Real speed of the P4?
ok, this is just a thought that occurred to me at 2 a.m. so if this has been done to death, forgive me.
ok, so i was trying to figure out a nice comparison between the G4 and the P4, and i think i might have one.
the 450 G4 was approximately the same speed as the 600 MHz P3. (i'm going to be dealing with all unaccelarated uses here).
that puts the G4 at 1/3 faster than the same MHz P3.
now, between P3's and P4's, from what i remember, a 1Ghz P3 is approximately the same speed as a 1.4 MHz P4.
so doesn't that mean that a 750 MHz G4 would be approximately the same speed as a 1.4 GHz P4?
which puts the G4 at 87% faster per clock cycle. not to shabby.
so those 877 chips are approx. equal to a 1640 P4.
which means that Apple is behind on overall speed finally, which would mean that either Steve-O is going to not do his little comparisons, or perhaps we get faster chips. (i know, i know, photoshop is accelerated for the G4, but it's also got code for the P4, that would not be nice)
and just in case you're wondering, the G4 catches up with the P4 (according to my calculations) at 1,070 MHz. so if we see 1.1Ghz G4's, we're finally at the front of the pack again.
how's that for a late night ramble?
-alcimedes
ok, so i was trying to figure out a nice comparison between the G4 and the P4, and i think i might have one.
the 450 G4 was approximately the same speed as the 600 MHz P3. (i'm going to be dealing with all unaccelarated uses here).
that puts the G4 at 1/3 faster than the same MHz P3.
now, between P3's and P4's, from what i remember, a 1Ghz P3 is approximately the same speed as a 1.4 MHz P4.
so doesn't that mean that a 750 MHz G4 would be approximately the same speed as a 1.4 GHz P4?
which puts the G4 at 87% faster per clock cycle. not to shabby.
so those 877 chips are approx. equal to a 1640 P4.
which means that Apple is behind on overall speed finally, which would mean that either Steve-O is going to not do his little comparisons, or perhaps we get faster chips. (i know, i know, photoshop is accelerated for the G4, but it's also got code for the P4, that would not be nice)
and just in case you're wondering, the G4 catches up with the P4 (according to my calculations) at 1,070 MHz. so if we see 1.1Ghz G4's, we're finally at the front of the pack again.
how's that for a late night ramble?
-alcimedes
Comments
I just love your logic... <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
I'll forgive you since it's so late at night.
I will agree with one thing, though: [quote]that Apple is behind on overall speed<hr></blockquote>
How can I put this... DUH??
Mmm. What did I miss?
"so those 877 chips are approx. equal to a 1640 P4."
Did I miss something?
"Apple is behind on overall speed finally"
O my! I just bought one. Damn.
the P4's suck, but the question is just how much. that's what i was trying to figure out. when Intel released the P4's, the P3's were still faster at almost all applications, until the P4's reached about 1.4 GHz, 'cause they capped the P3's at 1Ghz.
and from what i could get, the G4's aren't all that far behind on overall speed.
edit: here's a link to the P3 vs. P4 speeds.
<a href="http://firingsquad.gamers.com/hardware/p4preview/page8.asp"; target="_blank">Firing Squad review</a>
<a href="http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1524&p=7"; target="_blank">P4 vs. Athlon test</a>
<a href="http://www.arstechnica.com/cpu/01q2/p4andg4e/p4andg4e-3.html"; target="_blank">Useful diagrams of the P4 and G4 differences</a>
and finally
<a href="http://www.techtv.com/products/hardware/story/0,23008,3339307,00.html"; target="_blank">Comparison at TechTV</a>
[ 12-13-2001: Message edited by: alcimedes ]</p>
This was soooo compelling in 1998.
so i figured the only way it was going to happen was through indirect comparison.
hence the G4 to P3, P3 to P4, and finally G4 to P4 based on the previous two comparisons.
if someone has a better resource, please let me know, i've been wondering this for a while.
Processors aren't my area of expertise, so I'll avoid speculation.
Stefan
-alcimedes
that should include all hardware differences. the set of numbers i got at the beginning was based on typical use, including office apps, mail etc.
<strong>You have to keep in mind that a 733MHz G4 7450 is about equal to a 533MHz G4 7410.</strong><hr></blockquote>
hardly.
neutured it is only a little faster but in its normal config its what it should be
<hr></blockquote>
roughly, if not a bit a bit on the high side. Depends if you are talkinga about the P3 600 or the P3 600E or the P3 600EB (katmai, Coppermine 100, Coppermine 133)
[quote]so doesn't that mean that a 750 MHz G4 would be approximately the same speed as a 1.4 GHz P4?
<hr></blockquote>
Maybe, that's probably close on "Legacy" P6 targetted binaries. Then again the G4e suffers in it's own right on legacy code.
