Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

PC World: Apple G5 Gets Trounced By Athlon 64

Posted by timothy on from the os-x-doesn't-run-so-hot-on-athlon dept.

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."

5 of 1,063 comments (clear)

  1. In Memoriam of Alpha by 4of12 · · Score: 4, Informative

    both 64-bit contenders

    Both the G5 and the AMD64 are great chips, but they really only represent the intrustion of 64 bit computing in the popular consciousness, not the actual beginning of 64 bit computing.

    Compare their performance with the last Alpha chip, development of which was cut off years ago, and tell me again how the best is being brought to us.

    Even as Intel picks the carcass of Alpha to revive the still-born Itanium series, the killed off Alpha chip line has performance that embarrasses HP into covering it up.

    --
    "Provided by the management for your protection."
  2. Unscientific by Nexum · · Score: 5, Informative

    Hmm...

    So this is how we benchmark two different platforms these days?

    For everyone's information, I should not have to point the following out, but here we go... the benchmarks were taken from the following apps -

    Quake III, developed on, and for, x86 over 5 year period of programming research and enhancement. Later ported to OSX in a week by OmniGroup.

    Word, developed on, and for, x86, by the developer who also wrote the operating system running on the PC's. Ported by MBU to OSX.

    Photoshop, Adobe develops Photoshop in a very balanced way for the two platforms, and these are the results for this test -

    Fastest 50MB image = 17 seconds, G5 = 18 seconds
    Fastest 150 MB image = 47 seconds, G5 = 51 seconds

    The final test was a Premiere rendering, where almost all the systems tested did the job in 3 or 4 seconds. The fastest was 3 seconds, the G5 did it in 4. This is Premiere which no longer exists as a current ongoing product for OSX.

    Does anyone see just how biased and unscientific this all is?

    Oh, and I didn't mention that most of th PC's had double the graphics memory, and had RAID as their primary storage.

    This article is FUD.

    -Nex

    --

    This sig has been deprecated.
  3. Re:You're claiming a point? by primalamn · · Score: 4, Informative

    Apple never said first 64-bit workstation. Only first 64-bit personal computer. Get it straight.

  4. You're MISSING a point by danaris · · Score: 5, Informative

    The POINT is that Apple never marketed the G5 as the fastest workstation. All Apple marketed the G5 as was the a) first 64-bit desktop (and if your definition of desktop differs from "a pre-built box from a well-known company that an ordinary human might buy", that's your problem, not Apple's), and b) the fastest desktop around at the time.

    Saying, "Ooh! Ooh! New computers have come out! There are benchmarks against computers Apple wasn't talking about! The G5's not the fastest! Apple LIED!" is just plain dumb. Of course faster computers will come out! Apple isn't dumb enough to think or claim that their first-generation G5s will always be the fastest, and anyone who thinks they were claiming that is dumb.

    And does anyone else see the possible conflict of interest with PC World running these benchmarks? Now, note that I'm an Apple fan. However, I won't completely believe any benchmarks that are done by anyone with an interest in seeing either side win. And it would probably be best if both computers were running something neutral, like a Linux or a BSD. Does anyone really believe these benchmarks are any more fair and unbiased than Apple's own???

    Dan Aris

    --
    Fun. Free. Online. RPG. BattleMaster.
  5. Re:Compatibility Issues? by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Informative

    Off Topic Warning: Slashdot just gave me a message I've never seen before: "Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 31.0)." So in order to fix this problem, I bring you... "TEXT ADDED TO DEFEAT LAME FILTER". You'll know it when you see it. You can thank the dipshits constructing the lameness filter for the added content. When will you fucks realize that tampering with posts only hampers comments? If the moderation system is not sufficient to the task of cleaning up slashdot, improve the moderation system, don't make end runs around it.

    XP 64 won't have the 32-bit XP's support for DOS apps at all, nor will it run 16-bit apps (but it should have no trouble with 32-bit software). More important, 64-bit drivers for common hardware, such as printers, will be scarce when the OS debuts.

    You think that's bad. You should look at the current state of today's 64 bit XP on itanic. As per microsoft technet, it's missing just about every goddamn feature:

    Digital Media
    The following digital media features are not included with Windows XP 64-Bit Edition:

    • Digital video disc (DVD) video playback - TEXT ADDED TO DEFEAT LAME FILTER
    • CD Recording - TEXT ADDED TO DEFEAT LAME FILTER
    • Kodak Imaging Accessory
    • Windows Media Player
      A subset of Windows Media Technologies
    • DirectMusic(R)
    • Microsoft TV Technologies for Windows(R) - TEXT ADDED TO DEFEAT LAME FILTER
    • Video mixing renderer (VMR)
    • NetMeeting(R)
    • IEEE 1394 audio
    • Fax

    Subsystems and Protocols
    Windows XP 64-Bit Edition does not provide support for a number of older subsystems and transport protocols, including the following:

    • Microsoft(R) MS-DOS(R) subsystem - TEXT ADDED TO DEFEAT LAME FILTER
    • OS/2 subsystems - TEXT ADDED TO DEFEAT LAME FILTER
    • 16-bit subsystems - TEXT ADDED TO DEFEAT LAME FILTER
    • Portable Operating System Interface for UNIX (POSIX) subsystem - TEXT ADDED TO DEFEAT LAME FILTER
    • Legacy transport protocols - TEXT ADDED TO DEFEAT LAME FILTER
    • Internetwork Packet Exchange/Sequenced Packet Exchange (IPX/SPX) LAN and WAN
    • AppleTalk Protocol LAN - TEXT ADDED TO DEFEAT LAME FILTER
    • Services for Macintosh - TEXT ADDED TO DEFEAT LAME FILTER
    • Data Link Control (DLC) LAN - TEXT ADDED TO DEFEAT LAME FILTER
    • NetBIOS Enhanced User Interface (NetBEUI) LAN - TEXT ADDED TO DEFEAT LAME FILTER
    • Service Advertising Protocol (SAP) Agent for Server - TEXT ADDED TO DEFEAT LAME FILTER
    • Internetwork Packet Exchange (IPX) router - TEXT ADDED TO DEFEAT LAME FILTER
    • Infrared Data Association (IrDA) - TEXT ADDED TO DEFEAT LAME FILTER
    • Open Shortest Path First (OSPF) - TEXT ADDED TO DEFEAT LAME FILTER
    • Network BIOS (NetBIOS) gateway - TEXT ADDED TO DEFEAT LAME FILTER

    Mobile Computing
    Windows XP 64-Bit Edition does not provide support for features aimed primarily at users of portable computers. The following features are not included:

    • Hot docking/undocking - TEXT ADDED TO DEFEAT LAME FILTER
    • PC Card - TEXT ADDED TO DEFEAT LAME FILTER
    • IrDA - TEXT ADDED TO DEFEAT LAME FILTER
    • Terminal Services client for Handheld PC - TEXT ADDED TO DEFEAT LAME FILTER
    • Power Management- TEXT ADDED TO DEFEAT LAME FILTER
    • System Restore
      The System Restore feature is not supported in Windows XP 64-Bit Edition.

    Networking and Communications The following networking and communications features are not included in Windows XP 64-Bit Edition:

    • Internet Locator Service (ILS) - TEXT ADDED TO DEFEAT LAME FILTER
    • MSN Internet Access
    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"