First benchmark tests of Apple’s new Power Mac G5 dual-core machines

“We have compared the new G5 DualCore 2.0GHz and 2.3GHz with a old watercooled G5 dual 2.5GHz. The dual 2.5GHz was equipped with a GeForce 6800 Ultra graphics card, not standard equipment. The DualCore 2.0 had a two-drive RAID-0 volume so the disk test is better than normal,” Mats Björnström reports for 99Mac.

“The Power Macintosh G5 is better than ever and this is likely the last major update that we will see before the transition to Intel- processors. Apple has polished the details and the new processors gives some extra power. Because the exterior is largely [unchanged] this feels more like a “speedbump” even if the processor-switch is more significant than that,” Björnström reports. “Performance-wise, one Dual Core processor doesn’t make for a large difference compared to two old G5 processors. We predict that the new Quad 2.5GHz Powermac will make for a performance increase of 70% or more.”

Full article with benchmark results here.

Advertisement: Order the new Power Mac G5 from the Apple Store now. Dual-core PowerPC processors, a modern PCI Express architecture, and wicked-fast workstation graphics. From $1999. Free shipping.

Related MacDailyNews articles:
Apple introduces Power Mac G5 Quad and Power Mac G5 Dual – October 19, 2005


  1. Has Apple transitioned the entire Varsity team to the Intel transition, leaving these PPC baby steps for the JV team to learn on?

    While I am glad to see some speed bumps, I am in general underwhelmed by Apple’s developments here. The dual core chip has been available to Apple for some time. Why are we getting it just now? Likewise, why so minimal a performance boost for the PowerBooks which people continue to clammor for?

    It saddens me that with all the tallent at Apple, and all the new found revenues from the iPod side of the house, they have not put (what appears for the last 12 months anyhow) much effort into the Pro Line.

    MDN word: century

  2. Me:
    I think the reason Apple had to wait to launch the dual-cores is that they were waiting for IBM to get the production runs going to support the demand.
    At least that’s what we were told.

    Does anyone know why there isn’t a change in the processors for the Powerbooks?

  3. No, I guess a dual-core running at 10% lower clock speed than a dual processor wouldn’t make for a large difference. Well… Duh! No offense there Mats, but what would you really think you were gonna see? The new ones have a bigger cache and a slower clock, so it’s a wash. When you get your hands on a Quad, then I’ll go read TFA. While you’re at it, stack it up against the best Windows machine you can find. That would be interesting too.

    BTW, on Apple’s site they have plenty of comparisons to the older G5s. It’s in a pdf somewhere there. The charts show anywhere from 22 to 70% speed increase, depending on the tests.

    One thing that puzzles me… Mats says they compared it to the old water-cooled G5s. Does this imply that the new ones are not water-cooled? I haven’t seen anything on Apple’s site that says one way or the other.

  4. <We predict that the new Quad 2.5GHz Powermac will make for a performance increase of 70% or more.”>

    Generally, Apple upgrades its CPUs about every 6 months, and as the article intimates, this could be the last PPC upgrade of the “Pro” line we see.

    Six months from now is April. Stretching this CPU for another 3 months takes us to July, the month Apples says we will see the first Intels in CONSUMER CPUs.

    I’m convinced Apple is going to surprise at MWSF and announce consumer MacTels shipping in February. That would make Intel based PMs and PBs a natural in July.

    Now if these latest PPC PMs are indeed 70% faster than the CPUs they replace, what will the Intel PMs look like? I’m thinking all the power necessary to do video editing, H.264 encoding/decoding will be available on all Mac products by back to school 2006.

  5. I don’t get something: Are we to believe that this update will essentially be the LAST update to the PowerMacs until the switch to Intel?

    That’s not scheduled to happen until nearly TWO YEARS from now!

    I mean, what else could they do to improve them?

    We probably won’t see anything change at MacWorld in January, so, are we hoping for another “improvement” in the middle of next year?

    Or do we have to really wait until June 2007 for the Intel beasts?

  6. me:

    You might be correct in your assertion, but remember Apple is moving to the Intel platform. So, the question I have for you is, “what did you expect?”

    This is still progress for this architecture, once on a new platform entirely, my expectations will be much higher over a period like we’ve been through of only a few upgrades. Again, to be expected, though.

    Also, it’s no secret that iPod sales are now driving Apple’s bottom line making it a perfect time to change Mac’s architecture. Mac sales should come in at a higher level (as expected by analysts) once the transition to Intel processors is completed.

  7. Anyone notice all of their comparison benchmarks are to their prior G5 offerings? The big question is how the top of the line benchmarks against the current top of the line AMD and Intel offerings?
    Will they publish it or just conveniently forget it so they don’t tweak their new best bud Intel?
    Hopefully, or someone else will publish soon enough.

  8. The lack of quad processors (and a clock decrease) across the board shows that IBM is not getting a lot of these out of the factory. Intel isn’t having any easy time these days either. It makes me wonder if we are reaching a limit in our technology.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.