Mac G5 Dual 2.3ghz - worth it or not?

HempHog · Aug 13, 2005

My brother just spent $4000.00 CAD roughly on a G5 Mac Dual 2.3 ghz. No monitor, 512mb ram (he had to buy more) ati 9600?? (omfg) pretty basic stuff there. I don't know very much about mac's so I thought maybe this is the right place to ask. The reason for buying this computer is to run some high end studio software (Pro tools) and for video stuff. I know mac's do well in this category. But $4000.00 is a lot of money. The pro tools software it self will run on an intel system and is fully supported by the company, and the video stuff also.

For $4000.00 you could build a killer Intel/AMD system that would most likly out perform the mac. My brother can take this MAC back (it's still in the box) what do you guys think? Custom build or stick with the mac?

SolidxSnake · Aug 13, 2005

HempHog said:
For $4000.00 you could build a killer Intel/AMD system that would most likly out perform the mac. My brother can take this MAC back (it's still in the box) what do you guys think? Custom build or stick with the mac?

You're kidding, right? Dual 2.3ghz PPCs are some of the craziest processors out there. My neighbor spent around $3000USD on a dual 2.0Ghz G5, 6800Ultra, 1 or 2gb of ram, not sure... Note that the 9600 and 9800s are custom built, not the same kind of card that you'd get in a PC. If he has a use for the mac, than keep it. My neighbor is a professional (well, he's at that level, or damn close to it) artist, so he got a mac g5. It is one fast *** computer, runs America's Army, 1280x1024, max settings (16x AA/AF, ultra high detail), at 70-100fps constant. And thats with 2 monitors

HempHog · Aug 13, 2005

It's not going to be used for gaming at all, I found some benchmarks that somewhat relate to what it will be used for:

http://www.barefeats.com/dualcore.html

The 820 edges it out in a few things for sure.

Now I'm really starting to wonder.

It's more of a cost thing, If we have to wait a couple of more seconds for audio/video stuff it's not a big deal.

SolidxSnake · Aug 13, 2005

HempHog said:
It's not going to be used for gaming at all, I found some benchmarks that somewhat relate to what it will be used for:

http://www.barefeats.com/dualcore.html

The 820 edges it out in a few things for sure.

Now I'm really starting to wonder.

Reading those results, the Mac G5 beats the PD in everything but 2 tests (2 tests of which the mac couldn't run).

HempHog · Aug 13, 2005

They didn't win the photoshop test.

Ugh, I don't really want to open that box yet either hehe, This is a tough one for me, and my brother doesn't know what we should do either heh. Keep on researching I guess, or just keep the mac heh.

darksparkz · Aug 13, 2005

Well that Mac is a great choice, since it outperforms Intels at things Intels are good at by a lot. But, is he using it for a job or his profession or anything? If what he does is really important, then stick with the Mac. But if he only uses it to do school related video editing or personal usages of studio editing, then get a AMD or something.

So yeah, if it's his job and all that, stick with the Mac, if its nothing important, get a X2 4800+ for full benefits of X2s.

fuzzba11 · Aug 13, 2005

I think most Macs are a waste of money, you could easily build the sickest rig with that kind of money...monitor, mods, plus better graphics card and other internals. I bet you could get a dual core system for about that price.

SolidxSnake · Aug 13, 2005

fuzzba11 said:
I think most Macs are a waste of money, you could easily build the sickest rig with that kind of money...monitor, mods, plus better graphics card and other internals. I bet you could get a dual core system for about that price.

*sigh*

People don't understand why macs are there to buy.

Like darksparkz said, if its part of his job/profession, definately keep it. If its for personal use, do what you like

darksparkz · Aug 14, 2005

fuzzba11 said:
I think most Macs are a waste of money, you could easily build the sickest rig with that kind of money...monitor, mods, plus better graphics card and other internals. I bet you could get a dual core system for about that price.

You can get like 10 AMD X2 3800+ at $4000...not just a dual core system. And with $4000, you can almost build two "sickest" rigs with that.

fuzzba11 · Aug 14, 2005

darksparkz said:
You can get like 10 AMD X2 3800+ at $4000...not just a dual core system. And with $4000, you can almost build two "sickest" rigs with that.

$4000 Canadian

And any PC can get photo, video, and 3D programs, so there's no point in getting a Mac that has almost zero capacity for games, hardly any upgrades, and an undersupported OS. I see no advantage in having a Mac in any profession unless you're working with a specific file type that isn't supported by any PC program.

Kevin007 · Aug 14, 2005

I agree if it is just a hobby then build a pc. You can game if you want.....upgrade, etc.

