Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Don't buy a PowerMac G5... Core 2 Duo MacMini is better

9Charms

9Charms

macrumors regular
Original poster
May 19, 2006
206
0
Vancouver, BC
With the new merom processors being able to swap into the current Mac Minis, would this mean that the MacMini is the ultimate way to "future-proof" your investment? Should I buy a MacMini instead of an iMac? Would there be any way of upgrading the integrated graphics at all?

EDIT: I meant "PowerMac G5" not "iMac." so sorry for the mislead. And I'm sorry I can't edit the title. And if you think it's a stupid question, please just don't reply. I will get it.

It just seemed to me that with the new benchmark that the Core 2 Duo is kinda better than the G5...
 
9Charms said:
Would there be any way of upgrading the integrated graphics at all?
Click to expand...

No..

And your title is unfortunately misleading, as you're talking about an iMac G5, not a PowerMac G5.
 
yellow said:
No..

And your title is unfortunately misleading, as you're talking about an iMac G5, not a PowerMac G5.
Click to expand...

Yes, I thought the same thing. I would much rather keep my Power Mac G5 then buy a Mac Mini. Now a Mac Pro......... :)
 
just to be clear, is this the benchmark you are referring to?
http://macenstein.com/default/archives/323

This indicates that if all you do is convert mp3 to AAC, a merom mini (if one ever comes out) beats a G5 PM. I would hardly cite this one benchmark as evidence of superiority, although I agree that this does suggest great things from future machines (including the "Mac Pro")
 
Scottyk9 said:
just to be clear, is this the benchmark you are referring to?
http://macenstein.com/default/archives/323

This indicates that if all you do is convert mp3 to AAC, a merom mini (if one ever comes out) beats a G5 PM. I would hardly cite this one benchmark as evidence of superiority, although I agree that this does suggest great things from future machines (including the "Mac Pro")
Click to expand...

As you point out, there is more to a computer's power than it's ability to rip mp3's.


But still, it makes the Core 2 Duo look pretty sweet! :D
 
Danksi said:
There's a lot more to a PowerMac than just it's processor. Expansion for one.
Click to expand...


I concur, that's the reason I picked up a PowerMac in the first place. If I were to get a new computer (and had an inexhaustable income), I would go for a PowerMac G5 or a Mac Pro.
 
9Charms said:
With the new merom processors being able to swap into the current Mac Minis, would this mean that the MacMini is the ultimate way to "future-proof" your investment? Should I buy a MacMini instead of an iMac? Would there be any way of upgrading the integrated graphics at all?
Click to expand...

You can upgrade the intel iMac to a Core 2 Duo just they same as the intel mini since they both have socketed Processors. So unless you want onboard graphics or want to save some money (debatable) get the iMac.
 
TBi said:
You can upgrade the intel iMac to a Core 2 Duo just they same as the intel mini since they both have socketed Processors. So unless you want onboard graphics or want to save some money (debatable) get the iMac.
Click to expand...
And upgrade the CPU if you don't want a warranty, and have $hundreds just sitting around doing nothing.
 
Wow, this has to be the most idiotic post ever. Nice job with the completely wrong subject and everything.
 
milo said:
Wow, this has to be the most idiotic post ever. Nice job with the completely wrong subject and everything.
Click to expand...

Okay... sorry?? Geez... if you can't say anything nice...

I meant PowerMac instead of iMac, does that help? If you think it's stupid, don't reply... I will get it.

I didn't think this was a forum where members like to call eachother names, especially not someone that posts so much as you...

I will now go back an edit my original post since it has offended oh so many people so greatly...
 
yellow said:
In that case, you're way off then.

There's no way an Intel MacMini can stand up to a modern G5.
Click to expand...

If you stick a high end conroe into it then i'd bet it could beat a Powermac performance wise.
 
I still doubt it. Performance is a lot more than processor speed.

I can have 8x the RAM in a G5. I can have a huge video card in the G5. I can expand the G5 with PCI-X cards, more SATA disks, etc.

