I am very disappointed in the fact that Video Editing Magazine picked up and is running with the idea that Apples SPEC scores are false by comparing them to the ones Intel or AMD have posted on the SPEC web site. http://www.digitalvideoediting.com/...com/2003/06_jun/editorials/cw_editorial79.htm The author of the article clearly does not understand how SPEC scores are achieved nor the effect that compliers have on the scores. I dropped him the following note I think that other Mac users who understand SPEC scores should do the same. Remember if you do, please keep it polite as insults will only make him more anti-Apple. Mr. Charlie White, I feel that I should point out an error in the table calculations at the end of your article. B/c SPEC scores are 100% dependant on the compiler used the data from Apple and AMD cannot be compared. AMD and Intel use the ICC compiler whereas Apple used GCC for its test as it is the only cross platform compiler. Its is a UNIX compiler that is not native to the PPC. As you might recall, Apple ran the test on Linux on the Xeon, so GCC was the best compiler to use and disabling Hyperthreading actually increased the Xeon performance per DELL http://www.dell.com/us/en/esg/topics/power_ps3q02-khalid.htm IBM has run some SPEC on its processors using another complier not mentioned (but I suspect it was Visual Age) and it scores the following at 1.8 GHz Submitter: IBM CPU: PPC 970 1.8 GHz Compiler: Visual Age? SPECint Base: 937 SPECfp Base: 1051 But remember we are still not using the same compiler here either, note how the compiler affects the score. I feel that a correction should be made as the data analysis is misleading and incorrect. --- what does everyone think?