Are G4 processors really this slow?

[sindows]

I recently bought a Powerbook off of ebay expecting it to be pretty snappy but I'm finding this thing to run like molasses. Its the last model G4 with 1.67Ghz and 1gb ram running Leopard. I had Tiger on it but it didn't run too well either so I tried using Leopard and the performance is about the same even using a clean install.

The following are just some of the issues I've encountered;
1. App loading, its not intolerable but they do take ~4-5 seconds to load
2. Running multiple programs=not nightmare but noticeable "hick-ups" when switching programs/saving/opening etc. You just need to wait a second or two for the computer to catch up
3. My ability to type faster than the screen being able to render them, happens often and it gets annoying
4. jerky transitions while using expose/dashboard/spaces

I'm using a Pentium M as a comparison and although they are completely different architectures, doing roughly the same tasks on my Xp based notebook is much snappier and responsive . Is there something wrong with my Powerbook? The only thing that I can think of is perhaps Apple is using a completely outdated harddrive but then again, my PM notebook is also using a harddrive from 4 years ago...

 

[TheStu]

Well, the hard drive could be part of it.

I had a 1GHz G4 PowerBook with 768MB RAM and although compared to my MacBook it was awfully slow, it never felt quite as slow as molasses but felt reasonably snappy.

What speed is your Pentium M?
How much RAM?
How long has this slowness been going on?
Fire up Activity Monitor and let me know what kind of CPU usage you are looking at doing standard tasks.

 

[sindows]

The Pentium M runs at 1.4Ghz so its near the bottom end in terms of speed. It too has a 1Gb of ram with a 40gb harddrive. CPU usage always shows at least 10% usage usually going up to ~80 when I watch a video in quicktime or dvd player. The slowness has always been been noticeable. I may have been exaggerating when I said it was as slow as molasses but the lagginess/slowness to respond is definitely noticeable. The slowness exists in both Tiger and Leopard and the only difference that I can tell is that Tiger loads a little bit faster otherwise daily usage, it feels very similar.

An example is when I'm using Firefox and Pages. I would browse FF and then click on Pages to type something and as I first initially type something, the computer doesn't show anything and maybe 1 sec later, all the words pop up.

 

[Eug]

1) Yes, the G4 really is very slow. Pentium M blows it out of the water for most stuff.
2) Your hard drive is probably also very slow.
3) OS X loves memory.
4) IIRC, Pages is slow regardless.

 

[Zaap]

Did you try reinstalling Tiger?

I find that despite the hype, OSX tends to benefit from a good ol' fashioned nuke and pave every now and then also- maybe not quite like Windows, but it's a myth that OSX never gets bogged down over time- at least as far as Tiger.

I still have an old 550mhz G4 Powerbook with 512MB that runs pretty snappy with Tiger, so I'd tend to think yours should run circles around it. But I've also reinstalled it many times since 2001 or so when I bought it.

But I wouldn't even consider even trying to run Leopard on it- if it's even possible, it would be unusably dirt slow. I think you'd be far better off with a fresh install of Tiger than Leopard on that spec.

 

[TheStu]

Originally posted by: Zaap
Did you try reinstalling Tiger?

I find that despite the hype, OSX tends to benefit from a good ol' fashioned nuke and pave every now and then also- maybe not quite like Windows, but it's a myth that OSX never gets bogged down over time- at least as far as Tiger.

I still have an old 550mhz G4 Powerbook with 512MB that runs pretty snappy with Tiger, so I'd tend to think yours should run circles around it. But I've also reinstalled it many times since 2001 or so when I bought it.

But I wouldn't even consider even trying to run Leopard on it- if it's even possible, it would be unusably dirt slow. I think you'd be far better off with a fresh install of Tiger than Leopard on that spec.

Leopard min spec is an 867MHz G4 which he more than meets. Leopard on my old 1GHz G4 ran pretty snappy. Again, nothing compared to my MacBook... but I didn't hate the experience.

 

[sindows]

Oh well, thanks for the response it just seems that Apple completely over hyped an outdated architecture and I feel into the trap of believing them...

As far as running Leopard is concerned, I've done fresh installs of both Tiger and Leopard and IMO the only differences between the two are the load times if you shut the computer off. Other than Leopard taking slightly longer to load(maybe 5-10 seconds), the actual performance on the desktop is virtually identical. Using Expose/dashboard is a stuttering mess on both operating systems. The load time for applications is pretty much the same and the shutdown times as well. Making quicktime go into full screen mode is definitely not smooth on either OS. Ram usage is also pretty much the same but the when you do run out, it seems that Leopard actually runs a bit better.

 

[manly]

Originally posted by: Eug
1) Yes, the G4 really is very slow. Pentium M blows it out of the water for most stuff.
2) Your hard drive is probably also very slow.
3) OS X loves memory.
4) IIRC, Pages is slow regardless.

:beer:

DDR2 is dirt cheap so throwing more RAM in is worthwhile; it wouldn't improve "snappiness" though.

