Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
More Quad PowerMac G5 Benchmarks
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I use a Pentium M laptop at work (2.1Ghz) and I noticed my Powerbook (1.5) spanks it when comparing both laptops with unzipping and zipping files. My powerbook is much slower than my 2 year old Powermac G5. I would like to see how one of these new machines do first hand.
I hope next year's Intel is faster than this year's G5.
I hope next year's Intel is faster than this year's G5.
Dont Hurt Me said:
DirectX for one. Wait till someone benchmarks a native Intel binary on a AMD 3500 of a popular game. I bet you don't see any improvement over the G5.
Mr. Anderson said:
I don't want to burst your bubble but when I talked with the Apple representative she said that the custom Quads ordered in January will take the same 6 to 8 weeks shipping than the ones ordered now. I said that I would like to wait for MWSF and cancel my order and see what happens.
She said that the current orders will take most of the next weeks to be fulfilled and orders in January would still take 6 to 8 weeks to be deliver. So my guess after talking to her is that maybe by late February we might see short shipping times for custom quads.
Since I really need a machine soon, I decide to keep my order. I have 2 cinema displays sitting at my house in the boxes because i don't have a computer to hook them up.
Why are you surprised? A single-core AMD 64 @ 2.2 GHz PC will whup pretty much any Intel PC or Mac at gaming, but surely you 've been around Macrumors long enough know by now that the Mac issue with gaming is not a CPU issue, but is because of game optimization for the OS. The Intel transition isn't likely to help this much, if at all.Dont Hurt Me said:
As for consumer vs pro, would you play games on a dual dual-core Xeon or Opteron workstation?
Dont Hurt Me said:
You also need to remember that most games that come out on the PC first then the Mac, are just ports. And we all know how that can be...
If you look at the titles that are released for both Mac and PC, I cant think of any game that was ported from the Mac to the PC, that's worth it...Or from Mac to console either....(no really I cant)
Mac gaming, as it's own identity, doesn't really exists in the commercial world.
Mac doesn't have one "Killer Game App" that draws people away from PC or console gaming.
IMO, this is were Apple falls flat and must take upon themselves to correct this. And not expect other companies to do it for them.
You say thier just a hardware company, but adding a Mac "Only" killer game app to their lineup would only increase sales.
gugy said:I don't want to burst your bubble but when I talked with the Apple representative she said that the custom Quads ordered in January will take the same 6 to 8 weeks shipping than the ones ordered now. I said that I would like to wait for MWSF and cancel my order and see what happens.
She said that the current orders will take most of the next weeks to be fulfilled and orders in January would still take 6 to 8 weeks to be deliver. So my guess after talking to her is that maybe by late February we might see short shipping times for custom quads.
Since I really need a machine soon, I decide to keep my order. I have 2 cinema displays sitting at my house in the boxes because i don't have a computer to hook them up.
This is more or less what my EDU rep told me, he said that it will take them a little while to get things ramped up to build these machines in quantity. He didn't say things would take quite as long as your rep did, though.
Hey, I have a new 20" cinema display sitting behind me with nowhere to go. I just found out my new office will be done sooner than I had thought--and I am dead set on making it "PC-free" ----so it looks like I will have to migrate to the lab's extra Mini first
. I guess the silver lining is that the migration from the Mini to a Quad with a 7800GT may be fun.JT
It depends if you ordered with the 7800gt card. these are taking much longer. The quads without BTO are coming much faster.
plinden said:
Well, I was more referring to Athlon64 to separate it from the Opteron.
They exist:
http://www.boxxtech.com/products/cf_step2.asp?ModelInstanceID=567
Although they are thin on the ground, and do get quite pricy. Certainly Sun do a new workstation too with is dual processor, they aren't shipping dual cores yet for some reason.
And to comment about PCs better gaming performance, saying it is DirectX doesn't explain why Doom 3 runs much better on Linux/x86 than MacOSX/PPC.
So it is likely:
1. Works better on x86 for whatever reasons (athlon64s are damned good, better compiler, some assembler code maybe, better use of x86's vector units than ppc, etc your choice).
2. MacOSX itself isn't good with games. Anandtech's performance review did indicate as a server OS, it does have some performance issues compared to Linux. Don't think this is too likely.
3. Your OpenGL implementation. This is generally your graphics drivers, this is why Nvidia beats ATi in Doom 3 so badly as their OpenGL implementation is so much better. Although ATi's new drivers go some way to fixing that actually.
4. The Mac version of the Nvidia/ATi drivers aren't as good as their x86 versions. Quite possible to me.
Don't get me wrong, MacOSX is a great OS and the G5 is a very capable processor but I suspect any performance problems are probably quite difficult to exactly pin down.
T'hain Esh Kelch said:A test without Photoshop?
Move along plz, nothing to see here. (Well, almost...
but there is photoshop testing in the results ..
love the After Effects test, though it makes me and my Dual feel tiny in comparison
Dont Hurt Me said:
dont hurt me do you just make the same post and duplicate it for every single benchmark thread, seriously.
the G5 is a perfectly capable chip, the gaming divide is purely to do with the porting, about 1/3 of the work is re compiling for ppc, but the rest is directx/API work the intel switch will do little for gameing, and i bet you you will come a whining about "how badly apples OS works for games" the mac will not be a gaming platform until games are written for it and ported elsewhere, their are more mac users than pc gamers, you are a minority, heck i'm in that minority, i just dont go bitching a whining every god damn benchmark thread that you have to go through the hardship of owning a pc and mac, wah wah wah the whole world should feel sorry for you.
the athlon is not not faster period, nor is the P4, nor is the G5, they all win at roughly 1/3 of the benchmarks, the fact that you cling a biased and irrelevant benchmark such as gaming does not change the virtues of a cpu, heck apple is going to make your perfect system in a few months time, a mac that can run windows for games and the mac os for work.
what good is all that power if you just use it to waste your life playing games.
Hector said:
thanks for saving me the trouble, I wanted to say almost the same thing, and like you said if it runs work apps faster, then isn't that what's important for a pro machine? i'd rather go outside than play a video game anyway
unfortunately i'm like dont hurt me in a few more ways than one, i have my athlon pc, stupidly over powered 2.8GHz x800XT, and i used to play games on it ever now and again, yet i haven't for a long while partly due to my studies and partly due to the fact xbox live is infinitely better, the pc still has use for a few things, like rendering, gaming was never it's primary use, balance is the key and for the few mouse and keyboard games that just dont work on an xbox my macs suffice, that said i'm going to go bake some macaroons.
Dont Hurt Me said:
maybe that has more to do with the gpu and how the games are optimized. if games were optimized for dual core g5's and Open GL they probably would smoke a AMD if those games were poorly ported to wintel.
lightsout said:
But making a dual proc, dual core Opteron system would cost 2x more than a Quad core Mac. In fact, a dual core Opteron system would cost as much as a Quad core Mac.
lopresmb said:
Yeah, I wish it were cheaper as well. On top of that, I wish everything was cheaper as well.
If someone asked me if this machine was relatively expensive to comparable Intel or AMD based machines out there, the answer is no. In fact, this machine is cheap in comparison.
Abstract said:
This comment should really be a sticky b/c it cant get driven home hard enough. The DELL (or whatever current x86 company) equivalent of this machine in a dual dual core configuration is _WAY_ more expensive than the current quad G5 price.
I think Apple did this because People like to buy their own, cheaper RAM. This was the customer doesn't feel like they are paying extra for Apple RAM (well, it's not really made by Apple).mac n cheese said: