd suggest you not do this until AFTER you have learned how to use the Mac. You may find yourself in a different state of mind as many, many, many of us here did.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't necessarily disagree with this statement, however, that's what Apple marketing wants you to do - use their products and not venture out to use an open-source product in it's place. You see, Apple has always been a "closed" system architecture, and for good reason: it guarantees the money flow. I'm not convinced that method is of any benefit to me - I'm more of the mindset that if I buy it, I should be able to do whatever I want with it. Case in point: I have a 1st Gen iPod Touch 8gb. At some point an update to iOS came out, and I did it. Then my headphones stopped working (well, barely audible) and my volume slider disappeared. After much research and such, including replacement of the headphone jack (which didn't fix it), come to find out it was an issue with the update, and there is no way to downgrade back to the previous version. Apple's stance: "Oh, that's an older model that we don't support anymore, just trade up to a new iPod Touch Gen 3!". NO THANKS. Let me reinstall my previously-working software!

chas_m said:

Apple.com and iFixit.com would be the two chief sources, but the first thing you need to learn about Macs is this: whether they are upgradable or not, this is **NEVER** the reason someone should buy them. It is, indeed, anathema to their raison d'etre. The purpose of a Mac is to be a natural extension of yourself, not a "project" you need to "manage." Barring defects or neglect, they serve this purpose for customers for five + years before changes in general technology often force replacement (or in some cases upgrading). Macs are not hand-built motorcyles you can (or should) spend your weekends tinkering with: they are Ferraris you drive out of enjoyment of the experience.

Click to expand...

I got a good chuckle out of this. Really, I did. Comparing a Mac to a Ferrari was great. For people that want a computer that (99% of the time) works as expected, but that also don't mind having certain limitations on what they can do and the support they will receive, not to mention that they also don't mind paying significantly more for something that only gives you (and this is my opinion - it applies to both a Mac AND a Ferrari) that extra 10-20% of capability compared to other options that are significantly less expensive, I guess it's the way to go. If I had the money to buy a Ferrari, I wouldn't. I'd but a truck, a nice sports car (like a 350z for example), and a motorcycle, and get WAY more use and enjoyment out of them than a Ferrari. I'm not hating on Ferrari, Mac, or Apple products in general; they are very nice, very capable, and VERY EXPENSIVE. I'm not silly rich, so I'm a bit more "selective" in where I spend my money (I have a 10 year old laptop, a 10 year old truck, a 19 year old motorcycle, and an 11 year old motocross bike, among other things, and they all still do what they were designed to do and I use/enjoy them as much as any new version of them).

chas_m said:

It should be fairly obvious to say you want the absolute latest one you can afford, with as much RAM as possible, I personally would not even look at one that couldn't run the latest OS version, so that puts you in the 2009 or higher bracket. There's no point in spending money on something very old and then liking the experience and having to immediately figure out how to buy a better one. Buy the better one.

Click to expand...

I think you meant "not liking...", and I don't disagree. I'll go back to my intentions vs. your intentions for a computer. Applying your logic though, why even bother with a used one at all; I should just go plunk down $2000+ on the latest version so it will convert me to Mac (because the experience will be so awesome!). But, that is not really my intent.

chas_m said:

Linux lets you cheat on stuff like that; the Mac really doesn't. I appreciate what you're saying here, but you DO want something that can run the level of technology that was around circa 2012 if possible, even for playing around. See my point above about throwing good money after bad if you try to go too old/cheap on your first machine.

Click to expand...

Not really sure what you mean by this; on one hand you say I *can* run Linux, but then on the other you say I need something that runs 2012 technology (specifically what technology do you mean? USB 3.0? SATA III? PCI-E?). Seems contradictory....

chas_m said:

Oh okay, never mind. I thought you were serious. That'll teach me to read the whole post before replying.

Click to expand...

I am serious. Unless you mean serious about switching exclusively to a Mac. Which you are correct then, as I am not. I actually prefer Linux (hey, to be honest here, OSX is Unix-based and very similar to Linux, also Unix-based, and it's really the SOFTWARE/OS that makes or breaks the user experience. So, having said that, it's not necessarily Apple/Mac HARDWARE that makes it what it is, it's more the OS and software (and in some cases, lack of software, for example, games - not that I care about games - just an example).

Again thanks for your comments, and I hope I have not offended you by anything I've said (I say it like I see it, usually unfiltered). I will consider your input as I move forward. I welcome yours (or others) feedback/advice, I just ask that everyone carefully read and understand my intent.

I forgot to mention in my above post that only old versons of Linux will run on a G5 system due to it being Power PC. With an Intel Mac you could run any Distro I know of. Another thing to consider if you want Linux on the machine along with OSX.

You might find like I did that you like OSX better than most Linus distros!

MX372 said:

The G5 doesn't seem obsolete to me, based on it's specs, as compared to my "daily driver" (the Sony VAIO laptop, circa 2005, with 1GB RAM maxed out running at 1.2ghz, remember?).

Click to expand...

The problem with G5's is…it's not an Intel cpu like in newer Mac's. Basically G5's need specific versions of software. So what I'm saying is…a 2.0ghz mac G5 is not the same as a 2.0 core 2 duo Intel based Mac.

