You think Macs are fast?

[Wickedkitten Veteran]

Originally posted by smoke

And the thing about it could be switched, wasn't that my point to begin with? Why are you continuing to argue with me about that.

well considering the fact that I DID switch it, you shouldnt have ASSUMED that it was a personal attack on you.

As for arguing, you pretty much are arguing with yourself cos you're the only one typing long ass replies to yourself.

[Kenno]

Originally posted by silly_walk

You first.

Agreed. :)

[smoke]

Ok, well, in the future I'll preswitch it for you to save us all the trouble because I never said that it couldn't be. I just kinda take offence for someone correcting me for something that isn't wrong in the first place. And quit playing dumb you know I'm talking to you when I reply. Anyway, I'm outta here. This thread is going nowhere, fast. If not being heavily biased to either makes me wrong then let me be wrong. I'll get myself both and enjoy both and be wrong.

And P.S. If you think my posts are "long-assed" then you need to stop being so used to reading little snippets of text and get a book and read it.

[Wickedkitten Veteran]

Originally posted by smoke

Ok, well, in the future I'll preswitch it for you to save us all the trouble because I never said that it couldn't be. I just kinda take offence for someone correcting me for something that isn't wrong in the first place. And quit playing dumb you know I'm talking to you when I reply. Anyway, I'm outta here. This thread is going nowhere, fast. If not being heavily biased to either makes me wrong then let me be wrong. I'll get myself both and enjoy both and be wrong.

And P.S. If you think my posts are "long-assed" then you need to stop being so used to reading little snippets of text and get a book and read it.

wtf, who the hell is correcting you?

a 3 paragraph response to a one sentence reply is long assed alright? I perfectly know how to read seeing as how I learned how to do so when I was 2 and read about 8 500 word books a week.

You want a be a pedantic, hypocritical, paranoid twit then by all means feel free to be so.

[Morfious]

Originally posted by Wickedkitten

I can tell you right now having an IQ of 147 has nothing to do with how smart you are.

Mine is still higher than yours by one point so you can bite me! NEENER NEENER NEENER! MY DAD CAN BEAT UP YOUR DAD! YOUR MUM WORKS AT MCDONALDS AND YOU SMELL LIKE POO!

oh and by the way while you are trying so hard to be so intelligent and mature, the word you wanted to use was communicate, not commute.

No offense...just saw Austin Powers...but do you talk like Fat ...mustard since your from Scotland? (cant say the bast-word-tard)

[neo1980]

Here is a test from Techtv:

Mac G4 733Mhz

Intel P4 2.0 Ghz

Did the sub-gigahertz G4 win out over the 2.0GHz Intel behemoth? Well, yes and no. In terms of win-loss, the Pentium 4 handily beats the G4 scoring five wins to one. However, the G4 showed impressive strength in the RGB-to-CMYK color-conversion test by turning in a time of 23.6 seconds compared to 38.8 seconds on the P4 system -- a noticeable 64 percent quicker (view results). This particular test was the black eye that brought down the P4's overall average.

Image rotation scored the Pentium test box a small victory. The P4 was able to finish this task in 16.3 seconds compared the latest G4 at 17.5 seconds -- 7 percent faster.

The P4 won the Gaussian Blur test and Unsharp Mask test. The G4 managed to turn in times of 9.1 and 11.0 seconds respectively, but the P4 bested it with times of 6.7 and 4.7 seconds -- 36 percent and 134 percent faster, respectively (see results). Impressive percentages, but in terms of actual time the differences weren't enough to average out the P4's color-conversion defeat.

Image reduction and Lighting Effects were our two final tests. The P4 was able to finish reducing the image in 1.7 seconds -- about 88 percent faster than the G4's time of 3.2 seconds (see results). The P4, with its optimized Lighting Effects plug-in, managed to win this test with a time of 8.6 seconds beating the G4 and its time of 9.8 -- averaging 14 percent faster (view results).

Final thoughts

The overall times recorded to complete our six Photoshop tests favored the Mac G4 by a slim three percent. If we ignored the RGB to CMYK conversion test results, the Pentium 4 would have swept this competition and left the G4 behind by a healthy 34 percent.

