Performance boost from Dual 1.8 PowerPC G5 tower to a 2.4 Intel MBP?

It's time for a computer upgrade but I wanted to make sure this is going to make things faster for me. I'm currently working with a Dual 1.8 GHz PowerPC G5 tower with 7gb of ram and wanting to invest in a MBP (mid-ranged model, 2.4 - model that was released just before this current release)
I'm just wondering if this is going to make things faster for me. I'm a graphic designer and use CS3 programs like Photoshop, Illustrator and InDesign regularly. So I occasionally have to open multiple hi-res images at the same time. I'm hoping to not have significant lag times with this or the dreaded beachball.
My job has shifted since I bought my DP 1.8 mac and I now travel a lot more so I need something more portable. My thinking for work when I'm in town would be to have the lid of the MBP closed and connect it to my 30" Apple Cinema display.
My concern is that I may not notice a speed increase. If I go with this MBP, is the concensus that I will be able to work similarly or better than my DP 1.8 now? I'm open to adding more RAM if that's necessary as well.
Thanks in advance!

Rod Hagen wrote:
Big MaCanadian seemed to be more concerned that performance might actually be no better or worse, Ewen.
With CS2 there were certainly some major problems with Photoshop on Intels, but from what I can see CS3 (while not as good as it should be) will almost certainly give Big MaC at least equal performance, and probably a useful boost, when compared with his 1.8 G5 Dual...
... One test does not a summer make (and, as others have pointed out, maximum memory will be an issue in some circumstances) , but by and large , with CS3, an Intel Mac will easily beat a G5 Mac with similar processor speed, all other things being equal. All things aren't equal here, of course, but I very much doubt that BigMac will be disappointed with the speed of a 2.4 SantaRosa Core2Duo MBP when compared with his old 1.8 G5 Dual.
Cheers
Rod
Message was edited by: Rod Hagen
I have read your post, Rod. I just think you don't have a decent third-party Mac enthusiast site speed test comparison and some of your facts are wrong.
Going to the first major point, you in fact seem to be agreeing with us that the MB Pro may not be offering a vast preformance increase: +but from what I can see CS3 (while not as good as it should be) will almost certainly give Big MaC at least equal performance...+ . I think it will be a bit faster too, maybe even twice as fast in certain tasks as indicated by the comparison you made with the higher end Intel desktop system, but that isn't an out-of-this-world improvement imo.
Second point, +an Intel Mac will easily beat a G5 Mac with similar processor speed+ is a little erroneous as to my understanding due to the different architecture of PPC and Intel chips you shouldn't be directly comparing on the basis of clock speed and then suggesting that system are comparative if these are equal.
CS3 works fine with Intel Mac, but an issue many of us have is the disappointment that it hasn't been optimized at all for the latest Intel Macs.
(point 2 is also I believe idiosyncratically called the Megaherts myth, link to a Wiki article to bring you up to speed here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megahertz_myth , and also http://www.asia.apple.com/g4/myth/)
Message was edited by: Ewen
Message was edited by: Ewen

Similar Messages

  • Is there a big performance boost from 2008 MacBook Pro to i7 iMac/Mac Pro?

    I'm trying to determine if a new desktop is worth the investment. I have a 2008 MacBook Pro, 2.4 GHz and 4GB of RAM. I'm getting a little frustrated with it when using it with Aperture and Final Cut Express. It's just too sluggish for me.
    But before I drop about $2500 on a new Mac Pro or iMac, I want to be sure I'm going to see a huge performance boost over my laptop. I'd hate to spend all the money only to find my photos and videos process only 10 or 15% faster than before. I'd like to see a new machine perform twice as fast but maybe that's unrealistic. I'm just not sure.
    Can someone please tell me what I should expect? Thanks.

    Hi,
    Barefeats has done all sorts of tests http://www.barefeats.com/
    Maybe these two http://www.barefeats.com/mbpp20.html http://www.barefeats.com/mbpp18.html can give an impression on what to expect (i7 iMac - MBP 3.06 C2D)
    Hope it helps
    Stefan

  • Yoga 3 Pro or Yoga 2 Pro? Opinions from dual owners please

    Hi,
    I'm tossing up between the Yoga 2 Pro and the Yoga 3 Pro.
    I like the design of the 3 very much, and the weight.
    I will run Ofiice apps, Photoshop CS6 on the road, and lightroom 5.7.
    Any pros and cons from dual users with experience of this software in daily use would be apprecited.
    Regards,
    David.