OP's complaint #3 is the only suspicious part; he should peek at Activity Monitor to see if any process is dominating CPU cycles. The hard drive mainly impacts disk I/O; swapping in a modern 320GB drive will only have a limited benefit.

My ancient Athlon XP @ 2 GHz is much snappier than my original Mac mini; as with the OP, Windows XP vs. Leopard. However, I hardly ever use the PC any more; just the fan noise alone annoys me too much.

 

[thxdd]

You should see my 9600/350 running OS X.

 

[Zaap]

Originally posted by: sindows
Using Expose/dashboard is a stuttering mess on both operating systems. The load time for applications is pretty much the same and the shutdown times as well.

I'm thinking there's definitely something wrong with your machine, at some level.

My Expose/dashboard aren't stuttering on this G4 (nor is there any problem with the screen being able to render what I type as fast as I type it- it may lag once every blue moon, but certainly not all the time) and your machine is 3x as fast as mine, with twice the RAM (!!!).

I must say, personally, no, I don't think G4 processors are really that slow. Something sounds majorly wacky with your machine. That, or Apple royally screwed something up with that particular model.

 

[TheStu]

Originally posted by: Zaap

Originally posted by: sindows
Using Expose/dashboard is a stuttering mess on both operating systems. The load time for applications is pretty much the same and the shutdown times as well.

I'm thinking there's definitely something wrong with your machine, at some level.

My Expose/dashboard aren't stuttering on this G4 (nor is there any problem with the screen being able to render what I type as fast as I type it- it may lag once every blue moon, but certainly not all the time) and your machine is 3x as fast as mine, with twice the RAM (!!!).

I must say, personally, no, I don't think G4 processors are really that slow. Something sounds majorly wacky with your machine. That, or Apple royally screwed something up with that particular model.

I think Zaap is right here. The more I think about this, the more I am thinking that there is in fact something wrong.

Is the G4 super fast and able to trounce anything in its path? No.
Was the G4 quite quick, especially when paired with OS X? Yes.

 

[sindows]

Thanks for the replies but what could be wrong? I've done the hardware test and that comes up with no issues. I used Xbench and the scores line up with similar machines. I've reinstalled Tiger/Leopard multiple times. I mean its not like I type very fast, on a good day I could do 60 words/minute but I usually end up with ~50 as I always make mistakes. I still have Applecare on it but these problems aren't something that I "show" them...

On a related note, I've always had issues with Airport connectivity but than again lots of people have with these aluminum notebooks. The problem is that it connects to networks fine but image heavy websites oftentimes don't load every image. This happens in both Safari/Firefox and it doesn't matter how long I let the browsers load, images sometimes just don't appear. There is just a blank placeholder where they are suppose to be.

 

[TheStu]

Originally posted by: sindows
Thanks for the replies but what could be wrong? I've done the hardware test and that comes up with no issues. I used Xbench and the scores line up with similar machines. I've reinstalled Tiger/Leopard multiple times. I mean its not like I type very fast, on a good day I could do 60 words/minute but I usually end up with ~50 as I always make mistakes. I still have Applecare on it but these problems aren't something that I "show" them...

On a related note, I've always had issues with Airport connectivity but than again lots of people have with these aluminum notebooks. The problem is that it connects to networks fine but image heavy websites oftentimes don't load every image. This happens in both Safari/Firefox and it doesn't matter how long I let the browsers load, images sometimes just don't appear. There is just a blank placeholder where they are suppose to be.

It still seems like there is some sort of issue. I too type at about 50-60WPM, and I never had any issues with my G4 keeping up with me...

Also, your image issues, do they persist if you hardwire into the network?

Have you run all of system update? There might be some sort of firmware update or something that the system needs.

 

[VinylxScratches]

I installed Tiger on an early PowerMac G4. It had 192 megabytes of ram and I think it was 450Mhz. It didn't run Tiger good, but it wasn't bad. There was a lot of hard drive thrashing from what I remember though. Does your hard drive sound ok? Maybe it's failing. Run Activity Monitor while doing what you do and see how programs react, maybe something is spiking.
Windows XP and Leopard are hardly comparable though.

 

[LiquidIce1337]

I run a 12" powerbook G4 and it's 1.3 ghz it's choppy but thats just the video it's ecently snappy. The thing with mac's is they see the most improvement when you add more ram. It's a huge difference going from 1 GB to 2GB.. my powerbook saw significant improvement from 512mb by adding a 1gb corsair chip (max it can take).

I currently run all my dj software on this and play out with this. The video is always going to be choppy it's just the nature of these systems.. But it sounds like there is either something wrong with your system. Possibly the hard drive like one poster mentioned and I think you'd see a huge jump by adding memory if you could.

 

[Tegeril]

I'm honestly shocked when people defend the G4, it makes me seriously reconsider the thresholds of tolerance I have versus those of others. I am a G4 hater and you couldn't get me to use a G4 laptop if you gave it to me for free (I do have a MacBook Pro now) despite my love of the 12" form factor of old.

While I think you should be experiencing a slightly snappier experience (definitely no typing lag, the last time I've experienced that was on a 500MHz G3), I think you probably have a different performance tolerance similar to mine, and the G4 just wont cut it.

