Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

MattJeff · Dec 22, 2006, 03:42 PM

would the macmini dominate over my imac g4 800 mhz?

iMacYouMac · Dec 22, 2006, 04:06 PM

Of course it would. The only slower component would be the harddrive. Since the Mac Mini has a 2.5" HD it only runs at 5400rpm. Other than that it'd be vastly superior.

MattJeff · Dec 23, 2006, 04:44 AM

hmm cool, i have always wandered away from the minis because i thought they where "slow", so if i got a mini i would love the performance boost?

Mac_X · Dec 23, 2006, 07:31 AM

i doubt you would love the performance boost THAT much. But it would be faster I suppose.
My sis is using a 2 Ghz C2D iMac with 1 GB RAM, and i have to say it isnt that much faster than my 1.42 Ghz G4 eMac with 256 MB Ram. It didnt render that much faster than my eMac with iMovie. Its only better with multiple apps open. And it went twice as fast as my eMac on a Photoshop test.

An even more interesting thing is that the the iMac is brand new (<5days old) and my eMac is 1.5 years old. With 512 extra Ram, my eMac should catch up to it. I have to say the new iMac C2D has dissapointed me slightly, and the mini is even slower. The ratio between my eMac and the new iMac should be similar with the one your iMac g4 and the mini have.

you would get a some boost on bigger apps, but with regular apps there is NO difference.

iMacYouMac · Dec 23, 2006, 03:07 PM

I think you're kinda full of crap, man. You running the same OS version? The processor is at least 2x faster, the memory has more bandwidth and speed (DDR2) and the harddrive is SATA whereas I think the older Mac Mini/eMac had IDE. It may seem that way to you but it would totally obliterate your machine. I had a mac mini before and the only thing I would have done with it is buy a 7200RPM harddrive and it would be just as fast as the original Core Duo iMac.

brokecollegestudentF04 · Dec 23, 2006, 08:32 PM

My eMac kicks my Core Duo Mini's a$$ in photoshop and msoffice along with iMovie and stuff like that.. Honestly I prefer to use my 700mhz eMac with 512MB RAM over my Mini with 512MB RAM.. I get the spinning beachball on the mini alot where on the eMac i dont.. everything is lightning fast on the eMac and its running 10.4.8
Im sticking with powerpc for a while.. the apps I use perform best on them.

MattJeff · Dec 23, 2006, 11:13 PM

hmmm thats what i was afraid of

Mac_X · Dec 24, 2006, 07:05 AM

now i got 768 MB RAM on my eMac, now there is NO difference with regular apps. My iMovie rendering is equal if not faster than the iMac C2D. Photoshop still goes slightly faster on the iMac C2D. I have to say the eMac is one good machine, or at least the ones "brokecollegestudentF04" and I have. When on 256 MB RAM. my eMac ran equally as fast as my cousins PB 12" 1.5Ghz 512 MB. Now with 768 MB it runs circles around the PB.
My advice would be to wait for the Mini to go to C2D processor, or get 17" iMac with dedicated video card.. if you seek some improvement. I dont think I'd settle with less than a 20" iMac C2D with 2 GB RAM, seeing the dissapointment of the 17" C2D iMac.

Kar98 · Dec 24, 2006, 03:18 PM

Originally Posted by Mac_X

My sis is using a 2 Ghz C2D iMac with 1 GB RAM, and i have to say it isnt that much faster than my 1.42 Ghz G4 eMac with 256 MB Ram.

Erm. No way. I just upgraded from a G4 Mini 1GB to a 1.83 Mini, and the difference in speed is remarkable. Think about it. FSB 167 vs 667 Mhz. Hard drive speed 4200 vs 5400 rpm. CPU Speed 1.42PPC vs 1.83 Intel. Single core vs. dual core. DDR PC vs DDR2 RAM. If you're unable to notice a significant increase in processing speed all across the board, especially in the case you've mentioned above, 256 MB RAM vs 1 GB, then...sorry, all I can think of are remarks questioning your general sanity.
OSX can barely get out of its own way with less than 1GB RAM, that alone should make a world of difference. Sorry, I gotta go ahead and call you nuts.

iREZ · Dec 24, 2006, 04:10 PM

no g4 emac or imac could touch a core duo machine on native apps. this isnt opinion...this is fact.

now to say that a core 2 duo isnt that much faster than a 1.42ghz emac...yeah...i gotta agree with Kar98, youre nuts. the core 2 duo is:

A. 64bit
B. faster RAM
C. dual processor
D. faster processors
E. faster fsb
F. WAAAAAAAAAAAAY better gpu

this last comment was both fact and opinion.

you have to see what everybody means by 'isnt that much faster.' is 20 sec faster on a usual 60 sec task faster in these users opinions? 30? 50? i came from a powerbook to my mbp and the difference is night and day, just try to run an HD trailer on a power pc and intel machine at full screen and then lets have a talk.

MacOS-Fan · Dec 24, 2006, 04:40 PM

The new Mini will be MUCH faster than your current iMac. I used to have the exact same iMac as you. I went from it to a Mac Tower Dual 1GHz G4 with 1.5GB of RAM. This was quite a step up in speed. Then when the Intel Minis were released I ordered (the day that they were released) the 1.66GHz CoreDuo Mini with 1GB of RAM and it was much quicker than my dual-processor tower. So from actually owning these I can tell you that the Mini will be substantially faster than what you have now in most cases as long as you aren't running through Rosetta.

imitchellg5 · Dec 24, 2006, 05:02 PM

Originally Posted by MattJeff

would the macmini dominate over my imac g4 800 mhz?

1,000 more MHz would help out a bunch.

Mac_X · Dec 25, 2006, 06:02 AM

i guess the iMac C2D is faster than my eMac G4 in some areas. Overall less lag, and about 2x the speed with Photoshop CS2 (not to mention that its native on the G4, not native on the C2D). But unless its big programs, there is no diffference. I admit, I am seeing less speed difference due to the fact that I was expecting a super speed computer. So Apples claims of the C2D being 4-5x faster than the G4 in different benchmarks doesnt really replicate itself in real world tests. Maybe 2.5x on really processor hungry apps, thats all.