PDA

View Full Version : Geekbenched: G5 Quad vs. Athlon64 X2 vs. Pentium D


MacBytes
Feb 2, 2006, 05:27 AM
http://www.macbytes.com/images/bytessig.gif (http://www.macbytes.com)

Category: Benchmarks
Link: Geekbenched: G5 Quad vs. Athlon64 X2 vs. Pentium D (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20060202062712)
Description:: Follow up to an earlier article comparing more machines, but which lacked current AMD and Intel CPUs

Posted on MacBytes.com (http://www.macbytes.com)
Approved by Mudbug

iJaz
Feb 2, 2006, 05:38 AM
Seems like the G5 Quad is pretty fast.
How about the other machines, are they the fastest from AMD and Intel?

bigandy
Feb 2, 2006, 08:05 AM
need a Quad PM. now. :cool:

Mr. Anderson
Feb 2, 2006, 08:14 AM
Even though the quad is fast - there are somethings that still take a while - but overall its a nice beast :D

D

Belly-laughs
Feb 2, 2006, 09:24 AM
You mean you canīt watch movies any faster? Bummer! :D

micron1
Feb 2, 2006, 10:01 AM
If they used the fastest Mac desktop for the test, why didn't they use the AMD X2 4800+, the fastest AMD processor????:confused: They used a much slower X2 3200+ for the comparison. This seems very biased. Don't get me wrong I still prefer the G5, the OS makes all the difference.

greatdevourer
Feb 2, 2006, 10:08 AM
Seems like the G5 Quad is pretty fast.
How about the other machines, are they the fastest from AMD and Intel? No. The Pentium D is utter crap and the 3200+ is very slow compared to the best (4800+ or FX-60). However, the G5 does only have 1.5GB RAM instead of 2GB

adamfilip
Feb 2, 2006, 10:44 AM
its an unfair test

the Mac has two dual core processors
the other system are single duall core.

right there its unfair

I dont blame them for not having the best of each system.
common its hard to get access to these systems.

so either they should put in single processor dual core stats
or dual up the other systems

posterboy81
Feb 2, 2006, 10:48 AM
If they used the fastest Mac desktop for the test, why didn't they use the AMD X2 4800+, the fastest AMD processor????:confused: They used a much slower X2 3200+ for the comparison. This seems very biased. Don't get me wrong I still prefer the G5, the OS makes all the difference.

Because we didn't have one. In fact, it took several days to get someone with an X2 to run geekbench on their machine at all.

posterboy81
Feb 2, 2006, 10:51 AM
its an unfair test

the Mac has two dual core processors
the other system are single duall core.

right there its unfair


People asked to see the quad vs. an x2 and a D, so that's what they got.


I dont blame them for not having the best of each system.
common its hard to get access to these systems.

so either they should put in single processor dual core stats
or dual up the other systems

There are a number of other machines tested in the article immediately preceding this one (see here: http://www.geekpatrol.ca/article/101/geekbench-comparison_).

Sunrunner
Feb 2, 2006, 12:46 PM
Because we didn't have one. In fact, it took several days to get someone with an X2 to run geekbench on their machine at all.


Sounds like a perfectly good reason to me.

grapes911
Feb 2, 2006, 01:00 PM
Um . . . I'm pretty sure there is no AMD X2 3200. They only have 4800, 4600, 4400, 4200, and 3800. Do they mean the X2 3800 or X2 4200? Do do they mean the non-dual core 64 3200? If they can't get this right, I don't trust a damn work they say.

jfpoole
Feb 2, 2006, 01:47 PM
Um . . . I'm pretty sure there is no AMD X2 3200. They only have 4800, 4600, 4400, 4200, and 3800. Do they mean the X2 3800 or X2 4200? Do do they mean the non-dual core 64 3200? If they can't get this right, I don't trust a damn work they say.

Whoops. That was a mistake in the article, which I just fixed; Geekbench was run on an Athlon 64 X2 3800.

Timepass
Feb 2, 2006, 01:48 PM
its an unfair test

the Mac has two dual core processors
the other system are single duall core.

right there its unfair

I dont blame them for not having the best of each system.
common its hard to get access to these systems.

so either they should put in single processor dual core stats
or dual up the other systems

Unfair is an understatement. Besides the dual CPU adavatage there is the fact that the AMD and intel chips are older chips and not top of the line chips. The test was only done to make apple look massivily better and prouble to make the guy e-***** look big. Way to make sure of that is to use older chips from the competors.

