Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

hvfsl

macrumors 68000
Jul 9, 2001
1,867
185
London, UK
They basically show that the top of the range AMD FX642.4Ghz is basically the same speed as a 3.6Ghz P4 Xeon (or Extreme Edition as Intel now calls some of them).

There have also been some spec benchmarks comparing the chips to the G5. They show the single AMD or P4 chip easily beating the G5. The link, http://www.go-l.com/desktops/machl38/features/index.htm
And yes I know, the site is a copy of Apple's.
 

GUSTO

macrumors member
Sep 23, 2003
70
0
Scotland
Well we got to see what the speed test results are against the G5, and the rumor of no G5 powerbooks til 2004 (end of) is no great :(

Looks like AMD have a monster of a chip family.
 

Lancetx

macrumors 68000
Aug 11, 2003
1,991
619
Originally posted by hvfsl
They basically show that the top of the range AMD FX642.4Ghz is basically the same speed as a 3.6Ghz P4 Xeon (or Extreme Edition as Intel now calls some of them).

There have also been some spec benchmarks comparing the chips to the G5. They show the single AMD or P4 chip easily beating the G5. The link, http://www.go-l.com/desktops/machl38/features/index.htm
And yes I know, the site is a copy of Apple's.

Everything on that Liebermann site is bogus so I wouldn't believe those. I seriously doubt that's even a real company, the entire site looks like an elaborate hoax...
 

hvfsl

macrumors 68000
Jul 9, 2001
1,867
185
London, UK
Does anyone know if there are any UT2003 benchmark results on the G5, I would like to compare them to the AMD 64 and P4 EE results.

For me the UT2003 benchmark will be the deciding factor of which chip is fastest.
 

bousozoku

Moderator emeritus
Jun 25, 2002
15,602
1,759
Lard
Originally posted by hvfsl
Does anyone know if there are any UT2003 benchmark results on the G5, I would like to compare them to the AMD 64 and P4 EE results.

For me the UT2003 benchmark will be the deciding factor of which chip is fastest.

There are a couple in the games area here.

The prices look really high on these processors but early adopters usually pay big money to be first.
 

ZildjianKX

macrumors 68000
May 18, 2003
1,610
0
Originally posted by bousozoku
There are a couple in the games area here.

The prices look really high on these processors but early adopters usually pay big money to be first.

And Apple doesn't charge out the butt for G5 processors? I'm curious how much they pay IBM for them.
 

evolu

macrumors regular
Dec 10, 2002
232
0
LA la land...
Originally posted by hvfsl
They basically show that the top of the range AMD FX642.4Ghz is basically the same speed as a 3.6Ghz P4 Xeon (or Extreme Edition as Intel now calls some of them).

There have also been some spec benchmarks comparing the chips to the G5. They show the single AMD or P4 chip easily beating the G5. The link, http://www.go-l.com/desktops/machl38/features/index.htm
And yes I know, the site is a copy of Apple's.

Just to reiterate - this site is FAKE.
 

bousozoku

Moderator emeritus
Jun 25, 2002
15,602
1,759
Lard
Originally posted by ZildjianKX
And Apple doesn't charge out the butt for G5 processors? I'm curious how much they pay IBM for them.

You mean to compare what IBM charges for 64-bit processors against what AMD charges, not what Apple charges, since Apple is the integrator, not the manufacturer of the processors.

The 1.8 GHz and dual 2.0 GHz machines have a lot of value, even if they seem expensive to you. This is even more apparent when you contrast them to the prior set of PowerMacs.

Are cheap machines really the deal they seem to be?
 

Cubeboy

macrumors regular
Original poster
Mar 25, 2003
249
0
Bridgewater NJ
Originally posted by hvfsl
Does anyone know if there are any UT2003 benchmark results on the G5, I would like to compare them to the AMD 64 and P4 EE results.

For me the UT2003 benchmark will be the deciding factor of which chip is fastest.

Games like UT2003 are poorly optimized for the G5, Barefeat's results has a Dual 2 GHz G5 pumping out roughly half the fps of a 3.0 GHz P4 in UT2003 Botmatch, Quake III results are much better although the 3.0 GHz P4 is still the winner. This should change when developers start putting some G5-specific optimisations into their code. I'm expecting the G5 with it's excellent fp performance and memory subsystems to be at least the equivalent of a 3 GHz P4 in any of these 3d games.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.