1.2Ghz = No more powerusers!

[barkmonster]

why is nobody looking at history. you went from 400 to 500 and 550, thats 150mhz. next time, 550 to 667, and 733, that's 183hz jump, then you went from 733, to dual 800 and 867, not counting the dual because at the time only like 2 programs could even use the second processor and the os couldn't so, that's a 133 jump again. then from 867, to dual 1gigs, well, that's only a 133 again, jump, anybody seeing the connection here.

I take it you didn't

AppleSpec (on Apple's site)

From that you can see it went like this, in release order, only going off CPU speed not dual configurations :

fastest models, the code number of the motorola chip is at the end :

450 Mhz / PPC7400

500 Mhz : + 50Mhz (+20%) / PPC7410

733 Mhz : + 233Mhz (+47%) / PPC7450

867 Mhz : + 133Mhz (+18%) / PPC7450

1000Mhz : + 133Mhz (+15%) / PPC7455


Entry level models :

350 Mhz / PPC7400

400 Mhz : + 50Mhz (+14%) / PPC7410

466Mhz : + 66Mhz (+16.5%) / PPC7410

733Mhz : + 266Mhz (+57%) / PPC7450

800Mhz : + 67Mhz (+9%) / PPC7455


When the G4 suddenly increased by nearly 50%, it was because increased pipeline stages (4 vs 7) allow for higher clock speeds while adding a slight speed hit on a Mhz for Mhz basis. The faster L2, faster FSB (100 vs 133MHz) and the large L3 cache that later became DDR all make up for the loss to some extent. After only 2 different ranges of powermac, we've gone from 733Mhz - 1Ghz, that's not bad as a speed gain percentage.

133Mhz Increments are not really something that matter, it's how much faster the new CPU is than the previous fastest chip that counts. for example, A 1.133Ghz G4 wouldn't offer the performance benefit over a 1Ghz that a 600Mhz G4 would offer over a 466Mhz chip, the added performance of the extra Mhz decreases as the clock speeds get higher, they need to increase in 200Mhz increments now we're at 1Ghz or we're going to see that performance increase dwindle to insignificance if we only get 133Mhz more every 5 months or so.

 

[Cappy]

Originally posted by barkmonster

When the G4 suddenly increased by nearly 50%, it was because increased pipeline stages (4 vs 7) allow for higher clock speeds while adding a slight speed hit on a Mhz for Mhz basis. The faster L2, faster FSB (100 vs 133MHz) and the large L3 cache that later became DDR all make up for the loss to some extent. After only 2 different ranges of powermac, we've gone from 733Mhz - 1Ghz, that's not bad as a speed gain percentage.

133Mhz Increments are not really something that matter, it's how much faster the new CPU is than the previous fastest chip that counts. for example, A 1.133Ghz G4 wouldn't offer the performance benefit over a 1Ghz that a 600Mhz G4 would offer over a 466Mhz chip, the added performance of the extra Mhz decreases as the clock speeds get higher, they need to increase in 200Mhz increments now we're at 1Ghz or we're going to see that performance increase dwindle to insignificance if we only get 133Mhz more every 5 months or so.

There are a couple of things to add and point out here:

1. That depends on the architecture besides the pipeline increases. In the Intel world when Intel came out with their Northwood core P4's at the same clockrate as some of their previous P4's, they saw huge performance increases. Much of that can be attributed to the L2 cache increase.

2. In the x86 market it is normal to see cpu's come out with only 100mhz(P4) and 66mhz(Athlon XP) increments. They just do it more often than Moto and IBM do.

Lastly on a somewhat different note I was just thinking about how the P4 has made so many people aware now about the pipeline increasing and how it affects performance. A few articles on that simply has now made everyone believe that this impacts performance more than anything. It can but just like mhz cannot be tied to performance strictly, the same applies to the rest of the architecture. There are other variables which Apple we've seen is exploiting by the addition of L3 cache.

 

[GPTurismo]

First, the power4 is ppc.

second OH NO MY 700 MEGAHERTZ SGI MACHINE IS LAME BECAUSE OF THE LOW MEGAHERTZ!!! EVEN THOUGH IT OUTPERFORMS EVERY WINDOWS MACHINE OUT THERE BY AT LEAST 2 FOLD!!!

Why?

It has no system bus, every device can talk to each other at FULL speed. I can't remember what they call it. interconnect something...

Folks, it's moronic to focus on something which only means you can brag to your pc friends.

It's like putting a 800 horsepower engine in a car with a crap transmission.

No Performance, but all brag.