- Nick

@dtravis7 - thanks for the tip regarding Linux! Wasn't really thinking about that, but now that you mention it, finding a Linux distro that runs on PPC hardware may prove difficult. Another strike against the G5 then, as that would definitely be a negative impact for me.

So, I guess that resolves it then; no looking at G5's and instead focus on a Mac Pro, if I can't run a recent version of Linux (I'll do some research on that just for fun). See, that's the kind of feedback I'm looking for - another set of "eyes" to "see" the things maybe I missed. Good call man, thanks!

So, you indicated that $100 will not likely get me a Mac worth buying; I'm currently watching a few Mac Pro's on ebay that are not much more than that (shipping excluded) right now, but honestly I really have no idea what they are "worth". Care to give a few example (acceptable) system configurations/models and ballpark "value"? I'd appreciate any input! Of course, the bidding can shoot way up near the end on ebay, so I'll likely just need to be patient.

Another (apparent) option is a Mac Mini, though it does reduce any hardware upgrading/tinkering to a minimum compared to a full desktop. I asusme I would then be looking at only Intel versions as well (to maintain Linux compatibility)?

And for anyone out there that deems my previous post (response to chas_m) WAY too long, I apologize for the length of my response. It didn't seem that long when I was typing it.....

You just MIGHT find some of the very first Mac Pros that will be around $100 or so.

The Minis are an option but like you stated have way less upgradeablity than the Mac pro would.

Ok, so I've done a bit more research on this whole G5 being "not worth it", and from what I see, here's my take on it:

1. it uses a 64-bit processor, and can be found in both dual-core and dual-processor versions (2005 versions)
2. maximum can RAM can be as high as 16gb DDR2 4200
3. up to 1.25ghz FSB
4. PCI-E 16x support (for the last model in 2005)
5. support for SATA drives and USB 2.0

From a pure hardware perspective, this is completely acceptable and more powerful than anything I currently use at home. The critical factor here is OS/software availability. I think there is a workable solution for that as well: FreeBSD (a Unix-based OS; actually, part of OSX is based on FreeBSD). FreeBSD is available for the PPC/64 and runs on the G5, and the software repository contains over 24,000 software ports for FreeBSD. Of course, this would not be a simple "throw the OS disk in the drive and install"-type deal; it will require likely much compiling from source code and subsequent configuring, and maybe some bugs to work out (or live with).

I know, I know, likely no one on this forum is interested in any of this, as most of you are likely avid OSX fans and think a Mac should just be used as-is. But anyhoo, I'm going to do a little more research on the FreeBSD install process and see if anyone else out there on the internets has any experience with it and can give me some advice/pointers. After that, I may not count the G5 out, so for now I think I'm holding off as I complete some more research.

From what I'm seeing on ebay, a decent-spec'd early-model Mac Pro will run me $200-300 minimum (plus shipping); I can get a G5 for anywhere from $30 (plus shipping) to $150 (shipping included), and be in the mid-range of the G5 life cycle/specs (not the last model version, which would be the best version to get).

So, thanks for the input, happy trails!

MX372, I seriously suggest you don't bother. In addition to all of the reasons already brought forward, you will find drivers for anything other than Apple components hard to find, particularly as you go back in time as far as you will have to for your price limits. Just don't want you to throw away your money on a machine that you can't customize or play with the way you have described. It's more than the difference between a motorcycle and a Ferrari, it's more that you simply won't be able to find much in the market to let you "play" with it. You might do some research in that area before you spend the money.

Hi!

You post like someone of my age range and talk like the 16 year old I am mentoring. Not necessarily a bad thing.

After reading all the post I decided I really don't need to add much to the discussions but I thought I would add a few more resources for you.

I have an older Mac Pro and when I was doing my research I found a ton of information on the MacRumors forum -> Mac Pro area. Be advised - if you read through the posts you will find who really knows and who is just bloviating in their ignorance.

Also to help determine the value of your potential purchase a good place to check out is Mac2Sell

Good Luck!

Lisa

Funny as my 2.1 Ghz Mac G5 in every benchmark, is blown down by my 1st generation Mac Mini Core DUO. Not even Core 2 Duo.

Have fun with a boat anchor. At the end of the day, 64 bits means nothing when it's still slower than a cheap 32 bit system.

Take care.

@OP You've already been given many reasons not to use the G5 and I can't add to most of that. I had one when it was a current machine and loved it. Wouldn't buy one now but I wouldn't be doing the things you want to do.

The only comment I can add to that is if you go the G5 route avoid the liquid cooled versions. Even in their heyday some people had problems with the coolant leaking. That has only gotten worse over the decade or so since they were released.

I just don't see much point in investing in an Apple machine to primarily use Linux or the like on it; it's the same as buying one to primarily run Windows. Why?

As far as getting one for OS X, you'll be kicking yourself for getting a PPC these days. They're only best for running classic Mac OS software, in fact they're the only option.

