Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Developer Transition Kit Benchmarks

Abercrombieboy said:
No kidding. I just realized that right now on my iMac G5 I am burning a DVD, listening to iTunes on Airport, Surfing the net, and doing a Secure empty on the trash with about 8GB's of material in it and it is flying right along without any lag. I HOPE they don't take away this great processor and stick a freakin Pentium 4 that will bog down when you start to work it hard. I have critized the G5 before, but when I start to work the hell out of it and it takes it and comes back for more I have to admit I am impressed by it.
Click to expand...


Yes, but thats NOT a reflection really on how great the G5 is. Its more of a showcase of the mulltitasking ablities of OS X. Trust me, it will be just as good on Intel.

I've run other UNIX operating systems on Intel and they multitask just as well as the G5/OSX does. I remember using a 6-Way Intel server to service 300 concurent users of a large Unix/Oracle ERP system almost 5 years ago, and that system ran like a sewing machine.
 
abluesky said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by rubberband
I just want to let you know that the 64bit chips of Intel the Itanium, is a piece of sht! It is so bad that after 3 years it is being look by the industry as "needed to be phase out"-- just a hint of Intel so dont expect 64 bit



The Pentium 4 600 handles 64-bit extensions, which is in the Mac Dev computer...

"64-bit extensions — Intel has dubbed its 64-bit extensions EM64T, for Extended Memory 64 Technology, but they are really just a functional clone of AMD's AMD64 extensions, first implemented in the Opteron processor a couple of years ago. With these extensions and the right software, including a 64-bit operating system and applications compiled to use 64-bit extensions, the Pentium 4 gains the ability to address more than 4GB of RAM (without any workarounds). AMD64 and EM64T also include some additional registers, or local slots on the chip for storing data, that should provide a bit of a performance boost in 64-bit applications. The move to 64-bit computing won't bring revolutionary new heights of CPU performance overnight, but it will prevent us all from bumping our heads on the 4GB memory address space limitation in the next few years. "

http://techreport.com/reviews/2005q...00/index.x?pg=1
__________________
Pascal Sijen
Co-Founder
Blue Sky International
Click to expand...

The haddling of the extension alone doesnt provide suppor for code in this size. Whoopi! Mac os X latest big thing, from a dev point, 64bit terminal apps attached buy tcp/ip, terminal, echo or so on to 32bit interface.... I guess that whole idea goes out the window... or u telling me that on the EM64T i can fit it?
I c your point. i hope i am able to make you c mine. It is not just 16TB of memory what the future comes to... Mac users on the high end, science for starters NEED the power that a 64bit app can handle, not just on memory but productivity; and you r telling them 'it's ok. Get a 50-unit cluster, you can fit as much memory as you like, :) ' dont be surprise if they smack you before you finish that sentence
 
Rosetta

Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't these tests conducted in the Rosetta emulation mode?

The benchmarks do not reflect native performance of the 3.6GHz systems, however, but rather provide an indication of how PowerPC-compiled applications will run under Rosetta on Intel-based systems. - think secret
Click to expand...

Did you see how fast things were happening on the system Stevie used in his keynote? Before we knew that was an Intel machine, my friends and I were all saying stuff like "geeze that's going fast, what kinda machine is he using??"
 
eurrythmic said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't these tests conducted in the Rosetta emulation mode?



Did you see how fast things were happening on the system Stevie used in his keynote? Before we knew that was an Intel machine, my friends and I were all saying stuff like "geeze that's going fast, what kinda machine is he using??"
Click to expand...

I'd be willing to bet SJ was running non-released versions of those apps on a altered chipset to make it look that way..
 
Abercrombieboy said:
I don't know that for a fact, I am just telling you what is sitting on my desk right now is an extremely capable processor.
Click to expand...
Your literal words were "freakin Pentium 4 that will bog down". Why would a Pentium 4 bog down when running OSX (or Linux or FreeBSD for that matter).
I hope so, but just a week ago, 95% of people said Apple would never go x86 and they have. Now 95% of people are saying Apple WILL never use a Pentium 4/Celeron class processor. Next year when the first Intels start coming if that is what Intel has, they will use it. I have NO problem with replacing the G4 with the Pentium M, but I do have an issue with replacing the G5 with a Pentium 4/Celeron set up in the iMac or PowerMac. Don't say it is not possible, Monday showed us anything is possible.
Click to expand...
I'm not saying it's not possible. Just that in my opinion it's most likely Apple will start with the Pentium M in notebooks and mac mini first, and move up to the iMac / PowerMac later with whatever intel's desktop processor is at that point, which is likely to be a desktop derivative of the Pentium M, not P4-based.
 
Re: Maybe Altivec is irrelevant now?

-from a Mac game developer:

"- SSE3 is way more flexible and feature-rich than ALTIVEC. I don't care what the haters say, that's the truth. In terms of vectorization, SSE will be a better instruction set. There are lots of places were you get the feeling that Altivec should be a good optimization, but you can't find a way to coerce it to do what you want without a lot of effort (and frequently, while making the program _slower_). SSE has wider application. It just does, even without names like "Velocity Engine"."


Gospel-or BS?
 
Its really painful reading some of the comments here. Its great an all that you using nothing but macs but please PLEASE stop talking about intel cpus are if you knew what youre talking about since id say most of you havent seen an x86 pc since the ibm xt.

No kidding. I just realized that right now on my iMac G5 I am burning a DVD, listening to iTunes on Airport, Surfing the net, and doing a Secure empty on the trash with about 8GB's of material in it and it is flying right along without any lag. I HOPE they don't take away this great processor and stick a freakin Pentium 4 that will bog down when you start to work it hard. I have critized the G5 before, but when I start to work the hell out of it and it takes it and comes back for more I have to admit I am impressed by it.
Click to expand...

Multitasking is just as good on anything else. You can run doom3 burn a dvd and run an sql database if you want to. You think an intel cpu will just melt if you ask it to do more than 1 thing at once?


IBM will deliver in 2 years time because they could fall apart if they don't deliver to microsoft and sony also nintendo
Click to expand...
THOSE ARENT G5!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! God how many times do we need to repeat that, theyre not bloody cpus you can use in your mac.

I just want to let you know that the 64bit chips of Intel the Itanium, is a piece of sht! It is so bad that after 3 years it is being look by the industry as "needed to be phase out"-- just a hint of Intel so dont expect 64 bit
Click to expand...
Thats their 64 bit ONLY cpu thats designed for large database / servers. It is NOT a desktop cpu. see my intro about talking about what you know nothing about. Intel has been shipping x86-64 cpus for months. At the very cpu used in the dev box is 64 bit.


apple says the G5 is 83% and up to 2 times faster than a pentium and ibm is going up hill in it's processer market with the xbox ps3 and nintendo signed up for them why go to something slower ?
Click to expand...

CONSOLE CPU!!!!!!!! The g5 isnt 83% faster than a pentium, how the hell do you measure that something is faster than the other anyway, one benchmark? what about the other benchmark that uses another capability of a cpu that says the exact opposite. And any sentence starting with "apple says" should be marked as marketing. And EVEN if that were true, which it isnt, lets see how fast a g5 still running at 2.7ghz, or maybe with some luck 2.8, will run against a pentium m at ~2.5ghz a year from now. The answer: not very fast at all.
 
sord said:
If Apple uses a Celeron, no one in their right mind would buy it
Click to expand...
If I had to choose between buying a mac mini with a Celeron 3.06 GHz or a G4 1.42 GHz at the same price, I'd go for the Celeron one, MHz myth or no MHz myth.
 
Abstract said:
Are we going to get dual Pentiums? There is some software out there in the Mac world that takes advantage of having 2 procs. Will it all get recompiled so that having dual procs is no longer a benefit? :confused:
Click to expand...


Pentium architechture wasn't design like the PPC. Multi-thread or the ability to pair processors like in dual-G5 is not possilbe from the point of view that regards to performance. If you want to dual boot weaked! but aside from that dual-pentium macs are non-sense-- stupidity that we'll see from Apple to maintain their dual PM effect! (wow, it has to processors)
 
Macmadant said:
IBM will deliver in 2 years time because they could fall apart if they don't deliver to microsoft and sony also nintendo
Click to expand...

But based on the last few years they have been delivering, but not to Apple.



I've now seen all this whining and moaning about switching processors for days upon days upon days.
The same circular arguments and the same trolls with new names, but the same grammar every 8 or 9 posts.
It really is getting so boring that I'm going to be giving this a rest for a few days until some new and intresting rumour comes around, and not keep seeing the same point and counter point to a done deal.
If the whole move to intel is causing you to loose sleep and you're not a developer on a deadline then why not sit back in the garden with a nice glass of Pimms and smile.
The weather is to good to be wasting at a computer (unless procrastinating at work)

Smiles all

Chris
 
Going forward, it is possible to have equally good software installations using these "universal binaries" to run on both PowerPC and X86? Does it really just take a check box on XCode with new software?

