 |
 |
Is a top of the line iMac better than an MDD dual 1.25?
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Naperville, IL
Status:
Offline
|
|
I always got lost in the G4 vs G5 translation in terms of speed. I'm thinking of upgrading my system but wasn't sure if it would be better to use the MDD as a family member's upgrade or recommend the iMac G5 as a better alternative. So, if you had to choose between the two, which would you go for? The MDD 1.25 dual G4 or the top of the line iMac (Think it's 2ghz G5)...
Mike
|
|
2009 MacMini 2.0 C2D 4GB (3,1) - Needs update!
11" MBA (2010 1.6GHz C2D)
iPhone 4 / iPad!
Hooked on Apple since the IIGS
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Regular
Join Date: Jul 2005
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: adequate, thanks.
Status:
Offline
|
|
Yes, the iMac is better, unless you need more expandability than the iMac offers.
2 GHz G5 is definitively faster than a dual 1.25 GHz G4. The iMacs architecture is faster/better, you get a good video card, great connectivity (BT 2.0, Airport Extreme built in), Tiger pre-installed, big fast harddrive and a great screen. And a much better design.
iMac.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderator  Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Irvine, CA
Status:
Offline
|
|
heh, I would go for the MDD, but that is just me.
|
|
{{{ mindwaves }}}
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Naperville, IL
Status:
Offline
|
|
Hmm, maybe I'll rec the iMac to my family, sell the MDD on ebay, get an iMac for myself until the intel switch or something... Too many options!
Mike
|
|
2009 MacMini 2.0 C2D 4GB (3,1) - Needs update!
11" MBA (2010 1.6GHz C2D)
iPhone 4 / iPad!
Hooked on Apple since the IIGS
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Admin Emeritus  Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Status:
Offline
|
|
I'd go with the Power Mac. The G5 and G4 are roughly comparable, MHz for MHz, on most types of everyday things. Even if we say that the MDD loses 20% of its speed to its slow RAM, then it still has roughly the same raw CPU power -- but divided across two CPUs.
With Mac OS X, the dual processors will make the system stay responsive under many situations where a single CPU (even a much faster one) stalls.
If the primary application being used will be a single-threaded app, the single CPU will be faster. But if it's for everyday software under Mac OS X, everything important is multithreaded and will function far more smoothly on the multiple CPU machine.
tooki
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Naperville, IL
Status:
Offline
|
|
Thanks tooki! You truly are an encyclopedic admin! We'll keep the dual in the family somehow!
|
|
2009 MacMini 2.0 C2D 4GB (3,1) - Needs update!
11" MBA (2010 1.6GHz C2D)
iPhone 4 / iPad!
Hooked on Apple since the IIGS
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top
