Tim Dorr Veteran Posted September 18, 2003 Veteran Share Posted September 18, 2003 http://www.chaosmint.com/benchmarks/powermac-g5-ps7bench/ Ok, have enough proof the G5's are the fastest? Enough of these crappy theoretical benchmarks that just see how fast the thing does a certain processor call. This is the G5 running a *real* application and kicking ass. Also from this thread: http://arstechnica.infopop.net/OpenTopic/p...31&m=1150967585 2x 2000 G5 OSX 10.2.7 (G5 plugin) 547 (energy settings highest perf)2x 3060 Xeon (OC'd 2400) 488 2x 2930 Xeon (OC'd 2400) 471 3200 P4 (800MHz) 427 3000 P4 (800MHz) 405 3495 P4 (OC'd 3.06) 386 3060 P4 XP Pro (533 FSB) 358 HT As you can see, even the fastest, OC'ed P4s aren't as fast. I'm getting me a dualie for sure now :) Flame suit: On! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeoMasamune Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 I want a Dual 2 GHz G5! Gimme, gimme!!!! :devil: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
isus Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 yes, but this will immediately draw peecee users, as they can never stand the thought of a mac being faster then their computer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolvereen Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 I'm a PC user and knwo what I think? WHo cares? I used to run Avid XPress on my $3000 Mac that I needed to upgrade spending another $3000 every couple of years. Now I run Avid XPress on my $1000 PC that I need to upgrade every couple of years spending another $600-$1000 max. Both did what I needed it to do. Both work great. One allows me to play games too. One saves me a couple of grand every couple of years. I don't think its a question of whats "BEST", its whats "BEST FOR YOU". If I ran a studio and had unlimited funds I'd probably have some G5's too just for cool factor. In my last office setting I had one dual G4 and one P4. I used the G4 to edit and the P4 to number crunch (compress video) as the Software on the P4 was much faster. Batch COnverter from Sonic Foundry on my PC ran 10x faster than Media Cleaner 5 for Mac even if the mac was "faster". Why do Mac's and PC's always have to be hating? Can't we all jsut get along...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djsaad1 Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 considering how close the benchmarks are its only going to take intel a few months to get back on top. intel releases new chips a lot faster then apple does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macrosslover Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 i've said it before i'll say it again, where are the opterons??? if extremetech and other review sites can get opterons for review purposes, then there has to be opteron based systems out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Dorr Veteran Posted September 18, 2003 Author Veteran Share Posted September 18, 2003 considering how close the benchmarks are its only going to take intel a few months to get back on top. intel releases new chips a lot faster then apple does. The G5 will be at 3.0 Ghz by summer '04. That would be equivalent to a 4.5Ghz P4 by that time, which is not exactly likely (though possible, I'm sure). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Dorr Veteran Posted September 18, 2003 Author Veteran Share Posted September 18, 2003 i've said it before i'll say it again, where are the opterons??? if extremetech and other review sites can get opterons for review purposes, then there has to be opteron based systems out there. Opterons are server-based, so design firms and home users aren't generally going to buy them, nor pay the prices to get one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mac15 Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 So, by March apple will have upto 2.6GHz CPUs anyways Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudy Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 how fair is that?? dual g5 against single p4? ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nerd Rage Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 not only to do not know how to spell OWNED, you don't know how to show legit, fair benchies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uiop Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 not only to do not know how to spell OWNED, you don't know how to show legit, fair benchies. you talk the talk, but can you prove in any way that these benchmarks are not legitimate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
isus Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 considering how close the benchmarks are its only going to take intel a few months to get back on top. intel releases new chips a lot faster then apple does. can you read? apple = 547 p4 3.2ghz = 427 p4 3ghz = 405 assuming intel gains 20 points for every 200mhz, they would need a what, 4.4ghz p4? yes, the xeons are different, but the same deal as the opterons... xeons are mostly server chips. some people run xeon's in their home pc, but... not often. and no company like hp or whoever put them in their pc's. just their servers. and i had to laugh at "how fair is that?? dual g5 against single p4?" there are dual xeon scores on there too. and nobody i know makes a dual p4 mobo. and haha at bush0113. haha. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lynchknot Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 LOL, when will people grow out of the "my daddy can beat up your daddy" mentality/immaturity? I can understand if somone works for the company or is a salesman.............