[BrettOZ]

I was hoping to get your thoughts on if you think the G5 is worth the money and will the performance really be any better for what I need the machine for?

I basically need the machine for web design, MP3 (iTunes - plenty of ripping), Quicktime work (compression of video) and DVD authoring.

With the prices of the Dual G4s at an all time low - I am ready to buy, but would the G5 be a better option??? (note: G5 is really just a little out of budget - but I could squeeze the xtra dollars if I needed to)

Your thoughts would be appreciated.

[Gul Banana]

If you take the Superdrive out of the G5, it's only $200 more.. and it sounds like the stuff you do doesn't benefit much from dual processors.

[DBvader]

yeah, i would get the G5 for sure.

though, i dont know how much faster it would be, but i would just assume that with better software optimizations, the G5 would shine.

[zen]

Definately the 1.6 Ghz G5.

I really think people are getting too hung up on the dual proc thing - look at all the posts in this forum which say that the 1.6 and 1.8 Ghz G5s are worthless compared to the dual 2 Ghz

Remember it's not just the G5 processor which will make this machine cream even a dual G4 - there's the 800 Mhz bus and all the other carry-on in the new architecture. Sure the bottom model uses a different motherboard as it doesn't have PCI-X or 400 Mhz DDR RAM, but I don't think it deserves the "Yikes" label that other people have put on it.

I'm upgrading from a 333 Mhz iMac to a 1.6 Ghz G5. I can't wait

Zen

[BrettOZ]

Won't Panther be optimised for Duals though? I thought Duals performed very well with things like Altivec (ie iTunes ripping and Photoshop)???

[Simon]

Originally posted by BrettOZ:
Won't Panther be optimised for Duals though? I thought Duals performed very well with things like Altivec (ie iTunes ripping and Photoshop)???

But as I understand the G5's Velocity Engine will blow the living daylights out of the G4's Altivec unit (even if it's a dual G4 config) - mostly because the G4's Altivec is killed by the MaxBus' bandwidth limitations. The G5 doesn't have these limitations.

Get the G5. It will last much longer.

[scottiB]

In reverse order:

Originally posted by Simon:
But as I understand the G5's Velocity Engine will blow the living daylights out of the G4's Altivec unit (even if it's a dual G4 config) - mostly because the G4's Altivec is killed by the MaxBus' bandwidth limitations. The G5 doesn't have these limitations.

I read somewhere in an Ars thread that the G5's Altivec isn't as efficient as the most recent G4s (7455?), but akin to the G4-7400. That said, consider what Eug Wanker posted in this thread:

Something to consider with the new G5s vs. the old G4s.

Memory bus bandwidth:
G4 (fastest): 2.7 GB/s
G5 (any): 6.4 GB/s

Front side bus bandwidth:
Single G4 (fastest): 1.3 GB/s
Dual G4 (fastest): 1.3 GB/s
G5 1.6 GHz: 6.4 GB/s
G5 1.8 GHz: 7.2 GB/s
Dual G5 2.0 GHz: 16.0 GB/s

While the G5's Altivec may not be as efficient, Altivec can crunch something like 6GB/sec. All the efficiency in the world won't help when Altivec is waiting for data. The G5 makes up for this by brute bandwidth (2.37x the G4 in memory bus; 4.9x faster FS bus with the 1.6GHz G5).

BrettOZ wrote:
Won't Panther be optimised for Duals though? I thought Duals performed very well with things like Altivec (ie iTunes ripping and Photoshop)???

Yep. Panther will be (or perhaps more) optimised dual processors. But, in comparing to the PMac G4, we again run into the bandwidth issue. The dual G4s share the same, slow bus. Ripping in iTunes is more dependent on drive speed. I bought a cheap FireWire CD-RW drive for my DP800 (and iMac DV), and the 48x read speed boosted ripping times by 120% in contrast to my SuperDrive. The SDs in the G5 are rated at 32x read, so I don't think it'd be that much of a problem.

BrettOZ wrote:
I basically need the machine for...Quicktime work (compression of video) and DVD authoring.

Right there. That's why you need the G5. If you'll be using Cleaner, Squeeze, or Apple's Compressor, the 1.6 G5 will be (I anticipate) 1.5 to 2x faster than a DP 1.25 G4. Again, bandwidth means all the difference.

You mentioned the G5 is around the ceiling of your budget, but I'd beg, borrow, steal, or increase debt to cover it. Allow for 2x512MB of DDR memory and a second drive (though not a required). In the next year or so, DDR prices will drop enough that I'd bet you could max to 4GB (or even 3GB)--something the G4 could never reach.

[Simon]

Originally posted by scottiB:
While the G5's Altivec may not be as efficient, Altivec can crunch something like 6GB/sec. All the efficiency in the world won't help when Altivec is waiting for data. The G5 makes up for this by brute bandwidth (2.37x the G4 in memory bus; 4.9x faster FS bus with the 1.6GHz G5).

Which was actually exactly my point.

[scottiB]

Oh no, I knew what you were saying, but I was hedging a bit because I've read some posters that felt since the G5's Altivec wasn't as "good" as the latest G4's, the G4 would be better in Altivec tasks.

For some reason, bored on a Sunday morning perhaps, I wanted write too much about it.

As an aside, I can't believe some of the adherence to the PowerMac G4 in light of the G5 (other than affordability). As a whole, we've pissed and moaned and yearned for more power--for years. Here it is, and some still think a DP 1.25 G4 will be on par with a 1.8 G5. I'm dumbfounded.

Once real-world benchmarks have come in September, I may eat my words, but I really, really doubt it.

Good times.

[superfula]

Originally posted by scottiB:
Oh no, I knew what you were saying, but I was hedging a bit because I've read some posters that felt since the G5's Altivec wasn't as "good" as the latest G4's, the G4 would be better in Altivec tasks.

For some reason, bored on a Sunday morning perhaps, I wanted write too much about it.

As an aside, I can't believe some of the adherence to the PowerMac G4 in light of the G5 (other than affordability). As a whole, we've pissed and moaned and yearned for more power--for years. Here it is, and some still think a DP 1.25 G4 will be on par with a 1.8 G5. I'm dumbfounded.

Once real-world benchmarks have come in September, I may eat my words, but I really, really doubt it.

Good times.

I don't think the dual 1.25 will be on par with the 1.8G5, but I really don't think the price difference (1000dollars) makes the 1.8 worth it.

No matter what you are doing with your mac (email, internet, etc) the dual processors will make a huge difference versus a single processor. I have no doubt a G5 will launch programs faster, run games better, etc, but when you are doing some serious multitasking, the dual 1.25 will do better than the 1.8 because it is a dual processor machine. If you take Apple's benchmarks and lower them to what they really are (companies always make their product look better before it's released), the difference won't be as great as 1.5x-2x like some of you think. I guarantee no one will get the same marks and speed that apple showcased at WWDC. And keep in mind that was a dual 2.0G5, and it barely beat the single processor P4 on some of those tests. The single G5 processors will perform QUITE a bit lower on the bencharks. I don't think it would perform any better than 20-30% faster than the dual 1.25G4...and even less when doing multitasking....which doesn't warrant the 1000+ difference between the two. And given the fact that OS X does wonders with dual processors, the gap will be less than what some of you think.

I maintain the dual 1.25FW800 is the best powermac buy out there, and will be until apple lowers the prices and ups the speed on the G5..so basically until Jan 04. And throw in the fact that you can get the G4 now and the G5 won't be shipping until September....well at least for me the choice is obvious. Even if the G5 was available, I still think it's a poorer buy. Given apple's horrendous track record on revision A models of new machines, I'd say avoid at all costs.

[BrettOZ]

Thanks for the thoughts guys, but you state the 1.8 in your feedback - I would only be able to get the $$'s for a 1.6

In saying that I am trading in my old G4 400 MHz - so my head will spin whatever machine I get.

Point taken with the iTunes ripping and the faster CD drive.

From what I can see only multitasking would be assisted by the dual processors?? I would be using cleaner but they jobs are not massive in size. I am really swaying towards the 1.25 Dual at this stage...

Anyone else care to give their thoughts?

[Eug Wanker]

Which version of cleaner? Cleaner 6 supposedly runs much better on dual processors than cleaner 5 did.

[BrettOZ]

Yes Version 6

[Eug Wanker]

Hmmmm... It's hard to know based on our conjecture with no real benchmarks but...

If it were cleaner 5 I'd say 1.6 G5. With cleaner 6 I couldn't argue with the dual 1.25.

Either way, it'd blow away your dual 400.

Perhaps you can find a cheap dual 1.25 with Firewire 800 like superfula did. (The one in the Apple Store doesn't have Firewire 800.)

[BrettOZ]

I only have a single G4 400 - so anything is going to blow it away

I am hoping to pick up a cheap 2 x 1.25 with 800 Firewire - although, I bet they will not be around long with the G5 just around the corner.

[superfula]

Originally posted by Eug Wanker:
Either way, it'd blow away your dual 400.

Ah we finally agree on something!!

[BrettOZ]

You are totally right though - until someone can do some serious testing on real life apps - bit hard to make a valid solid decision at the moment - but I don't want to miss gettting a good deal on a dual G4 before they are GONE!!

[OreoCookie]

G5. Period.

[DaedalusDX]

Originally posted by scottiB:
Ripping in iTunes is more dependent on drive speed. I bought a cheap FireWire CD-RW drive for my DP800 (and iMac DV), and the 48x read speed boosted ripping times by 120% in contrast to my SuperDrive. The SDs in the G5 are rated at 32x read, so I don't think it'd be that much of a problem.

This is not entirely true... While drive speed is a concern, ripping to MP3 or AAC is processor capped to a great deal.

A big part of it is drive speed. The superdrive, for all its neat features, is abysmal in terms of audio extraction. Its perfectly conceivable that you'd see such a great increase in speed from a faster CD-RW.

Another issue is whether you're reading from the center of the CD or the outside of the CD. Because of the CAV (constant angular velocity... the disc always spins at the same speed) nature of modern CD drives, linearly, the disc spins much faster on the outside. Therefore, the fastest track that you can extract from is the last track of the CD.

On my Powermac G4 dual 1.25 ghz's combo drive, the inside extracts to AIFF at about 9x. On the outermost track, it extracts at close to the potential of the drive... 32x.

However, when i turned around and encoded to MP3, the dual processor G4 only managed to encode at around 20x. The same files and the same settings on my 1Ghz Titanium got about 12x encode. Adding a processor does help, and the hardware that is out there now does not truly outpace the speed the audio can come off the CD.

What's my point? No point really... wait for tests i guess!

[iCol]

If you can budget for a G5, then get a G5.

If you can only stretch your budget for a G4, then get a G4.

I am going to be getting a dual 1.25 G4 (FW400) as this is all I can afford at the moment, and if Apple hadn't dropped the prices I wouldn't have been able to afford that.

I am thinking myself quite lucky. Sure I wont have a top of the pack all singing all dancing G5, but I will still have a nice fast and powerful machine to call my own, and when all said and done, it's gonna be better than a 600Mhz G3 iBook, which is only just now becoming a little too slow for my needs!

Col

[Azzgunther]

Think about this:

Buy at single processor 1.25 for about $1300.

Wait for Rev. B. G5s for a year.

Resell 1.25 for about $800.

Buy Rev B. G5.

If I had to buy a new system, this would be my plan.

[superfula]

Originally posted by Azzgunther:
Think about this:

Buy at single processor 1.25 for about $1300.

Wait for Rev. B. G5s for a year.

Resell 1.25 for about $800.

Buy Rev B. G5.

If I had to buy a new system, this would be my plan.

You're onto my plan If I have the cash in January (or when Rev B comes out) that's what I will probably end up doing.

[Superchicken]

Shoudln't a 1.6 more than cream a DP G4? Dual doesn't mean twice the Mhz, so with a Dual 1.42 even you'd still see an almost 200Mhz jump, plus the fact that the G5 is significantly faster at the same Mhz than a G4, and I have no dout the G5 would be faster.

Not to mention for your altivec stuff the G5 will cream the G4 period.

[Arkham_c]

Originally posted by Superchic[k]en:
Shoudln't a 1.6 more than cream a DP G4? Dual doesn't mean twice the Mhz, so with a Dual 1.42 even you'd still see an almost 200Mhz jump, plus the fact that the G5 is significantly faster at the same Mhz than a G4, and I have no dout the G5 would be faster.

Not to mention for your altivec stuff the G5 will cream the G4 period.

OSX is actually very well optimized for dual processors.

We'll have to wait until the systems are shipping to know for sure how the G4 compares to a G5. Also, remember that when we get more 64-bit optimized apps, the G5 will get faster still compare to the G4.

I suspect a dual-1.42GHz G4 will keep up with a single 1.6G5 fairly well (faster at some things, slower at others). I think it will be slower than a 1.8GHz G5 though.

[DrBoar]

Not to claim that benchmarks tell the whole truth, but the numbers below suggest that a dual 1.4 G4 will keep up with a SP 970 in integer for SMP applications then be a road kill in the rest


MOT G4 does:
SPECint2000 418 @ 1.4 GHz [email protected] =970@800 MHz)
SPECfp2000 248 @ 1.4 GHz [email protected] =970@425MHz

[BrettOZ]

Weighing up my options - I have decided to get the Dual Processor G4 1.25GHz.

When I looked at the price I could get one of these with a Combo Drive VERY CHEAP - I really could not turn it down (I am adding a Pioneer A05 DVD Burner - just not getting it from Apple, cheaper this way).

Sure the G5s will more than likely be faster - but I had to draw a line and say how fast do I really need this box to go. I am thinking a dual processor machine will be just fine for my needs.

The G5's, especially the 1.6 will be outdated in a very short time (especially seeing that it already has some specs that are lower than the 1.8 and 2.0), Steve Jobs claiming 3GHz G5 in 12 months - these things are going to be in Rev B in no time. So I bit the bullet and went with the CHEAPER option, save money now and wait to see where these G5's go - not to mention how they benchmark.

Thanks to all for your comments and information - it was a big decision but I think I went for the right option (for me). Wish I could afford a Dual 2.0 G5 though

[flyhigher]

Originally posted by BrettOZ:
Weighing up my options - I have decided to get the Dual Processor G4 1.25GHz.

$1399 for a refurb dual 1.25, FW800 model at MacWarehouse. Amazing. This is better than the Apple store's current shipping top of the line machine.

[LeeG]

WOW. Here's the link for that deal - and that is a STEAL. Great option for someone who wants to update an older G4 as a bridge to a rev2 G5....


Lee

[Stratus Fear]

Originally posted by superfula:
No matter what you are doing with your mac (email, internet, etc) the dual processors will make a huge difference versus a single processor. I have no doubt a G5 will launch programs faster, run games better, etc, but when you are doing some serious multitasking, the dual 1.25 will do better than the 1.8 because it is a dual processor machine. If you take Apple's benchmarks and lower them to what they really are (companies always make their product look better before it's released), the difference won't be as great as 1.5x-2x like some of you think. I guarantee no one will get the same marks and speed that apple showcased at WWDC. And keep in mind that was a dual 2.0G5, and it barely beat the single processor P4 on some of those tests. The single G5 processors will perform QUITE a bit lower on the bencharks. I don't think it would perform any better than 20-30% faster than the dual 1.25G4...and even less when doing multitasking....which doesn't warrant the 1000+ difference between the two. And given the fact that OS X does wonders with dual processors, the gap will be less than what some of you think.

I maintain the dual 1.25FW800 is the best powermac buy out there, and will be until apple lowers the prices and ups the speed on the G5..so basically until Jan 04. And throw in the fact that you can get the G4 now and the G5 won't be shipping until September....well at least for me the choice is obvious. Even if the G5 was available, I still think it's a poorer buy. Given apple's horrendous track record on revision A models of new machines, I'd say avoid at all costs.

Keep in mind, even though OS X supports SMP, a lot of programs do NOT. These programs that don't receive little benefit from a dual processor system. When you're comparing a dual G4 with a single G5, you might as well figure numbers from a single G4 for most apps.

As for some of those numbers with the G5 against the P4 -- I question whether those were really all that well multithreaded for SMP. With the performance expected from IBM of a single 970 and Apple's numbers not falling too far under that on the Dual 2GHz, I don't think those numbers can possibly be from SMP compatible benchmarks.

[superfula]

It doesn't matter if programs don't support SMP. If you are doing some major multitasking with Safari, Mail, iTunes, iCal, Adium, Proteus, etc etc etc, OSX will distribute the load between the two processors automatically. Enough so that running dual processors almost doubles your mhtz speed when multitasking. Now of course Mail.app won't use dual processors on it's own. I never said it did. As well as OSX works with two processors, there is no reason to get just one processor. And seeing as how panther is even more geared toward dual processor systems than Jaguar was, I see no reason to even bother with 1.6 or 1.8 unless you need to run your games better.

[Simon]

Originally posted by BrettOZ:
The G5's, especially the 1.6 will be outdated in a very short time (especially seeing that it already has some specs that are lower than the 1.8 and 2.0)

The G5's (especially the 1.6GHz) will be outdated in a very shot time and that's why you're getting a 1.25GHz G4...? Hugh?

???

Dude, are you alright?

I mean, I understand your decision and of course I respect it, but that argument was just so entirely wrong it hurt.

[BrettOZ]

I guess what I meant was the specs on the 1.6 vs the 1.8 and dual 2.0 G5 - already put it behind the other 2, in another 6 months time what will be the introductory G5 system? The 1.6 with slower RAM and no PCI-X already puts it behind the other 2 in technology.

[superfula]

Originally posted by BrettOZ:
I guess what I meant was the specs on the 1.6 vs the 1.8 and dual 2.0 G5 - already put it behind the other 2, in another 6 months time what will be the introductory G5 system? The 1.6 with slower RAM and no PCI-X already puts it behind the other 2 in technology.

I agree. I can see the 1.6 being a bigtime bust for the line

[cowerd]

I see no reason to even bother with 1.6 or 1.8 unless you need to run your games better.

Or your code to compile faster, or your renderings to render faster. Until the G5 is released and some benchmarks are run, you can't sit there with a straight face and tell me that two 1.25GHZ G4's will absolutely outperform a 1.6GHZ G5. Sorry but 2FPUs, a bus with real 333mhz DDR and better out-of-order execution don't add up to a crippled single CPU system.

[Joel]

Originally posted by cowerd:
Or your code to compile faster...

Hi!

I'm in a similar situation (i.e., I can afford a dual 1.25 GHz G4 or a 1.6 GHz G5). I'm upgrading from a 500 mhz 2001 iceBook and am familiar with the speed of the 1.25 GHz G4 (use one at work). However, my main goal in upgrading is to increase the overall speed of the GUI when doing lots of things at once (i.e., multiple apps running at once with iTunes running in the background) and to increase my compile speed in Project Builder (soon to be Xcode). From what I've gathered from this thread, it seems that the 1.6 G5 might compile quicker than the dual G4 if that's all I'm doing, but whenever I'm doing lots of stuff at once, the overall speed will decrease (i.e., when I'm not compiling but have tons of other apps open and am multitasking). Is this an accurate read of the situation? I'm just entering my second year of computer science and will be taking a total of 24 units of CS classes next year, so I'll be doing a lot of coding, however, I think the overall amount of time spent compiling to the amount of time I'll spend doing lots of other things will be disproportionate (i.e., less than 50% of the time will be spent on compiling, I think).

Any additional opinions? Thanks!

-Joel

[himself]

Originally posted by Joel:
Hi!

I'm in a similar situation (i.e., I can afford a dual 1.25 GHz G4 or a 1.6 GHz G5). I'm upgrading from a 500 mhz 2001 iceBook and am familiar with the speed of the 1.25 GHz G4 (use one at work). However, my main goal in upgrading is to increase the overall speed of the GUI when doing lots of things at once (i.e., multiple apps running at once with iTunes running in the background) and to increase my compile speed in Project Builder (soon to be Xcode). From what I've gathered from this thread, it seems that the 1.6 G5 might compile quicker than the dual G4 if that's all I'm doing, but whenever I'm doing lots of stuff at once, the overall speed will decrease (i.e., when I'm not compiling but have tons of other apps open and am multitasking). Is this an accurate read of the situation? I'm just entering my second year of computer science and will be taking a total of 24 units of CS classes next year, so I'll be doing a lot of coding, however, I think the overall amount of time spent compiling to the amount of time I'll spend doing lots of other things will be disproportionate (i.e., less than 50% of the time will be spent on compiling, I think).

Any additional opinions? Thanks!

-Joel

Like a couple folks said here earlier, there's no real way to tell which would be faster without a machine to perform real-world tests on. but going by the benchmarks we do have (even if they are a little on the fast side), not to mention all of the raves from people who've gotten their sweaty mitts on G5's (likely for development and testing), *any* G5 will smoke a dual G4 in practically every task, judging from the bandwith numbers alone. the fact is, even with dual processors, the G4 is still limited to the bandwith of a single processor. If the work you do can max the bus on a single G4, a dualie won't help out that much more.

To try and answer your questions, I don't believe a single G5 will be hampered at all in any GUI operations, or with "multitasking," a.k.a running numerous apps at once. Then again, it looks like the release of Panther will mean GUI speed increases for all, even on G3s, so the GUI speed issue could be moot.

That said I'm placing my bets on the G5s. Let me know when the races start...

[DeathMan]

Originally posted by Simon:

I mean, I understand your decision and of course I respect it, but that argument was just so entirely wrong it hurt.

This is almost exactly word for word what I thought when I read that.

Joel: XCode is going to be your dream come true, my man. Did you see the demo of Fix and Go or whatever its called. Blew my mind.

Anyway, I think as far as compile speeds, you're going to get the best performance with the G5 because of the massive bandwidth factor, and sweet number crunching power. But as far as multitasking goes, you're going to want the G5 as well for the same reasons: Faster RAM, faster HD, Faster busses, faster everything.

Oh, and upgrade the video card, so you don't get embarrased at the LAN parties.

I'd love to see some benchmarks to disprove this, but I just don't see a starved dual G4 outdoing the single 1.6 G5 in any single task.

Also, when you say you're multitasking, what exactly are you doing? Multitasking with Mail? as someone asked earlier? How often does that happen. Maybe you're emailing a couple megs worth of pictures or something, and surfing the internet at the same time, but geez, thats not going to be processor intensive. Adium? iTunes? This stuff wouldn't max out an iBook. Okay, maybe and older iBook, if it was burning a CD at the same time.

The point is, I think people are giving more mindshare (in the form of percieved value) to the dual proc. thing. A dual 1.25 != 2.5 Ghz. It just doesn't. I'm sure you know this. Maybe with the G5, since they each have their own bus to the main controller, but not the everso starved G4 with its useless DDR RAM.

[Joel]

Originally posted by DeathMan:
Joel: XCode is going to be your dream come true, my man. Did you see the demo of Fix and Go or whatever its called. Blew my mind.

Yes, I did.

But as far as multitasking goes, you're going to want the G5 as well for the same reasons: Faster RAM, faster HD, Faster busses, faster everything.

...

Also, when you say you're multitasking, what exactly are you doing? Multitasking with Mail? as someone asked earlier? How often does that happen. Maybe you're emailing a couple megs worth of pictures or something, and surfing the internet at the same time, but geez, thats not going to be processor intensive. Adium? iTunes? This stuff wouldn't max out an iBook. Okay, maybe and older iBook, if it was burning a CD at the same time.

When I say multitasking, what I mean is that I might have Photoshop open editing a 6 meg file or so, Sound Studio open editing anywhere from a 100 MB to 1 GB file, have Safari open with multiple tabs, have Mail open, have iChat open, and then have iTunes playing in the background (and you might toss having Project Builder running/compiling in there too occasionally).

The point is, I think people are giving more mindshare (in the form of percieved value) to the dual proc. thing. A dual 1.25 != 2.5 Ghz. It just doesn't. I'm sure you know this. Maybe with the G5, since they each have their own bus to the main controller, but not the everso starved G4 with its useless DDR RAM.

This is very possible. I'm so used to being disappointed by speed increases like this that I guess I might be discounting the new architecture way too much. I have trouble imagining the 1.6 GHz G5 as being much faster than the dual 1.25 GHz G4.

-Joel

[Simon]

Originally posted by BrettOZ:
I guess what I meant was the specs on the 1.6 vs the 1.8 and dual 2.0 G5 - already put it behind the other 2, in another 6 months time what will be the introductory G5 system? The 1.6 with slower RAM and no PCI-X already puts it behind the other 2 in technology.

Yes, I thought you meant that.

Of course the 1.6GHz model is a Yikes-type of G5 machine. But, keep in mind, it was maybe just the necessary amount of corner cutting needed to get the entry price of the G5 to where it is now - which is for many people still too high...

But, if you are afraid of lifetime, than any dual G4 is not one little bit better than the 1.6GHz G5. The architecture has dramatically changed in the 1.6GHz model already. So, actually, I think you can only wait til realworld performance comparisons show which machine is faster at what tasks. Until then, I think the only people who should still buy a G4 are

- those that need OS 9 booting (which seem already rather rare by now)

- those that simply can't pay one dollar more than the price of the G4 whatsoever

All others should either wait for the benchmarks or get a G5. But - as always of course - this is just my personal view/advice.

[DeathMan]

Originally posted by Joel:


This is very possible. I'm so used to being disappointed by speed increases like this that I guess I might be discounting the new architecture way too much. I have trouble imagining the 1.6 GHz G5 as being much faster than the dual 1.25 GHz G4.

-Joel

As for me, I shall simply wait and see. I think it will be faster, but I have really no way of knowing one way or the other.

I just think that the improved G5 performance, with the better Altivec implementation, faster bus to the AGP, RAM and SATA, running 350 Mhz faster will make up for the missing CPU.

Time will tell. Deliciously.

[BrettOZ]

Originally posted by Simon:
Yes, I thought you meant that.

Of course the 1.6GHz model is a Yikes-type of G5 machine. But, keep in mind, it was maybe just the necessary amount of corner cutting needed to get the entry price of the G5 to where it is now - which is for many people still too high...

But, if you are afraid of lifetime, than any dual G4 is not one little bit better than the 1.6GHz G5. The architecture has dramatically changed in the 1.6GHz model already. So, actually, I think you can only wait til realworld performance comparisons show which machine is faster at what tasks. Until then, I think the only people who should still buy a G4 are

- those that need OS 9 booting (which seem already rather rare by now)

- those that simply can't pay one dollar more than the price of the G4 whatsoever

All others should either wait for the benchmarks or get a G5. But - as always of course - this is just my personal view/advice.

I do see your side of things too Although I just took my new G4 Dual 1.25GHz machine home last night and fired it up - AMAZING! Going from a 400Mhz G4 single processor to this is just freakin' awesome! The speed is great - I have not had a lot of time to do some serious processor work yet, but I am happy with my decision. Was able to take my 120GB Barracuda V out of the old box and whack it straight into the new one, plus another 60GB drive and put that in the box too - would not have been able to do that with a G5.

You do talk about the money factor and yes - if i had it I would spend it on a G5, however this option is more cost effective for me and I really go back to my point that you really need to say - that is enough SPEED for me... Plus the money I saved will go really well towards a new LCD display.

I am sure the realworld benchmarks will be stunning on the G5's - but I know I have my machine NOW and I can add my old drives with no problems.

[slipjack]

It's a tough decision... The 1.6 would probably win for me because of noise: quieter is better!

On the other hand, duals are great, I don't think I can go back to a single!

[AssassyN]

I'm very glad you're happy w/ your decision man...sounds like you're thrilled!

I would love to wait until about Jan. 2004 to get a G5, but I need a new system before August 19th to take w/ me to college (trying to sell my Shuttle XPC Gaming Rig...$800 if anyone's interested! {see Marketplace}), and I'm about in this boat as well...but I'm pretty sure I'm gonna go for the G5. I'm going to strive however, to someone get enough cash for the 1.8, but I want a G5 nonetheless.

[BrettOZ]

Originally posted by AssassyN:
I'm very glad you're happy w/ your decision man...sounds like you're thrilled!

I would love to wait until about Jan. 2004 to get a G5, but I need a new system before August 19th to take w/ me to college (trying to sell my Shuttle XPC Gaming Rig...$800 if anyone's interested! {see Marketplace}), and I'm about in this boat as well...but I'm pretty sure I'm gonna go for the G5. I'm going to strive however, to someone get enough cash for the 1.8, but I want a G5 nonetheless.

Yeah time was a factor for me too - but yeah I am stoked over my choice. If I had the $$$'s I would go for the 1.8 too

[scottiB]

Congrats BrettOZ, getting a brand new Mac always is cool.

[andynotts]

At the mo I'm runnig dual G4 1GHz and except for the noise I think its great. I can do VOB to divx conversions at 40fps.

Personally I'd hold off he G5s til they are released and have been out for at least 6months. Having 1 of the old 'windtunnels' is enough to make me hold off, the new machines may not have noise problems but I don't think they will be 100% first run. I'd go for the dual 1.25 and then in a year go for dual G5.

[SciFrog]

Well I just got a dual 1.25 combo for $1,500. It is much faster than my 500Mhz Cube, fast enough in fact to wait for the dual 2Ghz G5 to become mid or low range (<$2,400). Resale value is very high on these dual G4 and they are great "wait and see" machines.

Just my 2c.

[BrettOZ]

Originally posted by scottiB:
Congrats BrettOZ, getting a brand new Mac always is cool.

Thanks ScottiB - It does feel good seeings that the 1.25 Duals seem to all be gone from stock at all dealers here in Brisbane

[redJag]

Originally posted by LeeG:
WOW. Here's the link for that deal - and that is a STEAL. Great option for someone who wants to update an older G4 as a bridge to a rev2 G5....


Lee

a better deal, perhaps, but I'd prefer a brand new one for $150 more, personally. but hey, I can't afford it either way

[Rare Ink]

Originally posted by SciFrog:
Well I just got a dual 1.25 combo for $1,500. It is much faster than my 500Mhz Cube, fast enough in fact to wait for the dual 2Ghz G5 to become mid or low range (<$2,400). Resale value is very high on these dual G4 and they are great "wait and see" machines.

Just my 2c.

Hi, do you mind sharing where you got that deal? Cheapest I can find is that $1400 Macwarehouse refurb price.

Many thanks.