This makes me angry

Discussion in 'General Mac Discussion' started by The Dreaming, Feb 9, 2004.

  1. The Dreaming macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, USA
    #1
    Here's a link to page 19 of 19 of an article bitching about Apple falsifying the results of numerous SPEC.._base tests on the G5's debut. Can anyone offer credence to this article?

    If you wish, you can click the rest of the article (pages 1-19) so you can read through the trolling.
     
  2. stoid macrumors 601

    stoid

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2002
    Location:
    So long, and thanks for all the fish!
    #2
    While he does have some nearly valid arguments about the power of the chip, I am disgusted by how he is bashing V-Tech's. That super-cluster handed the asses of all similar cluster to them on a silver platter, and I think that people are just jealous.

    <sarcasm>

    I love his argument about that $5 million dollars not including the cost of pizza!! I'm sure that the volunteers ate so many MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF PIZZA that the cluster was no longer economical!!

    </sarcasm>
     
  3. bousozoku Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    Gone but not forgotten.
    #3
    I thought this quite interesting "Let me remind you that the very notion of Gigaflop was defined specifically for 64-bit precision." I'm not sure where he got this or that he is in a position to remind us. Many companies have been just as happy to report 32-bit numbers when their processors didn't handle 64-bit numbers directly, even those on that otherplatform. :D Is AltiVec's single precision performance good? Yes, better than many. Is it right for every situation? Of course not.

    He stated that Apple's 2.0 GHz numbers were below IBM's 1.8 GHz numbers and then makes it seem that they bumped them up for marketing purposes. The SPEC benchmarks have been suspectible to tampering but they're still just benchmarks.

    I do think that jealousy prevails a bit with the Virginia Tech. cluster. It took up a lot of space (as noted) and took extra cooling (as with any cluster) and knocked over twice as many PCs in one cluster down a notch.
     
  4. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #4
    Well once they replace those G5's with Xserves he won't be able to complain about them taking up so much space anymore! And then they'll be rackmounted, and probably cool better then too.
     
  5. Maclarny macrumors 6502

    Maclarny

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2003
    Location:
    MN
    #5
    If his arguments were valid then why do so many film companies and research organizations use Macs because they're much better for what they do? The author makes it sound as though x86 processors beat Apple across the board, totally false.
     
  6. Counterfit macrumors G3

    Counterfit

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2003
    Location:
    sitting on your shoulder
    #6
    The cluster was rackmounted before, just in really big racks...
    And as far as cost goes, I doubt that even including the cost of the building and cooling system would make it more expensive than the #2 cluster, it would have to be a $245 million dollar facility!
     
  7. Fukui macrumors 68000

    Fukui

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2002
    #7
    Gawd. That guy wrote 19 pages??? Some people....uh, need to GET A LIFE!

    So this guy reads an ars technica piece to so he looks like he knows something and then at the end makes himself total IDIOT!
     

Share This Page