2.5Ghz G5 Vs. PC

Discussion in 'Macintosh Computers' started by Little Endian, Sep 26, 2004.

  1. Little Endian macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2003
    Location:
    Honolulu
    #1
    Barefeats has just updated The PC Vs. Mac Page and the initial benchmarking of real world Apps are impressively in favor of the Power Mac G5 2.5Ghz bar only the most High End PCs.

    http://barefeats.com/pentium4.html
     
  2. Abstract macrumors Penryn

    Abstract

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Location:
    Location Location Location
    #2
    Wow, the PM 2.5GHz G5 was spanking those little suckers around. Even with a new Opteron and whatever, the PM should still be beating the dead horse in pretty much every category.

    *cue evil laugh*

    And what's the cost difference on these machines? Dare I say that the PM may actually be cheaper than some of the competition?
     
  3. edesignuk Moderator emeritus

    edesignuk

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2002
    Location:
    London, England
    #3
    The DP2.5Ghz G5 will be cheaper that the DP3.06GHz Xeon, and the DP2GHz Opteron (when bought from a company, not home builds) I'd have thought.

    These benches show the new top-of-the-line in a very good light indeed :)
     
  4. stoid macrumors 601

    stoid

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2002
    Location:
    So long, and thanks for all the fish!
    #4
    I was just blown through three walls of my apartment and was deposited against a tree trunk! :D
     
  5. jared_kipe macrumors 68030

    jared_kipe

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2003
    Location:
    Seattle
    #5
    Can we start airing the "world's fastest, most powerful PC" advertisements now??
     
  6. hcuar macrumors 65816

    hcuar

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2004
    Location:
    Dallas
    #6
    Yeah... but... They didn't bench mark the 3.6 Ghz P4??? Only seems fair. :cool:
     
  7. Timelessblur macrumors 65816

    Timelessblur

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2004
    #7
    well the test skiped a lot of the higher end chips from intel and AMD. Then eniter FX line was skiped along with the extrem edition.
     
  8. thatwendigo macrumors 6502a

    thatwendigo

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2003
    Location:
    Sum, Ergo Sum.
    #8
    Unfortunately, the benchmarks don't include the latest parts from Intel or AMD. There's a 90nm Xeon MP at 3.6ghz now and a 90nm 2.5ghz Opteron is either released or about to come to market. Compare that to the fact that the tested machines were 3.06ghz and 2.0ghz, respectively.

    Also, the chipset used could make a huge difference. The G5 is fast, but we really do need to keep up on the cutting edge if these kinds of claims are going to be made.
     
  9. 7on macrumors 601

    7on

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2003
    Location:
    Dress Rosa
    #9
    Apple was in hot water with this before. By the time they get a new ad out like this, newer and faster PCs will be out. That's what happened last time. When the dual 2.0Ghz was introduced, I am certain that it was the fastest PC. However by the time it shipped and the ads for it played, newer procs had hit the market.
     
  10. thatwendigo macrumors 6502a

    thatwendigo

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2003
    Location:
    Sum, Ergo Sum.
    #10
    Both the Athlon FX and the P4EE (which is discontinued, incidentally) get slaughtered by DP systems with good chipsets. If you're going to do a comparison, at least be fair and let the x86 side take advantage of having more than one processor, too.

    Hell, you can build a pretty nice dual-Opteron rig for the cost of using a single Athlon FX.
     
  11. Dippo macrumors 65816

    Dippo

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2003
    Location:
    Charlotte, NC
    #11
    I looked around and no one I can find sells the 3.6Ghz Xeon yet, and I have no doubt that it would beat the 2.5Ghz G5. But by the time it comes out, Apple will have certianly upgraded the G5. Comparing Apple's current offerings to stuff that isn't out yet isn't fair.

    According to pricewatch, the 2.4Ghz Opteron is over $1400 (for just one chip!)
    The two chips would cost about as much as a complete Dual 2.5Ghz G5 system...
     
  12. ZildjianKX macrumors 68000

    ZildjianKX

    Joined:
    May 18, 2003
    #12
    *Yawn"... how about throwing some Quake 3 with the OpenGL renderer at it...
     
