• Register
  • Help
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 17

Topic: Mac G5 vs P4 Benchmarks Re-Reviewed

Share/Bookmark
  1. #1

    Mac G5 vs P4 Benchmarks Re-Reviewed

    G5 vs. P4 Benchmarks Re-Reviewed

    http://www.haxial.com/spls-soapbox/apple-powermac-G5/


    The above link was published today by Good Morning Silicon Valley, a daily e-letter published by the San Jose Mercury News.

  2. #2

    Re: Mac G5 vs P4 Benchmarks Re-Reviewed

    Try the other arguments. The 999 one is lame. Sure everybody does that. But the rest of the article is fair enough. No doubt, Apple tampered with the results.

  3. #3

    Re: Mac G5 vs P4 Benchmarks Re-Reviewed

    Hi All,

    As a guy who sells Sun to the academic and research community in two states I read the article with great interest. If what the author says in true then Apple did indeed skew the test in their favor. Bear in mind that nobody likes to rely on benchmarks for two reasons, they\'re NOT \"Real world\" and they only support whoever\'s ahead today.

    As far as I can tell including the fast malloc library for the G5 is not a cheat, but it\'s not real world either. Not using SSE2 however is completely unfair to the Intel side, especially as regards processes vital to music production.

    Using Apple\'s numbers for the G5 and Dell\'s numbers for the Intel is entirely appropriate, that\'s the way the SPEC site works. All performance numbers are self reported, each manufacturer tests their own box and reports their results.

    I had to laugh when the author commented that floating point is less significant, because most applications are based on integer code. that may be so for office applications, but for music applications floating point is crucial.

    The quality of compilers is crucial to the speed of execution. If the NAGWare Fortran compiler is as bad a the author states then it definitely would be in Apple\'s interest to use them for the Intel benchmark test. However it\'s not a fair test.

    After the SpecRate discussion the page degrades into hyperbole. The author takes issue with Mac fanatics and while the criticisms may be justified he goes a bit off the deep end, most likely for the dramatic impact than anything else.

    Overall good points are made about how Apple ran the benchmarks. Actual users won\'t know about these systems until they actually get their hands on them.

    One thing is pretty obvious they\'re a whole lot faster than previous generation Macs, and that\'s a good thing. More competition is a good thing. Giving Intel a run for their money is a good thing.

    Steve

  4. #4

    Re: Mac G5 vs P4 Benchmarks Re-Reviewed

    Yeah for a few months anyway... P5 and AMD 64 (both 64-bit processors) are on their way. I wouldn\'t sink my teeth too deep in the Apple yet.


    Thomas

  5. #5

    Re: Mac G5 vs P4 Benchmarks Re-Reviewed

    Originally posted by pantonality:
    As a guy who sells Sun to the academic and research community in two states...
    <font size=\"2\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">Thanks for your time and your most thoughtful reply!

  6. #6

    Re: Mac G5 vs P4 Benchmarks Re-Reviewed

    Originally posted by Thomas_J:
    ...I wouldn\'t sink my teeth too deep in the Apple yet.
    <font size=\"2\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">If you\'re smart, you won\'t sink your teeth into the first generation of any new platform like that. Call me old-fashioned...I\'m still gonna get one - but not before the second batch.

  7. #7

    Re: Mac G5 vs P4 Benchmarks Re-Reviewed

    To be honest, you have to take this with a grain of salt. It\'s nearly impossible to have accurate benchmarks across platforms.

    The overall point of the announcement in my view is that this machine will rock in comparisons of application performance. The numbers of tracks/etc during their comparison against windows boxes was incredible. And what if the benchmark for integer calculations is debatable? So what? Did anyone this past weekend consider this benchmark a serious impediment to their ability to make music??

    Eric

  8. #8

    Re: Mac G5 vs P4 Benchmarks Re-Reviewed

    Originally posted by Hildog:
    </font><blockquote><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><hr /><font size=\"2\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">Originally posted by Thomas_J:
    ...I wouldn\'t sink my teeth too deep in the Apple yet.
    <font size=\"2\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">If you\'re smart, you won\'t sink your teeth into the first generation of any new platform like that. Call me old-fashioned...I\'m still gonna get one - but not before the second batch. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size=\"2\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">If I were to buy a G5 , I agree with Hildog .
    Well I`m not for now . It just an opinion.

  9. #9

    Re: Mac G5 vs P4 Benchmarks Re-Reviewed

    That\'s fair enough, but in my experience the PC-platforms (Intel and AMD) aren\'t really buggy on their first batch as long as you get a motherboard with a chipset that was produced by the makers of the processor. Other chipsets may be a gamble, though. I still wont be buying new computers for a while. I have more than enough to do some pretty insane amounts of work, if the computers would just shut up for a while...

    Gotta get started on that second room for the comps-solution.


    Thomas

  10. #10

    Re: Mac G5 vs P4 Benchmarks Re-Reviewed

    In my opinion, if the writer of that www.haxial.com article has any integrity he\'ll either apologize to Apple or outright admit he was wrong. The reason he won\'t is because he himself also has an agenda.

    Its revealing how we are all guilty of blindly believing a writer simply because he poses as some authority with knowledge beyond our grasps. Gotta be careful, EVERYBODY has an agenda. Just gotta hope its not harmful to you in anyway.

Go Back to forum

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •