PM 1.8Ghz DP vs. Mini C2D 2.0

[kermit4161]

Hi all,

This is a cross-post from the PowerMac forum in the hopes some advanced Mini users are watching...

I'm trying to do a comparison between the older G5 1.8 Ghz DP, 4GB RAM, w/NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra with 64 MB VRAM and the new Mini C2D 2.0 Ghz w/4GB of RAM (I know it'll only recognize 3GB... but will benefit from the 128 bit addressing with 2 - 2GB modules...worth the extra $30 cost for the extra GB).

We are in the position to replace 5 graphics computers at a small newspaper. The computers will be roughly the same cost with RAM upgrades. The biggest concern is the Mini handling the graphics tasks of the computers (putting out large four color magazines). The primary program they'll be running is Creative Suite 3.

With the Mini's larger L3 cache, faster processor, etc... I'm kind of thinking its up to the task. But I haven't tested CS3 on a Mini... nor have I run it on a G5 PowerMac 1.8DP.

Granted, I realize the PM G5 is more upgradeable, but that really isn't a concern of the owners (they won't be upgraded other than the RAM). They are interested in the best bang for their buck. What'll do the job and last the longest.

I also realize that graphics aren't the Mini's forte... but the new C2D 2.0 model has really surprised me in what it'll do. The older Minis are putting together newspapers in the group with little difficulty... but not using CS3.

Looking ahead, the minis would last longer (not needing replacement as soon as the PM due to software/OS), but I'm just a bit hesitant on recommending the Mini over the G5 (heart says yes... head says 'maybe').

Any thoughts, experience with CS3 on either platform, recommendations?

Thanks

 

[jsw]

I think it'd be a mistake to go with hardware that's already used and nearly out of warranty, even with AppleCare extending it to 3 years from the original date of purchase.

The only real issue with a mini C2D running CS3 is going to be the relatively slow hard drives. Otherwise, the C2D should smoke the G5.

Is there any way to convince the powers that be to bump to an iMac? At least that drive is going to be faster, and even the base iMac has a Firewire 800 port - which would make external drives a lot faster to use.

 

[kermit4161]

I think it'd be a mistake to go with hardware that's already used and nearly out of warranty, even with AppleCare extending it to 3 years from the original date of purchase.

The only real issue with a mini C2D running CS3 is going to be the relatively slow hard drives. Otherwise, the C2D should smoke the G5.

Is there any way to convince the powers that be to bump to an iMac? At least that drive is going to be faster, and even the base iMac has a Firewire 800 port - which would make external drives a lot faster to use.

No, iMacs are definitely out of the realm of possibility. The owners have had a pretty good run at buying older Macs and keeping them running (my job) in order to keep costs down and pass the savings onto their employees.

I hadn't thought about the slower hard drives. Although they might be working off of a server at this paper. I'm not sure... just got asked about it tonight... it is a new paper to me, so I don't know the topology yet. I'll keep that in mind though.

 

[jsw]

Well, since they all have gigabit ethernet, using a networked drive might at times be faster than using the internal one anyway.

However, in the interest of consolidation, let's continue all discussion in the original thread, please.