Comparing apples to apples

Ceroc Addict

Ceroc Addict

Registered
Ok, I now you can't equate PC to Mac processor speeds.

But what about Mac to Mac processor speeds?

There have been rumors floating around about a speed bump to the G4 Powerbooks (which already around 1.5GHz). Would a speed bump to say 1.8GHz mean that a 15" PB had the same power as a 20" G5 iMac at 1.8GHz?

i.e. With all the different factors (processor speed, bus, etc) how do you compare a G4 to a G5 (esp. when most software still hasn't been optimised for 64bit computing)?

Given that Apple will eventually release a G5 PB in the not too distant future, is there any point in buying a G4 PB?

Kap
 
seems that the G5 pb may actually be in the DISTANT future. lots of engineering issues to get around.
you're probably plenty well off to snag one of the [most likely] soon(er than the g5 pb) to be released dual core g4 pb's (link here)

i just thing - as I feel most of the folks around here will agree - the g5 pb is still something of a pipe dream...still can't wait for one, but I think it'll be a while still unfortunately.
 
That's like saying that a 1GHz G3 would be the same speed as a 1GHz G4. Not true, in most cases. Sure, they run at the same clock speed, but the G4 is technically more advanced than the G3 because of AltiVec, which Mac OS X is optimized for.

In theory, and probably in real-life, a 1.8GHz G5 would be slightly faster than a 1.8GHz G4.

And, as far as I know, there doesn't exist a G4 processor that has been scaled beyond 1.5GHz. Newer G4 chips may go faster, but as of right now, 1.5GHz is the ceiling.
 
There are a lot of things to look at when comparing processors of different generations. Even when moving from the G3 to G4, there were certain changes/improvements to the chip aside from Altivec that made a big difference. Most importantly (for me at least) Motorola improved the FPU of the G4, so that it would be approximately 20% faster than an equivalently clocked G3. That's not even going into Altivec and how that speeds things up by order of magnitude.

With regards to the G5, a lot of changes have been made. The G5 has a much better FPU than the G4 and at the same clockspeed, you can expect roughly twice the performance, maybe more. The Altivec unit of the G5 isn't as good as the G4, which is quite a surprise. Even so, it makes up for this with fantastic bandwidth (courtesy of the 600 MHz FSB) something that the G4 line of processors severely lacked. The end result is that the G5 is still faster than the G4 at altivec apps.

So in short, the G5 at the same clockspeed is gonna trump the G4's.
 
until the fine folks at Apple figure out how to make a liquid coolant system work on the G5 laptop, I'd say you're better off buying a G4...which is to say, you'll be playing Doom 7 on your G5 iBook at the Retirement Home...

...hard...to...keep...sarcasm....in...check....


but I think 98% of people say they REALLY NEED a faster Mac for things like e-mail and Web surfing. While I'm not saying that's you, the current G4 PB line is not too shabby. Or slow.
 
Ceroc Addict said:
I'm in complete agreement.

In fact, take a look at my last post to this thread:

http://www.macosx.com/forums/showthread.php?t=46583

for my thoughts.

I was only inquiring about processor speeds from a casual interest perspective.

Kap
Click to expand...

I second this and i had posted in your linked thread also. I would like to get a faster laptop but can't justify the cost because if i want/need to do anything more intense i will just sit at my dual g4. I think i am probibly going to pass up on the G5 until they probibly come out with the G6. I have to curb my spending on computers since mine do everything i need them to.
 
mseydel said:
but I think 98% of people say they REALLY NEED a faster Mac for things like e-mail and Web surfing. While I'm not saying that's you, the current G4 PB line is not too shabby. Or slow.
Click to expand...

this guy knows whats up.

I myself am somewhat of a lower end pro user when it comes to what I do on mac. I get by fine on my G4/500 mainly because I have really pimped it out spec-wise. osx, any G4 (or G5) cpu and lots of ram are the key to good performance. with the combo of altivec and lots of ram osx does just fine even on a yikes 350.
 
I can verify that Panther runs just fine on an old G4 Yikes! system with 1GB of RAM and a few fast hard drives.

I'll bet that I can be just as productive on my machine as I would be on a dual G5 machine. Sure, it'd be faster, but most of the speed comes from knowing what the hell you're doing and managing time efficiently. A dual G5 won't make me any more productive than I am right now.

It's funny -- Macintosh computers stick around and remain useful for YEARS... Windows PCs, on the other hand (like my girlfriend's parents' PIII 1GHz with Windows Me) seem to get outdated within a year or two.

Just more ammo for the Mac users... :D
 
Panther runs just fine on my old 400 MHz G3 with 400 MB RAM.

Of course... GarageBand and UT2004 don't :) They both need my 1 GHz G4.
 
You get loads of PC users on sites like Slashdot and OSNews complaining how slow macs are at resizing windows :). Some people really have no idea how to measure the usefulness of computers.
 
I once went through barefeats.com's data and scoured as much info as I could, then pro-rated G4s to G5s based on that and came up with a 17% average increase in speed per MHZ for the G5.

In other words, if you buy into the calculations, a 1 GHZ G5 would be 17% faster than a 1 GHZ G4. Of course, it completely depends on what you're actually doing. In one case, the G5 could be three times faster, and in other cases only 5% faster. It's just a semi-meaningless overall indicator.

I could DEFINITELY make use of a faster machine. Without question, I could be far more productive. Currently running Dual 1 GHZ G4s (still holding out for Steve's mythical 3 GHZ G5). However, can I be productive enough to justify the cost of a new box? That's a little harder to call. Especially given that being too efficient could actually lose me money on timed jobs. Truth be told, I think I could justify it over the course of a year. I just rally really really wanted 3 GHZ dammit, so I'm waiting. Should be quite a leap.

I personally find OS X to be just barely tolerable on my G4s. App launch, windows resizes and general processing is adequate at best. I'm still productive as a mother, but I have yet to experience an OS or computer that can even come close to keeping up with me. Not even the best G5s at the Apple store could keep up with my demands, though they are much faster than what I've got now, so I'll be happier one day. Fortunately, window resizing on the G5 is a dead issue. Even very complex web pages were glass. FINALLY.

Admitedly, I have absolutely no patience for any delay whatsoever, so it's a perpetual agony. Thankfully OS X is rock solid, a great multi-tasker and fast enough to get work done. It can only get better from here. The worst is over.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top