If so, might Apple actually be looking for a processor independent platform in a few years?
 
seashellz said:
-from a Mac game developer:

"- SSE3 is way more flexible and feature-rich than ALTIVEC. I don't care what the haters say, that's the truth. In terms of vectorization, SSE will be a better instruction set. There are lots of places were you get the feeling that Altivec should be a good optimization, but you can't find a way to coerce it to do what you want without a lot of effort (and frequently, while making the program _slower_). SSE has wider application. It just does, even without names like "Velocity Engine"."


Gospel-or BS?
Click to expand...

Concerning everything before SSE3 - complete BS. Concerning SSE3, could be true.
 
jimbobb24 said:
One of the worst things is we may be using BIOS. The development systems CANNOT boot from a Firewire drive. We are taking so many tech leaps backwards in this move. Sad sad.
Click to expand...
Doesn't mean the intel-based Macs that will be released won't be able to boot from firewire.
Given that the intel-Macs are still a year away from release, the hardware / firmware is probably still under heavy development. The development systems are most likely just off-the-shelf clone x86 systems in a G5 enclosure.
 
Peace said:
I've built a few PC's before and I've never seen a MB with a fan that huge right on the board..

ASUS perhaps?
Click to expand...

The board is upside down, thats the cpu fan.
 
ok for the Macintel in 06
what u have to purchase is not only a Mac
but also a whole bunch of new "Universal Binary" softwares
what a good news to Apple, Adobe, M$, etc etc

if you dont want to buy new softwares, fine.
Apple have rosetta to support u guys
and taking u back to the speed of a G3 and softwares for G3 (yes, G3 not G4, without Altivec)

So, whats the point to buy PentiumM Powerbook / iBook next year?! :mad:
 
Here is one thing we can all agree on. It won't matter anymore once the processor is replaced. Even if the last PowerPC Macs prove to have more performance then the Intel replacements, it won't matter. The Mac will be the same as any other PC you can go out and buy. This is probably the biggest advantage of going with Intel. Even if we had a crystal ball and we could see something GREAT happen in the future of the PowerPC, it won't matter because the Mac will be equal to every other PC out there. They will never sell a Mac on performance again so it is pointless. It will be sold on OS and a trendy design only. Performance won't matter because it will be the same as all the x86 boxes out there. That is the biggest advantage I can see.
 
rubberband said:
I just want to let you know that the 64bit chips of Intel the Itanium, is a piece of sht! It is so bad that after 3 years it is being look by the industry as "needed to be phase out"-- just a hint of Intel so dont expect 64 bit
Click to expand...

I just want you to know, that you don't know what you are talking about. The I2 processor is a clean-sheet design that is superior to every single CPU that has come before it. I've seen it, held it in my hand, and seen the benchmarks, and even had a chance to use it hands-on, to support the FACT that its easily twice as fast as the systems it was designed to replace.

It's failure in the marketplace is not due to technical issues...although the 1st rev did have thermal issues. Its fate was sealed by people such as yourself who read 2 lines on some tech rag and instantly become a CPU design expert. Sadly, the majority of our industy and marketplace seem to run on GROUP THINK where the ultimate sucess of a particular product is not based on technical merit. I give you BETA vs VHS, APPLE vs MS, I2 vs P4 64bit, etc, etc.

There is hope of an oddball exceptions though, e.g. iPod vs everything else.
 
Abercrombieboy said:
Here is one thing we can all agree on. It won't matter anymore once the processor is replaced. Even if the last PowerPC Macs prove to have more performance then the Intel replacements, it won't matter. The Mac will be the same as any other PC you can go out and buy. This is probably the biggest advantage of going with Intel. Even if we had a crystal ball and we could see something GREAT happen in the future of the PowerPC, it won't matter because the Mac will be equal to every other PC out there. They will never sell a Mac on performance again so it is pointless. It will be sold on OS and a trendy design only. Performance won't matter because it will be the same as an other x86 box out there. That is the biggest advantage I can see.
Click to expand...
Do not leave out innovation.

Apple won't take new technology as something that happens when it is finally included in the chipset or on every motherboard Intel or somebody else crank out.

Since Apple will still be designing the board -- expect Apple to be adding nifty new feature far in advance of the standard PCs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back