((MAJOR EDIT Yeah, I forgot that XP sees a hyper threaded processor as a Dual processor, it is only a single 3.2 
))
ok..
A friend at work was talking about Cinebench, and how he uses that to tell how his computer at home stacks up against the engineering workstations we are now buying at work. He was complaining because he bought a computer 4 months ago, and now work has faster Dell computers then his. I was trying to figure out what he was talking about, until I spotted him running Cinebench on a brand new dell recently imaged with just Windows XP Pro installed.
These computers are Dual 3.2 GHZ Pentium 4 computers, with 1 GB of memory installed. Impressive to say the least, in the sheer clock speed numbers. Anyway I told him about my recent powermac purchase, and he was just dishing out loads of negative remarks in regards to my Powermac.
I had no idea how fast or slow it was when compared to the Dual 3.2Ghz, but I do understand the advantages that Apple had in the past when compared to PC's of much faster clocking CPU speeds.
I told him I ran Cinebench on my MAC at home and posted the results on these forums, he wanted to see how slow my G5 was compared to the dual 3.2 GHZ pentium 4 computer, so we loaded the Dell up with the software and ran the same tests.
Here are the results,
Dell Demension 3.2 (HT) GHZ Pentium 4 Processor Rendering
Single = 281 CB-CPU @ 93.8 seconds
Dual = 337 CB-CPU @ 78.2 seconds
Powermac G5 Dual 2.0 GHZ Processor Rendering (results as posted on seperate thread)
Single = 286 CB-CPU @ 92.1 Seconds
Dual = 521 CB-CPU @ 50.5 Seconds
Both He and I were shocked, I didn't think my PM would overpower the Dell. The single CPU speed was almost a dead tie, but when we switched to Dual, the Dell was quite a bit slower. We ran the test 4 times, and the best results were posted for the Dell.
I also kindly reminded him that this is not the current "fastest" production Macintosh. There exists a dual 2.5 with factory Liquid cooling, that is faster then my G5. He frowned and said he still dosen't like the taste of fruit
To each their own.
840
))ok..
A friend at work was talking about Cinebench, and how he uses that to tell how his computer at home stacks up against the engineering workstations we are now buying at work. He was complaining because he bought a computer 4 months ago, and now work has faster Dell computers then his. I was trying to figure out what he was talking about, until I spotted him running Cinebench on a brand new dell recently imaged with just Windows XP Pro installed.
These computers are Dual 3.2 GHZ Pentium 4 computers, with 1 GB of memory installed. Impressive to say the least, in the sheer clock speed numbers. Anyway I told him about my recent powermac purchase, and he was just dishing out loads of negative remarks in regards to my Powermac.
I had no idea how fast or slow it was when compared to the Dual 3.2Ghz, but I do understand the advantages that Apple had in the past when compared to PC's of much faster clocking CPU speeds.
I told him I ran Cinebench on my MAC at home and posted the results on these forums, he wanted to see how slow my G5 was compared to the dual 3.2 GHZ pentium 4 computer, so we loaded the Dell up with the software and ran the same tests.
Here are the results,
Dell Demension 3.2 (HT) GHZ Pentium 4 Processor Rendering
Single = 281 CB-CPU @ 93.8 seconds
Dual = 337 CB-CPU @ 78.2 seconds
Powermac G5 Dual 2.0 GHZ Processor Rendering (results as posted on seperate thread)
Single = 286 CB-CPU @ 92.1 Seconds
Dual = 521 CB-CPU @ 50.5 Seconds
Both He and I were shocked, I didn't think my PM would overpower the Dell. The single CPU speed was almost a dead tie, but when we switched to Dual, the Dell was quite a bit slower. We ran the test 4 times, and the best results were posted for the Dell.
I also kindly reminded him that this is not the current "fastest" production Macintosh. There exists a dual 2.5 with factory Liquid cooling, that is faster then my G5
. He frowned and said he still dosen't like the taste of fruit To each their own.
840