The dark side of benchmarking computers is that anyone can put together a scenario in which one computer is shown to dominate another -- aka selective benchmarking. Only with well-written and equally optimized applications for differing platforms can one hope to come away with any meaningful results.

This particular benchmark focused on photo editing. Tests like these are not the best representation of overall performance. Nor do they accurately depict the end-user's experience. You can be sure that this topic will be constantly revisited and updated by TechTV Labs.

[unspec]

Originally posted by Morfious

No offense...just saw Austin Powers...but do you talk like Fat ...mustard since your from Scotland? (cant say the bast-word-tard)

What.

The.

****.

--

unspec

[Wickedkitten Veteran]

Originally posted by Morfious

No offense...just saw Austin Powers...but do you talk like Fat ...mustard since your from Scotland? (cant say the bast-word-tard)

No, I was born in New York, moved to scotland when I was 3, and was educated in England til I was 18 when I moved back to New York.

I don't know what kind of accent I have but it's completely ****ed sounding although most American men love it.

When I was in America, I had called up to get my Dreamcast online and the tech said it was making him horny.

Disgusting!

[caustiK]

*sigh* i know this isn't going anywhere but what the hell i don't have anything better to do:

Fastest available pc workstation vs fastest available mac desktop which the chipset happens to be 8 months old in while the Intel has been tweaked in the past 8 months.

ok since when does *any* dual processor system not count as a workstation, even if apple does bill it that way? get real. these systems are on equal footing.

5 words - **** off with that bull****.

wow that shows how mature you are when arguing. try not to throw a hissy-fit when debating ok?

You're comparing old hardware as well you know? The 1ghz processor didn't come come out yesterday. Hypocrite. Btw it wasn't a first shipping P4. PPC is just better at crunching numbers than x86. Go to distributed.net and look it up if you want.

just because it was released 8 months ago does not make it OLD. it's still the fastest thing apple's offering (besides an xserve). the fact is if apple can't release a faster chip in 8 months its performance is just gonna keep suffering, as amd and intel just keep pushing their products higher. and as far as ppc vs. x86 crunching numbers: maybe so if you're comparing a 1.6ghz p4 - i doubt an athlon would fall down like that. but you'd probably insist on it being 450mhz too, and yes the ppc would win because they're different architectures. mhz doesn't matter, obviously. again, the only way to compare is with top-of-the-line stuff and neither are.

Finally, the Dell Precision Workstation 340 as tested currently retails for $2875, the Mac dual G4 for $3000, and the BOXX dual Athlon 2000+MP for $4000

no the mac doesn't win on price. the mac system in question doesn't even come with a monitor (see apple store) and it has a 90day/1yr warranty. i'm not sure how the dell's configured, but a quick stop to dell.com at least gave me a monitor, with 3yr support standard, for less than the $2875 quoted in the article (granted priced could've changed since it was written, but it wasn't that long ago). and i'm not sure about the BOXX, but it does come with a full suite of sonic foundry software (gee that could be expensive) and it can probably be built or found with comparable hardware for less (which you can't say about any mac).

Dell Precision Workstation 340 =2.53 Xeon chip. Oh you didn't think to include that interesting tidbit did you?

excuse me, but could you please tell me where you see that? p4 2.53ghz does not mean its a Xeon:

from the review of the dell system:

The Dellians are cocky. They didn't send a dual-processor 2.4GHz Xeon monster, but a single processor Pentium 4 workstation running at 2.53 GHz with a 533MHz front-side bus.

and even if it was, so what. the mac g4 seems to have plenty of room to compensate, with its 2MB L3 cache. but you didn't mention *that* did you?