Yuriman · Aug 14, 2005

I am wondering why they only compare it to a 2.8ghz P4-D in that review... the price of the systems compared are very different. I think it would be more suitable to compare it to a 4800+.

Right now I am comparing the P4-D 2.8 to the 4800+, just to give it some scale, and going by Anandtech's image editing and similar benchmarks, the 4800+ is 15-25% faster. Its 30% faster in compression. Running Media encoder in the background and using Mozilla, the X2 is 55% faster. In adobe Premiere, the X2 is 40% faster. In audio and divx encoding, it is 15% faster. Now, when you plug those percentages into the review you linked to, it appears the X2 at stock would equal or beat the dual 2.7ghz G5's in everything.

Kevin007 · Aug 14, 2005

YAY, go with those then...nice points Yuri.

hafa · Aug 14, 2005

As a professional artist who has been creating digital graphics for 20 years, I have to vehemently disagree with the sentiment "buy a Mac if it is for work, and a PC if it is for play". Poppycock. Balderdash. Sheer nonsense.

The rig in my sig has no problems whatsoever keeping up with my collegue's G5 Dual Macs in nearly every application I run on a daily basis: Photoshop, Illustrator, Dreamweaver, Acrobat, etc.. My typical session consists of more than 20 running programs with multiple active batch processes.

The primary advantage of Macs in real world professional content creation is that many artists are simply more familiar with the platform, as many shops have been running on it from day one.

If you like the Mac, keep it. It's a great machine. If you like PCs build one. You'll likely get much more bang for your buck and have the abiltiy to upgrade and tinker with your machine if you're so inclined.

BTW, Yuriman, thanks for the info on the X2s. I'll be getting one just as soon as the prices drop a bit...

PCGUY112887 · Aug 14, 2005

Unless he REALLY has to have a mac, go with a PC. Not only will you save money, but you can do more things with it, and down the line when he needs more power you can UPGRADE insted of spending another $4000 on a G6 or whatever bull they think up next.

Kevin007 · Aug 14, 2005

that is what I was thinking. You could have a good computer, if you get the pc in many ways. You could even upgrade, with less money involved.

attack · Aug 14, 2005

hafa said:
As a professional artist who has been creating digital graphics for 20 years, I have to vehemently disagree with the sentiment "buy a Mac if it is for work, and a PC if it is for play". Poppycock. Balderdash. Sheer nonsense.

The rig in my sig has no problems whatsoever keeping up with my collegue's G5 Dual Macs in nearly every application I run on a daily basis: Photoshop, Illustrator, Dreamweaver, Acrobat, etc.. My typical session consists of more than 20 running programs with multiple active batch processes.

The primary advantage of Macs in real world professional content creation is that many artists are simply more familiar with the platform, as many shops have been running on it from day one.

If you like the Mac, keep it. It's a great machine. If you like PCs build one. You'll likely get much more bang for your buck and have the abiltiy to upgrade and tinker with your machine if you're so inclined.

BTW, Yuriman, thanks for the info on the X2s. I'll be getting one just as soon as the prices drop a bit...

Alright...I personaly do NOT like macs because I believe they're overpriced...but when when you started saying you were in the PS and design business I was expecting the "mac is god" post....but I read it and saw a 3700+....(Big grin on THIS GUYS face :santa:

) SELL THAT THING, get a X2...or 2 or 3 or 4 for the cash and have a faster system.
One of my buddies had a 2.0ghz mac (single proc)...payed 2k for it 2 years ago and he thought he would take the rig in my sig in PS....yeah, that was a good quick laugh once I was done and waiting for his to render still.

So now to contribute to the thread:
Custom build, I see NO reason to stick with the mac...especialy with higher end D series and X2's available at a lower cost....cuz for 2.5k U.S you can get a system on par with a 24" widescreen LCD or dual monitor setup which will help for editing.

Echo_ · Aug 14, 2005

the only place where macs really shine now are the music industry

heck george lucas uses amd machines for star wars

>HyperlogiK< · Aug 14, 2005

isn't the popularity of x86 in CGI art because x86 Linux boxes lend themselves to forming cheap renderfarms?

>HyperlogiK< · Aug 14, 2005

hang on, all the adverts on that site are for mac stuff, in fact all the articles on that site are for mac stuff too i.e. it seems to be a mac fansite. I would trust this about as much as official Intel or AMD benchmarks (you know the kind that show one chip is 6 mysterious red blocks faster than its competitor in 'multimedia tasks' or 'productivity software')

Mac G5 Dual 2.3ghz - worth it or not?

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Similar threads