Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Gigahertz Mac Finally SPEC'd

Posted by pudge on from the mo-speed-mo-speed-mo-speed dept.

FrkyD writes "C't magazine puplished a story with the results of a test they designed using a Mac OS X-adapted benchmark suite by the Standard Performance Evaluation Corporation (SPEC) entitled CPU2000. SPEC allows comparisons to be made within a certain framework with the Intel competition. They compared the G4/1 GHz running Mac OS X with a PIII/1 GHz (Coppermine) running Windows and Linux."

4 of 52 comments (clear)

  1. It all comes down to application by Strog · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Until a more optimized compiler comes along then it looks like for general purpose applications clock speed will mostly be the indicator of performance.

    Having said that, there will always be applications that are optimized enough to kick some butt on a G4 like Photoshop, etc. If you are a programmer then it is nice to not be limited on registers on a RISC cpu. Choose the right tool for the right job. If it comes down to a push then use your favorite. :P

  2. Re:Linux vs. Windows by foobar104 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That means Linux is over 30% faster than Windows!

    Of course it doesn't. It means that GCC is somewhat better at compiling the SPECint_base benchmark than Visual Studio is.

    I won't pretend to be educated about the inner workings of SPECint, but one would suppose that, because it's purported to be a hardware benchmark rather than an OS benchmark, it is completely independent of the standard C library, or any other OS-level service. One would expect the compiled benchmark to just run pure code inside the CPU, without any system calls or any of that stuff.

    So the same benchmark compiled with the same compiler but run under two different OSs should return exactly the same result, within a certain statistical margin.

    Somebody with more time on their hands could either test this hypothesis, or confirm that it's already been done by somebody else.

  3. Processor only test by gouldtj · · Score: 3, Insightful
    I guess, I am supprised by the results. In just USING the various machines I would say that there is about a 1:2 ratio between the MHz on a PPC to an x86 processor. But then I started to think about them. In reality the processors aren't what make the difference. It is everything else. Macs don't tend to use as much 'soft' stuff, and they make better use of the GPU, so the processor is left to do more 'processing'. I guess they're will never be an completely perfect 'user' test, I'll just have to go with feel. But in my experience those SPEC numbers don't tell the whole story.

    It might be interesting to see a comparison with Linux running on both machines... Anyone have one of these?

  4. Re:Linux vs. Windows by foobar104 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    [I]f GCC consistently turns out code that's faster than Visual Studio, we could extrapolate that Linux is significantly faster than Windows.

    Maybe you could, if GCC could be thus characterized. But there's no evidence in this article that points to that conclusion. Rather, this article says that GCC did a better job of compiling the SPEC benchmarks. As everybody knows-- or should know-- benchmarks are to real applications as fish are to bicycles.