  13. Timelessblur macrumors 65816

    Timelessblur

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2004
    #13
    the other hard part is there is no real good software out there to compare them since it either opimized for one of the other. None of those test I have ever seen be used to compared there diffence x86 processors but I have seen in the past on Apple computers.

    If apple made a bold claim there would be lawsuits dealing with false advertiment because they pull out some test that are not good for the Apple computers but good for PCs.
     
  14. thatwendigo macrumors 6502a

    thatwendigo

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2003
    Location:
    Sum, Ergo Sum.
    #14
    Yes, but the hardware benchmark sites are getting their hands on both parts and putting them in test systems, showing what they're capable of. The parts may not be mainstreamed into the OEMs just yet, but that doesn't change the fact that they're coming soon and the dual 2.5ghz G5 needs to be compared to them, too.

    Believe me, I would love to have Apple possess the speed crown, but we need to keep things honest and open.

    Yeah, top of the line Opterons aren't cheap. Then again, the dual 2.0ghz part that's tested by Barefeats is $350+ a pop, which means it could be built into a professional system for (quite possibly) less than a G5.

    I need to wake up more before I try to talk about this. :D
     
  15. slughead macrumors 68030

    slughead

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
  16. Little Endian thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2003
    Location:
    Honolulu
    #16
    Barefeats should have testing for at least the XEON MP @3.06Ghz ready in two weeks as well as testing for the Opteron 250. The G5 2.5Ghz MP is allready leading by 10-50% faster in all tests compared to the current Xeon MP 2.4Ghz and Opteron 246 systems so I think it will fair well against Opteron 248 and 250 as well as any Xeon system that is currently available. Would be interestin to see some Game scores especially with the new Geforce 6800 Ultra.
     
  17. tomf87 macrumors 65816

    tomf87

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2003
    #17
    In the first test, they use a Xeon 3.06Ghz, but in the remaining tests they use a Xeon 2.4Ghz. In any test, you should retain the same system configuration so you can take all the results in and compare evenly.

    I wonder why they changed systems in the middle of testing.
     
  18. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #18
    missing a lot of newer cpus from the pc world. the real answer to G5 2.5 performance will be what does Doom3 look like on it. will just have to wait on the mac version but i do think that macs are great for work applications(boring) but for gaming they have allways come up a little short.
     
  19. Little Endian thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2003
    Location:
    Honolulu
    #19
    This is a work in Progress. Barefeats will add test results for other systems as they become available. Rob Art Morgan does not own all those machines so he tests when he has an oppurtunity in many cases that means that not all tests can be done at once. Read the entire Page. Xeon 3.06 and others will be posted as figures become available.
     
  20. tomf87 macrumors 65816

    tomf87

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2003
    #20
    Considering a 3Ghz processor is the norm currently, I have to disregard most of the tests until the latest, or near latest, proc is used in all tests. Why not compare a 2.5 G5 to a Pentium 4 2Ghz? Because it doesn't represent a comparable platform, and that's my basis for disregarding the other tests as well.
     
  21. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #21
    I concur P4s @ 4.0 are on the way, so are the faster Athlons. I remember seeing a Macworld test(thanks Rdowns)and a 2.2 athlon fx51 was sometimes faster then the dual G5 at 2.0. it depends on applications you are running but if into gaming you are then a PC is pretty fast for many reasons. though its a week old this Alienware has showed some awesome gaming performance in Ut2004 & Doom3 & Far Cry. :)
     
  22. frozenstar macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2003
    #22
    I don't think the real answer to the G5's performance will come from the results of a Doom3 timedemo. Modern games are heavily optimized for x86 and all the associated multimedia instruction sets. Code Doom3 from the ground up with the G5 and OS X in mind, and then we might have the real answer to the G5's performance.
     
  23. slughead macrumors 68030

    slughead

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    #23
    Uh I don't think "optimized for x86" is correct, but you're right--the code is different.

    OS X is not very game friendly. Probably through no fault of its own, the video drivers are usually written by Apple and optimized for Apple's applications/OS.

    Also there's no real direct-x (for obvious reasons). The mac version of DX is like 7 or 8 equivalent.

    This is why SPEC benchmarks are performed on the same OS.
     

Share This Page