 System Profiles
Lisa/Macintosh
XL
Compact
Macs
Mac II
Mac LC
PowerBook
(68k)
Performa
500
Series
Centris/Quadra
Power
Mac
PowerBook
(PPC)
iMac
Maclone Profiles
Earliest
Maclones
Motorola
StarMax
Power
Computing
Umax
SuperMac
Mac Resources
Best Buys,
Used Macs
LEM Help
Desk
Memory Upgrade
Guide
Troubleshooting
Mac
Software
Mac
Classified
Mac
Dealers
Low End Mac
Museum
Best Mac
Links
56k Modem
Page
Email Lists
Compact
Macs
Vintage
Macs
Quadlist
(68040)
PowerBooks
PowerMacs
The iMac
list
SuperMacs
Mac
Webmasters
more
lists
Other Pages
Mac
Musings
Filtering
Spam
The
Macquarium
Apple
Timeline
Macspeak
Top
Pages
Support Low End Mac
Outpost.com
AuctionMac
Amazon.com
MusicForce - More resources on the links
page.
| Mac Daniel 99.06.21Used 7500 or G3?- 21 June
1999
JP writes: I just read a bunch of
your articles, and I got a kick out of them. If I had more
time for writing, I would focus in the same area. My
experience is limited between 20 MHz 68030 to 33 MHz 68040,
but I sure know just about everything in that range. I
almost had a Power
Mac 7100, but I gave it to my
parents because I couldn't get the 19" Radius Monitor to
work. I'm currently using a 'tricked out'
Quadra
650, but I will probably be
upgrading to a Power Mac next year. Although the Q650 is
mostly fast enough, I want to use some programs that are
PPC-only. Part of me wants a G3
(yes, I can say Mac OS X), but part of me thinks I could buy
a 7500,
upgrade it with a cheap 604 card and load of RAM, and be
better off. As you may know, G3 computers can't use RAM as a
startup disk -- I suspect running off a RAM disk would
dramatically increase the performance. (Using a RAM disk on
my Q650 improves web browsing; when I used a RAM disk on a
PowerBook
160, it was noticeably faster.)
Heck. with enough memory a 7500 could spin down the hard
drive for most normal use, making it much quieter. That way
I could also use 'sleep' and wake up immediately. What are your thoughts on that? The $600
difference between a 7500 and a G3/233 would buy a lot of
RAM. It seems strange to me that we still
don't see much of RAM disks. When I used it on a PowerBook
(which has battery backup) it seemed like a glimpse of the
future. With RAM prices as low as they have been and the
speed compared to hard disks, I don't understand why the
market doesn't move that direction. Mac Daniel responds: A RAM disk is
a marvelous thing, especially on a PowerBook. By treating a
portion of RAM as a hard drive, the computer makes less use
of the hard drive, thereby significantly reducing power
consumption. And, as you note, it's also quieter. The drawback with current desktop Macs is
that the Apple RAM disk loses its contents during a restart
-- earlier Macs, including the 7500, didn't work that
way. I've gone back and forth on RAM disks and
disk cache size, finally deciding that the cache is more
practical since it tracks files you're actively working
with, whereas a RAM disk doesn't distinguish between active
and inactive files. Although I've used caches as large as
7.5 MB (the maximum with current system software), I've
generally settled in on a 2-4 MB cache as providing the best
balance between improved performance and available memory
for all the applications I run. For a desktop, where you're usually
dealing with 32-128 MB of memory and 1-4 GB of disk space,
the RAM disk as a system drive really isn't too practical.
Better to set up a huge disk cache and let that actively
manage files you access than lock up 20-40 MB of RAM (or
more!) for a System Folder. On the other hand, if you keep a very
lean System Folder and have the memory to spare, especially
on a PowerBook, a RAM disk as startup disk will be fast and
quiet. Given the choice between a Power Mac 7500
at about $600, a G3/233 at around $1,000, and the new
Blue Power
Mac G3 at $1,600, I'd ignore the
G3/233 and try to budget for the Blue G3. But since that is
well beyond my means, I'd probably find a nice 7500 and drop
in a 300 MHz G3 card, which might satisfy me until used G3
Pros come on the market. - My home computer is a
UMAX
SuperMac J700/180 (roughly
equivalent to the 7500), which I hope to install a 250
MHz G3 card in soon. At work, I use a 300 MHz Blue G3 --
it's an incredibly fast computer and well worth the price
if your budget is big enough. dk
Recent Mac Daniel & Friends columns- Online with a PowerBook Duo, Julie
Fugett, Mac Daniel, 11/17/1999
- Time to buy an iMac?, Dan Knight,
11/15/1999
- Surfing With Low RAM Macs, Manuel
Mejia, 11/9/1999
- 6100 value, Voodoo3, Charlie
Ruggiero, 11/4/1999
- Getting an old Mac running, Julie
Fugett, 10/26/1999
- What can I do with a Mac Plus, SE, or
Classic?, Manuel Mejia, 10/22/1999
- Mac On? Mac Off?, Charlie Ruggiero,
10/20/1999
- Mac Connectivity, Julie Fugett,
10/14/1999
- Improving the LC 475, Dan Knight,
6/28/1999
- Used 7500 or G3?, Dan Knight,
6/21/1999
- more on the Mac Daniel index
Not sure if you should upgrade your old Mac or replace it? Check
the index to see if we've already addressed
your problem recently -- and look in the
archive if it's not in the recent columns. If not, visit our
staff page for the names of several people
who may be able to help you. Dan Knight, webmaster, Low
End Mac
Member of the Mac
Web Network
MacPromote
Xchange
Low End
Mac established April 7, 1997. This page,
the entire Low End Mac site, and all subsites of
<http://lowendmac.net/> copyright ©1997-99 by
Dan
Knight unless otherwise noted. All rights
reserved.
LINK
POLICY: This site allows and encourages
links to any public page, so long as the linked page does not appear
within a frame that prevents bookmarking the linked page.
Apple, the Apple logo, Macintosh, and iMac are registered trademarks
of Apple Computer, Inc. Additional company and product names may be
trademarks or registered trademarks of the individual companies and
are hereby acknowledged.
|