Athlon 2000+MP = Amd Server chip. Once again you didn't seem fit to mention the fact that you are comparing a server class chip to a desktop did you? If anything they should have used an xserve for the benchmarks since it has the newer more optimised 1ghz chipset in it but since they are trying to please pc users it doesn't matter.

not once again. and i wish they'd put a single athlon xp system in there but they didn't, nothing i can do about it. and hopefully someone will compare the xserves. but i doubt it would win and no matter what the outcome you don't have anything to back it with right *now* unless you can find me some benches (gee how would you prove it without numbers? i guess it just *feels* faster). and again, that g4 has an L3 cache, something no x86 desktop chip has, so i say its fair game. and as for pleasing pc users: read the other reviews on all the systems compared, the mac g4 review is "glowing." and did you check to see the stuff they changed in this new comparison? they tried their best to equal both systems (quicktime codecs and others), but there's just no pleasing you zealots is there?

think what you like but try not to don't make a mockery of yourself by preaching on about about a skewed benchmark like it's gospel

i'm no more preaching or making a mockery of myself than you are - you're spouting the same stuff my direction with your RC5 bench. you're right, benchmarks aren't gospel, but the techtv write up seems to corroborate what i've said (except for 1 test). i hope they do an updated one soon though because i know i'll be bashed for trying sneak in a 733mhz g4. oh well. the original DVE bench seems to be unbiased to me though (again check the review of the mac) - there are some good benches, too you know.

Which is faster?

A Pentium 4 at 2.5 GHz or an Itanium at 800MHz?

A MIPS R5000sc at 200 MHz or a MIPS R8000sc at 75 MHz?

first, a question for you: how do you know if you don't use numbers? as far as the p4 vs. the itanium (this is gonna be hard) - they are totally different architectures, but so are the ppc and x86. the difference is x86 and p4 have *many* apps that are common to both systems - that's why they are compared much more easily. i have seen a pure number-crunching test that shows a p4 ~2ghz (not sure exactly what freq.) handily beating an itanium, but i somehow doubt this. i'd say they're just too different to really be compared - one is meant for the server market, the other for desktops/workstations. as far as the MIPS go, i don't have any experience with that architecture, so rather than trying to be a know-it-all i'll just cop out rather than risk be crucified. sorry if you're disappointed. (waits for subsequent flames) :ermm:

[Wickedkitten Veteran]

Originally posted by caustiK

first, a question for you: how do you know if you don't use numbers? as far as the p4 vs. the itanium (this is gonna be hard) - they are totally different architectures, but so are the ppc and x86. the difference is x86 and p4 have *many* apps that are common to both systems - that's why they are compared much more easily. i have seen a pure number-crunching test that shows a p4 ~2ghz (not sure exactly what freq.) handily beating an itanium, but i somehow doubt this. i'd say they're just too different to really be compared - one is meant for the server market, the other for desktops/workstations. as far as the MIPS go, i don't have any experience with that architecture, so rather than trying to be a know-it-all i'll just cop out rather than risk be crucified. sorry if you're disappointed. (waits for subsequent flames) :ermm:

So you didn't answer the question and you can sit there and say that a p4 and itanium architecture is so different that you can't compare the 2 yet you want everyone to sit around and compare ppc to x86 which is even more radically different.......

since we are just posting benchmarks willy nilly

http://www.xinet.com/benchmarks/benchmarks...2002/index.html

As for your continued taking the mick with the numbers bit?

I meant you cant compare 2 cpus just by the megahertz numbers

[caustiK]

So you didn't answer the question and you can sit there and say that a p4 and itanium architecture is so different that you can't compare the 2 yet you want everyone to sit around and compare ppc to x86 which is even more radically different.......

since we are just posting benchmarks willy nilly

http://www.xinet.com/benchmarks/benchmarks...2002/index.html

As for your continued taking the mick with the numbers bit?

I meant you cant compare 2 cpus just by the megahertz numbers

wait to bash me for not answering the question: the x86 platform in your benchmark is a dual p3 1.4ghz, far from the fastest available server config for the x86 platform, so why don't *you* try answering the question.

