Just picked up a G4 867 cpu on eBay for cheap.  The QS cpu it is replacing has no cache which makes it painfully slow.  I am going to bump it to 933 in preparation for the new OSX.  Hopefully it will run sufficiently as I just dont have the funds for a dual processor upgrade.  Ill post some pics of the clocking when it comes in.

I currently have the same cpu in my red frankintsoh. It will run at 1.07Ghz with efficient cooling; I haven't had any issues over the year past with mine. Pretty much, just needs a fan.

That CPU will run Leopard fine as it supports all G4's.  I know a guy that works for Apple and he tells me the Gold Master of Leopard is faster than Tiger.

Apple have bumped the minimum specs to G4 867MHz for Leopard. Not that it matters either way for this discussion.

Indeed the minimum specs are pretty high... 512mb of RAM when last I checked. I'm certain it doesn't always need near as much. If it does, even on a machine with 4Gb installed, that's a good chunk of memory, and all the current laptops take 2Gb max, meaning a full 25% portion. With that sort of requirement, that better be with all the installed apps in mind -well, duh, of course it is, but it had better not be only the Finder, eye candy, and underlying processes taking up most of it.If it is, faster or not, I'll stay with Tiger. I have better things to do with my system memory than spend it all on so much glitter.

However, it is good to hear that it is faster than Tiger. Hopefully, it won't bog down in areas I notice where the 10.4 Finder acts like it's trudging through mud, even on fast hardware.
I'll probably install it if or when I hear it's not a complete resource hog.

Now on to my beta testing, you early adopters!

There are usually ways of deactivating what you don't use.

This is true... even if I have to do it from BASH

The newest macbook, macbook pro and mini support 3GB.

Really?
Will they not take four? I ask because, after you mentioned it, I took a moment to look, to find there are now 2Gb DIMMs available which I know are physically compatible (200pin, PC2 5300).

Even so, I'm not quite excited about my OS requiring 512mb, but we shall see what the actual product is like soon enough.

And I guess I'll be picking up a two-pack of those 2Gb DIMMs to do a little testing...

I think apple makes the requirements higher than is necessary so that it has room for running programs and all that - keep things running smooth.  Also, I think they're going to make an intel only OS sometime soon, so maybe 10.6 will be G5 or better, and then 10.7 intel only.  Gotta do things incrementally so that its not a sudden thing.  Either way, the people who bought the G5 quads won't be happy when it happens.

All the 2.2/2.4GHz MacBook Pros support 4GB. The previous models only supported 3GB.

Actually you can put 2x2GB in the macbook, macbook pro, mini and lower end imacs but they will only recognize 3.3GB.  This is why 3GB kits exist and not 4GB.

Even though you would have a matched pair with 4GB I doubt you would get all the possible matched performance as it wouldn't recognize over 700MB of one of the 2GB sticks.

Well, this thread has taken a turn.  I would have to guess that the new OS will use around 100MB running in the background.  With so many apps built into the OS, there is of course more ram needed.  I suspect that my QS will be marginal running 10.5.  I will be sure to run two OSs for some time yet.

My Tiger Kernel is currently munching about 140MB. Thats on a MacBook though. I'll bet the PPC version is way smaller.
Intel versions of the OS have been much bigger to date. I wonder if any kind of optimisation in Leopard can help with that.
I bet there are certain tasks which would run massively quicker in a G5 quad than in a Mac Pro with the same amounts of RAM.

thought this might be of interest for a couple of the topics going on here.

10.5 on G4/400

be interesting to see if the initial load/check can be removed.  best of luck on the cpu upgrade.

So the new cpu went south while trying to get to 1ghz.  It went straight to OF.  After lowering the speed, I only get a black screen.  I suppose I will try working on it again when I have more time.

You can probably put a 1Gb DIMM in with a 2Gb DIMM and reap the same benefits, so long as all other specs are equal.



Maybe not quicker, or if so, not by much, but certainly less resource-hungry.

Really?
Okay, question time (as I don't know the specifics of your Frankintosh)...
Are your logic board and PSU also from a QS, and if so, the same revision?

Ah, just thought of something: you may need to use a utility to lower the speed of the L2 and/or L3 cache on the new daughtercard, as overclocking of course increases the speed of cache, as well.

You would need to set the speed with the old daughtercard installed, of course, but the new one would inherit the very same settings, which are set as a ratio to CPU speed.