Power Mac G5 or wait for Intel?

[Bubbasteve]

I would definitely wait for April/May to order your computer... you never know what Steve has in store for Apples B-day? How old will Apple be? 30 years young? ....... I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say....Quad Core intel Macs.... 3 ghz each

Oh yeah... it's gonna happen

 

[combatcolin]

dude, what is your problem? you've made your position quite clear already. maybe you're fine with waiting, but some people may be unable/unwilling to wait. we have nothing but guesses as to when the intel powermac will come, and we have nothing but guesses as to how powerful it will be. regardless of how many universal apps there may be, it is going to be some time before alot of software is truly optimized for intel.

on the other hand, we do know how powerful the G5 and in particular, the quad are, and most software is still optimized for ppc. for the casual user, it may be in their best interest to wait it out, but for pro's who make a living off of what they do on their computer, they need something they can count on, not take an unwarrented gamble on when the new machines come out, how well they perform, how much they cost, and when software will be universal, and when software will be optimised etc...

Dude....

....im replying to a post.

Its what we do round here.

 

[winterdude010]

Idk..

If you need high-demand programs to use right now, you should probably get the G5, the Universal Programs aren't popping off the press that fast...

 

[Clydefrog]

you don't have to reply 5 thousand times making the same point though. Please. btw get the quad, intel so far cannot come up with anything faster than the quad yet, its always better to wait for new revs anyway.

 

[maxvamp]

You're obviously an expert on the matter. I go from work with my Quad G5 to Home to my Intel iMac. Speeds in universal applications are identical, if not slightly faster on the iMac. Do you have a Dual Core Intel machine and a Quad Core G5 machine to compare on a daily basis?

Do I have the setup you describe? Well, No, and I doubt you do either.

You assume I am an idiot on this and don't know what the Duo can do. I do know Intel processors as I have been doing, as a career, QA and application development on them for more than 10 years, and my Intel toy box includes current dual and quad XEON processor machines. I also have been performing Video Tasks ( Editing Special Effects, etc. ) for almost twice that long as extra income on a broadcast level ( yes, my stuff shows up on TV ).

Now, show me those benchmarks where your iMac kicks the crap out of the Quad G5 in Motion, Final Cut, DVD Studio, Photoshop, After Effects, Cinema4d, etc.

I am sorry, but peppier performance of Safari or FireFox on your iMac does not mean that the iMac is faster.

If you need additional information on the real power of a processor, try signing up to the SIMD developer list over at simdtech.org

Max.

 

[asencif]

Well I can understand people saying wait and others stating to buy now, however let's look at what the user needs it for. It is my sense that if you are using it for some sort of immediate production or business then there is no choice, but to buy now. That is something the OP must determined. Another issue is Pro Tools which appears that it will be UB ready in May, however this does not count for the tons of Audio Plug-ins that need to be UB as well. Of course the UB Pro Tools will work with Intel iMac and Mac Book Pro, but if there's no Intel PM then it diminishes the Pro setup. Ideally Audio Pros use PM's mostly with mixers attached to a PCI-X or PCI-E card. Some do use iMacs, again it depends on what exactly you are doing. The tests that will be important to you are is the UB Pro Tool app on Intel vs. the Quad Pro Tools.

 

[generik]

While intel is the way of the future, a Power Mac G5 Quad is a power house computer that will last you a long time. I would not hesitate to purchase a Quad- they are fast, expandable, and reliable.

You neglected to mention expensive, insanely expensive, for something whose value will fall that much closer to zero towards the end of the year

 

[risc]

You neglected to mention expensive, insanely expensive, for something whose value will fall that much closer to zero towards the end of the year

You do realise that computers are tools or toys not investments? If a professional needs a fast Mac now why should they wait? Oh because The Steve said there are new Intel machines coming out?

 

[combatcolin]

I would definitely wait for April/May to order your computer... you never know what Steve has in store for Apples B-day? How old will Apple be? 30 years young? ....... I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say....Quad Core intel Macs.... 3 ghz each

Oh yeah... it's gonna happen

Wrong.

All Wrong.

You should know by now that new hardware is only ever released the day after you buy the (now oudated) model.

Computer companies, Apple included spend a lot of money having Professor X on their payroll, so they have to re coup the money somehow.

 

[Will_reed]

I would rather have a quad g5 than the new core duo macs anyday. I was usin an older dual 2.5 ghz g5 and it was just so much cooler to use than the 20 inch imac (maybe it was the 30inch display + waicom tablet). I dunno the g5 just felt more responsive to me.

 

[chaosbunny]

You're obviously an expert on the matter. I go from work with my Quad G5 to Home to my Intel iMac. Speeds in universal applications are identical, if not slightly faster on the iMac. Do you have a Dual Core Intel machine and a Quad Core G5 machine to compare on a daily basis?

So you are earning your money with.... iLife????