 

[Kmax82]

Yea.. I've found that there are some things that OS X just doesn't do as snappily as Windows. It's odd, but some programs are just as quick, if not quicker (Mail, Safari, Finder, Transmit, iTunes, etc.. ) but then you do a speed comparison of Network traffic, Creative Suite 3/4, Firefox, etc.. and it's much slower, to me, than Windows. How much slower.. Not a whole lot, but noticeably. I tend to prefer the stable nature of OS X, so I put up with the slightly longer load times for that reason.

 

[MovingTarget]

Yeah, I have the last model iBook G4, with 1Gb ram. It is definitely starting to show its age. It is still snappy for the most part, but stutters on occasion as I usually keep a lot of stuff running in the background.

 

[umrigar]

the PB G4 1.67 is from 2005.

tell me how well a PC laptop from 2005 runs Windows Vista.

this isn't a defense of the G4 Powerbook - but it should run a bit better than you're seeing.

do you have an external FireWire drive you can clone the drive to, and run from that, as a test to see if it's the internal hard drive.

 

[LtPage1]

The hard drive is probably part of it, but yeah. I have the exact same machine (I'm posting from it now), only with 2GB of RAM. It's really slow (I mean, REALLY slow), but since I've spent a total of ~$3000 on it by now, I'm sticking with it until the 32nm mobile chips come through at the end of the year. Ugh. Have I mentioned how slow this thing is?

 

[MeStinkBAD]

I have a Powerbook G4 @ 1.3GHz w/ 1GB RAM running Leopard... got it in 2003... came with Jaguar (10.3)... I can understand if you compared Jaguar to Leopard... but Windows? How about you compare XP to 98 or Vista with Win2K. For those comparing XP with Tiger... on a system 4 years of age or older... well it's dumb. You know why don't I compare a G4 natively running OS9 versus OSX (beleive the fastest model is 800MHZ that still supported booting into MacOS 9, though not positive). What's gonna feel snappier eh?

I do have an aging DELL laptop from 2004 running Vista... but w/ 1GB RAM it doesn't just jump to life whenever I pull it out. No it takes some time. Would you like to know what feels snappier, though. Take a guess cuz it don't matter not a fair comparison. It is certainly usable... and although far more sluggish than XP I still prefer it cuz I like Vista better than XP (bet someone will call me nuts for saying this too... truth is I use Vista on a far more capable machine... and I have not had any problems... Vista has been good to me.)

 

[Redfraggle]

It sounds like something is indeed wrong with your powerbook. What that is exactly, I'm not sure. Tiger should run just fine on that. Somebody suggested you install the updates for it, and that's probably a good idea. Also, you bought this thing off ebay, that gives me pause right there. There could certainly be something wrong with it that was undisclosed, or unknown, but the seller. I would call Applecare and ask their opinion. If you are an edu Applecare member, so much to the good. I always had better experience with them than the non-edu sector for some reason. My powerbook ran Tiger just fine, and was a G4. The hard drive was getting really full, and that was causing a bit of a slow down, but nothing like what you are saying.

 

[sindows]

Just to update, I did find a local Mac shop that sold used Powerbooks and there is definitely something wrong with my laptop. I used a 12" 1.5Ghz with 512Mb ram and everything on it works better than mine. Itunes and GarageBand would load nearly instantly while on my Powerbook, they would both take the better part of 5-7 seconds. If I were to use Apple+N to open new windows in Safari, there were noticeable pauses with my laptop while the one I used opened new windows instantly. Keep in mind that I have 1Gb ram and a 1.67Ghz processor.

Now what is going on? I reinstalled Tiger and it still isn't as fast as that Powerbook I tried out. I have a couple days of applecare left and I need to solve it...

 

[TheStu]

If you put the Leopard disk into the drive, you might be able to run the hardware diagnostics by either holding H or D (cannot remember which). Not sure if that will work on a PPC Mac.

 

[AstroManLuca]

People who claim to have used G4 laptops in Leopard and say that it was "fast" or "snappy" are either lying or don't know what those terms mean.

I had a 12" PowerBook, 1.5 GHz G4, 1.25 GB of RAM. Nothing wrong with it. Ran Tiger at marginally acceptable speeds. Installed Leopard, ran like crap. I've subsequently had a bunch of people on the internet say I'm nuts because their PowerBook G4s were fine under Leopard. I think my standards are just higher. Only way to really explain the phenomenon.

Anyway, sindows, I answered a resounding "no" after reading only the title of your thread, but upon reading the post, that just reinforces it. G4s suck under Leopard, no two ways about it. And honestly they were never that great under Tiger either.

Sadly, PowerBook G4s use DDR, not DDR2, which is both more expensive and available in lower capacities. 2x1 GB is the best you can do with DDR, and it'll cost a bit (not too much but more than DDR2 would be, maybe around $60). It'll help some but the fact is the G4 is an embedded processor that was never designed to go into personal computers and it's just a crappy CPU overall.