• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Don't Laugh. I need proof why a PC is faster than a Mac

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Neither is faster than either. Each is suited for different applications and one will perform better than other if you use it for something they're optimized for.
 


<< i ain't never heard of Half-Life for mac, silly tech guy 🙂 >>



Does it matter?



<< i know Diablo2 works for mac though >>



Yeah, yeah it does. I need to visit CompUSA and check out thier Mac section, I havent been back there for a while...
 


<< And its comments like that that prove you dont know what you are talking about >>



We have a big one reel him in boys 😉

I was just joking, I personally can see know reason for spending more money on a machine that can do less.



<< 99% of the software I use on my PC will work on my Mac. >>



Personally I use my machine for everything from games to photoshop but critically also for 3d rendering and design, no apple is ever going to allow me to do that. I can do 100% of the things I need to do on my pc. And lets face it the pc will be quicker 99% of the time than any current apple, oh perhaps not in some pointless photoshop radial blur but in 99% of other apps it will.
 
You cant play CS
you cant PLay CS
All they can do is say look at Photoshop (yet PC is faster)
All i say is go do your phtoshop cus mine is faster 😀
 
I personally am a vegetable man and I don't like my computer being named after a fruit. If any of you have a better reason for not wanting a mac, I haven't heard it.

🙂

Ignorance is bliss.
 
X86 platform has a latency problem making it a no go for serious audio production on the PC. The MAC still reigns on 2D production due to the amount of freelancers working in the industry and makes it hard to collaborate on prodjects when everybody is running multi platforms so the MAC is the standard and is essential to work in the industry. While the speed on the MAC is faster in 2d production than the X86 platform you still dont see much real world performance between the two platforms running Illustrator Quark Photoshop. Lightwave 6 on a MAC G4 just boogies over the PC when doing the same rendering tasks.

Rain
 
Some numbers -
G4 867 1.12 gb RAM

Score Integer Floating Point Cache SIMD
peak 203.7% 126.5% 216.2% 0.00%
final 180.7% 135.9% 163.0% 0.00%

My machines -

1)(laptop) sony vaio PIII500 / 256mbpc100 /32gb5400 ide drive
Final score :int 82 fp :80 cache: 67 simd :0
Peak score :int 83 fp :81 cache: 69 simd :0

2)(my machine) Athlon 1.133 768mb pc2100 9.1gb 10k scsi

Final score :int 192 fp :187 cache: 105 simd :0
Peak score :int 194 fp :189 cache: 105 simd :0

3)(fiancee's machine) P4 1.4@1867(533mhz bus) 256mb pc800(running at 800mhz) 15gb 7200rpm ide

Final score :int 217 fp :148 cache: 144 simd :0
Peak score :int 229 fp :151 cache: 149 simd :0

Tests done using arstechina's cpu benchmark found
here
 
Check Here


Ok, AMD and Intel might not be clock for clock faster, however, when you have 2 times the processor speed you can find how the G4 gets it's a$$ handed to it. G4-800Mhz, Athlon 1.6Ghz XP 1900+.


Keep in mind the G4 has undergone no changes from 500Mhz - 800Mhz so you can find out the higher % clock speed and cut it in half... that is about what you will get. AMD has recently had a core change, the XP core. So on top of the higher clock, it also performs better per clock, esp with the better DDR motherboards out... So that even gives the PC a higher advantage.


That link on TOP will give you accurate results based on ALL the filters, even the ones where the G4 gets it's head handed to it. Steve Jobs loves to omit any benchmark where his precious G4 is loosing.


One more thing. Ask any MAC freak who designs and mfg the CPUs... uhhh... IBM mostly 🙂



 


<<

<< And its comments like that that prove you dont know what you are talking about >>



We have a big one reel him in boys 😉

I was just joking, I personally can see know reason for spending more money on a machine that can do less. >>



It can do just as much. Maybe not play some silly game, but the features of Mac OS X are numerous. Some of them are much better than what Microsoft has bundled with its OS. I dont think one platform is better than the other (come on x86 people, when are you going to get out of the 80's?). I like them both, and other architectures. I just dont see why people insult one when they know nothing about it. Its kind of stupid.



<<

<< 99% of the software I use on my PC will work on my Mac. >>



Personally I use my machine for everything from games to photoshop but critically also for 3d rendering and design, no apple is ever going to allow me to do that. I can do 100% of the things I need to do on my pc. And lets face it the pc will be quicker 99% of the time than any current apple, oh perhaps not in some pointless photoshop radial blur but in 99% of other apps it will. >>



I do networking and play with some source code. My Mac came with a C compiler, tcpdump (the best network troubleshooting tool out there), and a variety of UNIX tools, as any networking person would need. I dont play games, I dont mess with images, I dont do 3d. I dont need it. In these instances, if I were to stick with the OS that "belongs" on the hardware, Mac OS X gives me more benefits than Windows would.

ArchAngel777[/i] >>

, IBM and Motorolla. PPC and earlier Mac processors are used in plenty of computer hardware (cisco anyone?). Just wait for the G5's 😉

Degenerate, go back to your games, some people have work to do 🙂
 


<< I like them both, and other architectures. I just dont see why people insult one when they know nothing about it. Its kind of stupid. >>



And the problem with Mac people is that they cant admit the pc is faster, they wont admit that the price difference matters and lastly that people who use windows do it out of choice. Also some of them lack a sense of humour when it comes to their machines



<< I do networking and play with some source code. My Mac came with a C compiler, tcpdump (the best network troubleshooting tool out there), and a variety of UNIX tools, as any networking person would need. I dont play games, I dont mess with images, I dont do 3d. I dont need it. In these instances, if I were to stick with the OS that "belongs" on the hardware, Mac OS X gives me more benefits than Windows would. >>



fair enough, horses for courses. I am no network man so I wont try to argue. 😉
 


<<

<< I like them both, and other architectures. I just dont see why people insult one when they know nothing about it. Its kind of stupid. >>



And the problem with Mac people is that they cant admit the pc is faster, they wont admit that the price difference matters and lastly that people who use windows do it out of choice. Also some of them lack a sense of humour when it comes to their machines >>



PCs are faster in some things, sparc4u's in others, alphas in others PPC in yet again others. I wont use Windows by choice, but Im not a gamer. Thats what my new ps2 is for...
 


<< people who use windows do it out of choice. >>

a lot of people had no choice. the software devs made it for them. and a lot of people do it out of ignorance. they don't know of other platforms.
 
Both comments are valid but that doesnt mean that all windows users are ignorant of other platforms. I have used macs pc's and alpha's and I know which I prefer - and what I find easiest to teach.
 
<<<ArchAngel777 >>

, IBM and Motorolla. PPC and earlier Mac processors are used in plenty of computer hardware (cisco anyone?). Just wait for the G5's

Degenerate, go back to your games, some people have work to do >>>


Ohh...... G5..... Just like Ohh..... G4.... and Oh..... G3.... History repeats itself. You prove you are foolish.



A quote from Anand in the gamecube article


" Although both the Gekko and the Intel CPU used in the Xbox are built upon advanced 0.18-micron processes, the Gekko is held back by its relatively short pipeline limiting it to generally no higher than 500MHz. The Gekko does use Copper interconnects which are superior to their Aluminum counterparts (used in the Xbox CPU for example) in that they more efficiently conduct electricity, but this advantage is still not able to result in a higher clock speed for the CPU. In the case of the GameCube, the CPU is clocked at 485MHz, or 3 times its 162MHz FSB frequency. The benefit of a shorter pipeline is of course, an increased number of instructions that can be processed in those limited number of clocks. However from all of that data that we have seen comparing the PowerPC 750 to even the desktop Intel Celeron processor, it does not seem that the Gekko can compete, performance-wise. "

Ouch, a celeron outperform the Power PC 750? Whats up with that? 🙂 It's called the truth... open your eyes.


MAC COMMUNITY=HOMOSEXUAL CULT


Funny I really like MACs to be honest... It's the community of know-it-alls that ruins it.... they are a cult.

 


<< <<<ArchAngel777 >>

, IBM and Motorolla. PPC and earlier Mac processors are used in plenty of computer hardware (cisco anyone?). Just wait for the G5's

Degenerate, go back to your games, some people have work to do >>>


Ohh...... G5..... Just like Ohh..... G4.... and Oh..... G3.... History repeats itself. You prove you are foolish. >>



I guess you havent looked at the specs...




<< A quote from Anand in the gamecube article


" Although both the Gekko and the Intel CPU used in the Xbox are built upon advanced 0.18-micron processes, the Gekko is held back by its relatively short pipeline limiting it to generally no higher than 500MHz. The Gekko does use Copper interconnects which are superior to their Aluminum counterparts (used in the Xbox CPU for example) in that they more efficiently conduct electricity, but this advantage is still not able to result in a higher clock speed for the CPU. In the case of the GameCube, the CPU is clocked at 485MHz, or 3 times its 162MHz FSB frequency. The benefit of a shorter pipeline is of course, an increased number of instructions that can be processed in those limited number of clocks. However from all of that data that we have seen comparing the PowerPC 750 to even the desktop Intel Celeron processor, it does not seem that the Gekko can compete, performance-wise. "

Ouch, a celeron outperform the Power PC 750? Whats up with that? 🙂 It's called the truth... open your eyes.


MAC COMMUNITY=HOMOSEXUAL CULT


Funny I really like MACs to be honest... It's the community of know-it-alls that ruins it.... they are a cult. >>



Like I said, each architecture has its stengths and weaknesses. The celeron will beat the G4 in some things. No big deal. Unfortunately, the x86 architecture is refusing to grow up and that seems to be one of its biggest draw backs right now. Anyways, there is no reason to say such things about the Mac community because you cannot admit there are stengths and weaknesses to each and every platform. It makes you look like a child.
 
Why is it that macs need missleading benchmarks to try to show that macs are faster than a PC?
Weaknesses and strength... What can a Mac beat a dual P4 2.0 Xeon or the fastest dual config for Athlons? List them. Why do you find emulators for macs to rup PC material?
 


<< Why is it that macs need missleading benchmarks to try to show that macs are faster than a PC?
Weaknesses and strength... What can a Mac beat a dual P4 2.0 Xeon or the fastest dual config for Athlons? List them. Why do you find emulators for macs to rup PC material? >>



I dont know what programs they perform faster. I dont pay attention to that. Pure speed in my desktops isnt my biggest concern. My Mac is increadibly stable for 1. Also, the default configuration gives me more of the tools I need on a day to day basis. I dont have to go out looking for tons of software to throw on the Mac to be able to do all of the things I have to do. Unfortunately, if I got a nice big dell/compaq I would have to spend hours looking for the software I need.

I will also mention that x86 architecture is still using the BIOS. Why? There are better, more advanced solutions out there. Why not move up in the world? Why not get with the times? Why limit yourself to something as archaic as the BIOS has been?
 


<< He says programs like Final Cut 2.0 are faster on a Mac >>



This is irrefutably correct! Simply because FCP2 isn't available for the PC. That may sound like a cop-out, but it's actually an excellent point.

Just like there are many, many titles that are on the PC that aren't on the Mac, there are some key titles on the Mac that people crave. I know shops that run a PC for most things, but have a Mac set up just for Final Cut.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top