You seem to be one who always needs to have the latest and greatest. If you use Adobe CS for example buying an intel mac now is just a waste of money. By the time Photoshop & Illustrator run faster on your iMac or Mac Book Pro than on my Powerbook there will be a 2,5 ghz mpb or something like that in one year. But I guess some of us are lucky enough to have the time and the money to upgrade their hardware every 6 months.

 

[Actualsizeaudio]

Friends -
I am trying to help out some young bands by mixing live and demo tapes on Pro Tools and maybe a little video action on Final Cut Express HD. The Powerbook G4 can drag at times, and I've got those new resource intensive tasks.
Steve

For what you want to do, you will need to wait untill mid-summer to do the switch, but I highly reccomend doing that.

Universal Binary Pro Tools will be out in May according to the digi website. you will undoubtly have to wait another 2-4 months for all of your plug-ins to work on the intel machine.

If you are looking to get 3 years out of your machine then you really must wait the 6 months, but don't be fooled into thinking you will be able to jump before 6 months.

I also use pro tools on about 4 different machines (I own a studio that does post production). The machines where there are 2 processors helps Pro Tools 7 run with much, much more power. A dual core machine will help in the stability of Pro Tools quite a bit. Keep in mind if you jump to Universal Binary Pro Tools as early as this summer you will be effectively one of the beta testers (how it works in with digidesign when you get down to it). Since you are using a laptop I would do the switch while keeping your old machine around for 3 months untill you KNOW all is working well.

Good Luck!

Edit: I looked on the digi site about the quad 2.5 machine and although they are suppported, there are issues with running them with low buffer sizes. If you need to do more intensive work now then buy a tried and true USED dual 2.x, and wait a year for the Intel machines. Pro Tools has had odd issues on the G5 from the begining, and with the switch to intel they are bound to swap resources away from ever fixing these things.

 

[TOS 1.04]

I have no doubt that the intels will eventualy be faster but currently i'm going with the dual core powermac, the current available intels are a bit of a joke, the benchmark app they used was for a dual core... that is comparing both the imac and powerbook (single cores) ot the new imac and macbook (dual cores) which is totaly biased towords dual cores obviously. they are no wear near as fast as 2 or 4 x, admitidley the intels do pure proccessor speed dependant things faster like 3d rendering about 1.5 time faster, but most other things are currently slower, and considering the intel dual core isn't even comparable with a g4 ppc ... that's just poor. you cant actualy run things like Final cut or logic at all on current intels cos rosseta doesn't support it and there not universal yet, while i'm sure this will change it still makes current intels pretty useless for video and music editors.

i think that intel really are gona have to come out with somthing impressive to beat the g5 dual core, but even so the ppc is just more suited to the profesional mac user, the ppc's architechture obvisouly is designed for multitasking by simplifyling multiple commands... allong with the dual cores that makes it way more productive than any intel proccessor, intell always seem to be intent on trying to create the largest number and doesn't care what the results are, that's why intel chips allways seem slower than they should be.

all that crap set aside, looking at buying a powermac again, it's gona be much more worth buying a ppc now rather than have to put up with 1 gen intels which will probably be slower and less relyable, you can get the fastest workstation level gpu in them and all the software has been out for long enough to have any bugs ironed out, so i'm planning on buying one of the last ppcs untill the next mac i buy which will probably be an intel when they have been around long enough to be relyable.

one note on the g5's, don't bother buying the quad aposed to the single dual core unless you are going to be using apps that support the multiple processors, otherwise it's wasted money, have a chack on google to find out which apps.

 

[ReanimationLP]

If you jump for a Quad, Apple Refurbs got some for 2800. Not bad, 500 off.

 

[TexMex]

Am I the only one in this thread who expects the Intel PowerMacs to be much faster than the G5 ones?

The Intel Core Duo (and that's a mobile processor) is about as fast as a G5 (2.0Gh), or at least comparable. And for the same price.

Why shouldn't a Quad Intel 4.0Ghz desktop processor be MUCH faster?

 

[risc]

Am I the only one in this thread who expects the Intel PowerMacs to be much faster than the G5 ones?

The Intel Core Duo (and that's a mobile processor) is about as fast as a G5 (2.0Gh), or at least comparable. And for the same price.

Why shouldn't a Quad Intel 4.0Ghz desktop processor be MUCH faster?

Well considering the Woodcrest is meant to top out at 2.5 GHz per core I don't know what to expect other than NO 4 GHz per core action.

 

[YS2003]

I am also interested in the desktop Mac. All of my Macs are portables and the areas I am interested in would require more powerful machines. So, my next machines would be a powerful desktop Mac. I am playing with CS2, MX2004, and Corel Paint IX now. Those are considered for print and web graphics and I can run them on my PB/iBook without noticeable performance penalty.

Once I become very comfortable with using those tools, I would like to move onto to video editing, video graphics and 3D areas (Adobe Premier/After Effects, Apple Final Cut Pro, and etc).

