Return PM DC G5 and buy Intel Imac?

[asencif]

I apologize to those who already read this on another thread, but I felt there may be others who are in the same boat as me, so gave it a thread. I bought a PM G5 DC 2.0 on Saturday with plenty of knowledge of Macworld and even had an idea that the iMac G5 might be updated although very unlikely ahead of the PM G5. So I went ahead an bought this PM thinking even if they update the iMac, I am getting a Pro machine with distinction. I feel now this is no longer the case. This new Intel iMac looks on par with my PM DC G5 system, maybe surpassing it, or equaling the PM 2.3 G5 possibly. The Int Imac can now be a pro machine except for the pro applications not being ported to native yet. However, March is right around the corner for the apple pro apps...That only really leaves Adobe CS2 and MS Office performance running on Rosetta. If it's not much of a slowdown then this iMac clearly beats out or matches the PM G5 models except for the QUAD in power and expandability at a lower price. My thought initially was WTF....Return this Dual Core PM G5...Eat the restocking....Get the Intel iMac? I know in NYC the Intel iMac most likely is in stock already.

Anyone know of the comparison between the two? Early benchtests?
Thoughts? Ideas? Thanks I appreciate it.

 

[QCassidy352]

wait for the benchmarks on the new imac. they should be out before your 14 days are up to return the powermac.

 

[FFTT]

The new iMac 20" IS impressive but does not offer pro expandibilty.
You may also want to consider how much RAM you'll need.

Budget wise it's amazing what you get for $1699 AND the new iMac supports a second display with DVI out up to 23"

The interesting benchmark will be seeing just how fast OS X runs on Intel vs PPC at same clock speed.

I was totally surprised to see a new iMac this soon.

 

[asencif]

I was surprised as well and more so on the power of it. Ultimately, benchmarks will give a better sense of how it compares to PM DC G5, but it does still give a PM owner some reason to wonder. I think it's debatable whether the iMac needed to be upgraded now since it's already pretty popular and selling well. Does it need it? I feel that there are a lot of people waiting to buy laptops that would have been ordering after MWSF had Intel iBooks been anounced and a smaller lower priced 12 inch PB(MacBook Pro).

 

[budugu]

Get the 17/20" imac

The new iMac 20" IS impressive but does not offer pro expandibilty.
You may also want to consider how much RAM you'll need.

Budget wise it's amazing what you get for $1699 AND the new iMac supports a second display with DVI out up to 23"

The interesting benchmark will be seeing just how fast OS X runs on Intel vs PPC at same clock speed.

I was totally surprised to see a new iMac this soon.

what ever the pro expandability is hard disks (to be specific 1 additional) / FW800 (which may not be there on the intel powermacs anyway!) and free PCI-E slots. There are no cards PCI-E even in the PC world so you can safely assume there will not be may 'user' centric ones unless you want FIBRE or other server stuff. Now Rad X1600 is a mid level card (still ATi says that it is MPEG4 hardware accl so that should be a little better) - on the actual destop segment it falls close to >6600 but way below 6600GT so go figure (it has a DVI out and can span so you can use a 23" even). Processor is cooler and better, save 100-200$ on power over a year or so (180W vs ~600W). At 1200 (edu) i.e. <60% price you get AE+BT+17" screen and media related features + ilife'06. So just return it or ask for an exchange they might givein actually!! by the time you upgrade the GC on the powermac with 400-500$ you are already half way to a brand new imac after 1 year!

i say return it and get a 17" or if you want a 20" get that.

 

[asencif]

The Intel iMac does make a lot of sense in comparison to the PM G5, however one thing that still has me debating is Photoshop and Illustrator. Their performance on Rosetta appears to be an issue. MS Office most likely will run slower, but it's word processing. Not that big of a deal unless is horribly slow beyond belief. This also leads me to believe that they plan on updating all product lines quickly. Can't have iMac's outperforming PM for the majority of the year, which will be the case more and more as Uni Bin apps keep being released.

 

[Redneck1089]

The Intel iMac does make a lot of sense in comparison to the PM G5, however one thing that still has me debating is Photoshop and Illustrator. Their performance on Rosetta appears to be an issue. MS Office most likely will run slower, but it's word processing. Not that big of a deal unless is horribly slow beyond belief. This also leads me to believe that they plan on updating all product lines quickly. Can't have iMac's outperforming PM for the majority of the year, which will be the case more and more as Uni Bin apps keep being released.

