1.25GHZ is just overclocked 1GHZ

Quality higher or lower... I won't argue. The problem is the quality of the Mac.

Now, as you can see form the line at the bottom of my mail, I am still runing a 300 MHz G3... the 2 processors 1.xxx GHz is probably a lot of fun,... but I need my little $$$$ for other purposes !

I think that this race for MHz is a little bit "empty". Several small improvements on top of several small improvements do not make one breakthrough.

I expect a new breakthrough from Apple.
 
There is perfectly good reason to sell chips as 1.25 GHz to one guy and 1GHz to another. If you are using a chip in an embedded device the rate of cooling may be inherently limited, and the additional speed creates additional heat, and with insufficient cooling that means greater errors and failures.

How about automotive? Can you think of a more ridiculous environment for a processor? They need to last, and take heat, and not give it out. Embedded is where the PPC processors are strong. Speed means a lot less than reliability and cost in that environment. Apple may indeed be the only vendor with its hands in the 1.25GHz bin. Or it may be the only one who benefits from taking questionable chips and marking them as having an acceptable failure rate at a higher clock speed.

It doesn't matter. And we don't know which one (if any) of these things is true. But without something like a twofold performance increase in processors and memory bandwidth soon, Apple's hardware business is looking kinda crappy in terms of high end performance.

I still don't think the hardware speed is the most critical part of this equation, but a factor of two performance disparity is hard to ignore.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top