. . . once you go Mac, you WON'T go back

@dtravis - Yeah, but that is to be expected if you compare all the specs from one to the other. I mean the mini has 4x the L2 cache and uses PC5300 DDR2 RAM vs. PC2700 DDR RAM - that would make a huge difference alone, even if both are using the exact same operating system and HDD. But really, they are not both running the same OS either, since they are completely different chip architectures.

Hey, I get it - the consensus here is to let the G5 go to pasture and get the latest model MP I can afford. Sound advice, for sure, and I think that's what I will do. If I can pick up a G5 (or even an older Mac like a G4) along the way for free, I'll play with it. But I'll devote my cash to something newer based on the recommendations I've gotten here.

I will say this (I think I already did): it's the software that makes the machine, not necessarily the hardware. My VAIO is much faster running LXLE (or Tiny Core Linux) than it ever was with WinXP (it won't run anything newer than that), and LXLE works out of the box very well (with a few exceptions regarding special keys and such). Most people would have chucked that thing in the trash by now - 1.2ghz with 1GB RAM - my Galaxy S4 has a faster processor and more RAM than that!

@lclev - thanks for the info, I'll check those sites out.

@iBeldar - because it's (from what I've researched) easier to put Windows or Linux on a Mac than it is to put OSX on a PC, as OSX is closed-source software and if driver support is not built in for your hardware, you're SOL. Maybe that's not true? If anyone has any experience with that, please chime in.

Linux is much different, as it's open-source and drivers can be developed and rolled into your distro (or you can code your own and compile from source if you have the skills and inclination - and the vast majority of Mac users most likely DO NOT fall into that category, just like guys that buy Ferrari's don't tear them apart and modify them, they just drive them). That's not a knock on Mac users, or meant to be degrading or anything, but let's admit it: most Mac users just want a computer that "works" and that they can just turn on and use - no malware/viruses and all that AV maintenance you get with Windows, a slick GUI that integrates all the common tasks you do in the same fashion instead of a bunch of different software from different vendors with different interfaces, etc. That's not a bad thing....that's actually "smart". But, it brings (as I said before) some limitations as well - the limitations Apple sets (though it is less restrictive now than it has been in the past, I'll admit).

Maybe I should get a copy of OSX and install it on one of my desktop PC's (forget using my laptop - I'm sure no Intel-version of OSX would run on it). Again, my purpose for wanting a Mac is to learn and experiment with it. I like to hack hardware (I'm currently building another VAIO laptop with a 4gb CF card as the HDD and nothing but USB 2.0 thumb drives for storage in place of the original 1.8" 40gb HDD. The thumb drives will be internal on a 4 port hub that I plan to solder to one of the USB ports after I remove it. And that's just the start of my tinkering with this machine). I'm trying to learn some coding skills, ethical hacking/penetration testing and studying to get CompTIA A+ and Security+ certified. This is my hobby, what's wrong with that?

Thanks to everyone else that replied as well, I appreciate the feedback.

The memory Bus speed is not affecting it that much. I am talking Converting the SAME video on both systems using same application and the 2.1 Ghz G5 took close to 2 hours and the Stock 1st generation 1.66 Ghz 32-Bit mini took 24 minutes. The spread was that way with every application I use for video compression and conversion. I could do many videos and get my days work done in the time it took the G5 to do one.

The above is just one example!

Installing OSX On NON APPLE hardware is forbidden by Apple and thus not allowed to be discussed here at Mac Forums.

Alrighty then! Regardless of what Apple "forbids", it does happen, and there is no way for them to control that, honestly (and if it was 10-year-old non-current software, why would they even care?). But, since I am new here and you are a Mod, I'll refrain from discussing it further. And again, what you just said proves my point about Apple and their "limitations", which is a hindrance if you ask me.

Every software vendor has a EULA that you "agree" to by virtue of using the software, but c'mon, how many people REALLY: 1) read that, and 2) give a crap? If I bought it, I'll use it however I darn well please, period. That goes for any product I buy. Answer me this: how would you feel if you bought a new car that can play MP3's from a USB stick, but ONLY MP3's purchased from the dealer, because that's what it says in the owner's manual and there was a disclaimer that says "By purchasing this vehicle, you agree to abide by the contents of this owner's manual....", even though you COULD play any MP3? You gonna abide by that? Anyhoo.......'nuff 'bout that.

I'm not disputing that your mini is significantly faster (it should be, and I disagree with your premise that memory bandwidth is negligible in this case), and I really don't want to get into a long discussion about hardware specs, memory bandwidth, etc. Suffice to say this: there are many factors that influence the speed at which a computer (as a system, not just the CPU) can process data; those influences can be hardware-related, software-related, or both. It is completely plausible that a newer version of OSX may take advantage of newer technology (instruction sets, hyperthreading, etc.) that the Core duo has and the PPC does not, making it a combination of both hardware and software. And, completely possible that the software running on the PPC is not utilizing the full capacity of the CPU as well. Theoretically, all other things being equal, a 64bit CPU should outperform a 32bit CPU. Obviously, all things in this comparison are not equal. Maybe the software was not optimized for the CPU and not taking full advantage of it's capabilities, and that affects the performance. That's all I'm saying....