Are these new Core Duo chips 64 bits, or 32?

 

[shadowmoses]

Are these new Core Duo chips 64 bits, or 32?

They are 32-bit,

SHadow

 

[MRU]

Why people are saying that the powermac has better expandability...

In the two years I've had a dual G5 theyv'e changed motherboard and slots, also the great G4 CPU upgrades that were used to with the G4 powermacs have never materialised with the dual G5 and never will....

I'm happy with my dual 1.8 G5 and it is still more than fast enough for me, but the fact that the new iMac is more than likely faster..
In fact the new MacBookPro is going to be just as fast (i'm hoping as my current desktop...)

And while people worry about photoshop performace on it, it's highly likely that in no time we will see an intel patch/update via adobe updater for current versions and by summer CS3 which will be fully native...

 

[OSXconvert]

Wait 1 week for tests

I, too, am interested in how fast PS CS2 will run on the new intels. Since the MacBook Pros have slower clock speeds and drives than the new imac intel duos, I would bet that the imacs would be faster, so a detailed photoshop test on them would be in order. We are in a carrot and stick dilemma here. Apple needs to get windows people and mac people to embrace the intel macs so developers will have incentive to quickly release binaries. And Apple can't sell a $1700 consumer computer that will be faster than a $3200 pro one. So it is unlikely that even a souped up imac 2ghz duo with a raptor and 2gb ram would come anywhere near a quad G5 powermac, but by the end of March at the earliest or mid-summer at the latest (when Adobe will have most likely ported CS to universal binaries), the situation may change. By that time, apple will have to release intel powermacs or lose all their pro sales.

The bottom line is that probably no new intel machine will beat the quad G5 until at least mid-summer. So if you need to get your pro jobs done quickly, you will need your quad g5. By the late fall, G5s will be losing their value very quickly, since more than likely all programmers will be switching all their coding to intel optimizations and minimizing G5 development. Mind you, the G5 will still be very powerful for another year.

 

[weeag]

They are 32-bit,

SHadow

This is a good point for comparison.

What does this mean in terms of performance?... I'm stuck between buying the new 20" iMac (2.0Ghz) or the 2.0Ghz PowerMac. How does the dual core 64-bit PowerPC processor compare against the dual core 32-bit Intel processor? Does double the bit give it an advantage?

 

[djkny]

get a refurb

sure, the new iMac is $1699, but refurb dualie 2.0's are $1449 on apple. a Dell 20" WS is $340 or so during sales. That takes you nearly to the price point of the newly released imac.

My refurb came with 8 RAM slots, 250GB HD, ati 9600xt graphics card, and other hidden "goodies." Plus, apple gave me a $80 discount for keeping it during the xmas rush ... so for only $1369, there's no comparison.

 

[dwd3885]

sure, the new iMac is $1699, but refurb dualie 2.0's are $1449 on apple. a Dell 20" WS is $340 or so during sales. That takes you nearly to the price point of the newly released imac.

My refurb came with 8 RAM slots, 250GB HD, ati 9600xt graphics card, and other hidden "goodies." Plus, apple gave me a $80 discount for keeping it during the xmas rush ... so for only $1369, there's no comparison.

even trying to find the NEW Dual Core G5s at only $1799 for educational discount or Amazon would be better IMO.

The Graphics are upgradable, more RAM, G5 will be good to go for a long time to come, maybe at least 2 more years

 

[ninepoundjammer]

wait for the benchmarks

Remember all these 2-3-4x benchmarks are vs the G5 iMacs which are fairly old systems.

It'll be interesting to see real world benchmarks. The dual-core PowerMacs have at least a 1GHz system bus compared to 667 MHz for the new iMacs, while the iMacs do have 667MHz memory vs 533 MHz for the PMacs (but can system bus keep up?). The Core Duo does at least have a shared L2 cache unlike PentiumD, but the cache latency has increased over the PentiumM.

Basically, there's too many variables that go into system performance. We won't really know how the new iMac compares with the dual-core PowerMacs until some real world benchmarks are available.

I bought a 2.0 GHz dual-core PowerMac G5 in late November and have no desire for a new iMac. It's a solid system all around and I require space for extra PCI express cards and hard drives (expandability).