Since I am not in a rush (I need more time to get used to the current tools I am learning and playing with), I hope Apple will dish out the powerful multi core Intel Power Mac (or whatever they are going to call it after they put Intel chips in it) coinciding Adobe's release of their software suites with universal binary. I heard Intel's future chips will run much cooler than the current models and G5 chips, which is good as I prefer cooler running machines than a heat furnace.

 

[Tilmitt]

Am I the only one in this thread who expects the Intel PowerMacs to be much faster than the G5 ones?

The Intel Core Duo (and that's a mobile processor) is about as fast as a G5 (2.0Gh), or at least comparable. And for the same price.

Why shouldn't a Quad Intel 4.0Ghz desktop processor be MUCH faster?

Go read the comparison of iMac's on anandtech. They show that per core the G5 is quite a bit faster at the same clock speed. It'll be a long time before Intel gets Conroe to 4Ghz, considering the fugly excessively pipelined Prescott didn't make it there. (of course no one ever mentions how Intel canceled their 4Ghz P4, instead they harp on about the 3Ghz G5.) In short, the Quad G5 is not going to be blown away. Outperformed yes, but a new G5 model would do that too.

 

[electronboy]

the intel power mac will likely have a slower bus than the quad G5. Intel is designing the new machine for apple since Intel has not released details on the new processor bus. Apple has an edge with the current bus design. I recommend you buy a Quad G5 now. It should be supported for many years to come.

 

[electronboy]

The Quad is a very powerful, but very limited machine... there simply isn't enough software for it to make it worthwhile.

WRONG! Plenty of software available! Final Cut Pro, Logic Pro, Aperture (after they get it fixed), Shake, Motion, DVD Studio Pro, Soundtrack Pro, Peak, etc. What else do you need?

Apple and vendors will support PowerPC for at least the next five years which is the life expectancy of any computer these days. I don't think he is buying a machine to run games.

 

[electronboy]

Am I the only one in this thread who expects the Intel PowerMacs to be much faster than the G5 ones?

Maybe. The system bus on the Intel Mac Pro will probably be slower. The fastest chipset Intel can offer is a SHARED bus that is maxed out at 1066 MHz. The PowerMac G5 has featured a dual processor bus that runs at half the speed of each processor since 2003! A dual processor PowerMac G5 2.3 GHz computer has two independent buses that each run at 1.15 GHz. This is definately an advantage when doing processor intensive tasks such as rendering video or processing audio.

 

[electronboy]

You neglected to mention expensive, insanely expensive, for something whose value will fall that much closer to zero towards the end of the year

WRONG! Apple has stopped manufacturing the PowerBook G4 15" and they still fetch much more than any Intel notebook! Apple machines will always fetch more than the competition--even in their old age. There will be people who will require or not mind running on PowerPC technology for quite some time. All the people who beleive that its going to be so much better on Intel will be surprised.

 

[combatcolin]

WRONG! Apple has stopped manufacturing the PowerBook G4 15" and they still fetch much more than any Intel notebook! Apple machines will always fetch more than the competition--even in their old age. There will be people who will require or not mind running on PowerPC technology for quite some time. All the people who beleive that its going to be so much better on Intel will be surprised.

Um.

It is so much better on Intel.

At least as an alternative to the G4.

With an Intel chip Vs the G5 it will not be as profoud, but the increase in processing power will be there.

If Steve can see Apple without PowerPC, why can't the Mac fans?

 

[whaley]

I got the Quad

I couldn't see waiting a year for the software to catch up. I can run applications that work now without Rosetta. When I upgrade software, I'll be looking for the Universal programs. The kids have some stuff they like to run in Classic and Classic is going away with Intel. A couple hundred dollars off for the open box model sealed the deal. I'm looking forward to the switch to Intel, just not now.

 

[asencif]

G5

Um.

It is so much better on Intel.

At least as an alternative to the G4.

With an Intel chip Vs the G5 it will not be as profoud, but the increase in processing power will be there.

If Steve can see Apple without PowerPC, why can't the Mac fans?

Is not that the Mac fans can't see it. For the laptop line, Intel was really the only way to go. But when we think about the current Pro Desktop line with the G5's and look at what appears to be the replacement for them on the Intel side then the G5's don't look bad at all. Of course Intel will improve their Pro chips over time and get them to surpass the Quad, but during that time the G5 could also be improving itself and maybe eventually have reached the 3ghz on a Quad. So the real reason for Intel was portables and development of smaller compact consumer desktops. This is all fine as Apple will really make the money in this area since it will blend in with their media distribution plans. Their will be a lot of products like maybe PDA's and more Interactive Video iPods that will benefit from Intel Technology, so Apple had to go Intel. Now for Powermac fans the increase in power won't be noticeable anytime soon and will improve in the same amount of time a G5 would've for them. That's is of course IMHO.