Is there a real advantage on using an old registered domain instead a new one?
Are you targeting a local area or internationally?
If it's for a local business then it'll not really make much difference however, in my experience, my older parked names with a splash page on them have ranked much faster than either a new name or a name I have had to buy even when it has a clean history and is out of the starting blocks with established backlinks.
I'm basing this on .co.uk names and since GUK is an horrendous mess at the moment I'm not 100% about anything. I haven't launched a brand new .com for quite a while so cannot comment.
but I think that "age" is good for site once I redirect my content.
Is the site 5 years old and established?
If so, and so long as the name is new and/or not have a bad history, it should rank well and quickly.
Domain has been registered since 2007 with no activity (not hosted, nor splash page) thus no backlinks.
I have other (is it call parked?) set up on one site live for 6 years,let's callit example.com parked on example1.com if you type that domain name (example.com) in address bar in your brower, you access to example.com
I prefer to buy new domains rather than use old ones that might have a negative history. Certainly there is no advantage with Google in the date of the domain registered and Google have no sandbox in place for new websites. I happily rank brand new domains within 4 weeks or less for competitive words. that is of course assuming that there are no links to either at the time.
I'm behind you - pure age of domain registration is a red herring. Age of established and continuous content hosting AT a domain is the real factor that Google hopes to use.
Sometimes a change in ownership and a change content slips through and continues to rank. But that trick is getting harder to pull - even a change in content while ownership remains steady has more challenges than it did a year ago.