and if you want me to concede that itanium/p4 can be compared, fine. anything can be compared, the relation to the original ppc/x86 argument is nil for one reason: it's impractical. no one will (for the most part) ever need or want to run photoshop/premier/games/etc. on an itanium-based system. it's IA64 anyway whereas a current p4 is IA-32 - an itanium would probably be slower for any current app used in the desktop (or even workstation) environment just for the fact that they aren't written for x86!! these progs, however ARE written specifically for ppc, and are thus much more easily compared. if you wanna compare xserves and itanium systems in database read/write situations, fine - but these are desktop systems running consumer software (i guess photoshop would be called consumer). you can't simply throw out itanium vs. p4 junk (which you didn't even have evidence to backup because it was p3) so you can side-track my completely valid argument. and as for the MIPS question, i know plenty about x86 and ppc, not MIPS. i'm sure if i wanted to i could go find comparisons for the two you suggested but what would be the point? i've never worked with that architecture! and the only finding would probably be that the 8000 does more instructions per clock than the 5000. who really cares, we've already established (many posts back) that different architectures can't be compared as far as mhz goes (let's please not go into that again). *awaits flames*

[Tesseract]

Now what did I say about this turning into a flame war? :cheeky:

As for my opinion, i think PC's are just as good as Macs, and that is as far as i will go.

[caustiK]

am i flaming? if i am i'm sorry, just trying to debate, honest! and i never said i didn't like macs, either - they're great, just not faster at the moment (this could all change tomorrow i'll admit). *quietly awaits the day he gets to play with a cool, sleek mac* :D

[Gator]

I go away for the weekend and I come back to a 9 page rumble. :s

One good thing about these threads is that you learn how mature or not a lot of Neowinians are and how many damn kiddies we have running around.

Here's my 2 1/2 cents if it is not too late:

I bought my first Mac just over 3 weeks ago. I had only used PC's up until then.

Right now my Mac sits on my desk and my PC sits dismembered on a table in the corner of the room. It has been turned on once in the last 3 weeks.

There you go, I am loving my Mac. Is it better than a PC? Yes, for me it is. As long as my computer can run all the current software out there that I use then I could care less if there is a faster computer out there. What the hell does it matter?

PC's are great and Macs are great. I have both. I prefer the Mac.

So there is a PC faster than a Mac? Woop dee do!

[Tesseract]

Originally posted by caustiK

am i flaming? if i am i'm sorry, just trying to debate, honest! and i never said i didn't like macs, either - they're great, just not faster at the moment (this could all change tomorrow i'll admit). *quietly awaits the day he gets to play with a cool, sleek mac* :D

This has been a heated debate. You said yourself this is not going anywhere, and I agree with you. This goes to everyone: there is no need to try to convince anyone that the pc is better than the mac, or vice versa, because you won't suceed.

As far as I go, I wished I could provide my view of it, but I have not used a mac long enough nor do i own one so I can't really provide any info about it.

[caustiK]

again, just so everyone knows: i'm not arguing pc vs. mac - please don't read my posts and think that way - they're both great. it's just that the original article was about speed - somebody tell me if i haven't stuck to that. again, *that gui is purty sweet* (insert southern drawl if you must ;) )

[atomoverride]

The funniest thing I ever heard was someone took the time to write in to MaximumPC a magazine here in the USA. Then wrote" Your past article was unfair about your pc being faster than a mac, why not get a PC that is just as good as a MAC @ 1800$"

Anyways there were 5 repiles after that to the effect of They knew they could build a pc for 1800$ or less that could kick any Mac's A$$. And untill a mac comes down to pc level pricing for the same bang for the buck I dont think mac's will be out there as much as PC's are.

Macs are still to expensive. Personaly I have only seen 4 good things come from Apple.

1. iPOD with WinXP Software

2. 23" Widescreen LCD with converter to make it enable to use on a PC. Because why would want to use that sweet monitor on a slow mac?

3. Quicktime 5.0 and up.

4. .MAC started charging for services.

The last one is more of a funny thing because you mac users think it should be free. HA HA HA now you know how I feel when hotmail tightened down the mail on their site.

[disclaimer] all the above words and or thoughs / feelings are that of atomoverride and in no way reflect neowin.net and or its affilates, partners, and or owners.

[L33T P3NIS]

Originally posted by Wickedkitten

No, I was born in New York, moved to scotland when I was 3, and was educated in England til I was 18 when I moved back to New York.

I don't know what kind of accent I have but it's completely ****ed sounding although most American men love it.

When I was in America, I had called up to get my Dreamcast online and the tech said it was making him horny.

Disgusting!

want to have lunch.

[uniacid]

heh this thread jus sux now, anyways atomoverride macs aren't slow :)