pc reality

Discussion in 'MacRumors News Discussion (archive)' started by mozez, Sep 18, 2001.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2001
    #1
    mac and pc, who is better, well, mac of course, but, let's not get too cocky. people have been going back and forth with frame rates and speeds, but never do they match up the right computers, when will people realize that you can't test a P3 pc, vs a dual g4 800. of course the mac will win, but it doesn't mean jack cause you tested it against an yesturday's box. want to do a real test, here's today's top machines. a dual 2ghz P4 with pc2400 DDR ram by samsung, (266mhz bus on it) with a geforce 3, now, this machine costs less than the dual g4 800, so it's a fair in price fight, or, a dual athlon, 1.2ghz mp processors, ddr ram, pc2100, all it takes, and a geforce 3, this machien costs less than $1000 to build, easily fare, you could for price add in a 15,000 rpm hard drive, but, then it makes it unfair cause the standard dual doesn't have one. so, both ata 100, both geforce 3, dual athlon, dual p4 and dual g4, who would win? here's the kicker guys, mac gets crushed, don't believe me? run the tests, yes in a few applications which are the only ones that ever get posted, the mac can hold it's own, but the mac has so much farther to go, the dual athlon destroyed the mac in 3d applications and every game frame rate. it was no test, it was a crushing defeat. now, the p4 also beat the mac, lost on gamin to the athlon, not the mac though :( but did win on 3d apps such as maya, 3d studio max, and lightwave. you can't do tests without being fair. so stop posting stats that aren't true. want specific tests done, just ask. want pictures of proof, no problem. again, i like my macs better, but if you know how to build a pc correctly, and you run tests without biased opinions, raw speed is in the pcs, better os and less bugs and a happy person is in the mac, plain and simple.
     
  2. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 12, 2001
    Location:
    US
    #2
    bad newsmozez

    Ummm Moses, you are probably right but d you know that when the G5 comes out, when in dual configuration (i.e 1.5 GHZ Dual G5), I would really like to see the Pentium 4 or even the Itanium come close to it. So basically, so far yes, the happy person, non buggy and better os is mac. But wait a year from now and Intel would have completely painted itslef in a corner. Mac on the other hand will make a giant leap with the G5, even in raw speed.
     
  3. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2001
    #3
    NO MORE WAR

    Hello guys!
    I think all tests people are trying to elaborate to compare Mac and PC just don't take place anywhere: you know better than I do that you didn't choose a Mac instead of a PC for speed: there is a whole world behind the Mac due to its way of productions, etc... Would you find a http://www.pcrumors.com on the net? Never! Nobody would lie if he tells you he bought a Mac also for the shape!
    For my part, I was working on PCs for 9 years before comming to Mac, and I never wondered if I had a more powerful Machine than my friends on PC; I had a Mac, that's all!
    So stop that stupid "speed-war" between Mac and PC, it makes no sense! Or buy a PC! ;-)
    thanks for your attention!
     
  4. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2001
    #4
    I'll agree with some of your comments:
    • Yes, a dual 2ghz P4 is fast
    • Yes, a dual athlon is fast
    • Yes, a dual 800 g4 is fast

    However you have also mentioned one peculiar item
    with the optimal word being build. Most people that I know don't build their own mac's. And I venture to say that 80% of the pc buying consumers have zero desire to build thir own pc's. Mac's have been shown to be faster out of the box than most pc's.

    True, you can build a faster pc, but why go through the trouble when you can pay a little more and have a fast one already built for you. a la mac

    Also, add the various problems that go along with building your own PC box, (i.e. hardward conflits, driver problems, etc.) and most people will opt to go for the "pre-built" system.

    I find it funny that pc-zealots always use the excuse "I can build one for faster" (not directed at you, mozez) I see this all the time, and I agree you could build one for faster, but most people probably would rather not.

