Author: Tom Kerrigan
Date: 21:51:13 07/24/03
Go up one level in this thread
On July 24, 2003 at 23:14:52, Hristo wrote: >On July 24, 2003 at 20:43:14, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On July 24, 2003 at 17:27:55, Vincent Lejeune wrote: >> >>>http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/wwdc03/ -> click "watch now" -> go to >>>1:40:30; You will see Power Mac G5 perform a little more than 2 times faster >>>than a dual Xeon 3.06 !!! Live run, screens side by side, with 4 or 5 different >>>applications. >> >>Figures don't lie. >>But liars will figure. >> >>The shame from Apple's current misinformation campaign won't go away until they >>start telling the truth. >> >>A little distortion is not unexpected. But they are simply telling absurd tall >>tales. > >Dan, >if the applications being compared were using Altivec optimized code on the Mac >and were dependent heavily on this part of the code, then the Mac being 2 times >faster is easy to imagine. > >What they, Apple, don't tell "you" as a consumer is that only a few Applications >can gain execution speed from Altivec stuff ... and when it does happen you can >often feel that the P4 are slow, which is not the case for the general purpose >Applications. > >Why do you think Apple is not telling the truth? More precisely, what is it that >they are dishonest about, in relation to the above mentioned demo? > >Regards, >Hristo * The IBM guy was bragging about their 0.13um process, saying how great it is, saying that only IBM and Apple could deliver it... Hmmm... Intel has been selling 0.13um P4s for a year and a half and AMD has been selling 0.13um Athlons for, what, a year? Intel is going to be selling 0.09um processors not long after Apple starts shipping the 0.13um processors that only they are awesome enough to deliver, sure. * Steve says the 3.0GHz P4 was the fastest they could buy, but actually they could have bought a 3.2GHz P4. * Steve says the G5 is the world's first 64 bit desktop processor. The Opteron has been out for months now. If you want to argue that the Opteron is a workstation/server processor and not a "dektop" processor, then why are they comparing the G5 to a Xeon? * Of course there's the fiasco with Apple's SPEC scores being _way_ lower than officially submitted SPEC scores. * For the Photoshop and music demos, it seemed like the PC was stalling out for some reason. Is it because it didn't have as much memory? Is it because they were taking advantage of some problem with a memory allocator and it was thrashing? Maybe a virus scanner was running. BTW, you mention Altivec. What makes you think IBM's implementation of Altivec is any better than Intel's implementation of SSE2? One also has to ask what in the world Jobs is doing up there, oh so happy about having a 2GHz processor, when MHz don't matter. ;) -Tom
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.