Resolved A cursed Mac

[repairedCheese]

Can you see the problem here? I'd spent a while trying to figure out why my G5 didn't seem to line up with anything listed, and I just ran across a thread on here from a long time ago, where someone couldn't find their ram.

Looks to me like this Mac is stuck at 4 gb of ram, which is an absolute shame.

 

[Dronecatcher]

Looks to me like this Mac is stuck at 4 gb of ram, which is an absolute shame.

It'll still perform well - I had a 4Gb model and used it when I was freelancing graphic design - it never fell over, even when producing exhibition stand graphics.

 

[repairedCheese]

It'll still perform well - I had a 4Gb model and used it when I was freelancing graphic design - it never fell over, even when producing exhibition stand graphics.

Oh sure, it has been running fine, but I started thinking about what it would look like if I did use this Mac as my main system, and 25 tabs later in TenFourFox, I was basically out of ram. I'm more of a 200+ tab kind of person, so it really is a shame I can't get more ram for the thing.

 

[firelighter487]

....why would you use that as your main machine? that's just not a good idea at all....

 

[repairedCheese]

....why would you use that as your main machine? that's just not a good idea at all....

I never said I would. I wanted to see what it would look like if I tried to. Once TenFourFox is optimized with foxPEP and uMatrix, it's actually not much worse than my Core 2 Duo Dell Optiplex performed before I stuck an SSD into that system. It's also has 4gb of ram, and it's only 3 years newer, so it's not a bad comparison.

 

[Amethyst1]

I never said I would. I wanted to see what it would look like if I tried to. Once TenFourFox is optimized with foxPEP and uMatrix, it's actually not much worse than my Core 2 Duo Dell Optiplex performed before I stuck an SSD into that system. It's also has 4gb of ram, and it's only 3 years newer, so it's not a bad comparison.

A Core 2 Duo will easily and substantially outperform a G5, unless the latter is a Quad and you're using multi-threaded workloads. Which G5 do you have as there were several with only four RAM slots?

 

[repairedCheese]

A Core 2 Duo will easily and substantially outperform a G5, unless the latter is a Quad and you're using multi-threaded workloads. Which G5 do you have as there were several with only four RAM slots?

Of course you're not wrong. But, according to EveryMac, the only ones that max at 4 gb are PCI.

Do those look like regular PCI to you?

And unless I'm completely reading this wrong, LaCie themselves say it's PCIX.

I've read enough to know that EveryMac isn't the holy grail of Macs that exist, even if it's pretty clear they want to be.

 

[Dronecatcher]

25 tabs later in TenFourFox, I was basically out of ram. I'm more of a 200+ tab kind of person

No old Mac is going to be able to cope with that - maybe in 2005 when the web was slimmer but not now.
RAM won't be your main constraint but unoptimised code/javascript will be.

 

[repairedCheese]

No old Mac is going to be able to cope with that - maybe in 2005 when the web was slimmer but not now.
RAM won't be your main constraint but unoptimised code/javascript will be.

Only that's not remotely how it behaved. It was actually quite nippy until I stated to try to switch between tabs one after another. That's when things ground to a halt. And that's the exact same behavior I saw on my Core 2 running Windows 10, back before I switched to an ssd. Adding a proper gpu helped with the ram issues too, so at the time I actually had access to considerably less ram than the PMG5 does now. Not to mention, Windows 10 on 2008 Intel integrated video is just a terrible time. Windows 10 is just more demanding over all.

Which is to say, I feel it's a fair comparison. The Dell is better hardware, if not by that much, than the PMG5, but Windows 10 asks so much more than OSX 10.5 asks of the PMG5.

 

[defjam]

Only that's not remotely how it behaved. It was actually quite nippy until I stated to try to switch between tabs one after another. That's when things ground to a halt. And that's the exact same behavior I saw on my Core 2 running Windows 10, back before I switched to an ssd. Adding a proper gpu helped with the ram issues too, so at the time I actually had access to considerably less ram than the PMG5 does now. Not to mention, Windows 10 on 2008 Intel integrated video is just a terrible time. Windows 10 is just more demanding over all.

Is this statement wrt the Mac or other versions of Windows?

 

[defjam]

Of course you're not wrong. But, according to EveryMac, the only ones that max at 4 gb are PCI.

Do those look like regular PCI to you?

And unless I'm completely reading this wrong, LaCie themselves say it's PCIX.

I've read enough to know that EveryMac isn't the holy grail of Macs that exist, even if it's pretty clear they want to be.

Is the picture of the RAM slots a picture of a dual 2.0GHz G5 (the one referenced in your signature)?

 

[Amethyst1]

Do those look like regular PCI to you?

No, those look like PCI-X.

 

[1042686]

Is the picture of the RAM slots a picture of a dual 2.0GHz G5 (the one referenced in your signature)?

It looks like my Garage pmg5 - an a1047 (I think that’s the right identifier). Dual cpu 2ghz pci model that maxes out at 4gb DDR. This was my daily for a while after my iMac gpu failed. After having used it (And blowing up the psu lol), I think this machine would be quite snappy with a SSD & powerPEP/umatrix - which weren’t part of the rehab/tweak conversation when I was using it. At the time I was using TFF + 4GB ram + a spinner and browsing while not bad could get sluggish, so with a SSD & the aforementioned tweaks, I think you’d have a much improved experience. Parts are pretty cheap for it but if you have access to a dual or quad core, they’re the obvious choice to invest your cashola into a capable ppc g5 machine IMO. I really like my DC2ghz pmg5. Very snappy with a spinner raid zero config & a lot of ram. I think it would slay with SSDs.

FYI I have ubuntu 16.04 iirc & leopard 10.5.8 on the a1047. It is a great garage box.

 

[defjam]

It looks like my Garage pmg5 - an a1047 (I think that’s the right identifier). Dual cpu 2ghz pci model that maxes out at 4gb DDR. This was my daily for a while after my iMac gpu failed. After having used it (And blowing up the psu lol), I think this machine would be quite snappy with a SSD & powerPEP/umatrix - which weren’t part of the rehab/tweak conversation when I was using it. Parts are cheap but if you have access to a dual or quad core, they’re the obvious choice to invest in a capable ppc g5 machine IMO. I really like my DC2ghz pmg5. Very snappy with a spinner raid zero config & a lot of ram. I think it would slay with SSDs.

FYI I have ubuntu 16.04 iirc & leopard 10.5.8 on the a1047. It is a great garage box.

What's puzzling is I am unaware of any stock PowerMac G5 which utilizes PCI-X and which only has four memory slots. This was common on the PCI models but eight slots was the standard for all PCI-X based systems. Or am I missing something?

 

[1042686]

Yeah that’s weird. Mine is the PCI model. IIRC the pcix pmg5s came with 8 ram slots but I’m not in a space to verify.

 

[repairedCheese]

What's puzzling is I am unaware of any stock PowerMac G5 which utilizes PCI-X and which only has four memory slots. This was common on the PCI models but eight slots was the standard for all PCI-X based systems. Or am I missing something?

Yeah that’s weird. Mine is the PCI model. IIRC the pcix pmg5s came with 8 ram slots but I’m not in a space to verify.

Everything I've read says that, yes, only PCI PMG5 systems were sold limited to 4 gb of ram. And PCI-X systems should have a maximum of 8 gb. The thing that makes this system cursed is that you can see where more ram slots would go, if they'd chosen to include them.

I guess that's one reason I got a deal on this thing, huh?

 

[defjam]

You have a very unique PowerMac G5 because, to my knowledge, there never were any production systems which were PCI-X based and only had four RAM slots. Would it be possible for you to provide the configuration information off of the label located at the bottom of the side cover (cover removed) and / or the About This Macintosh screen shot?

 

[1042686]

Yeah I wonder if you have some neat tester/prototype model or something akin to the pmg5s with intel guts.

I’m popping my a1047 open when I get home to take a looksie

 

[z970]

Once TenFourFox is optimized with foxPEP and uMatrix, it's actually not much worse than my Core 2 Duo Dell Optiplex performed before I stuck an SSD into that system.

Your G5 would perform a lot better online with Firefox or Arctic Fox running on Linux, given the GPU is supported. There's a lot of technologies that TenFourFox prohibits from activating, which severely "bottlenecks" foxPEP. On the flipside, I don't believe Leopard WebKit has the same issue, so the performance gained from that (as opposed to TFF) is much more accurately indicative of what the system it's running on can actually pull in terms of Web content rendering load. Conversely, TFF will never paint a good picture of any system it runs on, sans perhaps a Quad.

Nonetheless, I am currently trying to work out methods to reduce thread count in a single instance of Firefox / TFF, which may or may not make it into 1.8 depending on my success. On a DP / DC G5, if you look at Leopard WebKit in Activity Monitor while (smoothly) streaming 720p HD video, the thread count never goes above 30 threads (perhaps evidence for GPU acceleration), while TFF sits at over 40 just while idling on the home page, and can hit 80+ by doing the same task (HD streaming). This constrains the CPU and is massively less resource efficient than it could be, especially for hardware where two or more processors / cores aren't always a given.

Do those look like regular PCI to you?

No, those look like PCI-X.

The MDD's slots look a whole lot like PCI-X. But apparently they're just PCI. Maybe the same case here?

 

[repairedCheese]

Is this statement wrt the Mac or other versions of Windows?

I've been using Windows since 3.11 For Workgroups, and I can tell you that on this particularly Dell, which was never a very high end system, Windows 7, which preformed very similarly to Windows Vista, an os contemporary to Mac OS Leopard, was much better on this hardware than Windows 10. I have no experience with Windows on Macs, just other generic x86 hardware.

Is the picture of the RAM slots a picture of a dual 2.0GHz G5 (the one referenced in your signature)?

Yes, it is. It's a dual processor 2.0 ghz PCI-X as far as I can tell. That's why it's been confusing.
[automerge]1583358816[/automerge]

The MDD's slots look a whole lot like PCI-X. But apparently they're just PCI. Maybe the same case here?

From what I've been reading, the MDD actually had what is referred to as 64-bit PCI, which is similar in design but still distinct to PCI-X. It's also less supported than PCI-X, which is impressive.

 

[repairedCheese]

You have a very unique PowerMac G5 because, to my knowledge, there never were any production systems which were PCI-X based and only had four RAM slots. Would it be possible for you to provide the configuration information off of the label located at the bottom of the side cover (cover removed) and / or the About This Macintosh screen shot?

I'll definitely do this when I'm home. The thing that's driving me up the walls is that EveryMac says that the PCI G5s have "Three open full-length 33 MHz, 64-bit PCI slots." and the Wiki entry for PCI-X says "The slot is physically a 3.3 V PCI slot, with exactly the same size, location and pin assignments. The electrical specifications are compatible, but stricter. However, while most conventional PCI slots are the 85 mm long 32-bit version, most PCI-X devices use the 130 mm long 64-bit slot, to the point that 64-bit PCI connectors and PCI-X support are seen as synonymous."

Which is to say, Apple may have shipped PCI and PCI-X G5 Power Macs that looked physically identical. Especially since the 2.0 ghz Dual Processor model got both a PCI and PCI-X release. I'm getting a headache.

 

[defjam]

I've been using Windows since 3.11 For Workgroups, and I can tell you that on this particularly Dell, which was never a very high end system, Windows 7, which preformed very similarly to Windows Vista, an os contemporary to Mac OS Leopard, was much better on this hardware than Windows 10. I have no experience with Windows on Macs, just other generic x86 hardware.

You might find this video interesting as it suggests Windows has become more "efficient", at least when it comes to memory requirements, over time:

How Much RAM Does Windows Actually Need?

Of the three versions (Windows 7, 8, and 10) of Windows tested Windows 10 required the least, Windows 8 came in behind it, with Windows 7 slotting into last place.
[automerge]1583361926[/automerge]

I'll definitely do this when I'm home. The thing that's driving me up the walls is that EveryMac says that the PCI G5s have "Three open full-length 33 MHz, 64-bit PCI slots." and the Wiki entry for PCI-X says "The slot is physically a 3.3 V PCI slot, with exactly the same size, location and pin assignments. The electrical specifications are compatible, but stricter. However, while most conventional PCI slots are the 85 mm long 32-bit version, most PCI-X devices use the 130 mm long 64-bit slot, to the point that 64-bit PCI connectors and PCI-X support are seen as synonymous."

Which is to say, Apple may have shipped PCI and PCI-X G5 Power Macs that looked physically identical. Especially since the 2.0 ghz Dual Processor model got both a PCI and PCI-X release. I'm getting a headache.

I'll check the slot configuration of my 1.8GHz PCI PowerMac G5 to see what the PCI slots look like. Unfortunately it's currently performing a 12 hour transcode.

 

[sparty411]

Of course you're not wrong. But, according to EveryMac, the only ones that max at 4 gb are PCI.
View attachment 897334
Do those look like regular PCI to you?

And unless I'm completely reading this wrong, LaCie themselves say it's PCIX.

I've read enough to know that EveryMac isn't the holy grail of Macs that exist, even if it's pretty clear they want to be.

Yes, it is PCI-X.

 

[RogerWilco6502]

Yes, it is PCI-X.

Can confirm with MacTracker that all 4GB max models have 64-bit PCI and no PCI-X.
There seem to be no physical differences between the two slots though.

What is the difference between 64-bit PCI slot and PCI-X slot?

I need to identify what kind of slots are available from my computer based on the shape of the slot. So far, I can easily tell the difference between 32-bit PCI and PCIe slots but I am having problem

superuser.com

Your best bet is to see if you can find anything in OF or System Profiler I think. Not sure how useful those will be though.

 

[sparty411]

Can confirm with MacTracker that all 4GB max models have 64-bit PCI and no PCI-X.
There seem to be no physical differences between the two slots though.

What is the difference between 64-bit PCI slot and PCI-X slot?

I need to identify what kind of slots are available from my computer based on the shape of the slot. So far, I can easily tell the difference between 32-bit PCI and PCIe slots but I am having problem

superuser.com

Your best bet is to see if you can find anything in OF or System Profiler I think. Not sure how useful those will be though.

Oh, I stand corrected. I wasn't aware of such a thing.