Now since they used an apple top of the line computer they should of used top of the lines AMD and Itel computer to test it agaist. It was an AMD 3800 dual core which is not a top of the line chip. it several months olds. I think this test is a bad test and I to make matter worse it makes the mac comminity it self look bad because majority of the mac zelots out there will sight this test showing how much better the apple is. A lot of those times the people PC side there are bragging 2 know a heck of a lot more about the techology and can see though the BS test. That or those people will talk with a PC guy who knows there stuff. And they would see right though it and clearly point out the fact how massivly unfair the test was. In the end it hurts the mac commminty and only add fuel to the fire that apple uses inflate the value of there computers and they are not any better than PC to worse because to make them selves look good they have to run unfair test.

grapes911
Feb 2, 2006, 02:32 PM
Whoops. That was a mistake in the article, which I just fixed; Geekbench was run on an Athlon 64 X2 3800.
Oh, wow. That makes me feel soooo much better . . . :rolleyes:

JordanNZ
Feb 2, 2006, 02:43 PM
Unfair is an understatement. Besides the dual CPU adavatage there is the fact that the AMD and intel chips are older chips and not top of the line chips.


It doesn't matter...
Unless they are testing Quads against Quads, the G5 is still going to spank the others when it comes to multi-threaded apps. Even if they were testing the latest dual core chips, the results wouldn't be that much differen't.

Timepass
Feb 2, 2006, 04:37 PM
It doesn't matter...
Unless they are testing Quads against Quads, the G5 is still going to spank the others when it comes to multi-threaded apps. Even if they were testing the latest dual core chips, the results wouldn't be that much differen't.

The lastest dual cored computer would of beaten the Mac in sevearl areas to blow them out of the water. It mostly the fact that it is so massisivly unfair in just the chips that makes me really sick.
Yeah AMD is going to be the weakest in multithreading. Intel Hyperthreading power really comes into play in multithreading and is extermly powerful if used correctly. But to give you an idea of how massivly unbalanced it was is AMD has a AMD 64 4800+ dual core and that is not the fastest. The fastest is the FX60 dual core. So you are talking very badly out placed. I dont know intel as well but I know for a fact by looking at it that it was bad. Oh matter thant the quads are not going to win every time. Each chip has it own advatages over the others.
AMD has the integrated memeory controller which in it self is extermally fast and very powerful and moves data to the chip faster than Intel or apple.
Intel has Hypertreading which gives it huge advatages in multitreading (something the other chips dont have)
Apple is the 4 cores among other things. Infomation about apple chips is not as well published from more relable sorces (apple not being very relieble for it because they are the maker plus they have a history of inflatting there numbers and info but that is the same I dont trust the numbers from AMD or Intel)

JordanNZ
Feb 2, 2006, 04:52 PM
Apple don't make the G5.....

Mr. Anderson
Feb 2, 2006, 04:57 PM
You mean you canīt watch movies any faster? Bummer! :D

Some video encoding still has you waiting - and if I set up a 3D animation rendering its going to take a while. But its not going to take as long as other machines :D

Oh, but Illustrator is slower than the dual 2.7 since the braniacs over at Adobe haven't made Illustrator multi processor aware - so it only goes as fast as it can on one CPU.

D

Timepass
Feb 2, 2006, 05:07 PM
Apple don't make the G5.....

No but it ther computers and the only ones who use them. IBM just does not put out much info on them. Besides most people related G5 chips to apple computers Not IBM.
But my orginal point on apple just not a good sorce to get info on them. Besides apple history of massivisly over inflating there numbers and getting nail for it several times over make them the worse for infomation on there own stuff (compared to AMD info on there own stuff and Intels the same. None of which are good sorces but apple is by the far the worse) IBM does not release much out.

either way the point stands. I knew full well IBM makes the chips. (same as IBM makes some of AMD chips)

posterboy81
Feb 2, 2006, 06:33 PM
Now since they used an apple top of the line computer they should of used top of the lines AMD and Itel computer to test it agaist.

The PPC970MP and the Athlon64 X2 and the Pentium D used in this round of tests are all contemporaries, having been announced or released in the late spring or early summer of this past year (the 970MP didn't show up in the PowerMac until several months later, but X2s and Pentium Ds didn't really show up in force until the fall either). There is just two of the G5 in the machine tested because that's what a couple people asked to see.

If you want to compare either the Pentium D or Athlon64 tested to a single dual core G5, just click back to the previous article which includes both a Dual 1.8 GHz PPC970 and a single 2.0 GHz Dual Core PPC970MP.

Also, as with the previous article, at this point it's still more about the testing than the results. The fact that you may not believe that doesn't make it any less true.

sjk
Feb 2, 2006, 11:58 PM
Timepass, please consider spell checking your posts.

Stridder44
Feb 3, 2006, 02:28 AM
I personally welcome our Quad G5 Overlords....

Platform
Feb 3, 2006, 03:27 AM
C'mon test 4 against 4......not 4 against 2 :rolleyes: