I know this is only one test, but that's impressive. I've used that exact same G5 minus 2.5 gigs of RAM -to make 2GB-, and it was fast. Like the guy said, the portable professional can truly start taking their desktop power with them now.
I wonder exactly what makes the MBP faster. Is it the processor, the RAM, or something else? The RAM in the MBP is much faster than the G5 system used in the test (it's even faster than the current G5 towers).
Of course, it's worth noting that compiling code is not the kind of thing that really makes good use of the G5. The G5 is a multimedia powerhouse. I'd love to see some tests comparing things like video encoding (MPEG4, H.264, DVD) or graphics work (of course, with no native Photoshop...). I imagine the G5 would fare a lot better for those things. But then again, who knows?
In any case, that is impressive. I would've thought the disk speed would cripple the MBP for something like that.
I'm looking forward to Apple's Intel towers. They should scream.
My ISP imposes a horribly low monthly bandwidth limit so I can't view the movie, but was that a dual core G5 or was it the earlier model with 2 distinct processors? A few friends of mine have MacBook Pros and they don't appear to be faster than my dual core 2GHz G5, at least not in FCP.
But yeah, considering that the Intel iMac is 2 times faster than its predecessor and the MacBook Pro is 4 times faster than the Powerbook, I can't wait to see how fast the top-of-the-range Intel PowerMac is.