Dual Mac G4 1.25Ghz vs. P4 3.06Ghz benches (cover your eyes, it's ugly)

[Hulk]

Mac vs PC

Owww!


Now I know why Mac switched their advertising campaign from "faster and easier" to just "easier."

 

[ojai00]

Wow...not good, not good at all. I haven't been following the RAM issue for a while now. Is Intel officially supporting PC1066 now?

 

[smp]

PC's are faster than macs???? really?!?
Since when? </sarcasm>
Well, I'm still buying an ibook, I guess that makes me some sort of a moron or something.

 

[Wolfsraider]

Originally posted by: smp
PC's are faster than macs???? really?!?
Since when? </sarcasm>
Well, I'm still buying an ibook, I guess that makes me some sort of a moron or something.

different strokes for different folks

i like macs but i spend a lot of money on new toys and not everybody would agree with me either lol

but hey you only live once.
might as well be pay for what you enjoy.cost isn't everything.who cares if processor "a" costs x amount. i buy my toys to enjoy my time on.not to have the best toys rather to make my time more enjoyable.

being stuck at home this last year i got me something to spend my time on and yes it is very enjoyable now lol

smp get that imac and forget the "mine is better than yours" that these folks are shoveling around

maybe they haven't realized that this is old news why shouldn't the newest fastest computer beat the mac? better question would be why doesn't it beat it by so much more?

mike

 

[LH]

Because even with HT, its still a single processor. Id expect a dual Xeon 3.06Ghz system to do even better and it'll still be cheaper than the G4 system.

 

[buleyb]

Originally posted by: Wolfsraider

Originally posted by: smp PC's are faster than macs???? really?!? Since when? </SARCASM>Well, I'm still buying an ibook, I guess that makes me some sort of a moron or something.

different strokes for different folks i like macs but i spend a lot of money on new toys and not everybody would agree with me either lol but hey you only live once. might as well be pay for what you enjoy.cost isn't everything.who cares if processor "a" costs x amount. i buy my toys to enjoy my time on.not to have the best toys rather to make my time more enjoyable. being stuck at home this last year i got me something to spend my time on and yes it is very enjoyable now lol smp get that imac and forget the "mine is better than yours" that these folks are shoveling around maybe they haven't realized that this is old news why shouldn't the newest fastest computer beat the mac? better question would be why doesn't it beat it by so much more? mike

No flame intended, but does your Mac have a broken shift key? :-D

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: LH
Because even with HT, its still a single processor. Id expect a dual Xeon 3.06Ghz system to do even better and it'll still be cheaper than the G4 system.

Right, this is a completely unfair comparison: dual versus single. The 533 MHz fsb Xeons are to be released this Monday. I wish that article had just waited a few days for a dual versus dual battle. However I doubt the Xeons will get 533 MHz fsb and a speed boost on the same day. Probably we are looking at them to stay at 2.8 GHz.

 

[Hulk]

I didn't post to create a Mac vs PC flame war, I made the post to let anyone who might be interested see how the fastest Mac stands up to the fastest PC, using dual threaded applications that the Mac has typically dominated. The Mac is still a great PC, a few seconds here and there aren't going to make a huge difference for some people.

The Mac cpu is (has?) becoming a casualty of the AMD/Intel war over the past few years. If anything the PC is handicapped in this review since it is a single processor machine and all the apps tested are multithreaded. The PC lead would be extended further on normal everyday apps.

Even though I think this lead is going to increase even further with the introduction of Hammer and Intel's Prescott response, it won't hurt the Mac too much. Realistically, a 1Ghz Mac (or PC) can do most things most people do with their PC's efficiently. i.e. word processing, spreadsheets, internet browsing, e-mail, a little photo or video editing, some light gaming, etc... It's only when the applications become specific and the work load heavy that people may start to recognize the workstation performance lead of the fastest computers available.

 

[LH]

Right, this is a completely unfair comparison: dual versus single. The 533 MHz fsb Xeons are to be released this Monday. I wish that article had just waited a few days for a dual versus dual battle. However I doubt the Xeons will get 533 MHz fsb and a speed boost on the same day. Probably we are looking at them to stay at 2.8 GHz.

Xeon 3.06's come out sometime in Jan.

 

[NOX]

Of course, Mac stalwarts will cling to the notion that Mac OS X is so much better and easier to use than Windows XP, but if you?re spending all day inside After Effects, which operating system you?re using makes little difference. What does make a huge difference is if you have to sit and wait for rendering any longer than necessary. And, according to our benchmarks here, if you have an After Effects composite that needs, say, two hours to render on the Mac, it?ll take you about an hour and 10 minutes on this PC. So, in addition to the extra $629 you must pay for the Mac, it will cost you plenty of time as well, especially while using After Effects. Time is money. After looking at these startling benchmark results, we have to gaze over at our beautifully-designed Macs and ask, "Is it worth it?"

WOW! A complete smackdown!!!

 

[First]

nm

 

[OulOat]

Originally posted by: smp
PC's are faster than macs???? really?!?
Since when? </sarcasm>
Well, I'm still buying an ibook, I guess that makes me some sort of a moron or something.

Yes

 

[tart666]

Right, this is a completely unfair comparison: dual versus single.

Actually, it's pretty fair since the system price is the same

In fact I would like to see more of this: like HT 3.06 vs dual Xeon 2.4 vs dual MP2400. All of these should also come in at about the same price.

(edit) And the mac held it's own pretty good, considering. Perhaps an actual decent SMP system would blow the doors off of HT for less money.

 

[Miramonti]

ouch, time to short apple stock.

 

[everman]

pwned

 

[CraigRT]

haha, there's a real surprise!!

 

[BFG10K]

I don't think anyone here is the least bit surprised by the results. And thanks to HT the PC platform is extending its advantage over the Mac platform even further.

 

[DngrMouse]

I wouldn't hate Mac so much if it weren't for those commercials... "I switched to Mac because...."

 

[Tab]

I wish Microsoft would make a 'I switch to a PC because..." They would own Mac users...

 

[NFS4]

I crap on Macs

 

[EdipisReks]

Macs are my dingleberries.

 

[CedarTeeth135]

You guys should remember that, if its Christmas day, and you just used your new digital camera, if you had a mac, all you would have to do is plug your camera in to your iBook, and download the pictures, while, if your on a PC, you would have to download all sorts of Windows drivers.






That commercial cracks me up.

 

[hdeck]

hmm...fastest mac vs. fastest pc...i can already smell the bias in the air...

 

[Spicedaddy]

haha, that's just sad...

Actually, it's pretty fair since the system price is the same

Yeah, it's only 600$ or so... That's pennies for most people.

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: CedarTeeth135
You guys should remember that, if its Christmas day, and you just used your new digital camera, if you had a mac, all you would have to do is plug your camera in to your iBook, and download the pictures, while, if your on a PC, you would have to download all sorts of Windows drivers.






That commercial cracks me up.

Hey, I think she's kinda cute though