[quote]which puts the G4 at 87% faster per clock cycle. not to shabby.<hr></blockquote>
Which still makes it slower. By quite a bit.
And I think your estimate is a bit off in favor or the G4.
[quote]lol, you guys do realize that the G4's are much faster per clock, right? as in they get more done?<hr></blockquote>
Not that much more. sorry.
[quote]the P4's suck, but the question is just how much. that's what i was trying to figure out. <hr></blockquote>
If the P4's suck, then the G4's absolutely reek.
[quote]when Intel released the P4's, the P3's were still faster at almost all applications, until the P4's reached about 1.4 GHz, <hr></blockquote>
Hello?
the P4 was initially realeased at 1.4.
[quote]'cause they capped the P3's at 1Ghz.
<hr></blockquote>
Hello? The P3 is at 1.266gighz and climbing.
[quote]and from what i could get, the G4's aren't all that far behind on overall speed.
<hr></blockquote>
depends what your running. But overall, it's about two-thirds the speed at best IMO.
MP1900+ anyone?
G4 867Mhz 512MB
[code]Ars Technica CPU Benchmark [Ver: 1.6]
Results:
Score Integer Floating Point Cache SIMD
peak 203.7% 126.5% 216.2% 0.00%
final 180.7% 135.9% 163.0% 0.00%
</pre><hr></blockquote>
Same bench on a P3 tualatin 1266Mhz 384MB
[code]FINAL SCORE: INT: 207 FP: 190 CACHE: 239 SIMD: 0
PEAK SCORE: INT: 208 FP: 191 CACHE: 241 SIMD: 0
</pre><hr></blockquote>
And, on a Athlon 1800(1.53Ghz) 256MB
[code]FINAL SCORE: INT: 286 FP: 311 MEM: 125 SIMD: 0
PEAK SCORE: INT: 289 FP: 315 MEM: 129 SIMD: 0 </pre><hr></blockquote>
[ 12-14-2001: Message edited by: xmoger ]</p>
<a href="http://www.cpuscorecard.com"; target="_blank">http://www.cpuscorecard.com</a>;
[ 12-14-2001: Message edited by: Scott H. ]</p>
and i dind't realize they kept increasing the speeds of the P3. from what i remember back when the P4 came out, i'd thought they were going to stop increasing speeds on the P3. (for the exact reason that the P3's were faster than the P4's already)
and did they release the P4's high and just start moving down with them? now they have a 1.3 Ghz P4, but that's the lowest i've seen.
seems that they aren't dropping the prices of P3's at all though, so not as much of a bargain.
1.4 Athlon is $99. way cheaper than it's P4 equivelent.
thanks for the specs though, i'm glad someone finally found them!
The PIII is the new Celeron as well, IIRC, either they're going to do away with the current Celeron line and just use PIII or they are going to give the Celeron name to the current PIII line.
not that much? when a 867 Mhz processor competes fairly well with a 1.7Ghz P4 I think that that is more than "not that much more".
[quote]If the P4's suck, then the G4's absolutely reek.
<hr></blockquote>
and you came to this conclusion how?
[quote]Hello?
the P4 was initially realeased at 1.4.<hr></blockquote>
and?
initially the 1Ghz P3 was outperforming or performing at the same level as the 1.4Ghz P4 in many tasks.
[quote]Hello? The P3 is at 1.266gighz and climbing.<hr></blockquote>
yes but they waited to create some room in clockspeed between the P4 and P3 because the P3 is faster clock for clock.
[quote]not that much? when a 867 Mhz processor competes fairly well with a 1.7Ghz P4 I think that that is more than "not that much more".
<hr></blockquote>
Ok, if you consider that the G4 shows up and get's it's ass handed to it, then it does indeed compete.
What are you going by, Photoshop or CPU scorecard?
[quote]quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If the P4's suck, then the G4's absolutely reek.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
and you came to this conclusion how?
<hr></blockquote>
Try reading the thread before spewing. you may find what it was in response to.
[quote]quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hello?
the P4 was initially realeased at 1.4.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
and?<hr></blockquote>
and? try reading the thread.
[quote]initially the 1Ghz P3 was outperforming or performing at the same level as the 1.4Ghz P4 in many tasks.
<hr></blockquote>
Yeah, so?
[quote]quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hello? The P3 is at 1.266gighz and climbing.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
yes but they waited to create some room in clockspeed between the P4 and P3 because the P3 is faster clock for clock.
<hr></blockquote>
Or perhaps they were waiting to impliment their .13micron process? Remember the P3 1.13gig fiasco which they had a recall for?
They couldn't clock the P3 higher on the .18micron process.
[ 12-15-2001: Message edited by: JFW ]</p>