The Mini is a consumer entry level model Mac.
The G5 is a professional level model Mac.

You ask a professional video editor which one they'd rather have. ;)
 
9Charms said:
Okay... sorry?? Geez... if you can't say anything nice...

I meant PowerMac instead of iMac, does that help? If you think it's stupid, don't reply... I will get it.

I didn't think this was a forum where members like to call eachother names, especially not someone that posts so much as you...

I will now go back an edit my original post since it has offended oh so many people so greatly...
Click to expand...

If you post something this stupid, people are going to call you on it. Really, it's not a good thing to post threads that have titles that are completely incorrect.

If you're not willing to accept the consequences and reactions to your posts, maybe you're not ready to be posting on a board like this.


TBi said:
If you stick a high end conroe into it then i'd bet it could beat a Powermac performance wise.
Click to expand...

Not a quad. Probably beat a dual G5, but not even close to the quad.

yellow said:
The Mini is a consumer entry level model Mac.
The G5 is a professional level model Mac.
Click to expand...

But the macbook is a consumer level mac, and still beats the dual G5's on some benchmarks. The rest of the box makes some difference, but generally the faster chip is still going to win.
 
milo said:
But the macbook is a consumer level mac, and still beats the dual G5's on some benchmarks. The rest of the box makes some difference, but generally the faster chip is still going to win.
Click to expand...

Links, please.
 
I would take a PowerMac G5 over the intel mini any day. The expandability and proven architecture would make it worth it for me.
 
Interesting, I'm not buying it. But interesting. Very close times according to the article's author.

It's close enough that I'd want to benchmark it myself, as I find it hard to believe. That sucks for the entry level G5 if it's true.

All in all, however, it still doesn't change my opinion that the Mini is no comparison to the G5 Desktop.
 
9Charms said:
It just seemed to me that with the new benchmark that the Core 2 Duo is kinda better than the G5...
Click to expand...


That depends on which G5 and what you do with it. I have a Quad and I push it very hard, like Maya/Mental Ray renders that push all 4 processors to 100% and tap more RAM than a Mini could hold. There is no way a Mac Mini is going to even come close to that.


 
yellow said:
Interesting, I'm not buying it. But interesting. Very close times according to the article's author.

It's close enough that I'd want to benchmark it myself, as I find it hard to believe. That sucks for the entry level G5 if it's true.

All in all, however, it still doesn't change my opinion that the Mini is no comparison to the G5 Desktop.
Click to expand...

You're not buying what? You think the test was flawed somehow? Or you think they are lying?

The mini isn't as fast as a dual G5. But if you swapped in a 2.16 yonah, or better yet a 2.16 (or higher) merom, it would likely beat the G5 at least some of the time.

Even the stock mini comes damn close to the dual G5's for what, less than half the price? That's a hell of a comparison. Ever since the quads shipped, I've thought that the dual G5's were a terrible deal.
 
milo said:
You're not buying what? You think the test was flawed somehow? Or you think they are lying?
Click to expand...

For this test I'd want to test it myself.

For one, I'm not going to take it as gospel simply because that guy says so. For another, I'm surely not alone in finding it hard to believe.

Excuse me if I have a hard time with a consumer level laptop meeting/slightly exceeding the lowest level "Pro" desktop.
 
yellow said:
For this test I'd want to test it myself.

For one, I'm not going to take it as gospel simply because that guy says so. For another, I'm surely not alone in finding it hard to believe.

Excuse me if I have a hard time with a consumer level laptop meeting/slightly exceeding the lowest level "Pro" desktop.
Click to expand...

Why is it so hard to believe? The MB is available with the same 2.16 chip as the MBP, and that beats the dual G5 as well. Other benchmarks bear this out.

The G5 has a dual 2.x processor, the MB can have up to 2.16. It only makes sense that they'd be pretty close, especially compared to the G5 2.0. Do you really think that using a case that isn't "pro" causes a significant slowdown on the CPU?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back