*drool*

[Piyono]

http://www.apple.com/powermac/

Piyono

 

[Buck]

Nice indeed! Why weren't these around when I was stuck using Aurora?

 

[time]

I read through the report, but I can't see where they used SSE2 on the P4 configurations ... Perhaps that's how they managed to score a 40% winning margin? After all, everyone knows the base FP unit in the P4 is weak.

Extrapolating, I feel that Opteron would run rings around these competitors in integer artithmetic, and if SSE2 isn't a consideration, probably put up a much better showing against the Mac in FP.

Any comments?

 

[Pradeep]

Hmm I see they have analog audio in/out back.

Apple never compare Macs to AMD processors, it's better for them to show Intel losing, than AMD winning.

Still an amazing advance from the days when Apple was stuck at what, 450MHz for 9 months?

Shipment date for the 1.8GHz system is August, perhaps a small paper launch?

 

[zx]

For PC users, going from 32-bit to 64-bit computing requires migrating to a 64-bit operating system (and purchasing the 64-bit applications that will work on it) or running a 32-bit operating system in slow-as-molasses emulation mode. The PowerPC G5, however, offers a seamless transition to 64-bit performance: Current 32-bit code — such as Mac OS X, the Mac OS 9 Classic environment and existing applications — runs natively at processor speed. With no interruptions to your workflow. And no additional investment in software required, period.

That’s because, unlike competing instruction sets, the PowerPC architecture was designed from the beginning to run both 32-bit and 64-bit application code. This enables the PowerPC G5 processor to run Mac OS X natively for an immediate performance boost. In addition, as applications are optimized and as Mac OS X is further enhanced for the PowerPC G5 processor, performance gains will be even more dramatic.

I guess nobody told them about opteron.

 

[zx]

Impressive specs indeed and a very nice look. At last, mac may be able to compete with PC's in term of performance. I'd like to see independant benchmarks to evaluate the performance of the newcomer.

 

[Prof.Wizard]

Apple again won hearts with the design.
Bravo.

 

[honold]

http://www.haxial.com/spls-soapbox/apple-powermac-G5/

 

[Piyono]

http://www.haxial.com/spls-soapbox/apple-powermac-G5/

Who is this guy?


Piyono

 

[Prof.Wizard]

honold, you ruined the dream machine buzz...

 

[zx]

http://www.haxial.com/spls-soapbox/apple-powermac-G5/

The guy's arguments are quite good I think, but i can't blame mac for using benchmarks that gives their machine an advantage. Most PC manufacturers play the same game (intel/sysmark?) to make their stuff score better.

In my opinion, marketing based on performance of you machines is ridiculous (and most/all manufacturers do it ). However, most informed PC users know this. I mean, I don't believe in the "independant" benchmarks apple posted on their web site much like I won't believe them if Dell or Intel did the same thing. Those benchmarks have all chances to be biased. What I'm ready to believe is independant information sources, such as independant (truted) web sites and (trusted) individials.

Plus, the whole arguing about performance (see the "Answering the Hate Mail" section in the site) is wasted effort and bandwith (however, I get the impression that those people enjoyed trolling). We all know that "performance" depends on how you use your computer. People should not base their evaluation of a PC or platform on a handfull of benchmarks.

The real valor of a system is how it answers to one's need. Performance is irrelevant when a system does not do the job.

 

[honold]

as far as benchmark fudging i'd say #1 is apple, #2 is amd, #3 is intel. remember those god-awful k6-2 benchmarks? lol.

at any rate, i think it used to break down like this:

intel claims you will get some wondrous experience

amd claims you will get the same wondrous experience for less money

apple claims you will get a better experience

now the linchpin of apple's marketing is how it's the fastest system in the world, and i think that's what makes this egregious tweaking/crippling totally terrible.

 

[zx]

http://www.haxial.com/spls-soapbox/apple-powermac-G5/

Looks like this made it on X-Bits :

Yesterday Apple released its Macs based on G5 processors and immediately claimed that these chips are the fastest on Earth. As the proof of its claims Steve Jobs’ company showed SPECCPU2000 scores obtained on G5-equipped Mac and on the Dell Precision workstation, based on the Pentium 4 3.0GHz CPU. Even leaving aside the fact that Pentium 4 3.0GHz is not the fastest x86 processor from Intel now and the lack of comparisons to AMD processors, there are some other things in Apple’s presentation, which can be called at least “doubtful”. The most “doubtful” decision that Apple made is that it turned off SSE2 use in compiler during compilation of SPECCPU2000 tests. As Intel Pentium 4 relies largely on this instruction set during floating point calculations, it is not a surprise that performance of this CPU dropped dramatically, compared to official SPEC scores. Read about this and other aspects of Apple’s approach of doing comparisons in this article written, incidentally, by a Mac user. There are also letters from angry Mac users about the blurb and its author.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/other/display/20030624173005.html