G3 v. G4

jefhatfield

Retired
Jul 9, 2000
8,803
0
Originally posted by Dunepilot
In all likelihood there won't be a G4 iBook for some time.

The big question I think you should ask yourself is whether you want to run OS X as fast as possible. The actual OS itself is optimised for the Altivec units present on G4 processors, and therefore you will see a substantial speed gain by running the forthcoming OS X.2 on a G4, particularly on a machine like a falt-panel iMac that has a graphics card that fully supports quartz extreme (Apple's new acceleration by graphics card).

my thoughts exactly:D

that's why i will be going g4 for next machine
 

Anon

macrumors member
May 23, 2002
41
0
Altivec is great for manipulating large sets of data. In other words messing with multimedia. Most of the iApps such as iTunes, iDVD, iMovie etc use Altivec. For example my 500mhz iBook rips a CD at 1.5 to 3x speed. My 400mhz G4 rips them at 4x to 8x speed. The advantages of Altivec for those types applications are obvious.
 

Malus120

macrumors 6502
Jun 28, 2002
273
268
Re: Yeah...

Originally posted by Catfish_Man

...and if you turn off the FPU on a G3 then it's slower than a 604! Wow! I want a 604! Bah...

OSX uses Altivec a lot. For some strange reason people seem to think that Altivec has something to do with graphics. IT DOESN'T. It's a parallel processing unit, not a fscking graphics chip. I think this comes from the fact that Photoshop happens to be easily vectorizable, and Adobe has put a lot of work into it. Some programs can use it (OSX, Photoshop, many many others), some can't (textures, my dinky little c++ programs).
Dude i KNOW WTF the Altavic unit is. I was JUST implying that MOST of the APPS that use it are GRAPHICS APPS. I wasnt saying it was a graphics chip dumb ass. AND turning off the FPU is knowhwere near like Turning off altavic. Altavic is ONLY used in a handfull or two of apps(again mostly graphics apps) whereas the FPU is used in many things. Anyway i dont wanna get to technical i just wanted to pioint out that the New G3's are much faster than everyones giving them credit for and without Altavic the G4's are most likely a dececnt amount slower clock for clock. You see not everyone uses Photoshop/FCP and othe Graphics all day and while the speed benifit in OS X is nice its not Neccesary for OS X to run good. And just to make abusolutly clear to you i do know that there are other apps besideds Graphics that use Altavic(Itunes andyone). BTW lets try not to start a flame war.
 

Grokgod

macrumors 6502a
You start your post with name calling and then finish with
"by the way lets not start a flame war"

I am surprised your not TOAST already, considering your SO lame!

The G3 is inferior to the G4 and the associated graphics that some with each chip.
A G4 laptop is faster then a G3.

Get over it! Its a reality and all your pitiful dialogues are not going to change it.

If you want to take out each chip from their motherboards and sit them on your local school track and watch them race. Good Luck.
 

cb911

macrumors 601
Mar 12, 2002
4,121
3
BrisVegas, Australia
wow. i'm only gone for a couple of days and the whole thread gets out of control!!

heres an example of G3 vs Celeron. most of the people in my class have iBooks. whenever they open up about 5 or more programs things slow down a bit. if there are documents or windows open in each of those programs it usually crashes. i've got a Celeron and a TiBook. ther Celeron can have a heap of Internet Explorer windows open, about 18 or 20 without any problems. i love that computer for the net!
but the Celeron is way slower then my TiBook on photoshop. there is a definite difference. i can have about 7 or 8 programs open on my TiBook without any problems, but at the same time only 2 or 3 IE windows, or the whole thing starts to slow down.


the people in my class who have iBooks, well, they crash at least 3 times a week. sometimes that many times a day. my TiBook froze twice today. the first time since i've had it - about four months.

so there you go.
 

drastik

macrumors 6502a
Apr 10, 2002
978
0
Nashvegas
That just seems odd. I keep several IE windows open on my Pismo at almost all times. Now it isn't a speed deamon to start with, but I don't notice any slowdown and certianly no crashes. I do minimize windows I'm not in, which probably helps a bit, but I (and I would guess everybody else) do that in Windows, too. I don't know why people would be having 3 crashes a week! Honestly, It sounds like people aren't doing preventive matinence, or bad RAM. You got to take care of stuff. The kids at mysistes school all use Celeron laptops, adn they crash a great deal and have to get reimaged at the end of every semester. Their main problem is a lot of fifteen year old girls with something like four gigs of MP3s, choking their system to death.
 

jefhatfield

Retired
Jul 9, 2000
8,803
0
Originally posted by cb911


heres an example of G3 vs Celeron. most of the people in my class have iBooks. whenever they open up about 5 or more programs things slow down a bit. if there are documents or windows open in each of those programs it usually crashes. i've got a Celeron and a TiBook. ther Celeron can have a heap of Internet Explorer windows open, about 18 or 20 without any problems. i love that computer for the net!


so there you go.
interesting example

for multimedia, my ibook 300 toasts my 366 amd k6-2 laptop (a compaq presario 1272)

but when i am doing several things at once like receiving mail and opening web pages, the pc laptop seems faster by a little bit

neither machine crashes that much with 160 MB of RAM and i use os 9 and windows 98

i am just curious to see what a tibook would do in my hands or a future rendition of an ibook with a g4 processor in it...i know the new g3 chip with 512k of level 2 cache...full speed...is a huge boost to apple's current ibook

somehow, i will wait for a g4 ibook and that may mean waiting until 2003 sometime
 

