PC World: Apple G5 Gets Trounced By Athlon 64

StewedSquirrel writes "PC World magazine has published an article comparing the AMD Athlon 64 and Opteron versus Apple's G5 processor, both 64-bit contenders for the title of 'fastest desktop processor.' Apple has made many claims to be the first, fastest and only 64-bit processor for the desktop and workstation market, but (not mentioning the fact that Opteron beat the G5 to market by over 4 months) the benchmarks should speak for themselves. Of note is the 3.2GHz Pentium 4, coming in competitive with the G5, but significantly behind the Opteron and Athlon 64 systems."

Comments

Re:The KEY

[Anonymous Coward]

Macs are fastar!

No they're not, and here's proof.

But macs are faster at speck, whatever that is!

No, they cheated on the test to make the PC look worse than it is.

But, um...Macs are faster at Photoshop!

Wrong, here's another test to disprove Stevie's secret filter test. They're even slower at Photoshop.

But they say they're faster!

Here the AMD absolutely trounces the G5 and leaves it in the dust.

BUT THE AMD DOESN'T RUN OS-X, W00T IN YOUR FACE PC BOY!

*cry*

[FatSean]

This isn't bashing. This is letting the Apple FanBoys know that their brief period on top is now over for the conceivable future.

And now, a summation of benchmark article response

[banky]

I'm so glad that someone FINALLY had the balls to call The Steve on his evil marketing ploy. How dare he try to claim that Apple was somehow better, when every Slashdotter knows it's not!

(He won't give us the source for Aqua, see. We installed Red Hat the other day and are therefore qualified to fix all the bugs.)

At any rate: I just wish Apple would go away and stop competing. Trying to improve their hardware and software - and then selling it with such outrageous distortions - is bad, and hurts the industry. It really hurt my ego to think that some Photoshop dork has a better computer than I do. We can' t have that. Everyone knows Apple sucks. Er, suX0rs.

Benchmarks, really! Everyone knows they're crap. ATI had the balls to claim theirs was faster, when everyone knows nVidia rules!!!1! (Or was it the other way around? I forget.) As soon as the benchmarks said nVidia was faster, I threw that piece of crap ATI out of my machine and got the newest GeForce.

*Sigh*

Apple could have always built OSX on x86!

[FatSean]

So don't try and shift the blame, son. Apple backed a loser (G5 is a baby cpu from IBM...they should have bucked up for something with more chest hair).

So there.

You're claiming a point?

[cnelzie]

SGI had 64-bit WORKSTATIONS for YEARS before Apple started marketing their solution as the "First" 64-bit Workstation.

IBM had 64-bit Workstations for Years before Apple started marketing their solution as the "First" 64-bit Workstation.

Sun has 64-bit Workstations for Years before Apple started marketing their solution as the "First" 64-bit Workstation.

Again, what is your point? Apple's marketing department is just as full of crud as everyone else.

BTW, The Intel Xeon was "never" meant as anything aside from being a Server chip, but that didn't stop people from making workstations out of them. UNIX, in general, was never meant as a Desktop Operating System, it was always geared up as being a Multi-User Server based system... But, that didn't stop anyone from making UNIX workstations, even Apple.

I say, if it works in areas that a product wasn't initially intended for, then by all means use it... The main reason behind the Opteron being 'geared' more for Server use is some architectural design differences that equate in higher fabrication and thus higher retail prices... Most 'desktop' users aren't willing to spend that much for a 'dekstop' system.

Again... I am still failing to see your point... (Did you even have one?)