    I will be doing a video review on my experience soon but here are some points I can tell you already -
    1) It is a great travelling companion, movies, videos, songs, small gaming is all perfect.
    2) Battery life is really nice, I watched 3.5 hour long Lord of the rings and still had about 60% left
    3) Pretty light and rotates 360 degrees, very comfortable to use in any and every mode.
    4) Does not get hot, remains cool.
    5) Exquisite looks especially the Bright orange color, which is my fav.
    6) Screen is beautiful and everything is crisp (I use it at 1080p)
    7) Some apps are very useful like ShareIt, transfer data from android, iphone etc in seconds over a wifi network.
    8) Performance is good for browsing as well.
    9) Boots in 3-5 seconds
    10) Keyoard is backlit and very nice but shallow, trackpad is an absolute delight.
    2 finger taps, 2 finger swipes, 3 finger swipes, 2 finger zoom, 2 finger scrolling of pages, everything is smooth and responsive.
    11) Sound quality is awesome as well, very loud and clear. Enough bass to provide enjoyable experience.
    What you should not expect -
    1) Heavy graphics intensive tasks.
    2) Lags a bit on some web pages scrolling (NOT noticeable)
    3) Some software which are useless and can be uninstalled.
    I typed this whole post on my Yoga 3 Pro and it is a great for me to type on this beauty.
    Going to watch a movie now.
    Current System - Lenovo Y510P, GT755M SLI, 8GB RAM, 1TB HDD + 24GB SSD
    When your plans fail, your Real Story begins!!

  • Can I install Tiger in a Dual 500 MHz PowerPC G4?

    Can I install Tiger in a Dual 500 MHz PowerPC G4, or is it better to stick with 10.3.9? I'm having some problems so I was going to wipe he hard drive and re-build everything from scratch o I was wondering if migrating to OS X 10.4.9 is worthwhile or even compatible with this PCU. Thanks.

    Yes you can run 10.4 on your dual 500, I have a dual 450 (I overclocked it to 550...) and it runs pretty fast. You need a minimum 192 MB of RAM to install it and a minimum 128 MB of RAM to run it. I would suggest having at least 512 MB of RAM when running 10.4.
    What problems are you experiencing? If it's just lagging and seeming slow it may just be worthwhile to clean some temp files and clean up your disk. IMHO, 10.4 is a much better system than 10.3, and runs much smoother. I can guarantee you that your system will run much smoother if you wipe the disk clean and put a fresh install of 10.4 on there, and also get a decent amount of RAM in there. After I upgraded my RAM to 1.5 GB, I noticed a substantial difference in speed, and got a lot less spinning color wheels. But one thing that you need to always keep in mind is to KEEP YOUR DISK CLEAN!!! Clean the temp files often and limit your internet downloading. If you keep your computer on all of the time, restart it every once in a while. There's a lot of little things you can do to increase speed in OS 10.4. Use spotlight and recent applications. Fill up your dock. Don't clutter the desktop, etc. There's plenty of articles on the net to help increase speed without adding anything else to your system, just navigating through the OS differently.

  • JDBC Lookup in PI 7.1 - SELECT ? FROM DUAL and Connection timed out

    Hi,
    We have a scenarios (Idoc to JMS) with JDBC lookup. We have used graphical JDBC lookup functionality.
    We are reading country names for a given country code from SAP in an external database table. The query is so simple. That  should not take much time
    Now the actual issues is,
    When we are executing the scenario, its taking quite a long time. Almost 6 minutes to excute a mapping. Which causing high performance issue in the Porduction.
    We started the inviestigation about found some interesting stuff. Here we have used Willy Introscope for the investigation.
    1. First few messages are taking quite a long time. LIke 6 minutes per messages. As i can see in the log i am getting below error in Willy,
    I dont know why PI is executing below queury apart from real secelt query to fetch the country name. I am getting below error: Error Message: Backends|ABCD2 mydatabase01-1526 (Oracle DB)|SQL|Dynamic|Query|SELECT ? FROM DUAL: java.sql.SQLException: Io exception: Connection timed out
    2. After couple of messages, interface works very normal. I mean rest of the messages works pretty fine.
    Please let me know if you have any idea about this error. What could be the problem for the issue.
    Thank you in advnace.
    Best Regards,
    Prasad.