DakotaGuy

macrumors 601
Jan 14, 2002
4,003
3,125
South Dakota, USA
Jefhatfield,

Don't be misled by the G3 or G4 name applied to the machines, I have had the chance to use a new 700MHz iBook with the "Sahara" chip and it is a very quick machine running OSX and every program I tried on it. If you are in the market for a new iBook I would give it a try. You would be amazed at how it would stack up against your old iBook 300. I can tell you that it feels quite a bit snappier then my iBook 600 with the older generation G3 so I can imagine you would be very impressed with it's performance against your old 300. Give it a real try before you count it out just cause it's a G3. Go out and try one and experience it first hand...and then let us know what you think.
 

Grokgod

macrumors 6502a
~Drastik

Are you saying that MP3's choke systems to death?

Why would 4 gigs of anything choke a system to death?

Is 4 gigs of Mp3's a negative type of data for some reason.
Or do you have something against girls with 4 gigs of MP3's?
 

jefhatfield

Retired
Jul 9, 2000
8,803
0
Originally posted by Abercrombieboy
Jefhatfield,

Don't be misled by the G3 or G4 name applied to the machines, I have had the chance to use a new 700MHz iBook with the "Sahara" chip and it is a very quick machine running OSX and every program I tried on it. If you are in the market for a new iBook I would give it a try. You would be amazed at how it would stack up against your old iBook 300. I can tell you that it feels quite a bit snappier then my iBook 600 with the older generation G3 so I can imagine you would be very impressed with it's performance against your old 300. Give it a real try before you count it out just cause it's a G3. Go out and try one and experience it first hand...and then let us know what you think.
i saw blakespot's glowing review of the new ibook and i have not had the chance to try one out yet with the new level 2 cache running os x or photoshop and it's filters...some of those filters can really slow a machine down and it's a good way to test out a machine's power...games is another one

when i tried out a high end sony 1.6 ghz pentium 4 laptop, photoshop filters bogged the thing down and i swear that the pentium 3 seemed faster

in five months at the three year mark of my old ibook, i will see what options apple has for the ibook...somehow, i am excited about the chance of the g4 in one of those with altivec and its ability to process redundant info like graphics at a very fast speed

if i could justify it, i would get a tibook since i already know without doubt that the ti is the best multimedia laptop in the world
 

jefhatfield

Retired
Jul 9, 2000
8,803
0
Originally posted by jefhatfield


when i tried out a high end sony 1.6 ghz pentium 4 laptop, photoshop filters bogged the thing down and i swear that the pentium 3 seemed faster

and to be fair to the pc fans out there, i am not knocking the sony vaio line...they are the best multimedia computers on the pc side

also, the vaio had windows xp which is the first true NT operating system that can handle a "wide" range of multimedia options and software

...and if i were a pc user only, the vaio would be my choice and i would use windows xp over windows 2000, me, or 98 se
 

big

macrumors 65816
Feb 20, 2002
1,074
0
Just a quik viewpoint here, the G3 iBook @ 600 mhz is very nice at running OSX, however, my G3 B&W w/a 500 mhz Zif upgrade to a g4 is still sluggish (though better then the 350 G3)

anything over the 600 mhz line basically screams
 

danman

macrumors member
Jul 5, 2002
67
0
I personally have been far more impressed with IBM's development of the G3 than Blotorolas work on the G4.

I have almost resigned myself to never owning a G4 because of it's poor gains in Int performance (Im gonna wait until next year for a G5 (G4+++?) that should actually improve Int performance significantly over the G3).

I would be perfectly happy owning a current gen. iBook. The video card -will- accelerate Quartz, and the processor is incredibly capable.

My B&W G3 (400Mhz) is running OSX very well, and a current iBook would far outmatch that performance.

I would of course wait for MWNY to pass before making any decisions.
 

rice_web

macrumors 6502a
Oct 25, 2001
584
0
Minot, North Dakota
The thing that bothers me, is that Motorola needs to increase the pipeline stages just to increase its megahertz rating. IBM will continue to use 4 pipeline stages, while soon Motorola will be at 12 (or so rumor has it). If IBM can continue to scale the 750FX, it may end up being the better processor megahertz-for-megahertz.
 

Catfish_Man

macrumors 68030
Sep 13, 2001
2,579
1
Portland, OR
Basically...

...the 750fx is a better (simpler and more elegant) processor, and the 7455 is a more powerful processor. The reason Motorola had to add more pipeline stages to increase clockspeed while IBM didn't, is that Motorola's manufacturing is less advanced. The G4+ is .18 micron, while the 750fx is .13 micron. When the Pentium 4 switched from .18 to .13 it easily scaled an extra 533MHz, and is still going. If my guesses are correct, the G4 at MWNY will be .13 micron, so it should jump ahead of the G3 in clock frequency again. If the G3 had Altivec (which is both elegant and powerful) and better floating point (does it? someone said they improved that on the later ones) then it would be ahead of the G4+. As it is, the 750fx is a very nice little chip, but it can't match a G4+ (unless you're comparing speed per watt of power. It wins that quite handily). With a 200MHz bus, and running at 1GHz, the next 750FXs are going to be VERY fast for their size. However, I'm expecting the G4 to get smaller, faster, and have DDR266 support.