[OsakaBill]

In order to make a purchase possible (and in order to maximize my funds), I have been thinking about purchasing a refurbished PowerMac G5 instead of new.

Depending on the day and the time, Apple has both Revision 1 and Revision 2 PowerMac G5s available.

In light of this, which way would you lean in the following situations:

A.) Rev. 1 Dual 1.8 G5 vs Rev. 2 Dual 1.8 G5
B.) Rev. 1 Dual 1.8 G5 vs Rev. 2 Dual 2.0 G5
C.) Rev. 1 Dual 2.0 G5 vs Rev. 2 Dual 2.0 G5

I was personally thinking that of the above, going with a Rev. 1 Dual 1.8 G5 would be the best way to go. The next choice would be the Rev. 2 Dual 2.0 G5. (I know the Rev. 2's are supposed to be cooler, quieter and have faster optical drives, but... for the price point...)

[Nacente]

I'd pick 1.8. In fact, I'll pick a Dual 1.8.

[Turnpike]

A) the first revision is more future-proof (more RAM slots, PCI-X, larger standard hard drive). However, if you aren't going to use these features, the Rev. B would be cheaper. I would (and did) go for the Rev A here.

B) Depends on the price difference. For $100 more, I'd go for the 2.0. For 200, it'd be a tough choice. For 300+, I don't think it is worth the extra money for the rather smallish speed bump.

C) Late Rev A (April and after) 2.0 models are identical (as far as I know) to the Rev B. If you can verify this is a late model (it probably is, but I'd check if I could), then the Rev A is a much better option, if it is any cheaper. If you are comparing early Rev A to the late Rev A or Rev B, it depends on the price difference. IIRC, the main addition was an 8x Superdrive, but there might also be a larger stock HD. I'd wait for somebody else to clarify this.

Overall, I think the Rev A 1.8 dualie is the best bang/buck. It is 90% the speed of the 2.0 (CPU-wise.. bus speed may make a difference, too). By the time the 1.8 is looking old, the 2.0 won't be doing much better. Take the money you'd save by getting 1.8 instead of 2.0 and spend it on RAM; you'll have much better performance with 2x1.8 + 1.5 gigs RAM than you'd get with 2x2.0 + 0.5 gigs RAM.

Just my opinion... if your cash flow allows for more, go for it. Plus, hitting the 2GHz breakpoing might be good for your pride

[OsakaBill]

Originally posted by Nacente:
I'd pick 1.8. In fact, I'll pick a Dual 1.8.

But which dual 1.8? Rev 1 with PCI-X slots and capable of 8 GB of RAM, though potentially louder and with a slower optical drive, or the Rev. 2 with PCI and limited to 4 GB of RAM, though potentially quieter and with a faster optical drive?

[Crusoe]

On rare occasions they have the single 1.8s up there for $1499. I've hovered over that purchase a few times. It's a want not a need.

If your looking for a bargain future proof system and you not going to do heavy # crunching, encoding, etc that's a sweet deal.

[Turnpike]

Dual processors is definitely the wave of the future, and it is one of the things that separates the towers from the rest of the Mac lineup.

One of the few things I've been simply amazed about with my new (rev a) dual 1.8 is how well it handles two things at once... I can have one process taking up 104% CPU (one full CPU plus some) and everything is still Snappy�. Especially since we don't know what the upgrade situation will be like for G5 towers a few years down the road... paying a little extra now (300 or so) will definitely go a long way to future-proofing.

IMO, if you are going to get a single-processor tower, it should be because you need those expansion slots, but are on a very tight budget... maybe you really want to do some pro audio level stuff, but as a hobby... If you are more than a hobbyist, you'll want the power of a dual. If you don't need the expansion, go for one of the new G5 iMacs... great price, can handle up to 2 gigs of RAM, et cetera. I suppose if you have desk space and have a monitor that would just be sitting around anyway, a single processor G5 tower might be an option for a home PC...

Either way, the fact that you are considering the PowerMac G5 indicates you want power.... I definitely recommend the duals for that. Specifically, the rev. a dual 1.8 or, if you have the money, late rev a/any rev b dual 2.0. early rev a dual 2.0s are great, too, but I think they cost the same as the late rev a, which is a slightly better machine.

[OsakaBill]

Originally posted by Turnpike:
A) the first revision is more future-proof (more RAM slots, PCI-X, larger standard hard drive). However, if you aren't going to use these features, the Rev. B would be cheaper. I would (and did) go for the Rev A here.

B) Depends on the price difference. For $100 more, I'd go for the 2.0. For 200, it'd be a tough choice. For 300+, I don't think it is worth the extra money for the rather smallish speed bump.

Overall, I think the Rev A 1.8 dualie is the best bang/buck. It is 90% the speed of the 2.0 (CPU-wise.. bus speed may make a difference, too). By the time the 1.8 is looking old, the 2.0 won't be doing much better. Take the money you'd save by getting 1.8 instead of 2.0 and spend it on RAM; you'll have much better performance with 2x1.8 + 1.5 gigs RAM than you'd get with 2x2.0 + 0.5 gigs RAM.

Just my opinion... if your cash flow allows for more, go for it. Plus, hitting the 2GHz breakpoing might be good for your pride

There is that 2.0 GHz break point. Maybe I should just wait for a refurb 2.5 GHz baby to come along?

OH, here are the price points:

Rev 1 Dual 1.8 = $1799
Rev 1 Dual 2.0 = $1899
Rev 2 Dual 2.0 = $1999

[stuffedmonkey]

At those prices I would definately go with the rev b dual 2.0. There were several improvments to the design that have been made - and they are quieter.

[Eriamjh]

I'd get the old dual 2.0 when it's going for $1999.

[schwaz80]

I got the Rev.A 1.8DP. Couldn't be happier with it (unless it came with more RAM).

160GIG HD
512MB RAM
4X DVD-RW
Radeon 9600

$1799