New barefeats article proves G4s sometimes faster, sometimes slower than AMD/Pentiums

Discussion in 'Hardware Rumors' started by gopher, Oct 7, 2002.

  1. gopher macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2002
    Location:
    Maryland, USA
  2. TheT macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2002
    Location:
    Germany
    #2
    Re: New barefeats article proves G4s sometimes faster, sometimes slower than AMD/Pent

    But Macs look better than most PCs :D
     
  3. gopher thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2002
    Location:
    Maryland, USA
    #3
    Re: Re: New barefeats article proves G4s sometimes faster, sometimes slower than AMD/Pent

    I don't dispute that.
     
  4. Backtothemac macrumors 601

    Backtothemac

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2002
    Location:
    San Destin Florida
    #4
    These test that this guy puts up are crap! The Athlon is overclocked to be a 2100+, none of the systems have the most current OS. I personally have seen great variations in his tests over the years, and personally, I don't buy it. Why test for single processor functions? The Dual is a DUAL! All of the major Apps are dual aware, as is the OS!

    Try that with XP Home.
     
  5. TheT macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2002
    Location:
    Germany
    #5
    I think Mac users just live in their happy little world and think their computers are still the best... well, wake up!
    As of now, PCs kick every Mac's ass, they are just simply faster! Mhz may not matter that much, but a 2Ghz DP compared to a 1.25Ghz DP has to be faster, if you configure it right.
    The reason I use a mac is the software, no Windows can beat OSX! And, as a matter of fact, my mac looks better than any of the pcs my friends have...
     
  6. Backtothemac macrumors 601

    Backtothemac

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2002
    Location:
    San Destin Florida
    #6
    Um, no. You are wrong. Just because the Intel machine is 2GHZ doesn't mean squat. Pipelines, stages, all of this matters. Don't assume anything about the quality of a 25 year old architecture. X86 blows crap, and always will.
     
  7. mr evil brkfast macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2002
    Location:
    Toronto, Canada
    #7
    I think it is pretty sad when the comparisons are not between the best of the best of each manufacturer and Apple still looses with the top of the line.

    I dunno what AMD's best is but to see how close/ or far behind Apple is the comparison should at least include a 2.5-2.8 ghz pentium 4.
     
  8. ddtlm macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2001
    #8
    I'd be more impressed with these "tests" if the pro-Mac cowards had used a top-of-the-line Athlon system (1.8ghz is available for duals, 2.13ghz is pretty much available for singles) or a top-of-the-line P4 (2.0ghz? haha!). The 2.0ghz P4 runs on the old 400mhz FSB whereas there is a 533mhz FSB P4 clocking at 2.8ghz available. They also make no mention of memory type used on any platform. For the P4, PC1066 RDRAM is tops, for the Athlon the new nForce2 with 2 channels of 333mhz DDR is tops (although I will admit that chipset still has a one-month ETA). OK, so maybe use the VIA KT400 for the Athlon, it's pretty good.

    And what's his quote about a dual Xeon 2200 probably being top dog? Other than the fact you can get Xeons at 2.8ghz as well...

    Anyway I think these tests are crap. But they will suffice so that "Macs are fastest!" freakos can keep them in mind and make vauge statements about how Macs and PCs are about the same speed in "tests". (Those people annoy me.)
     
  9. ddtlm macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2001
    #9
    Backtothemac:

    Does it annoy you to know that even in Photoshop (gasp!) those 25-year old ISA x86 machines kick the snot out of the latest and greatest Mac? Sure seems to.

    2.8ghz, by the way.
     
  10. alex_ant macrumors 68020

    alex_ant

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2002
    Location:
    All up in your bidness
    #10
    New G4s sometimes faster, sometimes slower

    ...but usually slower
     
  11. gopher thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2002
    Location:
    Maryland, USA
    #11
    Well so can the G4 be overclocked. So what's your point? Big whoop, overclock all you like, but we are talking about systems sold by manufacturers. To learn more about overclocking Macs, visit http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/
     
  12. cr2sh macrumors 68030

    cr2sh

    Joined:
    May 28, 2002
    Location:
    downtown
    #12
    I thought we decided to ignore everything that barefeats has to say? They are not a reputable source at all, their tests are flawed and they have little metadata at all.... why even bother?
     
  13. PCUser macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2002
    #13
    No, no, the Athlon in the test was overclockled. That Athlon would not be sold by system manufacturers overclocked that far.


    Added: The guy who ran this test even states that a dual 1GHz G4 rig is equal to 2GHz, which it isn't.

    On the graphics test, he doesn't even give the Athlon and P4 the same graphics card. That's a very innacurate testing site, IMO.
     
  14. Backtothemac macrumors 601

    Backtothemac

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2002
    Location:
    San Destin Florida
    #14
    Um,
    Don't know what chart you were looking at, but with both processors being used, the 1.25 kicked the "snot" out of the PC's.
     
  15. MrMacMan macrumors 604

    MrMacMan

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2001
    Location:
    1 Block away from NYC.
    #15
    Just one little statement.
    They Overclocked to make the Althon Faster, so why not the mac. They could make their mac 'Closer' to the 2 GHZ mark, just by a little. And anyways not every program is going to take the 2ed processor and use it fully.
    1 (1 ghz processor) *2 does not equal to 2 GHZ.
     
  16. ddtlm macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2001
    #16
    Backtothemac:

    Ohhh, you mean that one test where the Mac beat an old dual Athlon by, look, 2 points? 38/40 hardly matters, especially seeing as how Athlon MP's are available at 1.8ghz rather than the 1.6ghz tested. Xeons are available at up to 2.8ghz if you want a real top of the line SMP PC. How do you suppose the dual 1.25 would do against that sort of competition?
     
  17. ddtlm macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2001
    #17
    MrMacman:

    Perhaps you missed it the first few times around, but Athlons are available at speeds of 2400+ (2.0ghz) and there are even a few 2600+ (2.13ghz) models out there. Why does it matter if they overclocked an old Athlon to 1.6ghz? Tell you what, to make it fair why don't we add in my overclocked dual 800?
     
  18. Backtothemac macrumors 601

    Backtothemac

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2002
    Location:
    San Destin Florida
    #18
    Jesus you still don't get it. If you compare Apples to Apples, the 1.6GHZ Dual Athlon is still slower in apps that are multi processor aware. Now, how about the PIV? How does that stack up? The x86 is garbage. Any real IT director would know that.

    The point that I was making was that the testing was flawed.

    And pc's suck.
     
  19. ddtlm macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2001
    #19
    Backtothemac:

    No, I "get it" fine. Don't bother testing a 1.6ghz dual Athlon when 1.8ghz dual Athlons are readily available. It would do you good to note that this test did not cover all "apps that are multi processor aware", it covered only two apps that are multi-processor aware, and on one of them the Mac looses by a lot. Even on its one win, the dual 1.25 G4 would still loose to a top-of-the-line dual Athlon. Which is slower than a top-of-the-line dual Xeon. Get it?
     
  20. samdweck macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2002
    Location:
    1 Infinite Loop
    #20
    Re: New barefeats article proves G4s sometimes faster, sometimes slower than AMD/Pent

    yeah w/e.. winblows!! forever live apple!
     
  21. barkmonster macrumors 68020

    barkmonster

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2001
    Location:
    Lancashire
    #21
    They'll be a more stressful benchmark coming soon

    I emailed this to rob-art morgan on Saturday :

    He responded with this :

    I can just see the look of disappointment on everyone's faces when the dual 1.25Ghz mac is slapped silly by both windows systems at practically everything.

    Call me a pesimist but concidering how it's scrapped by when compared with lower end cpus I can see a thorough G4 thrashing coming up on barefeats very soon.
     
  22. samdweck macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2002
    Location:
    1 Infinite Loop
    #22
    all pcs are is snot... he is right.. now leave... cease and desist you s.o.b. PROPAGANDA STARTED THE HOLOCAUST, AND YOU ARE GIVING PROPOGANDA... arn this is a personal attack and is totally fair... let me speak my peace!
     
  23. alex_ant macrumors 68020

    alex_ant

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2002
    Location:
    All up in your bidness
    #23
    Re: They'll be a more stressful benchmark coming soon

    Won't happen. To a Mac zealot, if the G4 is slower than anything, either 1) the benchmark was rigged, or 2) "pcheese" and "Windblowz" suck anyway.

    The Pentium 5 could come along and deliver 15,000 in SPECfp and all the Mac zealots would be whining about how SPEC isn't a real-world benchmark and how Macs deliver such better real-world performance etc., even when they have nothing to substantiate their claims but the biased and selective evidence from themselves and their Mac-using friends.

    I love Macs, but I harbor no illusions about them not generally being just about the slowest thing on the block at the moment.

    Alex
     
  24. samdweck macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2002
    Location:
    1 Infinite Loop
    #24
    Re: Re: They'll be a more stressful benchmark coming soon

    mac rules, pc sucks, how hard is this? if you dont' agree, why are you on a site devoted to macs? leave now!!!!!!! (not u alex... lol)
     
  25. alex_ant macrumors 68020

    alex_ant

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2002
    Location:
    All up in your bidness
    #25
    I wish I could leave. Macrumors is to the GPA what the bug zapper is to the fly.
     

Share This Page