CHUD.com Community › Forums › DVD, HOME THEATER, & GADGETS › Chewer Tech › Power PC vs Intel on a Mac
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Power PC vs Intel on a Mac

post #1 of 6
Thread Starter 
I need to buy a computer soon, but I want to buy a used or refurbished one to fit my budget. Most of what I'm seeing on the market has Power PC processors and the one I use right now for work has an Intel. What's the difference, and if I do buy an older one with a Power PC, are there going to be things I can't do/programs I can't run?

Also, if anyone knows of a good place to find a used Mac that isn't eBay, please let me know. Thanks in advance.
post #2 of 6
Quote:
Originally Posted by RathBandu View Post
I need to buy a computer soon, but I want to buy a used or refurbished one to fit my budget. Most of what I'm seeing on the market has Power PC processors and the one I use right now for work has an Intel. What's the difference, and if I do buy an older one with a Power PC, are there going to be things I can't do/programs I can't run?

Also, if anyone knows of a good place to find a used Mac that isn't eBay, please let me know. Thanks in advance.
Well, for starters, Power PC Macs won't run the new Mac OS X Snow Leopard (10.6) and most likely any later OS releases. 10.5 is pretty solid, so you won't really be SOL, but you will feel the lack of upgradability the longer you hold onto the computer.
post #3 of 6
Thread Starter 
That's dumb, but I can get Leopard and I'm not too concerned about that.
post #4 of 6
PowerPC's can not handle the 64 bit processing of Snow Leopard, I would get an early Intel Macbook Pro, mine has operated flawless traveling the Atlantic 4 times, and all across Europe and back.
post #5 of 6
The Snow Leopard kernel is still 32-bit by default on all systems (excepting the x-serve) due to a lack of compatible drivers. A few newer, higher-end systems can force boot into the 64-bit kernel, but compatibility with third party devices suffers.

And 64-bit is not inherently faster; it's inherently faster for complex instructions and applications that need to address chunks of RAM greater than 4gb--but slower in other instances. Ultimately, Snow Leopard means little more than the introduction of a bunch of promising new APIs and technologies that won't matter for some time.

So, Leopard (Universal) vs Snow Leopard (Intel only) isn't that big a deal, but it's been about four years since the first Intel mac and Power PC macs are very out-of-date now. Unless you have very specific reasons for buying professional hardware but can't afford a Mac Pro, in which case a Powermac G5 might (conditionally) be understandable, there's no good reason to spend more than $300 on a PPC mac. If you're planning to spend a decent amount of money and want a computer that will last longer than a year, get a lower end Intel mac, even if the minis are pretty abysmal for the price.

Also, I hate to say it, but Applecare is usually worth it if you're doing any heavy lifting; I've had thousands and thousands in free repairs for a few hundred in Applecare.
post #6 of 6
All of the optimizations moving forward are Intel-only, greatly incentivizing third-party developers towards doing the same, let alone the fact that once Apple drops support for something (as it did with Power-PC support in Snow Leopard), it greatly accelerates this very process.

So, if I were you, I’d definitely hold out for an Intel based mac, especially because the last Power-PC Macintoshes are at least three years old and worse performers overall.

And before I forget, another added benefit is the plethora of virtual machines, like Parallels and VMWare, that can run Windows seamlessly on your Mac.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Chewer Tech
CHUD.com Community › Forums › DVD, HOME THEATER, & GADGETS › Chewer Tech › Power PC vs Intel on a Mac