Operating Systems > macOS
What the fuck is this shit???
Pissed_Macman:
For a second I thought they had something legit. This goes to prove that charts are shit when they're made by someone unprofessional and biased.
billy_gates:
it was funny when he dismissed GCC as an unheard of compiler, I'm not even aware of the names of other compilers that are present in visual C++, etc.
It shows how stupid this guy is when he puts on there that using Linux was not cool, implying that the machines would run slower with linux. pft.
However, its not like Apple didn't blow up these results.. of course they did, just not to the extent that he implies. For instance, I highly doubt that Photoshop runs 2x as fast. Just remember when Jobs said the single 867G4 ran Photoshop 80% faster than the 1.8GHz P4... and of course he was totally full of shit...
One thing that bothered me bout the Photoshop G5 to PC comparisons is that ONE step on the PC took forever, if that one step wasn't there the PC would be neck and neck. This just shows how Apple picked the filter that was hardest on the PC and not so hard on the Mac just as a crowd pleaser. Intel could have very easily picked a filter that is really hard on the Mac and easy on the PC just to slow the Mac down, then the PC would be 2x as fast.
So.... I believe that the G5 will be faster than most stuff, however, not as fast as Jobs says.
P.S. My dad has a dual Xeon system. He is very unhappy with it. Before the Xeons he had a dual PIII. The Xeon Machine is faster, but not that much faster. The really funny thing about it is at any given time it only uses 50% of each CPU. Hows that for multi processor management in Windows. I keep telling him to install Linux so it can take advantage of the Xeon's and the dual CPU's. But so far he just has XP on it.
Just my 2Cents, however this post is a little longer than 2Cents worth, so I'll say its my 6Cents.
psyjax:
quote:Originally posted by jeffberg: Mac Capitalist:
it was funny when he dismissed GCC as an unheard of compiler, I'm not even aware of the names of other compilers that are present in visual C++, etc.
It shows how stupid this guy is when he puts on there that using Linux was not cool, implying that the machines would run slower with linux. pft.
However, its not like Apple didn't blow up these results.. of course they did, just not to the extent that he implies. For instance, I highly doubt that Photoshop runs 2x as fast. Just remember when Jobs said the single 867G4 ran Photoshop 80% faster than the 1.8GHz P4... and of course he was totally full of shit...
One thing that bothered me bout the Photoshop G5 to PC comparisons is that ONE step on the PC took forever, if that one step wasn't there the PC would be neck and neck. This just shows how Apple picked the filter that was hardest on the PC and not so hard on the Mac just as a crowd pleaser. Intel could have very easily picked a filter that is really hard on the Mac and easy on the PC just to slow the Mac down, then the PC would be 2x as fast.
So.... I believe that the G5 will be faster than most stuff, however, not as fast as Jobs says.
P.S. My dad has a dual Xeon system. He is very unhappy with it. Before the Xeons he had a dual PIII. The Xeon Machine is faster, but not that much faster. The really funny thing about it is at any given time it only uses 50% of each CPU. Hows that for multi processor management in Windows. I keep telling him to install Linux so it can take advantage of the Xeon's and the dual CPU's. But so far he just has XP on it.
Just my 2Cents, however this post is a little longer than 2Cents worth, so I'll say its my 6Cents.
--- End quote ---
One step? Dude I saw the comparison, ALL the steps took a significantly longer time, watch it again. That PC was slow as fuck... I don't care what the numbers say, they don't mean shit.
I don't care if it processes 1.85645446Million microziples and has a half terabite BIOS overune memry jackoff cumshoot accelerator cartrige xtreeem. It fucking kicked the shit out of a dual Xeon... case closed.
billy_gates:
quote:Originally posted by psyjax: plain 'ol psyjax:
One step? Dude I saw the comparison, ALL the steps took a significantly longer time, watch it again. That PC was slow as fuck... I don't care what the numbers say, they don't mean shit.
I don't care if it processes 1.85645446Million microziples and has a half terabite BIOS overune memry jackoff cumshoot accelerator cartrige xtreeem. It fucking kicked the shit out of a dual Xeon... case closed.
--- End quote ---
yes, they were all slower, but only slightly... that one step was an extreme apple used to twist the the numbers.
Also, I bet the PC wasn't using more than 75% of both its CPU's, the Mac was using 100%. Sure, thats windows fault. What happens when u get Linux on that thing?
[ June 29, 2003: Message edited by: jeffberg: Mac Capitalist ]
Laukev7:
Why is it that you only take the Photoshop tests in consideration? What about the other tests? The G5 beat the PC hands down at the audio software test. The G5 was reportedly 3-5 times faster than the PC at the scientific/genoma/DNA software test, confirmed by the CEO's testimonial. It even beats the PC at Quake III. How many tests do you need to see that the G5 is much faster than today's Pentium or Xeon?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version