Actually I used the Speed Tools ATA High-Cap Driver with the ata already on the motherboard.-Joans
On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 10:24 AM, Len Gerstel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 11:23 PM, Tom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> I have a G4 733 Digital Audio that I was setting up to give to a >> relative to use with Photoshop. He's into digital photography, and >> this 733 ran Photoshop 9 just fine, and I was also giving him iLife >> for iMovie and iPhoto and such. I put two 250-gig hard drives in it >> and maxed out the memory at 1.5 gig. It was all set to go. > > > Since you have 2 250GB HD, I assume you have a controller card, either > ATA133 or SATA that supports large HDs, and that means you do not need to > worry about large HD support on the motherboard that the second generation > QS have > > > Fortunately, replacement 733s are cheap and plentiful on eBay, going >> for around $150 or less in good working order. >> > > Make sure you check out LEM swap list, DAs are going for about 100 there > > > All the above is the setup for this question: there are Digital Audio >> 733s, and there are Quicksilver 733s, going for approximately the same >> price. The Quicksilvers are newer, but are they that much better that >> I should only consider the Quicksilvers? I think that a QS can accept >> the RAM from a DA, so switching the drives and memory from one to the >> other should not be a problem. >> >> But what would I really gain by upgrading to a Quicksilver 733 instead >> of a Digital Audio? Or are the differences so slight that I should go >> with a DA if I happen to see a better deal on one of those on eBay? >> > > If it is a choice between a 733 DA and a 733 or single 800MHz QS, go with > the DA. The 733 and single 800 QSs were the entry level models and do not > have a level three cache. They will run like a 5-600MZ processor with a > cache. The 733 DA was the top end and has the L3 cache and will be faster > than the 2 QS mentioned. > > The other main consideration is the easily usable OS. All of the above > systems will run 10.4 with no problems. You need a very easy hack to install > 10.5 on any system with a processor less than 867MHz, but a hack > nonetheless. I am fairly certain that 10.6 will only run on Intel based > Macs, so if I were in the market for a G4 mac, I would be looking for a 867 > or 933 QS to run the latest operating system I could, with a preference to > the 933 since it seems to run cooler. > > Since you have all the parts, I am sure you could get a 867 or 933 stripped > (no HD, ram, OS) off of the swap list for not much more than $100. > > FWIW, I bought my DAs a while ago when there was a big price difference > between DAs and QSs and I could upgrade the DAs slowly. My 2 configs are: > > Work DA has an 867QS processor, hacked Radeon 9600 64MB from a G5, 1GB ram, > 120GB HD running 10.4.11 (I need classic apps at work) > > Home DA has a dual 1.2GHz OWC processor (to be overclocked as soon as I get > more cooling) 1.5GB ram, hacked Radeon 9600 pro 128MB video card, 2 x 120GB > HD on the onboard ata controller, 320GB and 500GB HDs on a SATA card. This > used to have a QS 933 processor in it. > > HTH, > > Len > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed Low End Mac's G3-5 List, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list?hl=en Low End Mac RSS feed at feed://lowendmac.com/feed.xml -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