    Did you check how many SQL requests were executed per one message ? Do you have a log of these SQL requests ?
    I assume that the country table is quite small, so that lookup should not be an issue.
    About this:
    >Message: Backends|ABCD2 mydatabase01-1526 (Oracle DB)|SQL|Dynamic|Query|SELECT ? FROM DUAL: >java.sql.SQLException: Io exception: Connection timed out
    1. I only know SELECT * FROM DUAL, not SELECT ? FROM DUAL. Better use the former
    2. the exception means that the database server can not be reached => check your network configuration
    So I assume that there is a network (performance) problem between PI and this Oracle server. Or the Oracle Server is so overloaded that it has (sometimes) problems in processing new requests.
    CSY
    Edited by: Christian Sy on Mar 9, 2010 10:17 AM

  • 8.0.2 and new ram, performance boost or waste of time?

    Hi all,
    I am going to add more ram to my MacBook. I understand that my MacBook officially only accepts of 2GB of ram (2x 1 gig sticks)I have read that many folks have put 4 gigs in a 2x2 gig matched pair configuration in there machine to get a maximum of 3 gigs. As I understand it this is not a supported configuration.
    I don't mind paying for 4 gigs to only 3 my question is, would this make Logic unstable? I only use this machine for Logic and the apps that come with Logic Studio 1. I only go on line with it for updates and such so my main concern is keeping this machine stable for Logic.
    Also I am imaging that increasing ram from 1 gig to even just the 2 that is officially supported will give me a bit of a performance boost but in what ways will I notice it in relation to Logics performance?
    Also any recommendations for RAM in the UK would be very welcome.
    Sorry for such a dull question,
    Regards,
    Jay
    Message was edited by: NoteFarm

    Hey Notefarm, a lot of my friends ( including myself and I noticed somebody else linked it here as well the other day ) use Crucial because of the macapp you can download which will tell you want you can have RAM wise and how much it's gonna cost you.
    http://www.crucial.com/

  • Delay due to selecting sysdate from  dual

    Our application accessing dummy table dual frequently for getting current date and time. But some times this could reduce our database performance.
    How could we overcome this problem.
    ASH report_
    Top Events_
    latch: library cache      29.87      "5015593920","214","0"      26.57      address      number      tries
    Top SQL Statements_
    0vnruqfxmtu6q     Select to_number(to_char(Sysdate, 'YYYYMMDD')) from dual

    orianmoon wrote:
    Thanks for your replies,
    Please check this below link which shows my database performance at the time of running a particular sql , which is selecting sysdate using table dual. It created Lbrary cache latch contention.
    http://arun-itadmin.blogspot.com/2010/12/oracle-performance-screen.html
    My question is
    Is this the problem of frequent usage of table dual or usage of 'sysdate' ?
    It there any way to get date and time other than using sysdate function?
    Edited by: orianmoon on Dec 8, 2010 9:42 PMI don't see anything there that points the finger at SELECT SYSDATE FROM DUAL;

  • Select sysdate from dual (to custom format).

    Dear all,
    i like to SELECT SYSDATE FROM DUAL, and run this result in a query something like:
    SELECT X, Y, Z FROM TABLENAME WHERE ACCESSDATE = (SELECT SYSDATE FROM DUAL);
    The problem is that the value of ACCESSDATE is in an format like DD-MM-YYYY and that sysdate form dual is
    DD-MON-YYYY.
    How do i get sysdate into the format DD-MM-YYYY?
    Thanks already,
    Johan.

