View Full Version : 3xG4 1.25ghz VS 2xG5 2.0ghz usin ScreamN

12-09-2003, 10:04 AM
...hello all!
kinda big question over here. A friend who has a small venture about to start wanted to know whether investing in 3x G4 1.25ghz(with fancy graph cards) running screamnet( he has a large animation project bout to start) would out render 2xG5 2ghz.

you see we've just come off http://www.appleinsider.com/ where if you go to the news section you'll find info bout the new G5's comin out from Jan-Mar. which means the price of G4's (if there any left) would go down even further meanin good news for someone tryin to build a small render farm. So we was thinkin 6 good processors would be better than 4 super dupa ones...right?...

:) :confused: :( :) :D :D :D

12-09-2003, 10:13 AM
It's a tough call. The G5 significantly outperforms any G4 setup. Is it significant enough to spend that much cash?

I suggest pricing out the whole setup per box (RAM, processors, KVMs, monitors whatever), then looking at speed differences. If the 1.8 GHz G5 is 4 times faster and only costs twice as much per setup box, it's obviously a better buy. Will there be new G5s soon? Maybe, but that will always be true. The G4s probably won't come down more because they are around to support OS 9-based businesses (that's why the version for sale is two generations old).

12-09-2003, 10:23 AM
Let me fill in for Beamtracer here:

"Buy a G5 now! Don't wait! It's so fast it's pointless to wait for faster versions!"

I feel bad that he always has to handle these questions. ;) Seriously though, unless there is a real cash issue, go with the G5s. But make sure you run 10.2.7.

12-09-2003, 10:30 AM
...why whats up 10.2.8?...
i'm runnin 10.2.6 right now a G4 867 ati 9800 on 7.5 which seems pretty cool right now.:D

12-09-2003, 10:38 AM
I do NOT agree!

Personally, If you don't need it right now, but in a month i also ok, DO NOT BUY Mac's in DECEMBER!!

They are faster in january.. We probably will see 2.4 at least, and 2.6 prefered dual G5's in January! That is a performance increase of 20 to 30 %!!!

Meaning, current renderings lasting 1 hour will then be finished in 48 or 42 minutes!!!

Certainly when you buy 2 or 3 machines.. It's allways worth it!

I am just WAITING for the next edition.. Allways works better (faults are worked out)

So jcool?? I don't understand you statement of "it's fast enough" Since when is a computer "Fast enough" in 3D? ;)

12-09-2003, 12:38 PM
Hmmm, i don't know where you live but here i can get 4 dual G4 1,25 for the price of 2 dual G5 2.0, and of course the four G4's are faster, and run cooler.
The G4's have prooved to be reliable for a long time, the G5's are still very new, in my eyes too new for something like a renderfarm. And fancy graphiccards are definitly no must for a renderfarm.

just my two cents

12-09-2003, 01:10 PM
at the moment my friends leaning towards the G4 setup. at least he can get the G5/G5s when more money comes in.
and over here he can get 3 G4 1.25ghz for the price of 2xG5 2ghz

Question: why do you say no to graph cards in the G4s that will be used in the render farm?????:confused:
i thought they would help in the rendering.:confused:

12-09-2003, 01:47 PM
Mmm.. I'm sorry.. Rendering is PURE on CPU-power.. It has nothing to do with your graphics.. A good graphic card only speeds up the things you see in realtime on a computer's monitor.. (rotating models in modeler, animating and rotating, moving things in layout,...) from the second you push F9 or F10 to render,.. It's pure CPU-power.

Apple did succeed to use the graphics power for image-building! This resulted in Quartz-extreme wich powers our graphical interface (dock, windows, menu's,...) in OS X.

3D Apps however did not use the graphic card's power to help a system render yet. I also think that is impossible. (there was a thread about this somewhere, sometime.)

12-09-2003, 07:29 PM
The G5 would ouperform the 3 g4's in raytracing, partical effects and loading..

G4 are crap for 3D..slow buses that impede on the PID cpu usage.

Video cards absolutely do nothing for rendering, stay at the stock ATI9000.

G5 is more cooler and quieter, 1000 bus not sure if its 500mhz for each cpu or 1000 for each cpu?

More ram in g5, also comes with superdrive.

Overall im using a g4 1.25 and I can see where it sux in 3D, expecially lightwave.
Loading huge scenes and screen refresh is a joke when compared to a 2.2 ghz xeon dual.

Wait for jan and buy x2 dual 2ghz g5's, they would destroy the g4 cluster.

Let G4 die off and relegate to the 'i' products where it belongs, the fruits of motorola's slothness.

12-10-2003, 03:00 AM
i just passed that on to my friend
G5's in January-March, see you there!...:D :D :D

12-10-2003, 04:51 AM
...sorry Ade,
the ATI 9800 and Geforce Ti 128mb cards claim to have on board memory that helps with 3D does that still not help with rendering?:confused:

12-10-2003, 07:48 AM
Not one bit..

When u think of video cards think visual..

12-10-2003, 10:50 AM
...ADE!, just 1 more and thats it

you see there's a segment limit thingy in Layout. where you can boost memory used, is that dependent on how much memory you have on your Mac?

and if so how much should you use before you blow something?
i have 1.5g...

12-10-2003, 06:50 PM
Seg memory is based on the rez u are rendering, many hee set it to 300, I have mine to 2000, thats the highest, i have 1.75 gigs ram. Many have spoken here about optimum size, so do a search and read indepth about it.

I read though G5 gets a speed bump when maxxed out with 2 gigs a ram compared to 1gig.