Apple Commercial "G5: world's fastest, most powerful PC"

[grant2]

So I saw this G5 commercial, AS USUAL apple is claiming they have the fastest computer ever made.

Anyone know where this claim stems from? Did apple actually perform any benchmarking?

 

[Lyfer]

Another Apples and oranges rant?


Why not take this to Offtopic.

 

[modedepe]

I think I saw some benchmarks on their site a while back about this..

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: Lyfer
Another Apples and oranges rant?


Why not take this to Offtopic.

This isnt off-topic. Its general hardware, in general the way the work is extremely different. The question isnt which one is faster is which method (2 Apple CPUs vs. the Single AMD/Intel PC CPU) is faster?

 

[HokieESM]

Why, oh WHY, did you have to bring this up again?

Lyfer had it right, apples to oranges, apples to oranges.

It IS a big improvement for Mac... and should be applauded as such (its an enormous step from the G4). But going and comparing it to a PC becomes, ahem, difficult in that its 1) multi-processor and 2) difficult to compare architectures. Its like the Athlon to P4 debate--except worse.

Anyways. Let Jobs be happy in Mac-land... and just leave him alone. Be happy that your PC on your desk is 3 orders of magnitude faster than the one that sent us to the moon.

 

[fredtam]

Originally posted by: Tabb

Originally posted by: Lyfer
Another Apples and oranges rant?


Why not take this to Offtopic.

This isnt off-topic. Its general hardware, in general the way the work is extremely different. The question isnt which one is faster is which method (2 Apple CPUs vs. the Single AMD/Intel PC CPU) is faster?

Then go
here. It has different benchmarks and all the flaming you could ever want.

 

[Tab]

Someone should find the link for the Switch to Mac Video

 

[magomago]

its a lie

 

[DaveSimmons]

search "G5" for several earlier threads discussing this claim. BTW, pepsi does taste better than coke, and four out of five dentists who recommend a soda brand to their patients are undergoing psychological counseling.

 

[DaTT]

The G5 isn't for your average PC user IMO. Especially if your a gamer. Go to your local computer game shop and take a look at the PC section.....then walk over to the very far back corner of the store, thru the curtain marked"DANGER", down the spiral staircase and thru the tunnel to where they stock the Mac compatibale games. With enough cans of air, you might be able to blow off the dust on the boxes (yes, they will still be in the big boxes) to make out such titles as Unreal, DoomII, and maybe Street Fighter.

 

[addragyn]

Ah but is Mentos really the "freshmaker" and how much faster will the P4's "Netburst" make my internet?


DaTT c'mon Mac gaming isn't completely moribund. Not completely.
http://www.macgamer.com/
http://www.insidemacgames.com/
http://www.macplay.com/specials.php
http://www.ambrosiasw.com/news/

 

[grant2]

I did search earlier threads and only found some 3rd party benchmarks which didn't seem to support Apple's claim.

This isn't supposed to be a flame thread, just wondering if there's any fact behind the claims.

 

[fredtam]

Whose benchmarks would you want to see? Apple's? I believe the claims are based on NASA's test (not sure) but you can also find some on Apple's site.

 

[addragyn]

Grant2 the claim was initially made @ WWDC 2003. It centered on some application bakeoffs and SPEC.

You can watch it. http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/wwdc03/ (quicktime)

Go to 1:28:50. And by Veritest's tests it is, er was - WWDC was 6/27 - 7/1. However many people disagree with the tests parameters, others don't. Basically what it all comes down to is a marketing claim. And if you're into those you must still be waiting for John Romero to make you his bitch.

Please don't link that haxial.com article. It's full of errors that could've been corrected by knowledge or just some plain ol' research. Ars, HardOCP, and AnandTech all had many debates on the benchmarks. The best info, versus PC & Mac bashing, is on Ars.

 

[Sunner]

Originally posted by: grant2
I did search earlier threads and only found some 3rd party benchmarks which didn't seem to support Apple's claim.

This isn't supposed to be a flame thread, just wondering if there's any fact behind the claims.

Facts are irrelevant in marketing.
Back when the K7 was killing the Katmai P-III's Intel still claimed to have the fastest CPU, even though AMD was faster in the vast majority of cases.
And right now, you can probably look around AMD's site and find some claim that the 3200+ is the fastest CPU out there, even though the 3.2 GHz P4 is clearly the faster CPU for most tasks.

 

[LethalWolfe]

Originally posted by: Sunner

Originally posted by: grant2
I did search earlier threads and only found some 3rd party benchmarks which didn't seem to support Apple's claim.

This isn't supposed to be a flame thread, just wondering if there's any fact behind the claims.

Facts are irrelevant in marketing.
Back when the K7 was killing the Katmai P-III's Intel still claimed to have the fastest CPU, even though AMD was faster in the vast majority of cases.
And right now, you can probably look around AMD's site and find some claim that the 3200+ is the fastest CPU out there, even though the 3.2 GHz P4 is clearly the faster CPU for most tasks.

What sunner said.


Lethal

 

[jacktesterson]

Originally posted by: LethalWolfe

Originally posted by: Sunner

Originally posted by: grant2
I did search earlier threads and only found some 3rd party benchmarks which didn't seem to support Apple's claim.

This isn't supposed to be a flame thread, just wondering if there's any fact behind the claims.

Facts are irrelevant in marketing.
Back when the K7 was killing the Katmai P-III's Intel still claimed to have the fastest CPU, even though AMD was faster in the vast majority of cases.
And right now, you can probably look around AMD's site and find some claim that the 3200+ is the fastest CPU out there, even though the 3.2 GHz P4 is clearly the faster CPU for most tasks.

What sunner said.


Lethal

 

[Ardan]

I don't see why that matters so much. If my girlfriend saw this, she'd probably say to those that argue about this "both your penises are big" . I have used the G5 and I love it...I have also used the P4 3Ghz (800FSB) and I use a 2500+ OC'd to 3000+ (fine at 3200+ but there's no performance difference to my eye) at home and I love them all equally. I build programs from source on Gentoo, work with graphics and encode video as well as play games and I am sure the P4 3.2Ghz is faster than my PC at this but its like twice (or more) the cost of this system for performance that MIGHT (don't flame me) be less than 50% greater than this one.

I agree with that one guy, it should be applauded because this is a big leap for Apple and one hell of a computer. I love its design, and its speed. To me, personally, whether a CPU runs a benchmark 5-10% faster than another is of no concern--its how it looks to my eye. When comparing them with personal use, I probably would actually get the Apple G5 because I liked it better than the P4 system, mainly because I also have an Athlon system that and I don't play as many games as other people do. The 'apples to oranges' thing is soooo relevant, whoever mentioned it. Comparing an x86-architecture PC to a Macintosh is foolish. They can be completely different.

Well thats my 2 cents...if you don't like it, then thats okay because you don't have to like it. Do take opinions with a grain of salt, however.

 

[batmang]

apple owns pcs in video editing/creation.... but thats about it.

 

[grant2]

Originally posted by: Ardan
I don't see why that matters so much. If my girlfriend saw this, she'd probably say to those that argue about this "both your penises are big" .

Yes, many women love to trivialize any kind of comparison or competition down to phallus size. Which indicates they are more interested in that metric than me since they're the ones always bringing it up =)

The 'apples to oranges' thing is soooo relevant, whoever mentioned it. Comparing an x86-architecture PC to a Macintosh is foolish. They can be completely different.

If this is REALLY an 'apples to oranges' debate then Apple & others shouldn't be making speed claims. Yet still they manage to do it, most famously with photoshop benchmarks. Comparing the speed photoshop (or X program) runs on various platforms sounds like apples-apples to me.

 

[bigpow]

Apple computers = chick computers

Of course I'm biased since I prefer something cheaper & faster (T-bred?).

The same reason why I would not ever buy a VW Beetle!

 

[LethalWolfe]

Originally posted by: batmang
apple owns pcs in video editing/creation.... but thats about it.

I think Macs make good home systems unless games are a priority.


Lethal

 

[rjain]

Originally posted by: bigpow

The same reason why I would not ever buy a VW Beetle!

Even if it came with an iPod for free?

 

[Tab]

The 'apples to oranges' thing is soooo relevant, whoever mentioned it. Comparing an x86-architecture PC to a Macintosh is foolish. They can be completely different.

If this is REALLY an 'apples to oranges' debate then Apple & others shouldn't be making speed claims. Yet still they manage to do it, most famously with photoshop benchmarks. Comparing the speed photoshop (or X program) runs on various platforms sounds like apples-apples to me.

They are both computers, does anyone besides me notice that? Anyway, if not who is faster its what method is faster like I stated before.