    Perhaps usefull for performance:
    first of all: no subselect is not needed. sysdate can be used as an argument directly (all functions are).
    secondly, if accessdate is of type 'date' and the table has a lot of rows, converting it to a char will bypass the index usage. Instead, if you are worrying about the time try this (the display format is of no concern here if the datatype is date):
    SELECT X, Y, Z FROM TABLENAME WHERE ACCESSDATE >trunc(sysdate) and ACCESSDATE < trunc(sysdate+1);
    if accessdate is of type 'varchar2' then this should be enough (and should remain using the indexes on accessdate):
    SELECT X, Y, Z FROM TABLENAME WHERE ACCESSDATE = to_date(sysdate,DD-MM-YYYY);
    Hope this helps,
    L.

  • Query from DUAL

    I am calling a Pl/sql function in a select query which has a statement as below
    SELECT SUBSTR(5/2,2,1) INTO m_delim FROM DUAL;
    The number of records returned from the calling select query is more 1 million.
    How much adversly the query from DUAL table affects the performance of the select query?

    user557052 wrote:
    I am calling a Pl/sql function in a select query which has a statement as below
    SELECT SUBSTR(5/2,2,1) INTO m_delim FROM DUAL;
    The number of records returned from the calling select query is more 1 million.
    How much adversly the query from DUAL table affects the performance of the select query?Even if you are selecting from dual, querying once would be enough based on your select statement.
    It does not seem like it is varying, you are trying to find the delimiter, which can be done once.
    Ss

  • Query Issue with select level from dual

    Hi,
    I have a question regarding this query. The problem seems that when selecting level from dual while including another table the rows returned seem to increase exponentially.
    I can add distinct and get the correct number of rows but am worried that this will cause a possible performance issue. Am I using the level option wrong?
    I have included details below.
    There are 4 rows in tbl_incidents
    When I run the following queries I get rows returned based on the total number of rows
    select start_date + level - 1, tbl_incidents.incident_id, level
    from dual, tbl_incidents
    where incident_id = 6
    connect by level <= 1;
    returns 1 row
    select start_date + level - 1, tbl_incidents.incident_id, level
    from dual, tbl_incidents
    where incident_id = 6
    connect by level <= 2;
    returns 5 rows
    select start_date + level - 1, tbl_incidents.incident_id, level
    from dual, tbl_incidents
    connect by level <= 3 and incident_id = 6;
    returns 21 rows
    select start_date + level - 1, tbl_incidents.incident_id, level
    from dual, tbl_incidents
    connect by level <= 4 and incident_id = 6;
    returns 85 rows
    select start_date + level - 1, tbl_incidents.incident_id, level
    from dual, tbl_incidents
    connect by level <= 5 and incident_id = 6;
    returns 341 rows
    So with
         r being the number of rows in tbl_incidents and
         l being the number used in the connect by for level and
         q being the number of rows returned by the query
         it appears that
    q(l) = r * q(l-1) + 1
    level 2:     4 * 1 + 1 = 5
    level 3:     4 * 5 + 1 = 21
    level 4:     4 * 21 + 1 = 85
    level 5:     4 * 85 + 1 = 341
    Thanks much,
    Nora

    Hi,
    The dual table is used when you want to do something in SQL when you are not otherwise using a table.
    Generating a "counter table" of the integers 1, 2, 3,..., X is an example
    SELECT  LEVEL   AS n
    FROM    dual
    WHERE   LEVEL   <= x;There is never any point in joining dual to another table, as in
    select  start_date + level - 1
    ,       tbl_incidents.incident_id
    ,       level
    from    dual
    ,       tbl_incidents
    where    incident_id = 6
    connect by  level <= x;You will always get the same more easily by just eliminating dual:
    select  start_date + level - 1
    ,       incident_id
    ,       level
    from    tbl_incidents
    where    incident_id = 6
    connect by  level <= x;It is quite useful and common to join a counter-table to a real table, like this cross-join:
    WITH    counter_table  AS
        SELECT  LEVEL   AS n
        FROM    dual
        WHERE   LEVEL   <= x
    select  start_date + n - 1
    ,       incident_id
    ,       n
    from    tbl_incidents
    ,       counter_table
    where    incident_id = 6

  • Performance boost?

