The problem with that is that thousands or maybe tens of thousands of G5s will already be pre-ordered or shipped before we see any benchmarks from either MacWorld or MacAddict. Thus, it would be nice to know sooner rather than later whether the G5s will offer significant performance improvements over the existing G4 Power Macs. In some areas there is no question that the higher-MHz G5 will outperform the G4. But wouldn't everyone like to see results from some Altivec-enhanced Photoshop filters, or MPEG2 compression, or MP3/AAC ripping, or Final Cut Pro? The people who would be interested in these types of benchmarks already know that the G4 is "slow." Thus I don't believe that showing the G5's superiority would drastically affect sales of the G4 Power Macs.
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.
PowerMac G5 Benchmarks (again)
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The problem with that is that thousands or maybe tens of thousands of G5s will already be pre-ordered or shipped before we see any benchmarks from either MacWorld or MacAddict. Thus, it would be nice to know sooner rather than later whether the G5s will offer significant performance improvements over the existing G4 Power Macs. In some areas there is no question that the higher-MHz G5 will outperform the G4. But wouldn't everyone like to see results from some Altivec-enhanced Photoshop filters, or MPEG2 compression, or MP3/AAC ripping, or Final Cut Pro? The people who would be interested in these types of benchmarks already know that the G4 is "slow." Thus I don't believe that showing the G5's superiority would drastically affect sales of the G4 Power Macs.
Single versus dual processor.
Anyone notice the difference between the single cpu 2Ghz G5 and the dual cpu 2Ghz machine is nearly unnoticeable?
Look at the long list of results:
http://www.netlib.org/benchmark/linpackjava/timings_list.html
236 Mflop/s; Other Mac OS PowerMac G5 Dual 2GHz; 6/24/03
232 Mflop/s; Other Mac OS Apple PowerMac G5 2 GHz; 6/25/03
So only a 4Mflop/s gain? piddly. Somehow I doubt the second cpu is even used in the test.
joe.
Anyone notice the difference between the single cpu 2Ghz G5 and the dual cpu 2Ghz machine is nearly unnoticeable?
Look at the long list of results:
http://www.netlib.org/benchmark/linpackjava/timings_list.html
236 Mflop/s; Other Mac OS PowerMac G5 Dual 2GHz; 6/24/03
232 Mflop/s; Other Mac OS Apple PowerMac G5 2 GHz; 6/25/03
So only a 4Mflop/s gain? piddly. Somehow I doubt the second cpu is even used in the test.
joe.
hey hey hey. long time mac user. time to replace the 6115 with somthing a lil faster. just wondering. i have a pc. its watercooled. you guys think you could over clock the new g5 dual 2gig.? why you ask? my pc gains 400 mhz from it.. that case is looking sweet as helll.
I think Apple did a smart move (from a marketting point of view) of releasing 2.0 Ghz machines. I think they actually have faster.
But just being slightly faster than the Intel systems creates debates. If Apple had slammed the door on the PC there would not be the debates and the attention that goes with it.
But just being slightly faster than the Intel systems creates debates. If Apple had slammed the door on the PC there would not be the debates and the attention that goes with it.
If they already have faster why bother with the single 1.6?
Come to think of it, why bother with the single 1.6 anyway? Or at least why not have a dual 1.6 as an option? I'd pay $400 extra for it. I just can't pay $1,200 extra for the dual 2.0. And if I DID have that kind of cash I'd have a dual 867 already.
Come to think of it, why bother with the single 1.6 anyway? Or at least why not have a dual 1.6 as an option? I'd pay $400 extra for it. I just can't pay $1,200 extra for the dual 2.0. And if I DID have that kind of cash I'd have a dual 867 already.