AnandTech: Mac Pro vs. PowerMac G5

“It’s here, it’s quiet and it’s fast; we got our Mac Pro on Friday and spent every day since taking it apart, using it and benchmarking it,” Anand Lal Shimpi reports for AnandTech.

“The Mac Pro is pretty much everything the PowerMac G5 should have been. It’s cooler, quieter, faster, has more expansion and it gives you more for your value than the older systems ever could,” Lal Shimpi reports.

“If you were happy with your PowerMac G5, then you’ll definitely be happy with the Mac Pro. And if you’re a heavy multitasker, you will quickly be spoiled by the four very high performance cores that have found their way into the familiar looking chassis,” Lal Shimpi reports.

“From a performance standpoint, running OS X, the Mac Pro is truly Apple’s fastest system by a long shot. Some of the performance advantages over the PowerMac G5 aren’t enormous, but then you look at situations like iPhoto, Xcode or Final Cut Pro where the G5 is just put to shame. Rosetta performance is just about as good as it gets, the only real solution to that problem is for Adobe and Microsoft to hurry up and release updated software. Unfortunately since Apple isn’t really a favorite of either company, it’s not like greater than usual amounts of resources are being thrown at releasing new products specifically for the Mac platform,” Lal Shimpi reports.

Very comprehensive, as usual, full article here.

[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Dave” for the heads up.]

Related MacDailyNews articles:
Apple Mac Pro Quad Xeon 3.0GHz benchmarks – August 16, 2006
Apple Mac Pro dissection photos – August 16, 2006
Ars Technica reviews Apple Mac Pro Quad Xeon 64-bit workstation – August 11, 2006
Apple Mac Pro Quad-core Xeon easily beats Power Mac G5 Quad – August 11, 2006
OWC offers Apple Mac Pro memory upgrades; rebate trade-in of Apple factory memory – August 11, 2006
Benchmark duel: Apple Mac Pro vs. Power Mac G5 – August 10, 2006
Apple unveils new ‘Mac Pro’ featuring quad 64-bit Intel Xeon processors – August 07, 2006

18 Comments

  1. Remember a few years ago when Adobe actually recommended on their website their customers buy a PC as they were better value for money? Disgraceful, and an insult to their admitted 50% of customers.

    Well, I wonder if they are now recommending Macs now?

    Oh wait, these M$ lackeys don’t really even seem to make software for Macs any more do they!

  2. fsck that, Brad…

    who was the smart ass asshole that spoke at the WWDC where I announced we were moving to Intel…? Yeah – Bruce Chizen…

    “Its about time, Steve… what took you so long?”

    Hey Bruce – buddy – FSCK YOU right back!

    So, smartass – where the hell is Photoshop – at the very least, dipwad? What? next year???

    Ohhhhh… i get it… WE took so long to make the transition – now, its gonna take you two years to catch up…

    eat my shorts, chrome dome.

  3. Adobe is going to be bought out by either Apple or M$ sooner than later anyways…

    With almost $10 billion in cash (or will it be $5 billion by the time the back-dating is over and done with?), lying around, and Adobe at a $20 billion market cap, Apple could fairly easily pick up 51% of Adobe, some cash, mostly stock, some borrowed money.

    How Apple purchases Adobe without MS getting into the bidding game out out-lasting Apple – that’s the mystery.

    Lastly, perhaps my 5-year running thought that purchasing Adobe is a golden-calf goal of Apple isn’t reality after all. Perhaps Apple is content to simply chip away at Adobe with it’s own offerings until mostly irrelevant…

  4. He’s full of crap. Adobe is not dragging their feet. And the people at the MacBU love Apple. It’s pure nonsense and calls into question his understanding of the industry as a whole.

    Please spare us the melodramatics that have no basis in reality.

    Bozo

    S.

  5. Unfortunately since Apple isn’t really a favorite of either company, it’s not like greater than usual amounts of resources are being thrown at releasing new products specifically for the Mac platform,” Lal Shimpi reports.

    Now that Intel is here for the Pros, how long before that market share shift causes Adobe to rethink its business priorities.

  6. ====
    Remember a few years ago when Adobe actually recommended on their website their customers buy a PC as they were better value for money? Disgraceful, and an insult to their admitted 50% of customers.

    Well, I wonder if they are now recommending Macs now?
    ====

    Well, what has happened in 10 or so years? Apple buys NeXT, switches to Intel…ditches PowerPC and now Macs are a better value for the money.

    Except that PC boxes running a Windows OS inherently blow (and only add to the cost of the box over a few years time), how was Adobe wrong?

  7. I’d like Apple to ramp up Aperture to make it a Photoshop-killer.

    I already use iPhoto for storage and low-end editing, but need to transfer images to PS for the heavy drilling.

    Apple did it with FCP and FCPE, so go to it guys!

  8. Back to the topic at hand . . .

    The review confirms the WWDC claim that the Mac Pro is considerably cheaper than an equivalent Dell and (once you factor in the cost of case, a power supply and an OS) cheaper than you could build yourself.

    MDN magic word: true, as it really is true

  9. YEAH said…

    < Except that PC boxes running a Windows OS inherently blow (and only add to the cost of the box over a few years time), how was Adobe wrong? >

    I am saying there is something inherently wrong with an “independent” software company stating an opinion on the subject.

  10. Comparing the Mac Pro to the PowerMac is great for the Apple faithful, but it doesn’t give switchers any information.

    Showing that Windows is faster on a Mac than on a Dell might motivate some people to buy Apple hardware, but most people have noticed that the latest model is usually the fastest model and will just wait for Dell to catch up.

    Okay, so the hardware is fast. What about the platform?

    What I would like to see is a comparison of OS X and Windows on the same hardware (now possible), using applications that are native to both. If someone demonstrates that OS X is faster than Windows, all other factors being equal, that would really command some attention. It would increase Apple’s market share.

  11. JUST LIKE I EXPECTED!!

    Where the heck is the PowerMac G5 Quad in the charts against the Mac Pro Quad?

    Why isn’t the machines tested equally to give the charts a accurate representation?

    With only two cores, the CineBench results between the PowerMac G5 2.5GHz and the Mac Pro 2.66GHz are reasonably close, with the Mac Pro only holding a < 6% advantage

    You see, the Xeons only just slightly exceed the G5 processor if you match them evenly.

    It’s just like the early days of dual core CPUs; just wait until Apple throws two quad core Clovertowns in the Mac Pro, then we’ll really start running out of things to do with them.

    This first version of Mac Pro is a DUD in performance gains really.

    Wait for the eight core beast.

Reader Feedback

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