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

Dual Processor or Dual Core? PowerMac G5...

MIDI_EVIL

MIDI_EVIL

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Jan 23, 2006
1,320
14
UK
I graduate in about 2 months, and i won't need portability so i'm considering selling my pristine 15" PowerBook to pay a big chunk off a refurbished G5 PowerMac.

My dilemma is that i don't know if it is best to get a 2.5 / 2.7 Dual Processor or a 2.3 Dual Core.

I know the Dual Core can address 16GB of RAM, but i'll probably never go over 4 - 6 GB. Anymore than that and it'll cost more than a new PowerMac. I don't require the cutting edge of technology, but i would like the machine to last me a good 3 - 4 years.

I am a filmmaker/video artist, but don't use any special effects, and i don't use HD. I am quite comfortable with DV for a couple more years at least.

Does anyone know which machine is my best option, which will bring me the best performance for my money ?


Thanks in advance, i value everyones' opinion.

Rich.
 
A dual processor machine has two dual core chips, making it a quad core, and a whole lot more powerful and a single-chip dual core machine. If you can afford it, go for the quad.
 
Felldownthewell said:
A dual processor machine has two dual core chips, making it a quad core, and a whole lot more powerful and a single-chip dual core machine. If you can afford it, go for the quad.
Click to expand...


I think the OP is going as 2.7/2.5 with 2 chips with one core on it vs 2.3 with one chip with 2 cores.

Go with the 2.3, newer should last long. Or you might hold out with your PB and wait for a intel PowerMac
 
A Quad would be overkill, and i honestly will never need the power as the only rendering i'll be doing is colour correction.

I don't think my PowerBook will be worth that much by the time Intel PowerMac is released, and i would to like earn back as much as possible, so now is the best time. Plus, i'm also worried about revision A niggles and would prefer to turn my PowerBook into a PowerMac and keep that for a few years to come.

Thanks for the replies though.

Just to re-cap,

Quad is overkill.
Intel PowerMac is too far away and my PowerBook will devalue too much.

Rich.
 
Felldownthewell said:
A dual processor machine has two dual core chips, making it a quad core, and a whole lot more powerful and a single-chip dual core machine. If you can afford it, go for the quad.
Click to expand...

Hi,

Couldn't quite understand your wording ? did you mean...

''a whole lot more powerful than a single-chip dual core machine''?


Thanks
Rich.
 
Sorry I didn't realize there were dual chip single core systems, I thought it was just the quad and the dual core, single chip configurations.:eek:
 
iGary said:
I get a dual processor machine. My dual 2.7 scrolls like butter™.
Click to expand...

you know what makes me sad iGary the fact that each of your chips is 900Mhz faster than mine, and i think i got my PM after yours :(
 
iGary said:
I get a dual processor machine. My dual 2.7 scrolls like butter™.
Click to expand...

Hahaha, brilliant.

Well, you do have a fat 8GB of RAM.

So, you recommend the 2.7 Dual Processor...

How does it compare to the 2.3 Dual Core?

Do you know of any reliable benchmark tests ?


Rich.
 
Thanks iGary,

Some interesting information there.

I'm leaning toward the Dual Core 2.3

If anyone with more knowledge of the benefits of any of the G5's i mentioned, please speak up. I value the opinions of the MacRumors boarders and i have learnt so much from these boards.

Rich.
 
iGary said:
I get a dual processor machine. My dual 2.7 scrolls like butter™.
Click to expand...
My AMD Duron 700 scrolls like butter too, you'd dam want to hope that your beast makes light wrkr of viewing web pages ;)

Dual chip machines tend to have a slight advantage over singel chip/dual core machines. Those benchamarks seem a little bogas as they don't give any indication as to memory configuration, how long the operating system has been on the computer (all PC benchmarks use a fresh install) so don't read too much into it.

DDR 1 RAM is also really cheap, I'd go the Dual chip 2.5/2.7 if you can afford it.

Takumi

P.S: the advantage of the newer machine of course is that it use's a PCI-E graphics interface.
 
fatsoforgotso said:
Thanks iGary,

Some interesting information there.

I'm leaning toward the Dual Core 2.3

If anyone with more knowledge of the benefits of any of the G5's i mentioned, please speak up. I value the opinions of the MacRumors boarders and i have learnt so much from these boards.

Rich.
Click to expand...

I actually know what I am talking about this time!

The pro photographer I intern for (I bring him up alot, mostly because he has the only high end macs I get to play with...) has the 2.3 dual core, and he uses it for editing multiple 108mb images and capturing 22mp images. He has 6.5GB of RAM and it runs photoshop, sinar capturshop, mail, photomechanic, and safari at the same time, all passably fast. One program at a time, its really fast.

For what you want to be doing it should be great.
 
Felldownthewell said:
I actually know what I am talking about this time!