    What kind of performance boost can I expect by switching to a Macbook Black Core 2 Duo 2.4 Ghz 4GB Ram from a Macbook white CoreDuo 2.0Ghz 2GB Ram? I am into photoshop and use iMovie HD a lot. I notice that in iMovie things begin to get laggy when importing, or editing. Will the Upgrade in Sped and RAM eliminate this? Would the experience be comparable to the 2.4 Ghz iMac? I really don't have the money for the Macbook Pro, so will the upgrade help my situation at all? I am looking for advice from anyone who had the CoreDuo then Upgraded to A santa rosa or the newest processor.

    iMovie and Photoshop like lots of RAM. Is your current MacBook upgraded to its max (it depends on which iteration of MacBook you own, so I don't know from the information you provided.) If you can upgrade beyond 2GB that would provide a speed boost.
    The difference between the older Santa Rosa and the very newest MacBooks and their older siblings isn't insignificant so if you have an original MacBook you'll find that the newest ones are faster. But fast enough to suit your needs? Dunno. If you can get to a local Mac shop check them out for yourself.
    You might find that your better solution is an iMac. Again, a trip to a Mac reseller is probably your best bet.

  • Performance boost with 10.5.3 and LP 7/multicore ?

    There is a HUGE performance boost reported from LP8 users when updating to 10.5.3. They can run up to 40 percent more plugins on 4 and 8 core machines.
    I wonder if it is due to the 10.5.3 update or the combination 8.0.2 and 10.5.3.
    It would be nice to hear some reports from 7.2 users with 4/8 core Mac:s.
    Logic has been optimized for only two cores too long, only been using 50 percent of each core on 4/8 core machines. Maybe 10.5.3 is a booster even for LP7 users?

    Here's one person's experience with LP7 and 10.5.3:
    http://discussions.apple.com/message.jspa?messageID=7305592#7305592
    Disuye,
    I've got a Mac Pro with LP 7.2.3 and OSX 10.5.2, and it runs pretty smoothly. I get the occasional core audio overload, but not enough to cause a concern.

  • Upgrade from G5, dual2.7, PowerPC, does it makes sense??

    Hi,
    I wonder if somebody can give me some advice.
    We have two G5, dual 2.7, PowerPC, 4 GB ram, running 10.5.4.
    Beside the normal office stuff we run Aperture and Lightroom with large image RAW files (Canon 1DsMark3).
    We have been on the road for two years and I wonder if it makes sense to upgrade our computers?
    1. Is there a big speed difference between the Intel and PowerPC?
    2. Are there any CPU upgrades available?
    3. Would be our PowerBook Pro, 2.33 Intel 2Duo, 2GBram, faster then the "old G5's?
    Would be great if somebody could give me some advise.
    Thanks
    Rolf

    At this point probably worth waiting for '09. Are there differences? yes. And all indications are that Snow Leopard will be Intel-only. And wait for quad-core to come to laptop and desktop.
    A MacBook Pro is fine for on the road maybe but not where you need more storage and memory options. Or better GPU performance.
    http://www.barefeats.com/harper.html
    http://www.barefeats.com/harper10.html
    http://www.barefeats.com/imp02.html

  • I have a Mac OSX 10.5.8 processor dual 2 ghz powerpc g5 what is the next update for that?

    I have a Mac OSX 10.5.8 processor dual 2 ghz powerpc g5 what is the next update for that?

    There is none. You are at the end for a PPC machine. To upgrade you need to purchase an Intel Mac.
    Upgrade Paths to Snow Leopard, Lion, and/or Mountain Lion
    You can upgrade to Mountain Lion from Lion or directly from Snow Leopard. Mountain Lion can be downloaded from the Mac App Store for $19.99. To access the App Store you must have Snow Leopard 10.6.6 or later installed.
    Upgrading to Snow Leopard
    You must purchase Snow Leopard through the Apple Store: Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard - Apple Store (U.S.). The price is $19.99 plus tax. You will be sent physical media by mail after placing your order.
    After you install Snow Leopard you will have to download and install the Mac OS X 10.6.8 Update Combo v1.1 to update Snow Leopard to 10.6.8 and give you access to the App Store. Access to the App Store enables you to download Mountain Lion if your computer meets the requirements.
         Snow Leopard General Requirements
           1. Mac computer with an Intel processor
           2. 1GB of memory
           3. 5GB of available disk space
           4. DVD drive for installation
           5. Some features require a compatible Internet service provider;
               fees may apply.
           6. Some features require Apple’s iCloud services; fees and
               terms apply.
    Upgrading to Lion
    If your computer does not meet the requirements to install Mountain Lion, it may still meet the requirements to install Lion.
    You can purchase Lion by contacting Customer Service: Contacting Apple for support and service - this includes international calling numbers. The cost is $19.99 (as it was before) plus tax.  It's a download. You will get an email containing a redemption code that you then use at the Mac App Store to download Lion. Save a copy of that installer to your Downloads folder because the installer deletes itself at the end of the installation.
         Lion System Requirements
           1. Mac computer with an Intel Core 2 Duo, Core i3, Core i5, Core i7,
               or Xeon processor
           2. 2GB of memory
           3. OS X v10.6.6 or later (v10.6.8 recommended)
           4. 7GB of available space
           5. Some features require an Apple ID; terms apply.
    Upgrading to Mountain Lion
    To upgrade to Mountain Lion you must have Snow Leopard 10.6.8 or Lion installed. Purchase and download Mountain Lion from the App Store. Sign in using your Apple ID. Mountain Lion is $19.99 plus tax. The file is quite large, over 4 GBs, so allow some time to download. It would be preferable to use Ethernet because it is nearly four times faster than wireless.
         OS X Mountain Lion - System Requirements
           Macs that can be upgraded to OS X Mountain Lion
             1. iMac (Mid 2007 or newer) - Model Identifier 7,1 or later
             2. MacBook (Late 2008 Aluminum, or Early 2009 or newer) - Model Identifier 5,1 or later
             3. MacBook Pro (Mid/Late 2007 or newer) - Model Identifier 3,1 or later
             4. MacBook Air (Late 2008 or newer) - Model Identifier 2,1 or later
             5. Mac mini (Early 2009 or newer) - Model Identifier 3,1 or later
             6. Mac Pro (Early 2008 or newer) - Model Identifier 3,1 or later
             7. Xserve (Early 2009) - Model Identifier 3,1 or later
    To find the model identifier open System Profiler in the Utilities folder. It's displayed in the panel on the right.
         Are my applications compatible?
             See App Compatibility Table - RoaringApps.
         For a complete How-To introduction from Apple see Upgrade to OS X Mountain Lion.

  • Alchemy performance boost

    Little CMS is a great open source colour management system by a fellow named Marti Maria.  The key benefit of his software is being able to easily exploit ICC color profiles in image processing projects.  With two minor edits to the makefile and some glue, the Little CMS code compiles and runs on Flash Player 10 quite nicely.  If any application is good at evaluating performance of Alchemy that would be raw image processing.  The difference in processing time between Alchemy and natively compiled C I found to be generally about 8-10x.  Converting a 1,500 x 1,500 pixel CMYK image to sRGB takes just under 9 seconds in Flash and .9 seconds when running natively on my testbed.  This is impressive.  Experiments to do the same conversion with hand-optimized ActionScript cause Flash Player to abort the script for running too long.  Only much smaller test images succeed with the pure ActionScript version, and the per-pixel processing time is over 80x slower when compared to Little CMS compiled with Alchemy.  It's possible that a Pixel Bender version could improve on this time, but the whole idea of Alchemy is to re-use existing C/C++ codebases ....... right?  The bottom line is Alchemy provides very substantial gains in performance over pure ActionScript, and the ability to re-use C/C++ opens up a whole new realm of Flash applications that were not possible before.  It's disappointing for developers that Alchemy hasn't progressed beyond research status, when it has so much potential for creating killer applications that can exploit about a bazillion lines of open source.

    I wrote this article up last week to provide just the
    information you're looking for:
    Understanding
    Adobe Alchemy
    Alchemy first compiles the C/C++ through LLVM into a
    combination of ActionScript and inlined bytecode (for some special
    FP10 bytecodes). Then it compiles that AS3 into a SWF and packages
    it into a SWC.
    Any performance boost comes from a combination of using the
    new bytecodes and the fact that certain tasks are just faster with
    how Alchemy does them (functions calls for example don't require
    boxing/unboxing).

Maybe you are looking for