As I predicted
memofromturner said:
"There's no real way to compare [benchmarks]"? What are you talking about? The whole purpose of benchmarks is comparison, LOL. But seriously, good one.
A good variable for comparison is time... something all three contenders have in common. Unless Intel, AMD, and PPC are experiencing some sort of time dilation, of which I'm unaware?
If you had continued to read, you would have figured out that I was also talking about efficiancy with the machine's. Using a stop watch to compare the time it takes for Photoshop to apply a filter is fine, but unless you know whats going on under the surface of the software, or unless you can somehow make OS X and Windows handle the software the same, those aren't going to be fair comparisons. Also do the same test multiple times, the results won't be the same every time, which inherently makes the Benchmarks between the machines not to be completely accurate which was my point. Also the software on the Mac, hardly any of it right now fully takes advantage of the architecture, so you're comparing 32-bit to 32-bit, which takes out a key component of the G5 Architecture. making the Benchmarks unreliable (YES Apple's too) Try making Quicktime 7 do on Windows what it can do on a Mac, it won't do it nearly as well, at least not yet.
I DO NOT blame Intel, or AMD for anything that they are limited too, that's Windows fault. I'm sure you're aware of that however, just thought I'd reiterate.
memofromturner said:
You might want to do a bit of research before you go around saying, 'don't refute my statements, just believe me'.
http://barefeats.com/maya.html
http://barefeats.com/macvpc.html
http://spl.haxial.net/apple-powermac-G5/
blah blah blah , many more but I'm bored now.
With all due respect "I did my Research." You looked at the results of someone else's and tried to pass it off like you did it yourself.
You know you CAN do your own test's, I assume you use both Mac and PC and can find your way into a CompUSA or somewhere you can play if you don't have sufficient machines for testing. I do it all the time (Yes I am a complete Geek and proud
) I do alot of Video editing and Graphics Design and the numbers are signifigantly in favor of Apple, especially when it concerns render times (The ones on the site you gave were nothing like what I get, my results are VERY different, and I used better machines on both the Mac and PC)
Again, if you read everything I had to say, I WANTED you to do your research or "have" done your research like you did, I didn't want someone making outrageous claims against mine without any information of their own, I never asked you to "believe" me, I wanted you to know "the facts" NOW as far as MY research is concerned, it's alot of reading technical pdfs from Intel, AMD, and Apple and doing my own stopwatch sessions. I didn't read what someone else put a stopwatch too, I read pages of technical documentation on the EXACT specifications of the CPU's and Architecture then put MY stopwatch to it. I assume you know how to look the documents up through Apple, AMD, and Intel, so I'll spare the links cause It's late and I need to finish this
memofromturner said:
I'm not going to even include something as pathetic as the Doom3 benchies.
I wouldn't either, Doom 3 was a HORRIBLE port, they didn't do anything to the source code to take advantage of the G5 Architecture, that game didn't even run well on a Dual 2.5 with a 9600XT and 1.5 Gigs of RAM (A feat easily done on even an Athlon XP 3000 with a lower end card) I've got it on my 1.6, it runs fine, but well, I prefer the PC version.
memofromturner said:
Yeah, the G5 was a respectable machine... but it's just overpriced and outdated now.
Overpriced, that's debateable, there's the software you get too, not much but you still use more of it than you would from an out-of-the-box Wintel Machine. Though I DO AGREE myself on that one, if they do the updates they need to lower the price. OUTDATED, yeah ok that's why people in the creative and cinema business (PIXAR, WETA, Lucasfilm, you get the idea) use G5's instead of Wintel, I mean, those guys need their renders to be slower "THAT's HILARiOUS, I think that's better than my benchmark joke......oh wait, was that a joke..... Oye, jokes aside, I don't mean to insult, but an eye for an eye. NOW THEN
memofromturner said:
Give me OSX on AMD, the ability to game, and I'll never look back.
Give me the best PowerMac on the Market and the games that FULLY take advantage of the Architecture, and I'll never have a date for the rest of my life. Oh crap, the NEW XBOX (I'm going to die alone
) OH YEAH, thats a funnny thing too, if the G5 and it's architecture are so slow, I wonder why they're using them in the XBOX 360 (or whatever it'll be called) hmmmm....
Just for the record, I know the "Cell" is going to be much better suited for Console Gaming than a G5, and don't take anything I said as a mean direct insult, I have nothing against you I just feel obligated to defend myself if I feel I am being insulted. Now then your turn......
