New G5 seems kinda slow(DC 2.0ghz)

Posted:
in Current Mac Hardware edited January 2014
I just purchased a DC G5 it has 512 and the 6600 with 256 vRam. I don't know I seems slow to launch programs.



I've been using a 800mhz G4 iMac with 512 RAM. I'm not saying the iMac is faster but the G5 is lagging. I'm thinking of reinstalling Tiger since it still has the original installation.



I open Adobe Bridge and it take forever. I open Photoshop and it takes quite a while. I don't even have plug-ins or fonts and it still takes long.



I also just sold a 12in Powerbook with 768 of RAM. The G5 is faster but it take forever in sertain things. Maybe I just need RAM. I;m thinking of adding 2 gigs(2x1gig) of RAM but since I can't aford it I think I will get 1 gig(2x512). Should I just cough up the money for the two gigs?



What a good afordable RAM maker?



Hey any ideas of what up with my Mac. My expectations weren't that high for it it just seems slow. Granted I haven't installed Final Cut maybe I'll feel the diffence then.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 21
    powerdocpowerdoc Posts: 8,123member
    512 MB RAM is not enough, especially with tiger.



    My quad is very fast for openinf files. As the HD is the same, your dual should also shine in this aera.



    I suggest you to buy two 1 GB RAM modules.
  • Reply 2 of 21
    krassykrassy Posts: 595member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Powerdoc

    I suggest you to buy two 1 GB RAM modules.



    yep and do the hardware-test after you buy those the difference between 512 and 1GB is not that big so you should rather throw in a little more to get 2x1GB instead of 2x512
  • Reply 3 of 21
    Hey guys but do you guys think reinstalling Tiger would help?



    I'll install Final Cut Stidio tonight and test it with that to see if a notice some raw power.
  • Reply 4 of 21
    messiahmessiah Posts: 1,689member
    2GB is a must.
  • Reply 5 of 21
    pbpb Posts: 4,232member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by krisneph

    Hey guys but do you guys think reinstalling Tiger would help?





    Yes, maybe. In some cases the factory installation comes problematic to customer's hands and a re-installation generally solves such issues. Anyway, in a new machine with little to no data for backup, it should be easy to do it. Besides, you will know what gets installed in the machine.
  • Reply 6 of 21
    lundylundy Posts: 4,466member
    Check the pageouts in Activity Monitor, under System Memory. If it is near zero or less than a couple thousand, memory isn't your problem.



    Could be Spotlight indexing, but I think you would have noticed that.



    Also, a fresh system will always take a while for the auto-defrag and hotfiles areas to get constructed on the hard drive by the OS. These things are what help with launch times. So giving it a bit more time, with extended use of the most common apps, should help. Or just leave all the apps open and let the OS take care of everything.



    If you do reinstall, don't forget to click Customize and uncheck all the languages that you don't need.
  • Reply 7 of 21
    Perhaps some will disagree with me, but I don't think there is much of a difference in Mac OS X's UI responsiveness when you go above about 1GHz.



    I helped my friend setup & install some applications on his new Dual 2.7GHz G5 w/6GB Memory, and the UI did not feel faster than my 1.42GHz Dual G4.



    I'm sure I would have noticed a difference with specific things.. like FCP, processing Photoshop jobs, and other intensive tasks, but the speed at which applications opened, and the general responsiveness of the UI was not a noticable improvement over my ol' 1.4GHz G4.
  • Reply 8 of 21
    satchmosatchmo Posts: 2,699member
    Actually I find the Dual core 2.0 to "feel" slower than the dual processor 2.0 I had about 8 months ago.



    It just doesn't seem as snappy as the old one. Launching apps such as Photoshop and Illustrator is fine, but the Finder seem to be a tad slower...and that's with 2gb of RAM.
  • Reply 9 of 21
    Quote:

    Originally posted by krisneph

    I open Adobe Bridge and it take forever. I open Photoshop and it takes quite a while. I don't even have plug-ins or fonts and it still takes long.



    It may not be your Mac. Photoshop and Bridge are ungodly slow to launch on my dual-2.5 with 2GB of RAM. Bridge in particular drives me crazy, as the simple file browser in Photoshop CS was very quick to launch. I don't have any benchmarks to prove it, but I feel like ALL the CS2 apps are slower to launch than their CS versions, and Bridge is absurd.



    Don't forget to check your Energy Saver options and try setting processor performance to Highest (Automatic is the default). See if that makes any difference.
  • Reply 10 of 21
    Well I did transfer 60 gigs of stuff from my iMac. Stupid iMac didn't want to boot at all. I had to use Target Disk Mode to take my files of. Thanks God I was able to retrieve my files and resintall Tiger on the iMac.



    Did my G5 come with a cooy of Tiger?





    I really don't think the 60 gigs is somehow making my G5 slow. Spotlight indexed it pretty quick. I think a will reinstall Tiger.



    What about the apps that come with my G5. Like OmniOutliner I wanna make sure I keep that. Will they be in the reatore Cd's?





    Ha good thing my G5 came with a Pioneer 110. I really like it it burns DVD's like in five minutes.
  • Reply 11 of 21
    messiahmessiah Posts: 1,689member
    Check how many fonts you have activated. Nothing brings a system to its knees like fonts...
  • Reply 12 of 21
    nvmnvm Posts: 24member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Messiah

    Check how many fonts you have activated. Nothing brings a system to its knees like fonts...



    How do you do that? I have OS 10.3
  • Reply 13 of 21
    messiahmessiah Posts: 1,689member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by NVM

    How do you do that? I have OS 10.3



    Open up the Font Book app. You basically only want the system fonts and the dashboard widget fonts activated ? deactivate all the rest of them.
  • Reply 14 of 21
    xoolxool Posts: 2,460member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Messiah

    2GB is a must.



    I second this. If you really are gonna use that dual-core machine, you owe yourself plenty of RAM.



    I was running 1.5 GB for a while and noticed a significant improvement when I added another GB. '



    When I compare my 1 GB machine at the office to the 2.5 GB at home, my home machine always wins... hands down. I'd say the increase in daily productivity completely overshadows the negligible cost of RAM.
  • Reply 15 of 21
    xoolxool Posts: 2,460member
    I just checked crucial, and 1 GB for my G5 only costs $110. If I didn't have 2.5 GB I'd snap some up today! Ho ho ho!
  • Reply 16 of 21
    Quote:

    Originally posted by krisneph

    I just purchased a DC G5 it has 512 and the 6600 with 256 vRam. I don't know I seems slow to launch programs



    I feel the same way about my iMac 1.6 G5 here at work. My personal 1Ghz PBook G4 seems quite a bit faster with regard to disk access, etc. Both systems are running 10.4.3 and both have 512mb ram.
  • Reply 17 of 21
    Ram makes a massive difference to your computers performance.



    512Mb is p|ssy so try getting 1gb at least or 2Gb. You should notice a difference.
  • Reply 18 of 21
    Well I don't think I can afford 2 gigs right now. I would be either gigs or 1 gig and a 250 internal HD. I think I'll go for the HD and the 1 gig.



    I did see some company selling 2 gigs pair for 174 of something like that. I can't find that site anymore. They seem like a decent deal I searched the web and that company has been making RAM for the MAc for 10 years. IU forgot their name. Should I go with crucial or somewhere else?
  • Reply 19 of 21
    aslan^aslan^ Posts: 599member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by lundy

    Check the pageouts in Activity Monitor, under System Memory. If it is near zero or less than a couple thousand, memory isn't your problem.



    This looks like good advice to me but is it true that OS X will try to minimize pageouts regardless of your memory ? If you have more will it use that memory preloading stuff to improve performance, but if you have less it will conserve memory to avoid pageouts ?
  • Reply 20 of 21
    lundylundy Posts: 4,466member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by AsLan^

    This looks like good advice to me but is it true that OS X will try to minimize pageouts regardless of your memory ? If you have more will it use that memory preloading stuff to improve performance, but if you have less it will conserve memory to avoid pageouts ?



    Not sure I understand the question - Mach will try and use 90% of the memory at all times if possible. There is never a good reason for leaving RAM unused.



    And remember, just because you pre-load stuff (caching) doesn't mean that it has to be paged out if its space is needed. If new data needs to be loaded, and the stuff you pre-loaded hasn't been modified, it just gets written over - no need to page it out.
Sign In or Register to comment.