intel(x86) vs PPC

PPC or Intel

  • PPC

    Votes: 7 11.3%
  • Intel(x86)

    Votes: 34 54.8%
  • Not sure yet, need to see more intel Macs

    Votes: 21 33.9%

  • Total voters
    62

zap2

macrumors 604
Original poster
Mar 8, 2005
7,241
1
Washington D.C
Ok, we have the PPC to intel switch happing, so after seeing some intel macs what do you think?

Did Steve call it right or could PPC have done just as good?
 

grapes911

Moderator emeritus
Jul 28, 2003
6,994
3
Citizens Bank Park
Not really a fair poll. Intel Processors don't yet run all programs, but they are faster and the wave of the future. I'll stick with PPC for another year or two. Intel after that.
 

SpaceMagic

macrumors 68000
Oct 26, 2003
1,740
0
Cardiff, Wales
Laser47 said:
A year ago I would have said PPC, intel now

Remember This? I guess they take it all back
No... at the time the Pentium 2 was awful. They haven't gone back on their word... the core duo is a new chip.
 

Laser47

macrumors 6502a
Jan 8, 2004
856
0
Maryland
SpaceMagic said:
No... at the time the Pentium 2 was awful. They haven't gone back on their word... the core duo is a new chip.
Wow i cant believe I forgot how much the PII sucked, I remember using them in middle school.
 

yankeefan24

macrumors 65816
Dec 24, 2005
1,104
0
NYC
give me a redesigned macbook pro (no isight) or a whatever is in my signiture now, and i would say intel. but right now, im not sure.
 

bousozoku

Moderator emeritus
Jun 25, 2002
13,973
3
Gone but not forgotten.
I don't think there is much of a question, we aren't seeing much progress with PPC.

If you need current applications that haven't been converted and you need to work today, you'll have to go with PPC machines.

If you have less strict needs, you should go for the Core Duo machines because performance in the long run will be much better.
 

~Shard~

macrumors P6
Jun 4, 2003
18,377
43
1123.6536.5321
My vote is for Intel - perhaps not for what they've done so far, since we're just getting started, not all the apps run natively on x86 yet, etc., but rather for where they will be in a few months, and ultimately by the end of 2006 when all Macs are Intel-based. :cool:
 

dubbz

macrumors 68020
Sep 3, 2003
2,284
0
Alta, Norway
~Shard~ said:
Not the best when it comes to stability though, no? So I've heard at least...
I've had no problems with stability, though unlike Intel, AMD (mostly) leave to others to make chipsets for their CPUs, and stability can vary between the different chipset makers.

VIA had some really bad chipsets back in the days before Athlon 64. Truly horrible ones; truly painful. I've heard they've improved much lately, but I stick to NVIDIA anyway.


And I voted for x86. I think it's one of the best things they could do at this point. (or worst... we'll see :p)
 

~Shard~

macrumors P6
Jun 4, 2003
18,377
43
1123.6536.5321
dubbz said:
I've had no problems with stability, though unlike Intel, AMD (mostly) leave to others to make chipsets for their CPUs, and stability can vary between the different chipset makers.

VIA had some really bad chipsets back in the days before Athlon 64. Truly horrible ones; truly painful. I've heard they've improved much lately, but I stick to NVIDIA anyway.


And I voted for x86. I think it's one of the best things they could do at this point. (or worst... we'll see :p)
Thanks for the clarification on this, that's essentially what I was referring to.
 

dmw007

macrumors G4
May 26, 2005
10,635
0
Working for MI-6
~Shard~ said:
Not the best when it comes to stability though, no? So I've heard at least...
I had an Athlon 64 3000+ in a HP Pavilion notebook about a year ago (sold it for my iBook G4) and it ran fine....well, as fine as windows xpee would allow it... :rolleyes: :)

But as dubbz has said, the instability that you are referring to probably has something to do with rogue chipsets.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.