It is amazing how bent out of shape PC users get when it is merely suggested that Mac could possibly be as fast as a PC.
These seem to be the common replies to this suggestion from PC users/fanboys:
1. But the Opteron wasn't running 64-bit code/OS!
Neither was the G5.
2. But the Athlon64 is faster!
There were people crying around here for an Opteron comparison. Here is one. How many fanboys said the Opteron would crush the G5? It didn't so, so now they cry Athlon64.
3. But they should run linux on both for a fair comparison.
How would that be anymore fair? It wouldn't be in the fanboys' eyes unless they got to hand pick the compiler and tune the OS. The G5 is stuck with a crappy compiler (comparitively). If anything this would create an unfair advantage for the Opteron.
4. But the software used for benchmarking wasn't representative of what someone would run on an Opteron workstation.
Wha!?!? Other than CAD, what is a workstation for if not to do 3D rendering, video editing and a little photochopping? The G5 serves as Apple workstation offering as well.
5. But the Opteron is server chip, whereas the G5 is a workstation/desktop chip.
OK, so you want to compare a Power4 or Power5 to the Opteron? You'd certainly be able to claim the PC was cheaper again. Of course, XiComputer seems to think the Opteron isn't just a server chip. Oh yeah, and AMD says it's not just for servers, too.
6. But they didn't use the fastest Opteron.
You're right again. They only used the Opteron with the same clock speed as the G5. If that's not unfair, I don't know what is.;)
7. But I don't want the Mac to be as fast or faster than my PC.
Too bad. Go cry to mommy, I'm tired of hearing it.
What is becoming clear from all of the comparisons to the G5 that I've seen is that Macs are extremely competitive again, and no platform mops the floor with the other. This is a good thing. This means more real choices for you. If you can't handle this reality, there are plenty of medications that you can take to keep from snapping. Seek therapy NOW! Because if you're pissed now, just wait until the 980 is out at 3+ GHz in 2004 at ~40% better performance (reportedly) at the same clock speed as the 970.
I don't think so. I just did the same thing. 2 1.4 PIIIs, 256 MB Ram and default HDD config (no raid), no additional hardware and added RH 2.1 AS for the OS and it came to $3294. That price is good until 3/19 then it goes up to $3594. Either you didn't actually add the second proc or you didn't add the OS.
Did you even read the page you linked to? It clearly says SINGLE 2.4 XEON and NO OS. You do not get dual 2.8 XEONS for $2667. To get dual 2.8 XEONS add $699 and you still need the OS. Red Hat AS 2.1 is $799. So now we're at $4165. But Dell is offering $300 off if buy before midnight tomorrow 3/19. So you can get it for a limited time for $3865. Still $1000 more than the XServe.
Slashdot Mirror
It is amazing how bent out of shape PC users get when it is merely suggested that Mac could possibly be as fast as a PC. These seem to be the common replies to this suggestion from PC users/fanboys: 1. But the Opteron wasn't running 64-bit code/OS! Neither was the G5. 2. But the Athlon64 is faster! There were people crying around here for an Opteron comparison. Here is one. How many fanboys said the Opteron would crush the G5? It didn't so, so now they cry Athlon64. 3. But they should run linux on both for a fair comparison. How would that be anymore fair? It wouldn't be in the fanboys' eyes unless they got to hand pick the compiler and tune the OS. The G5 is stuck with a crappy compiler (comparitively). If anything this would create an unfair advantage for the Opteron. 4. But the software used for benchmarking wasn't representative of what someone would run on an Opteron workstation. Wha!?!? Other than CAD, what is a workstation for if not to do 3D rendering, video editing and a little photochopping? The G5 serves as Apple workstation offering as well. 5. But the Opteron is server chip, whereas the G5 is a workstation/desktop chip. OK, so you want to compare a Power4 or Power5 to the Opteron? You'd certainly be able to claim the PC was cheaper again. Of course, XiComputer seems to think the Opteron isn't just a server chip. Oh yeah, and AMD says it's not just for servers, too. 6. But they didn't use the fastest Opteron. You're right again. They only used the Opteron with the same clock speed as the G5. If that's not unfair, I don't know what is. ;)
7. But I don't want the Mac to be as fast or faster than my PC.
Too bad. Go cry to mommy, I'm tired of hearing it.
What is becoming clear from all of the comparisons to the G5 that I've seen is that Macs are extremely competitive again, and no platform mops the floor with the other. This is a good thing. This means more real choices for you. If you can't handle this reality, there are plenty of medications that you can take to keep from snapping. Seek therapy NOW! Because if you're pissed now, just wait until the 980 is out at 3+ GHz in 2004 at ~40% better performance (reportedly) at the same clock speed as the 970.
I don't think so. I just did the same thing. 2 1.4 PIIIs, 256 MB Ram and default HDD config (no raid), no additional hardware and added RH 2.1 AS for the OS and it came to $3294. That price is good until 3/19 then it goes up to $3594. Either you didn't actually add the second proc or you didn't add the OS.
Did you even read the page you linked to? It clearly says SINGLE 2.4 XEON and NO OS. You do not get dual 2.8 XEONS for $2667. To get dual 2.8 XEONS add $699 and you still need the OS. Red Hat AS 2.1 is $799. So now we're at $4165. But Dell is offering $300 off if buy before midnight tomorrow 3/19. So you can get it for a limited time for $3865. Still $1000 more than the XServe.