----------  Original message  ----------
Subject: Re: Leopard on an upgraded QS? maybe not?
Date:    Sonntag 11 Oktober 2009N
From:    Kris Tilford <[email protected]>
To:      [email protected]

> According to xBench & GeekBench archives, Leopard's about 20-25% slower than
> Tiger for PPC Macs, while counterintuitively running about 15-20% faster for
> Intel Macs.

Where did you take these figures from?

I could only find a 4% slow down for Leopard versus Tiger on a 867 MHz G4 with 
1 GB of memory.

http://lowendmac.com/ed/royal/09sr/leopard-vs-tiger.html

> ... G4 laptops in the 1.5-1.67 GHz range, not older slower PPC Macs.

I've installed -side-by-side- 10.2 Jaguar, 10.3 Panther, 10.4 Tiger and 10.5 
Leopard (with the Open Firmware hack) on my QS 2001 with Dual 800 MHz G4 7450 
processors.

I have to say that the QS has now 1.5 GB memory. And I cannot see Leopard 
being so horrible as you say. It works like a charm.

> The possible reasons to upgrade to Leopard include: Time Machine,
> Spaces, and some newer software that isn't Tiger compatible. Are there
> other reasons?

For me the main reason was Time Machine, which is absolutely great!
A reason to stay with Tiger is the Classic support, which you loose if you 
upgrade to Leopard (sigh).

I don't use Spaces. I don't like it at all, it's not really well integrated. I 
also don't use Dashboard.

> I don't think this is enough reason to upgrade myself, so I've left my G4 
Mini with Tiger. I upgraded my G5 PowerMac to Leopard, and I'm too lazy to 
downgrade, so it's stuck, but luckily the G5 has enough horsepower for the 
slowdown to be not too bothersome until just recently.

For the G5 it might be worth the upgrade, since Leopard is able to run 64-bit 
GUI applications. If memory is an issue for you (for an application you're 
using) then this could greatly speed up your workflow. The G5 is a 64-bit 
processor. Leopard is a 64-bit capable operating system with a 32-bit kernel. 
All you need is >4 GB or memory and a 64-bit application using this memory.

If you're below the magical 4 GB this feature doesn't affect you and you can 
happily stay with Tiger.

> When I migrate onto an Intel machine I'll likely downgrade the G5 also. In
> my opinion, Tiger is the "best" OS for PPC Macs, and is with certainty the
> "fastest".

Sorry, I cannot see that. Leopard maybe a little slower, but it integreates 
more features that slow it down. Do that with Tiger and it will be slower too.

If you're so much into the speed thing, why don't you still run 10.2 Jaguar? 
This would really give your system a boost.

> Intel Macs likely need Snow Leopard now, but I have no experience with Snow
> Leopard, so I'm not certain.

Snow Leopard is really the way to go on an Intel Mac. It has been optimized 
for the Intel architecture and has a lot of speed-ups under the hood. Although 
it really looks like Leopard and the look-and-feel hasn't really changed at 
all. A user might not even notice a difference.
All in all I would assume it is more stable then Leopard was (on Intel-Macs).


Cheers,
Andreas.

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, 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]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to