CPU Comparison

mac voyermac voyer
Posted:
in Current Mac Hardware edited January 2014
OK guys and dolls. It's time for another Mac to PC CPU comparison table. So Help me complete these statements:



A 1.6 GHz G5 is roughly the same as a ____ Intel processor.



A 1.8 GHz G5 .....



A 2.0 GHz G5 .....



And so on .....



Informed opinions and supporting links would be nice, but I would take unsupported, bias speculation as well. I am in that kind of a mood.



I don't care about total system performance for the sake of this thread. I am only interested in the CPU. A lot of people compare PC specs and prices to Mac hardware and call it about even when looking at a consumer Mac product vs. a 3+ GHz HT monster PC and completely ignore the CPU discrepancy as if they were the same. This is completely unacceptable. In order to compare apples to apples, we must be realistic about the CPU that drives the machine. I have not immersed myself in this area so I really don't know enough to speculate. I know how to compare graphics cards, HDs, and ram. But I don't know how to compare CPUs. Anyone who uses the words "spec whore" or "OS X" in this thread will receive a custom made virus. If you are inclined to turn this into an OS comparison or berate others for caring about such things, then you obviously don't belong in this thread. As for everyone else, have at it.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 6
    jaegermannjaegermann Posts: 33member
    spec whore



    OS X



    www.barefeats.com
  • Reply 2 of 6
    kcmackcmac Posts: 1,051member
    This is what matters to me.



    Current iMac = 400 DVSE G3



    On order iMac = 1.8 G5 20" LCD



  • Reply 3 of 6
    kennethkenneth Posts: 832member
    Not to mention..



    systemshootouts.org
  • Reply 4 of 6
    powerdocpowerdoc Posts: 8,123member
    Some people created a chart (I must find this site)

    from memory :



    1,8 ghz G5 = 2,8 P4

    1,6 ghz G5 = 2,5 P4

    2,0 ghz G5 = 3,O P4

    dual 2,5 G5 = 4,4 P4



    You must beware that this kind of chart is a simplification. The two systems are way differents and perform better is some aera, and worse in others. Hope it will help.



    edit Kenneth gave the link : http://www.systemshootouts.org/processors.html



    Thanks Kenneth
  • Reply 5 of 6
    mac voyermac voyer Posts: 1,294member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Powerdoc

    Some people created a chart (I must find this site)

    from memory :



    1,8 ghz G5 = 2,8 P4

    1,6 ghz G5 = 2,5 P4

    2,0 ghz G5 = 3,O P4

    dual 2,5 G5 = 4,4 P4



    You must beware that this kind of chart is a simplification. The two systems are way differents and perform better is some aera, and worse in others. Hope it will help.



    edit Kenneth gave the link : http://www.systemshootouts.org/processors.html



    Thanks Kenneth



    Thanks, Pdock. That's interesting. It seems that the chart gives a Gig to the Mac at any speed. Do these numbers take HT into consideration? I will take you at your word. But the formula seems a bit arbitrary, or at least very coincidental.
  • Reply 6 of 6
    pbpb Posts: 4,255member
    This thread may be of interest to you. We tested a special code (calculation of the number pi with FFT) on several CPUs. You will notice that at equal clock frequency, the Pentium-M processors are substantially faster than a G4 in the Powerbooks. However, this test relies much on FPU calculations and it ignores the Altivec unit of the G4. It would be interesting to see how an altivec-optimized version would run.
Sign In or Register to comment.