Megahertz Myth
- Thread starter Winblows
- Start date
rharder
Do not read this sign.
Even without the megahertz myth, which even AMD is starting to whine about, the current crop of G4's don't seem to keep up with the AMD/Intel offerings overall. The stuff that's optimized for the G4 does make an impressive (though not decisive) case, but that's just for the optimized stuff.
But you know what? I don't care. I'm not in the market for a 2.x Ghz AMD/Intel machine or even a Dual 1Ghz G4 machine. I'm in the market for a home computer that manages all my photos and videos well and that's the Mac.
-Rob
But you know what? I don't care. I'm not in the market for a 2.x Ghz AMD/Intel machine or even a Dual 1Ghz G4 machine. I'm in the market for a home computer that manages all my photos and videos well and that's the Mac.
-Rob
true... it doesnt matter if the AMD is a bit faster in technical speed.. but it doesnt matter, cause you dont sit in front of a processor and send information all day..you want to have a great system that does everything better than your freinds.. itd be like buying a jus an engine and the engine is more powerful and faster than everyone elses, but the engine is sitting in your garage or in a POS car
serpicolugnut
OS X Supreme Being
While there is a "myth" that mhz is all that matters, it's also a myth that the G4 can whoop ass on P4's running at twice the clock speed. Sometimes it can, other times it gets trounced. It depends on the application, how well the developer optimized for either chip and OS, and other system components like Video Card, HD speed, bus speed, RAM speed, backside cache, etc.
Apple's problem is two fold. Yes, they are hampered by Motorola not getting faster G4s to market. But they do themselves a disservice by sticking with outdated technology longer than PC manufacturers in an attempt to save costs. For instance, Apple could switch to ATA-133 hard drives, which would dramatically increase performance all around. They could also have switched to DDR SDRAM, which would have sped things up. Same with faster bus speeds and better video chipsets. The processor is just one of the areas where Apple is behind the upgrade curve.
The good news is that even if all we get are 1.4/1.5ghz G4's at Macworld, if Apple implements DDR SDRAM, Faster bus speeds and the increased back side caches, we will still probably see almost 100% in increased performance.
Apple's problem is two fold. Yes, they are hampered by Motorola not getting faster G4s to market. But they do themselves a disservice by sticking with outdated technology longer than PC manufacturers in an attempt to save costs. For instance, Apple could switch to ATA-133 hard drives, which would dramatically increase performance all around. They could also have switched to DDR SDRAM, which would have sped things up. Same with faster bus speeds and better video chipsets. The processor is just one of the areas where Apple is behind the upgrade curve.
The good news is that even if all we get are 1.4/1.5ghz G4's at Macworld, if Apple implements DDR SDRAM, Faster bus speeds and the increased back side caches, we will still probably see almost 100% in increased performance.
phatsharpie
Futuristic Robotic Cat
Those POWER4 processors are kick ass... Unfortunately they are electricity hogs. I'd love to see OS X on POWER4 machines though.
vanguard
Registered
I'm taking notes as I listen.
His explanation of pipelines is wrong.
I don't give a crap how large the CPU is. (Although I understand it impacts the price)
Ok, the detailed pipeline explaination is on target.
This thing is out of date. They've added 20% more mghz while the P4 has added 75% more mghz. I noticed they stopped talking about processors. I would too.
The bottom line with G4 is that it's not as bad as it sounds. It sounds like we run at 1/2 to 1/3 of the speed of a PC. The truth is that we're only a little slower. (On the other hand, all the eye candy requires more and the system has less)
Anyway, these processors are a problem. Hopefully it will be solved before too long.
Vanguard
PS Don't even get me started on the fact that they use one damn photoshop test to skew their results.
His explanation of pipelines is wrong.
I don't give a crap how large the CPU is. (Although I understand it impacts the price)
Ok, the detailed pipeline explaination is on target.
This thing is out of date. They've added 20% more mghz while the P4 has added 75% more mghz. I noticed they stopped talking about processors. I would too.
The bottom line with G4 is that it's not as bad as it sounds. It sounds like we run at 1/2 to 1/3 of the speed of a PC. The truth is that we're only a little slower. (On the other hand, all the eye candy requires more and the system has less)
Anyway, these processors are a problem. Hopefully it will be solved before too long.
Vanguard
PS Don't even get me started on the fact that they use one damn photoshop test to skew their results.