The G5

[preacher]

Ok, well from what I hear, Apple is touting the G5 as the most powerful desktop pc ever. Now I dont know too much about the benchmarks they are using, however I truly am curious how many FPS at which resolutions they get on popular games. For instance Quake3 at 1600 X 1200, or Unreal Tournament 2003 at 1600 X 1200. Before anyone goes on about how gaming benchmarks arent fair judgements, I just want to say that I am just looking for a benchmark that I undertstand. If you know the url of a set of gaming benchmarks post it please, or if you have done your own, please post them.

[Fett101]

G5 Tech Papers (pdf)

[billy_gates]

do you mean to say that a mac is a better gaming machine than a PC.

BLASPHEMY!!!

I hope so, then Game Devs might pay more attention.

[mushrooomprince]

its not about if mac hardware runs games better or not.  Its all about the mac software.


Imagine running Half Life or Warcraft on a system that wasn't plagued with all these virus's.


lets just port os x to the x86

[Fett101]

quote:Originally posted by mushrooomprince:
Imagine running Half Life or Warcraft on a system that wasn't plagued with all these virus's.

Does not compute.

[Pissed_Macman]

In August Battle.net (the place where Warcraft people play online with each other for all you little kids) was hell because everyone had firewalls up and couldn't make games. So everyone joined my games instead.  

[mushrooomprince]

Yeah i knew about that.  In fact I still can't host games because of my firewall and router settings.


Anyways, my point is that mac os has the same level of security ( or probably better ) as Linux, but it has a greater range of software especially games.

Than Linux.

[Laukev7]

quote:Originally posted by mushrooomprince:
its not about if mac hardware runs games better or not.  Its all about the mac software.


Imagine running Half Life or Warcraft on a system that wasn't plagued with all these virus's.


lets just port os x to the x86

That would mean a certain death for Apple. It's not going to happen, and I hope it never does.

[hm_murdock]

but they should sell NeXTStep again

[preacher]

quote:Originally posted by Fett101:
G5 Tech Papers (pdf)

Im sorry to tell you guys this, but that Quake3 benchmark proves the Apple G5 might not be top dog yet. True that Dell dimension is slower than the G5, but I have an issue of Maximum PC magazine in my hand that has Quake 3 Benchmarks for the 3.0 ghz P4C with a Radeon 9700 Pro backing it up and it was pushing 425 frames per second.


Well simply put the new athlon 64 trounced all over the 3.2 ghz p4 with hyperthreading, so I think pc users are safe from apple.

[ September 27, 2003: Message edited by: ThePreacher ]

[TheQuirk]

Well good thing it's 100fps faster, or else I would have had to deal with a really laggy game at only 300fps!

[Zombie9920]

quote:Originally posted by Fett101:
G5 Tech Papers (pdf)

Those scores are awfully low for a P4. Did Apple do the benchmarking? Here is a real benchmark of a P4 running Quake III@640x480. This one isn't modified to favor a certain processor.

The Pentium 4 in this test is a 3.2ghz but the difference between a 3ghz and a 3.2ghz is not no 120+ FPS. What is really impressive is the score the P4EE(Extreme Edition) gets.



There aren't any G5 benchmarks in there but as you can clearly see the P4 does alot better than what Apple wants people to think it does. As you can also see, the P4 is faster than the G5(and that is against a heavily optimized by Apple benchmark). Apple cripples the P4 in their tests to make it look bad. Apple has always pulled funky shit like that. You can't trust any benchmarks that come from Apple.

   

quote:Originally posted by ThePreacher:



Im sorry to tell you guys this, but that Quake3 benchmark proves the Apple G5 might not be top dog yet. True that Dell dimension is slower than the G5, but I have an issue of Maximum PC magazine in my hand that has Quake 3 Benchmarks for the 3.0 ghz P4C with a Radeon 9700 Pro backing it up and it was pushing 425 frames per second.


Well simply put the new athlon 64 trounced all over the 3.2 ghz p4 with hyperthreading, so I think pc users are safe from apple.

[ September 27, 2003: Message edited by: ThePreacher ]

The Athlon 64 trounced it by a measly 5-15FPS(depending on the chipset). The P4EE trounces the Athlon FX by about 70 FPS.

[ September 27, 2003: Message edited by: Viper ]

[Zombie9920]

{NT}

[ September 27, 2003: Message edited by: Viper ]

[Zombie9920]

Here is a 2ghz Pentium 4 Williamette w/400mhz FSB with a Geforce 2 Ultra.



That is only about 40FPS lower than Apple's benchmark of a 3ghz P4c Northwood w/800mhz FSB and Hyperthreading with a Radeon 9800. Apple is a real piece of work(*right*).

[ September 27, 2003: Message edited by: Viper ]

[hm_murdock]

that's testing defaults across the board.

theyr'e using the default OpenGL for Quake, instead of optimized DirectX drivers. it's not exactly a good test of the processor, because MS's OpenGL implementation isn't as fast as it could be, and the video card is still going to be different. It's not an issue though, because GL is nearly always accelerated through DirectX drivers on Windows, while OS X relies solely on OpenGL.

actual results of running Quake3 on Windows will be markedly better, because of DirectX

[ September 27, 2003: Message edited by: Jimmy's Always On Topic ]