What is this guy talking about???

Discussion in 'General Mac Discussion' started by G3-Pwnz-G4, Aug 17, 2003.

  1. G3-Pwnz-G4 macrumors regular

    Jun 5, 2003
    i found this post on another forum i'm on, and i was just wondering if any of you can make sense of it...

  2. Stike macrumors 65816


    Jan 31, 2002
    Re: What is this guy talking about???

    The test itself may be not fake, the entry of the G5 in the final list of course has to be fake.
    The bar is completely empty, this is statistically impossible. Besides... the Dual 2 GHz G5 would be slower than my G4 933....
  3. edesignuk Moderator emeritus


    Mar 25, 2002
    London, England
    That test is the biggest load of crap I have ever seen! You can't bench a system based on how well flash performs FFS! Sheesh!
  4. Alte22a macrumors 6502

    Feb 25, 2003
    back in London
    I`m actually on my way back from Japan from work and I popped into the Akihabara which is the electronic town of tokyo and they have a G5 there on display and all free to play and mess around with. Yes it kicks arse!! on initial playing around with PS and stuff. Looks promising, it smoother than any other MAC that I've ever messed with.... And no way is it slower than a G3 iMac...

    At the moment sitting in the departure lounge waiting for my connecting flight back to London. Of course I can surfing the net on my PB ti 1Ghz.... Be home soon... :D
  5. rainman::|:| macrumors 603


    Feb 2, 2002
    yes, apple releases a much-anticipated next-generation chip, hoping to god no one actually used it, and realized it was slower than anything on the market..


    i don't think CNN or anyone else has G5's, except for those people that had them briefly to perform benchmarking. And i really doubt they'd breach contract with Apple by running unapproved benchmarks on it.

    Liar, liar, pants on fire.
  6. Vector macrumors 6502a


    Feb 13, 2002
    That test, or at least the results, are completely false. I used the test on a single 933 G4 and got 1340 and it says the G5 got 36147 ms.

    He also says that the results are from a dual 2 ghz G5 that CNN has, and while i know apple has sent out some G5's, i would be willing to bet that CNN does not have one. They are only sending out a few to companies who already buy macs in large amounts. I can see them sending G5s to pixar and some other big users like a couple of research companies whose names currently escape me.
  7. tjwett macrumors 68000


    May 6, 2002
    Brooklyn, NYC
    let's say this guy really did test a Flash app on a G5 and it really did suck. i still wouldn't be impressed and i still wouldn't blame the Mac because everyone in the world knows that the reason Flash performance sucks on the Mac is because the Flash player and plugin we have is the crappiest port this side of Windows Media Player. Macromedia will NEVER fully support the Mac correctly, ever. period. that goes for their retail applications as well. they are all crappy ports. toy software for toy computers.
  8. OutThere macrumors 603


    Dec 19, 2002
    wow-sad people

    some people are just idiots. athalon=athlon, dual p4 xeon=dual xeon, 2.8 ghz p4s aren't generally beaten by 2.4 p4s IMHO this OBVIOUSLY shows that apple is a bad company, macs suck, and single p4s always beat dual machines.
  9. G3-Pwnz-G4 thread starter macrumors regular

    Jun 5, 2003
    well i'm glad i'm not the only one who doesn't quite understand what the hell this guy was talking about...and besides, how does sending it to CNN help? i not sure how CNN can get a g5 and nobody else can...
  10. Powerbook G5 macrumors 68040

    Powerbook G5

    Jun 23, 2003
    St Augustine, FL
    Even if it was true, a Flash benchmark would not give any sort of accurate messure of performance between systems, it's just the most pathetic, useless "benchmark" I've heard of. By next they'll compare a P4 to a G5 with "internet speed" tests and use a cable modem with the P4 against a dial up with the G5 and declare the P4 the better system to surf the net with! I remember when the PIII came out and Intel was bragging how with the PIII you can surf the net faster and better than anyone else...I seriously doubt that PIII made surfing the net faster than the PII I had at the time, I just don't see any logical performance issues with that.
  11. ColoJohnBoy macrumors 65816


    Mar 10, 2003
    Denver, Colorado
    Don't pay attention to that dude. An ignorant Mac basher. He just needs to be ravished by Mac OS X. Then he won't care about anything regarding that test.
  12. Mac Kiwi macrumors 6502a

    Apr 29, 2003
    New Zealand
    Get used to it guys :rolleyes: when the G5 finally hits the ground there will be a myriad of these guys trying to find ways to make the G5 look bad,might be wrong but I doubt it.
  13. Billicus macrumors 6502a


    Apr 3, 2002
    Charles City, Iowa
    What a load of crap man. If this was a viable test the G5 would have scored way higher than the rest of them, and by no means would my G3 iMac DV 400 Mhz have almost beat the Dual Processor G5. No way. Some people...:rolleyes:
  14. Powerbook G5 macrumors 68040

    Powerbook G5

    Jun 23, 2003
    St Augustine, FL
    It would make me feel good about my 400 MHz G3 PowerBook, though. :)

Share This Page