The pro photographer I intern for (I bring him up alot, mostly because he has the only high end macs I get to play with...) has the 2.3 dual core ... One program at a time, its really fast.
Click to expand...
Once again for the price you'd want it to be

look to ebay for some special deals, you don't get a warrenty, but the prices are much better than apples referb page

Ttakumi
 
That's 2 recommendations for the 2.7 Dual and one for the 2.3 Dual Core.

PCI-E and DDR2 - Worth it for Video, photo organisation and light touching using photoshop?

I understand the Dual Processor has slight speed benefits, but i get the impression the Dual Core is a better all rounder ?

Why did Apple go Dual Core?

Rich.
 
fatsoforgotso said:
Why did Apple go Dual Core?

Rich.
Click to expand...

I think it was because the dual core is more economical, generates less heat and takes up less space - or that was part of the reason. The weird thing was that they didn't make the G5 case smaller to take advantage of the smaller sized processor.
 
2.3 dual core vs 2.7 dual processor

I would recommend a 2.3 because you can likely get it with a warranty (especially if you order refurb), and they may also include the latest version of iLife which would be a bonus, since iPhoto 5 is a dog.

The 2.3 has faster (and cheaper) RAM, PCI-E, dual ethernet, and probably a host of other benefits I don't recall (better DVD burner? better graphics card?). Just has a slower processor. But they should be pretty close in price, if not even more expensive for the 2.7.
 
dual core. I second what smack said.

The switch to dual core vs dual proc is insignificant. It's just has better multithreading + power usage then the dual proc equivalent. Performance wise, its the same as the dual proc.

Second, the 2.5 is faster then the 2.7 at somethings, and keeps its own pace with it on the other tasks.

Go dual core. Everything else besides the proc is better on it, vs the other machines.
 
Definitely Dual Core, Graphic cards no longer limited to old AGP standard. PCI-express helps a lot. Newer machines. Faster RAM if I remember correctly.
 
Let me throw this into the mix. If you are thinking of selling your PowerMac down the road, then the Quad is going hold the best resell value. As for buying a dual 2.7, good luck on finding one that's not going for a premium. They were discontinued and are a pretty hot commodity. I found a used one last week and they wanted almost as much as a new dual 2.3 (with educational discount).

I'm in the same boat as you. My powerbook is old and I can't wait for the intel desktops, as well as waiting for the applications I use to be ported to UB. I'm probably going to go for the Quad and try to resell for an intel desktop after next year. I think the Quad has the longest shelf life of all current PPC Macs. If you can get an educational discount, the Quad is around $750 more than the Dual 2.3, but you get a hell of a lot more computer.
 
To answer your question first, I'd probably recommend going with the dual core over the dual processor. The technology is probably better and will grow with you more going forward (ie, PCI-E).

If you're deciding between which dual core (including the dual dual-core) to get, I'm going to go the opposite way of THX and suggest considering the dual core 2.0 instead of the quad core 2.5. I recently purchased a dual core 2.0 after considering the dual core 2.3, then the quad core 2.5, and finally settling on the 2.0. I tend to upgrade my machine every 3 years or so and I don't think I could really utilize 4 cores with the stuff I do everyday (mainly photo processing) enough to justify spending an extra $1200 for it. Yes, the quad core will probably hold its value better, but if you upgrade in a few years, will the value be more than $1200 more than the dual core 2.0? Probably not. As I'm typing this, I'm realizing that you will probably get a refurb and the special deals section at apple don't usually have the dual core 2.0, so you'd probably want to go with the dual core 2.3.

The main consideration for me was how much computing power I need and cost. For some people, a quad core is the way to go cause of the nature of their work. As long as you have enough RAM, I think you'll be very happy with the dual core 2.3.

The only consideration of getting a refurb is that you can't upgrade anything such as the wireless/bluetooth or the graphics card when you order it. There are wireless/bluetooth kits, so if you want that, you can probably do it yourself, but right now, the only way to get an upgraded graphics cards (7800GT) is when you're configuring a new system.

Good luck with whatever you decide and let us know how it goes!
 
I'd go with a dual core 2 Ghz PowerMac because you are not doing INTENSE video editing, it is apparently just DV that you are editing. With the extra money you'd save, I'd get some massive upgrades and have one sweet setup.;)
 
Well, they have both the 2.3 and the 2.0 on Apple.com/uk refurbished store.

There is a £500 pound saving on the 2.3 and a £400 pound saving on the 2.0, bringing it to only £979 uk pounds.

I like what FF_Productions mentioned about the fact i'm not doing intense video, so the 2.0 will suffice, as i could definately do with Airport upgrade and some more RAM. The refurbs don't come with Airport unfortunately.

Bang for buck i think it's the 2.0 Dual Core.

Thanks all for some great and insightful information.

I'll let you know which one i choose, thanks.

Rich.
 
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