Dell 2.53GHz Pentium 4 Runs Circles Around Fastest Mac G4

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
A windows user friend of mine sent me this link. I didn't believe the story, nor do I want to. What's your take:



<a href="http://www.digitalvideoediting.com/2002/07_jul/features/cw_macvspc2.htm"; target="_blank">Dell 2.53GHz Pentium 4 Runs Circles Around Fastest Mac G4</a>



[ 11-26-2002: Message edited by: murbot ]</p>

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 11
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    Yep, and just wait to see the hyperthreading examples at work, 3.06Ghz and up. The G4 is a dead end for the pro machines, with a die shrink and beefier FSB it should make for good portables/consumer-desktops, but it's no longer suitable for a high-end machine.
  • Reply 2 of 11
    Apple is doooooooooooooomed!! <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />



    I believe this was already discussed here when that article was new.
  • Reply 3 of 11
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    I've never said they're doomed, BTW. That's just popularly attributed to me. My contention is that they will change into something different if, within the next decade, they remain unable to reverse current long term trends. And I have always maintained that. Apple's reconing will come after 2010, when computers reach truly disposable status.
  • Reply 4 of 11
    Did I say you said Apple was doomed?

    No, *I* said that Apple is doomed.

    Big difference.
  • Reply 5 of 11
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    Sure you did, and I think the margins on macs are razor thin.
  • Reply 6 of 11
    Not surprised. After effects makes poor use of multiprocessing, and is in general high data, so the P4's theoretical 4.2 GB/s will beat the G4's 2.6.



    In raytracing with EI Universe, which has an excellent dual processor implementation and is more processor intense than memory intense, I think the story might be a bit different.



    I'll know soon enough. I'm building a p4 2.53 to use as a renderbox. It's very cheap, and since I really won't be interfacing with it much, it's the perfect machine. I'll run some tests, but methinks Altivec + well designed FPU will beat a highly optimized but idiotically designed FPU in ray tracing.



    Lastly, since After Effects doesn't use multiprocessing too well (claims Leonis) I don't think HT will affect performance numbers much at all, since the OS is what's going to utilize Hyper Threading. It's not done entirely in hardware. (or so claims intel)
  • Reply 7 of 11
    spartspart Posts: 2,060member
    Your Windows using counterpart failed to notice that there is already a round three from Mr. White, if you want to see some more discussion of this sort of thing go <a href="http://forums.appleinsider.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=2&t=001737"; target="_blank">here</a>.
  • Reply 8 of 11
    leonisleonis Posts: 3,427member
    [quote]Originally posted by Splinemodel:

    <strong>

    Lastly, since After Effects doesn't use multiprocessing too well (claims Leonis)</strong><hr></blockquote>



    That's true. After Effects very rarely gets above 50-68% per CPU usage (using Adobe's own filters) on MP Macs.



    Ironically. When rendering with filters that are third-parties (Digial Equilibium, KPT Final Effects etc) many of them DO get over 90% per CPU usage.



    Something is really wrong on Adobe's side.



    [ 11-26-2002: Message edited by: Leonis ]</p>
  • Reply 9 of 11
    Just a sidenote, hyperthreading is not going to make any single application run that much (if at all) faster than it already does now. In numerous tests, it is shown to even underperform hyperthreading-disabled hardware on such tests (albeit, only by a hair). It may have benefits when it comes to 2 or more independent processes are competing for resources. An actual dual-processor system would also benefit in such a scenario. Of all things, it is certainly not clear that hyperthreading has any implicit advantage over a conventional dual-processor implementation.
  • Reply 10 of 11
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    Whatever, it gives a little boost, and the extra 500 MHz over a 2.53 give another boost, and that was already faster than the top mac, and well, you see where we end up...
  • Reply 11 of 11
    Yeah, half-a-Mac, but like you said- "whatever" I can understand someone gloating once over their favorite platform, but gloating at every possible opportunity over the same benchmark gets to be a tad immature. We get your point already.
Sign In or Register to comment.