Here is the issue, there has been a lot of discussion about how Mac OS X for Intel is slower than Windows XP on the exact same hardware. Yet in at least two benchmarks, the Mac version of the applications were faster than the Windows versions of those applications.
http://barefeats.com/bootcamp.html
In the first case, it could be argued that Cinema4D is probably more optimized for Mac OS X, explaining why CineBench is slower on Windows.
But how about Quake 3? You would think that id software would have invested more resources to make Quake 3 run as good as possible on Windows systems. Also, unlike UT2004, WoW, etc, Quake 3 runs in OpenGL on *both* Windows and Mac, making it a good cross-platform benchmark.
One explanation put forth says that Quake 3 is an old application, written in the 600 MHz P3 days, and because of this, the crappy system call performance of Mac OS X is less of an issue. But, wouldn't that also imply that it should run faster on XP too?
Could someone please explain this to me? I know next to nothing about benchmarks and statistics. Do these two tests suggest that Mac OS X might be as fast or even faster than XP? Do they suggest that Quake 3 was poorly written? Is there a rational explanation why Mac OS X was faster for these two tests, but slower for the others?
http://barefeats.com/bootcamp.html
In the first case, it could be argued that Cinema4D is probably more optimized for Mac OS X, explaining why CineBench is slower on Windows.
But how about Quake 3? You would think that id software would have invested more resources to make Quake 3 run as good as possible on Windows systems. Also, unlike UT2004, WoW, etc, Quake 3 runs in OpenGL on *both* Windows and Mac, making it a good cross-platform benchmark.
One explanation put forth says that Quake 3 is an old application, written in the 600 MHz P3 days, and because of this, the crappy system call performance of Mac OS X is less of an issue. But, wouldn't that also imply that it should run faster on XP too?
Could someone please explain this to me? I know next to nothing about benchmarks and statistics. Do these two tests suggest that Mac OS X might be as fast or even faster than XP? Do they suggest that Quake 3 was poorly written? Is there a rational explanation why Mac OS X was faster for these two tests, but slower for the others?