    ----just my 2¢
     
  5. thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2001
    #5
    abosolutly i agree, most people do not build, and with good reason. i build becuase i love to do it, you have to do alot of research to make sure you are building the right system. with mac, you need not worry, and i know this. i love my powerbook and g4. now, when the g5 comes out at whatever speed next year, then tests will be done again. but you were assuming that intel and athlon are just sitting still. why did i not include the itanium, well, it sucks, the kernal must have been written by an intern i mean come on. intel and athlon will continue to grow and expand and the race will go on, benifits, mac is starting to make an impact. nvidia was a big gain for the mac. personally i love to watch and see what happens. i hope apple pulls it off but osx has really pissed me off seeing how they released a beta os.
     
  6. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2001
    #6
    I agree, but I have used 10.1 and it is awesome!!!

    I'm just hoping it gets released soon...
     
  7. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2001
    #7
    ytifi8ycfif
     
  8. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2001
    Location:
    Athens, Greece
    #8
    Multiprocessing


    A Point here......

    It is not fair to compare dual macs with OSX with dual Athlons or Pentiums. Let me remind you that the current Windows versions do not support multiprocessing for more than network purposses. So comparing a dual G4 with a dual P4 for e.x, is like comparing a dual G4 with a single P4. Not fair enough is it????? Wait for Win XP or later, and then here we are again.....
     
  9. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2001
    #9
    Not only that, but nearly all pc programs are not optimised for dual processing.So macs have a clear advantage there.
    Macs have alot to learn from PCs about versatility, although that is probably not what would make them sell better.
     
  10. thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2001
    #10
    ok, the last two idiots that posted, wake up!!! mac knows nothing about multiprocessing, osx is the only os on mac to supoort it and very very very few programs do it without the os crashing horribly, pcs have been able to do multiprocsseing for more thna 6 years, they lead the industry, so whoever said a dual p4 was like a single p4, is an idiot. i use duals, both platforms, trust me, mac is lagging, has been. pcs are the only steady dual paltform. unix is more stable, but doesn not have the program backing that pc, all, and i mean all major grafics programs even aol can use dual proccesing on a pc. windows nt folks, years and years old, suports up to 32 processors, that's right, wake up to reality, windows 200 can handle 64 processors, so guess what, make sure you know what your talking about before you post a reply
     
  11. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2001
    #11
    Well as idiots go i think of myself as an average one.
    I have used a dual athlon with windows XP (a beta version), it didnt seem faster than the single Athlon and it produced a hell of alot more heat inside the case which made the system quite unstable so i saw the temp of the motherboard and cpu and they were 38 and 50 degrees respectively ( and i was surpised when i saw it had 2 6800 rpm Delta fans on the heatsink too!).

    But anyway, i wasnt impressed by the performance so i looked on the web and found out that on average a dual processing pc will only run 3% faster than a single.
    So as for being an idiot Mr mozez, atleast i got a reason to be.
    u stink.
     
  12. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2001
    #12
    Oh and if u want to know why dual processing PCs are only 3% faster on average. It is because unlike macs with optimized apps, the second processor only works when the first processor misses a clock cyle the second will cut in.

    OSX assigns tasks to each processor so the load
    evens out between the two. and multiprocessor-savvy software runs its various tasks on either processor -- the operating system's scheduling software will give the job to the processor doing less work at any given time.
    wow mozez an idiot is explaining to you what u know most, surely that says something.
    Mozez you are an idiot in denial, u reek of PC, and you have the brain of a masturbating wombat. Go fu** off you pri**.



    [Edited by spikey on 09-22-2001 at 01:47 PM]
     
  13. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2001
    #13
    However i will admit that in an app that can take advantage of multi processing it can be up to 75% faster.

    Oh and by the way although PCs have been able to do multi processing for 6 years it hasnt been with windows

    "The first thing you need to benefit from two CPUs is an operating system--such as Windows 2000 or NT.4.0--that can utilize both processors. If you try to use Windows 95, 98, or Millennium Edition, that second CPU will sit idle."
    I guess you will have to put up with a shi* GUI or a not so hot OS.

    I have used both PC and Mac dual processing machines and i have seen that a dual processing G4 is more stable, doesnt crash nearly as much, and is faster.
     
  14. thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2001
    #14
    sparky or who ever you are, you seem to know nothing about computers. 3% faster huh, this isn't even worth argueing about but i'll make some simple points for you to understand ok. windows nt, ok, windows got that, has been running since 95, 6 years, it then changed to 2000 in the year 1999, and went to xp professional in 2001, we good so far. now, first, if you actually used a real dual athlon built correctly, and using an nt based os, not 98, mil or 95, you would notice that not only is it faster, and by the way, PROVEN faster than a dual 800, check with apple man, even they know the stats, but also, more stable. you were also incorrect, again, on saying how the second cpu only turns on if the first misses a cycle, god i hate when small time nerds think they know something, if you set affinitys and know how they work, you will notice that you can assign 2 to 64 processors to any given task as well as when doing a render or calculation, you can see any you assign to be using 100% of it's power, but of course, you are one of those people who take windows 98 or mil and think that it works the same way. now, if you would please check with say CCR (center for computational research) top 10 supercomputing labs int he country, or say, ilm (industrial light and magic) and ask what kind of workstations they use and why. here's why, you listening, BECAUSE ALL SGI's and all SUPERCOMPUTERS are EITHER UNIX OR WINDOWS BASED, why? BECAUSE THEY ARE ABLE TO USE ALL PROCESSORS TO IT"S FULL ABILITY. on apple site you will see specs of them comparing their dual to single processors, why? b/c you think it makes them faster than top end pcs. why do you think they did not test it agaisnt the computers i mentioned, why, BECAUSE IT WOULD LOSE JACKASS!!! you failed to realize that i support apple and i like the direction they are going, but my point of this was to show that they have much farther to go, but they have taken a good step. normal people, being 80% of buyers, are not hardcore users, nor do they ever know how to see the true power of their system, these are the people who think a computer is only for the internet, or burning cds, you seem to be one of these people. your knowledge is lacking reality. you're having fun making things up that you really don't have a clue about, here's the thing, prove it, i have the tests, i have the machines, and it seems, i am right, and all my information checks out. yours however, is a sad story of somebody trying to sound smart. next time, why don't you get real facts, and do real tests, but you need to know how to actually use a computer first ok. and don't just write back, but i do know how to use one, cause anybody who knows computers, can see you DON'T.
     
  15. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2001
    #15
    Ok then, prove me wrong why dont you. Dont even take my feelings into consideration why dont u.
     
  16. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2001
    #16
    I dont read the bible much, but i dont think moses had PMS... up until now.
     
  17. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2001
    #17
    Oh yeah, fu**head if you really know so much you will realise that although windows 95 was created 6 years ago (an amazing calculation by your standards dipshit) windows 95, 98, 98se, millenium do not support multi processing. So dipshit in short you are wrong about pcs having multi processing for 6 years, im surprised you didnt know that seeing as you "know how to use a computer"
    I aint even a small time nerd cos i have friends, yes thats right "friends", repeat after me jesus or moses or whatever ur name is, "friends".
    Dude firstly you need to calm down, secondly you need to get out cos that CRT radiation is probably killing your dick (which means no more masturbation for Mr holy man moses, yeah i know you cant get sex with any1 else), and thirdly you need to understand that this is a debate room and in debate rooms people get things wrong, i got alot wrong but so what, and fourthly using the comic store owner in the simpsons as a role model aint a good idea Mr "im a fat trekky with no social life".
    Dude chill out, calm down, have a glass of aftershocks have a smoke and get out once in a while.
    Having a sexual relationship with your mac aint a good idea, go see a gig and get yourself a proper dominatrix (yes, i know who wears the trousers between u and ur mac) and get a life. Dude i use a mac for fun but not that kind of fun, i go out and dont come back till the morning for that sort of thing.
    Your life seems to be ruled by computers and the internet, i mean do you scream init strings when you give yourself an orgasm. Infact how do you give yourself an orgasm with that 3 and a half inch floppy of yours. Do you use a microscope to wank? and how do you pick it out from the hairs? (although i wouldnt be surprised if you were pre-pubescent and put hormone rooting powder on your bollocks to get pubes, or do i need to translate that into binary for you?)
    Damn, im having to drop to your level of nerdiness.
    Women must be an alien race to you, get the **** out ur house geek, go and have some fun, stop getting vexed at a forum, and go and release that sexual tension on someone else for once.
    You need to get a social life.
     
  18. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2001
    Location:
    10 Minutes from Disneyland
    #18
    ok, all things aside, lets recap this whole thing:
    Pure raw speeds of a dual processor:
    Win2000 beats out Mac OS X 10.0.4
    so we asume that's where Mac got the
    Megahertz Myth campaign

    (i can't spell well)

    that was the first point made, then the bashing came...
    Windows 9.X doesn't support multiprocesing DIRECTLY (that's windows 95, 98, 98se, ME) however windows NT 4.0 doesn't either, but with the first service pack it does, however, that's just a random tib bit of info. With some extra apps and some phone time to Microsoft, you can get them to do it, but it's not something i recomend. Mac OS 9.2 supports Multi -pros actually, just not very stabley and only when used in classic mode.

    Now, what OS' for instence do support multi-pros directly? Windows 2000, Unix, Linux, Mac OS X 10.x
    OK? so that's put down....

    final wrap up...
    Procesors themselvs- who cares? what's the big deal? test are important if you need a specialized machine. i happen to have both machines (Mac and PeeC) in my house because they serve specialized purposes.

    So final though: buy what you want and what you're used to!
     
  19. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2001
    Location:
    10 Minutes from Disneyland
    #19
    ok, i do have to say a personal note cause i feel insulted...

    ILM does use macs in production. They are very specialized macs and are used for sketching and pre rendering. They are again used in production rendering for again very specialized rendering purposes that the PeeC and Linux can't do for whatever reason.

    Square Pictures orded 100's of Macs for their production team for Final Fantasy.

    Shrek was made on Dual Pros Macs running Linux. It was split half and half, they have a mac server there and PeeC and Mac workstations all running linux.

    ...sorry, that was just something i needed to say. but i would also like to mention that everyone is entitled to their opinion...
     
  20. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2001
    Location:
    Athens, Greece
    #20
    hahaha


    mozez... watch your mouth you stupid piece of s***
    I AM A PC user but I HAVE THE GUTS TO ADMIT that OSX is the first OS that suports multiproccesing for commercial applications like games and programms.
    Example: Cubase v5 for MAC gives a 50-60% performance increase if is used uder dual G4 compared to a single G4.
    Under Cubase v5 for PC this increase is nil....

    SO KEEP YOUR WIN 2000 WITH THE 32 CPUS, TOGETHER WITH YOUR "ADVANCED COMPUTER KNOWLEDGE" FOR YOURSELF....

     
  21. macrumors 6502a

    chewbaccapits

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2001
    Location:
    Torrance, Californizzel
    #21
    I think spikey is going to cry:(
     
  22. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2001
    #22
    i dont cry, i get dadsha**ers who annoy me on the floor and then i rub my hot ciggarrette end in their eye.
     
  23. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2001
    #23
    Eh, I know nothing about PeeCees and their ability to use several processors, nor do I care to find out, but I think Spikey should be of to bed if he's gonna get up to kindergarden tomorrow. BTW, Spikey, stop reading those porno magazines they are really messing with your head.

     
  24. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2001
    #24
    go home mozez

    Get outa here mozez, you Wintel troll!
    No one really cares! Sounds like you spend to much time building PCs. Take off those coke bottle glasses. Remove your pocket pencil protector. Get outa the house, get some fresh air. It will be ok...
    Don't you know? What really matters is how much money you make. My $2000 G4 made me over $100,000 last year. That's
    enough for me! Who cares if your dual P4 does sometihing
    10 seconds faster or you get 200 zillions fps....
     
  25. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2001
    #25
    I will stop reading porn mags as soon as u stop masturbating over ur mum. You are proof that it kills brain cells.
    As for me graduating from kindergarten, well u aint made ur way out ur mums pu**y u fu**ing aggrophobic geek, get out the house. stop debating how many star trek episodes there were with ur online buddies. go and replace ur double glazing for contact lenses. and get a f*cking life
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page