Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

MacWorld Magazine Benchmarks the G5s

Posted by pudge on from the i-want-one dept.

La Temperanza writes "Macworld has released yet another set of benchmarks of the full line-up of G5 desktops, along with Dual 1.42GHz and single 1GHz G4s. The results are very interesting indeed, and I think I can safely say they're not biased in the G5's favor." I dunno, it should not come as too much of a shock that a dual G4 can beat a single G5 in many tests.

9 of 96 comments (clear)

  1. MacAddict benchmarks by CarlBenda · · Score: 5, Interesting

    More benchmarks are becoming available. Some like MacAddict's start to point out what a huge effect having a lot of memory means to the G5.

  2. G4 still kickin' by Mr12inch(Powerbook) · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This just goes to show that, depsite the FSB bottleneck, the G4 DP still has a lot of life left in it. With the love affair of the new G5's in full force, maybe I can pick up a G4 DP dirt cheap now:)

    --
    every time a republican dies a queer angel gets his wings
    1. Re:G4 still kickin' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You can't. Macs never really drop to the "dirt cheap" point until they're utterly obsolete. You can still expect to pay several hundred dollars for the original 450 MHz DP G4, for instance.

  3. Why not ship them running at full speed? by rodik · · Score: 4, Interesting

    One would wonder what the downside of setting the energy saver preference to 'best performance' really is. Seems odd for Apple not to be shipping the machines running at full speed if there isn't any difference when it comes to processor life, etc. Energy use can't be the issue here.

    1. Re:Why not ship them running at full speed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Noise. At full speed, the CPUs generate more heat, and the internal cooling system speeds up to deal with it, generating more noise.

      With default system settings, a G5 under moderate use is damn near silent. The noisiest thing in it is the hard drive. But the harder you work it, the louder it is.

  4. Mixed feelings by rhetland · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I have been reading all the G5 benchmarks with mixed feelings lately. First of all I should clarify that I am a fan of Macs, and so I am glad to see that there is any interest in the platform at all.

    However, I do most of my real computing on a home-grown linux cluster using Rocks. These intel machines are simply so cheap if you step slightly back from the bleeding edge, that I don't know if I could justify spending a significant amount on an equivilent Mac cluster (although I am watching V. Tech's apple cluster, just like everyone else apparently is...).

    Is there really much need for so much desktop power? How many users will utilize the full potential of a dual G5? Keep in mind that if even slashdot users can't keep two procs going, the general public has little hope.

    Of course, this will not stop me from buying one.. It's just so cool looking... I am just confessing that I realize it is wasteful...

  5. 1.6 & 1.8 single to dual processor upgrade pat by amichalo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    For me, the major advantage of the G5 is not that it is 64 bit or that it reaches speads up to 2.0 Ghz. For me, it is that there is finally a single chip that can process at the same rate as two G4's (see benchmark results for the 1.6Ghz G5 vs 2 1.4Ghz G4s).

    This is important because there is once again - in many years - a single Apple box one may purchase and upgrade as demands increase. THAT IS as long as a single 1.6 or 1.8 Ghz G5 has the option of upgrading to a second processor (of the same clock speed of course).

    Does anyone know if this is possible or is the 2 Ghz the only configuration able to support dual G5's? (Can one purchase a single 2.0Ghz and add a proc later?)

    Radio shack: You've got questions, we've got Tandys

    --
    I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
  6. Re:Bus speed, ddr memory path, floating point???? by macmurph · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The obvious ways this thing [the G5] should be different are huge memory moves: [snip]...the processor should be able to have multiple floating point commands being processed at once (in addition to altivec).

    You are absolutely correct. Look at the benchmarks in this guys Navier-Stokes fluid dynamics caclulations... The 1.8 ghz G5 is more than 3 times faster than a G4 at small memory calculations and the G4 isnt even capable of being tested in the large memory calculations...

    And he isnt even testing multiprocessors...or even the faster 2 Ghz G5.

    Basically, the G5 and the motherboard its on solve all of the major problems the G4 had.

    http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/G5/G5_fluid_dynamics_be nch/G5_fluid_dynamics_bench.html

  7. Re:Apple did not invent desktop media by daviddennis · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I don't know of any widely used operating systems that are NOT bloated. Clearly bloat is what the modern OS consumer wants.

    Personally, I love the MacOS X eye candy because it just looks good. I find that it makes me feel better overall, which is a very nice plus if you think about the amount of time most of us spend in front of our monitors.

    My company's PowerMac G4/1.25 dual processor and my PowerBook G4/1.0ghz are both very snappy machines, I assume largely due to successful offloading of display tasks to their graphics cards. Is this somehow morally wrong?

    I like and appreciate beauty in design, so for me the MacOS X GUI is a big winner now that it doesn't slow the machine down, as it used to in older machines.

    D