composer Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 Check out this link. http://www.anandtech.com/printarticle.aspx?i=2685 Although he says he would buy a intel mac towards his final comments, I remember reading somewhere someone tested a few older G4s vs newer G5 minis and the older seemed to run faster. Does this mean universal binary will speed up the programs? On one bench mark on the above link he turned off the dual core and the older G5 iMAC beat the newer iMAC, even with it turned on, the older beat it in some applications. peace to you while looking for advice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Nonny Moose Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 I am forced into getting a PPC Mac for a new one because I need to use the Classic Environment for one application that will never ever ever get updated (Music Maid) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
user2 Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 What G5 minis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabr Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 I would probably go with the Intel Mac's - seeming as that's the newest hardware, so it's gotta be better. I would like to see the article you say you read about the G4 and (intel) G5 comparisons, if you have link... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shanks** Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 Of course I would probably go with the Intel Mac's. It's five times faster!!! -_ -; Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabr Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 Of course I would probably go with the Intel Mac's.It's five times faster!!! -_ -; Well, according to this page its 2x faster: http://www.apple.com/imac/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shanks** Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 Well, according to this page its 2x faster: http://www.apple.com/imac/ AH... I was just saying about http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/ Sorry kk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabr Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 Lol - that's ok, I just thought I should point out we're talking about the iMac instead of the MacBook Pro Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WiZMaC Posted April 26, 2006 Share Posted April 26, 2006 I'd go for an intel for sure Reason: Always love a challenge- mending & breaking things that is and I've always been an intel fan! IBM PC-Architectures SUCK!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colonel Posted April 26, 2006 Share Posted April 26, 2006 IBM PC-Architectures SUCK!!! I can safely agree with this. My iMac seems to suck all the air out of my house with its extra loud and always running cooling fans. I WANT INTEL! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rogabean Posted April 26, 2006 Share Posted April 26, 2006 IF I were to buy an iMac (I wouldn't) I'd go Intel. Personally I'll keep waiting for the PowerMac replacements to come. The Dell laptop is doing a fine job as of now for my mobile needs (and will continue to do so even if I can't get 10.5 on it). So iBook/MacBook isn't something I'm looking at... but Intel based PowerMac? mmmmmm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigboss Posted April 26, 2006 Share Posted April 26, 2006 I'd go for an Intel machine probably just because its not as power hungry as a G5. The Core Duo is a laptop processor and consumes much less power and overall is just a more efficient chip. In addition, with an Intel Mac, I could run Windows XP which would offset not being able to run OS 9/8/7 (the classics). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Nonny Moose Posted April 26, 2006 Share Posted April 26, 2006 But with a PPC Mac, you can run OS X (natively), OS 9 (via Classic) and Windows (via Virtual PC). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozzie123 Posted April 27, 2006 Share Posted April 27, 2006 Yes indeed you can use Virtual PC to run Windows app but at the cost of speed (around 20% sacrifice if I'm not mistaken). Plus, I don't need any classic app since I've been a Mac user only since MacOS X so I missed nothing . I'll wait for the Intel iBook (MacBook?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Bond Posted April 27, 2006 Share Posted April 27, 2006 Intel for sure...simply because I can't quite tear myself away from the Windows world. I use Mac alot more now, but Windows is still a necessity for me. At this point, it's alot easier using Photoshop and audio-recording in Windows, than on my Hackintosh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheoCryst Posted April 27, 2006 Share Posted April 27, 2006 Yes indeed you can use Virtual PC to run Windows app but at the cost of speed (around 20% sacrifice if I'm not mistaken). No way, it must me much more than that. I have an iBook (1.33 G4) and it definitely doesn't run at 80% speed when compared to a 1.3 GHz native install. I'm thinking 50-60% loss, at the very least. As for me? I'm definitely going to wait for the MacBook as an upgrade to my iBook. Here's hoping for May! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colonel Posted April 27, 2006 Share Posted April 27, 2006 No way, it must me much more than that. I have an iBook (1.33 G4) and it definitely doesn't run at 80% speed when compared to a 1.3 GHz native install. I'm thinking 50-60% loss, at the very least. Very true. Even for me on my former iMac G5 it was almost unbearably slow. I would definitely get an Intel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigboss Posted May 1, 2006 Share Posted May 1, 2006 Well I myself have never used VirtualPC so I cant offer comment on the performance decrease but like most software which either emulates a different architecture and virtualizes another OS, it`s ram intensive. You probably will see a noticable performance decrease if you use an iMac, PB or iBook. Not to mention, getting an Intel Mac would be better from the future proofing standpoint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Nonny Moose Posted May 1, 2006 Share Posted May 1, 2006 Virtual PC is very RAM intensive, and without disabling the eye candy, it runs very very slow in VPC. Without the eye candy, it becomes pokey, but not super slow. It's usable for word processing and non-processor intensive projects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts