PowerMacs compared to iMacs
If everything was the same (same amount and type of RAM, same size hard drive, same type & size of screen, etc.), and they where both 1 Ghz G4's, would a Power Mac G4 and an iMac G4 both operate the same? Or would the "professional" Power Mac outdo the iMac because it is engineered differently?
If so, would the Power Mac be *significantly* faster than the iMac -- like, worth the extra $300-400?
I'd be doing graphic/web design, web browsing, email, word processing, instant messaging, and stuff with iTunes on it.
If so, would the Power Mac be *significantly* faster than the iMac -- like, worth the extra $300-400?
I'd be doing graphic/web design, web browsing, email, word processing, instant messaging, and stuff with iTunes on it.
Comments
But then consider that you're getting a display with the iMac, and it stats being a better deal. But nothing matches the powermac for true "instant-demand" computing.
Originally posted by Placebo
Unbelievably faster. I have a G5 1.8, and every time I have to use my dad's G4 933, I get frustrated.
Well... I imagine. They aren't exactly the same computers though are they?
Why'd you ask?
Originally posted by Zapchud
Well, they'd perform pretty similar. There's usually some minor hardware-differences between iMacs and PowerMacs, but assuming roughly the same specs, they'd perform 'roughly' the same.
Why'd you ask?
Yeah, but the specs aren't close to *roughly* the same, and that's the difference.
Originally posted by Placebo
Yeah, but the specs aren't close to *roughly* the same, and that's the difference.
am i the only one who read the original post?
he is comparing a powermac g4 to an imac g4, both with 1ghz processors.
so the specs are roughly the same.
both will perform similarly, but the PowerMac has the benefit of a L3 cache, faster system bus (depending on the models) and has internal options for expansion.
i wouldn't spend the extra on the imac in your situation. Performance differences will be negligible and you won't have to worry about noise or space with the imac.
edit: spelling and i think you will gain a firewire 800 port on the PowerMac (again depending on the reversion)
THe G5 is a whole other story, though.
Originally posted by Placebo
THe G5 is a whole other story, though.
Definetly. I have concluded that I have no need for the awesome power of a G5... Nor the wallet for it!
That is especially true after I heard a "mere" dual 1.42 Ghz G4 is 32% faster than a Pentium 4 3 Ghz (I think in terms of Pentium, being a godless PC user).
The 1.25 Ghz G4 won't become "obsolete" (as in most major programs won't run on it) for at least four-five years will it?
Originally posted by Sapper46123
Definetly. I have concluded that I have no need for the awesome power of a G5... Nor the wallet for it!
That is especially true after I heard a "mere" dual 1.42 Ghz G4 is 32% faster than a Pentium 4 3 Ghz (I think in terms of Pentium, being a godless PC user).
The 1.25 Ghz G4 won't become "obsolete" (as in most major programs won't run on it) for at least four-five years will it?
Oh, it will be considered pretty slow, if not completely obsolete. 4 or 5 years ago, we were using <500 MHz G3 comps, and those suck now.
Originally posted by Sapper46123
That is especially true after I heard a "mere" dual 1.42 Ghz G4 is 32% faster than a Pentium 4 3 Ghz (I think in terms of Pentium, being a godless PC user).
I'm sorry, but that's wrong in most cases. You might be able to find some situations where the dual 1.42 is faster than the Pentium, but in most situations, the Pentium will be significantly faster.
It all depends on what you're going to do with it.
Originally posted by Placebo
Oh, it will be considered pretty slow, if not completely obsolete. 4 or 5 years ago, we were using <500 MHz G3 comps, and those suck now.
"Suck" is a relative term. I use a G3 400 Mhz iMac at my office, with OS X 10.3 and it's perfectly fine. I'm not editing video or playing 3D games on it, so it's a nice computer and will be for awhile yet.
Sapper, I'd go for the iMac unless you think you might want to expand it someday. There are minor issues between the Power Mac and the iMac such as L3 cache that make a difference, but it depends on what you need to do.
A good reason to get a tower, is so you can fit more hard drive space into it, more expandle RAM, upgradeable processor(s). Last G4's could hold 5 hard drives, a CD/DVD/-R/-RW/-ROM drive and would run fine.
The iMac is good for students who don't want to worry about hook up, and want a fairly small foot print on the desk. You can only put 1 hard drive in it, 1 CD/DVD/-R/-RW/-ROM in it. RAM is upgradeable to 1GB.
So performance wise, if you had the same RAM speed, bus speed, clock speed on the CPU, then you'd likely get pretty similiar speeds.
If you have the money, you should go for a Tower, your going to need the expandibility, our G3 Tower is still running great with OS X panther on it, it does everything for internet, email, downloading, playing videos, editing and a lot of features that are still good today. Because of it's expandibility it will far out last an iMac of the same age. The machine is 5 years old and runs great. And we haven't even gone for a CPU upgrade yet ! It was 2300 $ with monitor on sale in 1998, the Blue and White one.
-walloo
Originally posted by Sapper46123
If everything was the same (same amount and type of RAM, same size hard drive, same type & size of screen, etc.), and they where both 1 Ghz G4's, would a Power Mac G4 and an iMac G4 both operate the same? Or would the "professional" Power Mac outdo the iMac because it is engineered differently?
If so, would the Power Mac be *significantly* faster than the iMac -- like, worth the extra $300-400?
I'd be doing graphic/web design, web browsing, email, word processing, instant messaging, and stuff with iTunes on it.
The performance would be about the same, so I'd go with the iMac and put the other 300 - 400 into a savings fund for your next computer.
I do most of my graphics and web design work on my 800MHz Ti powerbook, and it works fine (Although I must admit I really want to upgrade to something faster).
Originally posted by Sapper46123
Definetly. I have concluded that I have no need for the awesome power of a G5... Nor the wallet for it!
That is especially true after I heard a "mere" dual 1.42 Ghz G4 is 32% faster than a Pentium 4 3 Ghz (I think in terms of Pentium, being a godless PC user).
The 1.25 Ghz G4 won't become "obsolete" (as in most major programs won't run on it) for at least four-five years will it?
Sorry to tell you, but for the most part, dual 1.42GHz G4s are eaten alive by 3GHz P4s. G5 are a whole other story.
As for the 1.25 GHz G4s life-span, it depends. There is no way I would want to be using anything that slow for the next 4-5 years, but it will probably still run most of the important software, although it might not run it well. 5 years ago we were using 233 - 333MHz G3 processors -- I'm not even sure if they can run OS X at all, and there is no way that they will run it well.
Truthfully, I think that the G4 is coming to the end of it life cycle in desktop machines and I've been advising people that, unless they really need to upgrade now, they should wait a while longer before getting a Mac (except for the dual G5s -- if they have the money).
If connecting cameras and other devices are your kind of stuff, you may want to consider an iMac.
But iMacs do not have much capabilities for expansion, so do take note.
my 800mhz iMac is still going strong after almost 2 years, and i havent bought anything for it except ram. and it gets heavy usage for video editing and gaming. there is nothing about it that makes me unhappy or want to replace it yet.