1.25 GHz Dual G4 Article

Discussion in 'General Mac Discussion' started by mrpepsi, Dec 6, 2002.

  1. macrumors newbie

    Aug 21, 2002
  2. macrumors 6502a


    Jul 15, 2002
    Washington, DC / Rochester, NY / Lexington, NC
    I'm not surprised that no one has replied. :p

    They can be very negative, especially with the "facts" that Apple is twisting. But it's good to see that at least in LightWave 7.0, the Dual 1.25 is creeping close to the new HyperThreading-enabled Pentium 4. But then again, those dual Xeons are yet faster by quite a bit still.

    Seems like the G4 has hit a very thick brick wall. One only can wait to see if Motorola will actually produce and successfully scale the 7457 and future G4s to be used before the PowerPC 970, if Apple is indeed going to use the PowerPC 970. If Apple isn't, then I don't know. 1.8 GHz G4 while there are Athlon 64 3400+ to 4400+, maybe more. That'd be sad.
  3. macrumors 6502

    Oct 28, 2002

    Man who messed up that Johan De Gelas' cornflakes... (subtext: this guy is a Windows Widget Without Wisdom).

    He's so clueless I'm not even going to address his mistakes.
    Wonder what Gates would say about such devotion...

    Apple ignited the personal computer revolution in the 1970s with the Apple II and reinvented the personal computer in the 1980s with the Macintosh. Apple is committed to bringing the best personal computing experience to students, educators, creative professionals and consumers around the world through its innovative hardware, software and Internet offerings.
  4. macrumors 6502

    Oct 24, 2001
    Re: Wheeeeewwww...

  5. macrumors 603


    Jun 25, 2002
    LaLaLand, CA
    Uh, isn't 12 GigaFlops less than 18 GigaFlops?

    I do wish Macs would render faster ( instant would be nice:D ), but I can't believe how fast the G4 actually is. At 1.25 GHz, it trounces the 2.53 P4, 2.4 Xeon, and 2800 AMD. The only config that really beats it is a Dual Xeon. I think most people would be willing to take a small performance hit and still pay a bit more for an Apple product, but we all know that we need more speed. And lower prices.

    It's just the nature of the beast.
  6. thread starter macrumors newbie

    Aug 21, 2002
    After posting that article and no one replied I feared I would be "blackballed" from MacRumors.com. ;-)

    I love my Mac because it rarely crashes, the OS is FAR superior to Windows, it's stylish and the list goes on.


    I have to admit that while it is awesome that a 1.25 GHz mac can keep up with a 2.53GHz PC, it would be nicer when there are 2GHz+ 970's actually besting PC's is everyday tasks (such os scrolling webpages, or general OS peppiness) rather than just a few photoshop benchmarks.

    It would be awesome for Mac's to have 50% of the market, for little grandmas and such to go and get Mac's because they are just easier, and for kids to want Mac's cuz they are blazingly fast on games....but for now they are just a kind of small niche.

    Hopefully with IBM pushing for a future in Linux, Apple can catch the wave and have a long line of cpu upgrades.
  7. Moderator emeritus

    Mr. Anderson

    Nov 1, 2001
    As a Lightwave user, this really interested me, if we get a faster chip soon, the tables could be turned because the speed difference isn't that great.

    In the conclusion Still, Apple needs a 0.13 micron chip soon, as a PowerMac is a lot more expensive than a typical OEM PC. Dell's 3.06 GHz Pentium 4 system is about $600 less expensive than the dual 1.25 GHz PowerMac.

    I just hope Apple pulls something off soon.


Share This Page