Apple says "G5: twice as fast as Xeon and Opteron"

[Mephistopheles]

Shocking. Can't possibly be true.

<A HREF="http://www.apple.com/powermac/performance/" target="_new">Here are the benchmarks.</A>

Are we to believe these ridiculous benchmarks? I mean, I know 2x2.7Ghz IBM CPUs probably pack some punch, but seriously, even twice as fast as a 2.6Ghz Opteron? <i>Really</i>?

Add to that that these guys simply say "baseline" and ignore actual scores. Remember the last time they gave a Spec score for P4s? It was less than half the official rated Spec performance...

And a dual 2.0Ghz system can always beat a dual 2.6Ghz Opteron, always offering at least 150% of the Opteron's performance? <i>Really?</i>

Is it just me? Am I being too cynical? Or what?...

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Mephistopheles on 04/28/05 01:11 AM.</EM></FONT></P>

 

[Schmide]

I love the fact that no information is given on each configuration. It may be true but the credibility level is quite low.

Dichromatic for your viewing plesure...

 

[Mephistopheles]

Yes, I noticed that too... quite unbelievable in the first place. No extra information... just "cache sizes" for the PC setups...

Seriously, these processors probably pack a punch, but not that much of a punch. As far as I'm concerned, I'd like apple better if they didn't do this ridiculous advertising and stuck to reality. They do have selling points, they don't have to create huge performance advantages out of thin air...

 

[HardWareBoss]

Yup Everytime Apple launchies a new G5 it's allways faster than AMD and Intel. But as the benchies show their not.

 

[Schmide]

I noticed this...

The Power Mac G5 systems were testing with a prerelease version of Final Cut Pro 5. The PC systems were tested with Adobe Premier Pro version 1.5.1

All Power Mac systems were tested using Logic Pro 7.0. The Dell Dimension XPS Gen4, Dell Precision 670, Alienware Aurora 5500 and Boxx Tech Series 7300 were tested using Steinberg Cubase SX 3.01.

They're not even using the same program. lol.

Did you see that? What! Credibility flew right out the window.

Dichromatic for your viewing plesure...

 

[slvr_phoenix]

The last time that I saw Apple 'benchmarks' (and I use that term very loosely) to proclaim the Mac as the most powerful PC, Apple used all sorts of insane compiler settings that no one in their right mind would use (because it would make the software extremely unstable or flat out unusable for anything but running a benchmark), including a special very fast floating point library with incredible inacuracies. They likewise had also turned all of the x86 compiler options to pretty much the slowest possible. It'd be interesting to have definitive proof that Apple is still doing this years later to royally skew their results.

For as much Intel vs. AMD hatred as there is in the world because of company practices and dishonesty, all x86 processor companies combined still don't equall the dirty tricks of Apple.

<A HREF="http://www.nuklearpower.com/daily.php?date=050421" target="_new">You ever get the feeling that the universe is a vast, impersonal emptiness that exists only to hurt you?</A>
@ 186K -> 200,000 miles or bust!

 

[wolverinero79]

Whether or not their benchmarks are accurate, I will give apple this - they are actually pricing their systems more realistically now than before. Looking at Dell's site and Apple's site for these 2 systems, even if they were perfectly the same in terms of performance, an apple machine ends up being quite a bit cheaper (comparing the dual 2.7 G5 to the dual 3.6 Xeon). *awe and shock*.

Now, the P4 they keep mentioning as being "Half the speed of the G5" is about $1000 dollars cheaper.

I'm just your average habitual smiler =D

 

[slvr_phoenix]

Looking at Dell's site and Apple's site for these 2 systems, even if they were perfectly the same in terms of performance, an apple machine ends up being quite a bit cheaper. *awe and shock*.

Yeah, but I can still build an x86 system for a lot less than I can build a M... Wait. I can't even <i>build</i> a Mac. **ROFL**

Seriously though, it is good if Apple's prices get more reasonable. It's at least a (small) step forward.

<A HREF="http://www.nuklearpower.com/daily.php?date=050421" target="_new">You ever get the feeling that the universe is a vast, impersonal emptiness that exists only to hurt you?</A>
@ 186K -> 200,000 miles or bust!

 

[Mephistopheles]

For as much Intel vs. AMD hatred as there is in the world because of company practices and dishonesty, all x86 processor companies combined still don't equall the dirty tricks of Apple.

ROFL!! Indeed...

 

[HardWareBoss]

That sums it up in a nut shell.

 

[HardWareBoss]

Lead on.