There was an interesting article and thread concerning a comparison between the G4e and P4 at ars technica. It's old (oh well, I want to vent), but I learned a lot and wanted to share. It can be found here: http://arstechnica.infopop.net/OpenTopic/page?a=tpc&s=50009562&f=174096756&m=7500907803&r=7500907803 To summary, in a debate between Mac and PC techies, both sides finally agreed that the G4 was 33% faster per clock cycle than a P3 and 69% faster than a P4. The P3 achieves more work per cycle, but the P4 can achieve clock speeds high enough to negate this advantage and thus create a faster system. The main disadvantage to the G4 is that it is lacking DDR Ram and is thus starved for information. Therefore, if Apple releases a 1.4 GHz G4 system in NY, the P4 equivalent would be a 2.366 GHz processor. At 1.5 GHz, the G4 is equivalent to a P4 2.53 GHz. Also note however, that this is excluding the performance gains due to DDR Ram and to dual processor systems. Cool Huh! Now I won't feel so bad if I get a Powerbook G4. I think I will wait for 1GHz though (and DDR?). Should Apple move to an AMD style naming system for their computers, multiplying the megahertz of a particular system by 1.69? Also, since P4 mobiles are slower than their desktop counterparts, any thoughts as to how much more work is done per cycle by the G4 as opposed to these systems? What about AMD chips?