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KC Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 (edited) not only to do not know how to spell OWNED, you don't know how to show legit, fair benchies. timdorr pwn j00z! Why are these not legit? Edited September 18, 2003 by kxgard3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macrosslover Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 Opterons are server-based, so design firms and home users aren't generally going to buy them, nor pay the prices to get one. opterons are also in workstations. and i think it's fair to say the g5 is a workstation cpu. and considering the first athlon64 which are targeted toward the consumer are rumored to essentially be rebadge opteron chips, it would be fair to compare the opteron to the g5, and to the a64 etc... the opteron was designed to be a competitor of the xeon chip, so if you're buying a xeon based system, i'd wager they would/could get a opteron based system that suits their needs just as good or better in some cases than the xeon. on average the opteron is cheaper than the xeon, though more expensive in some cases. and as we know thanks to Mac users price is not really all that important ;). as long as dual opteron based systems are near the same price as dual g5/xeon systems then price is not part of the equation. frankly we all know that the p4 chip is not really that efficient, while the g5 is a very efficient chip. considering a opteron 244 clocked a 2.0 ghz can beat a 3.2ghz p4 with a 1200 mhz clock speed advantage in many benchmarks, it's fair to say that the opteron is a much better challenge if you will to the g5. however IMO i don't think Apple PR wants those benchmarks to be released. let the g5 use the g5 photoship plugin and let an opteron use an opteron plugin (design one if it doesn't exist) and then we could truly see which chip/system is the superior. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miran Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 These may be legit, but I think they are irrelevant. Software and style draws people to the Mac, not speed. The fact that people will buy an 800MHz iBook or Powerbook over a 2.66GHz PC Laptop just proves it. Sure the G5 is a beautiful machine but again we see apple aiming for the small user base - smart, usually computer-literate people, with money to burn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evizu Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 not only to do not know how to spell OWNED, you don't know how to show legit, fair benchies. chill, its meant to be pwned, ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Dorr Veteran Posted September 18, 2003 Author Veteran Share Posted September 18, 2003 These may be legit, but I think they are irrelevant. Software and style draws people to the Mac, not speed. The fact that people will buy an 800MHz iBook or Powerbook over a 2.66GHz PC Laptop just proves it. Sure the G5 is a beautiful machine but again we see apple aiming for the small user base - smart, usually computer-literate people, with money to burn. Very true. My iBook is 900Mhz, but I don't feel it becuase the OS and software are built in a different way, and the applications I run on it don't ever show any slowdown to me. Sure, I could scroll safari faster and do other things, but that's why i'm getting the dual 2.0 anyways :) You've also gotta remember that by having higher clocks on their processors, Intel's going to be hitting physical barriers faster than AMD or IBM. AMD probably has the most reasonable follow-up to the G5, but it's a server chip for now and it'll be a while until we see it. So, for now at least, the dual 2.0 rules the photoshop world. I'm still waiting on some UT2003 benchmarks or something, too :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary_Player Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 Opterons are server-based, so design firms and home users aren't generally going to buy them, nor pay the prices to get one. Can most home users afford a $3000+ computer??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macrosslover Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 Can most home users afford a $3000+ computer??? ask the legions of Apple users out there :rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kairon Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 Opteron are made for the workstation too, yes, but in certain benchmarks optimized for Intel chips the Xeon will still outrun it. Also, opterons are probably 2x more if you want the same power of the G5. Also, AGP is a very rare feature included on Opteron boards with the exception of a few (Asus SK8N for one) and AGP does not work very well either and lots of times the video drivers will not even detect an AGP card even when one exists.For this reason, the Opteron is not suitable in workstations as say a G5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kairon Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 Can most home users afford a $3000+ computer??? If you save a little bit each month affording one should be no problem. Do you think we all buy it all $3,000 at once? I don't think the iMacs and iBooks/Powerbooks are that overpriced either. Maybe the G5 but they still rock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomwarren Veteran Posted September 18, 2003 Veteran Share Posted September 18, 2003 Intel will respond sooner or later and they'll hit hard, just like ATi are hitting Nvidia at the moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batfink Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 The P4 extreme will be the first smack and will greatly increase the CPU's performance... then comes Prescott, keeping the Cache boost and adding so much more to the 'puter. But I would like to say... why can't we all get along? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts