G5 benchmark tests challenged

Posted:
in Current Mac Hardware edited January 2014
This may have been posted elsewhere, but I can't find it if it has:



http://www.haxial.com/spls-soapbox/apple-powermac-G5/



I want to just blow it off, but I'm afraid I just don't know enough to do so. Could someone else, to reassure me?



Martin



Edit: And another pretty scathing criticism -

http://www.amdzone.com/articleview.c...id=1296&page=2

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 8
    jimmacjimmac Posts: 11,898member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Malokata

    This may have been posted elsewhere, but I can't find it if it has:



    http://www.haxial.com/spls-soapbox/apple-powermac-G5/



    I want to just blow it off, but I'm afraid I just don't know enough to do so. Could someone else, to reassure me?



    Martin



    Edit: And another pretty scathing criticism -

    http://www.amdzone.com/articleview.c...id=1296&page=2






    It has. It's called sour grapes.
  • Reply 2 of 8
    dstranathandstranathan Posts: 1,717member
    Ya, its all over the net.



    I hope Apple comments.



    Anytime you say things like "the best" or "the fastest" you are in for a lot of critical comments. And with good reason.



    I would have been happy if Apple would say "The G5. Faster than the G4." LOL
  • Reply 3 of 8
    klinuxklinux Posts: 453member
    More here: http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...threadid=26676



    Seriously, I would have preferred if Steve just said World's Fastest Mac instead going on a bunch of hyperbole (1st 64 bit chip, 1st 64 bit OS, etc).



    Oh, jimmac, there is a difference between sour grapes and disputing Apple's marketing. I see more and more facts supporting the other side and I think once G5 is actually shipping, we will find out the truth which at this point I don't think bodes well.



    However, like I said before, all I care is OS X running faster and better. Not Apple calling itself the world's faster and a bunch of fanatics buying into that!
  • Reply 4 of 8
    foadfoad Posts: 703member
    I don't feel like getting into about that first report, but just know that it is complete BS. From what I have heard, it is just some PC troll-type. acting as though he's a mac faithful.



    I have seen the G5 in action. I have seen it go head to head with XEONs (not just the keynote bake-offs) and it does in fact beat the s*** out of the XEONs. My next workstation at work will be a PM G5, compared to the Dual XEONs that we currently have.



    I am never buying another PC again for use at home. All my 3D except for Maya Unlimited (not yet at least...but it shall be coming), I use Maya Complete on Mac, all of my 2D, my web, damn near everything I need runs on OS X. Never shall I feel the turd known as Windows at home.



    At work we are a mixed platform deal so I will but I wil be using my MAC more often then my PC.



    Don't worry about it...we are on the top again!
  • Reply 5 of 8
    low-filow-fi Posts: 357member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Malokata

    This may have been posted elsewhere, but I can't find it if it has:



    http://www.haxial.com/spls-soapbox/apple-powermac-G5/



    I want to just blow it off, but I'm afraid I just don't know enough to do so. Could someone else do so, to reassure me?



    Martin




    SPEC marks are SPEC marks. Real world performance may be something else altogether.
  • Reply 6 of 8
    airslufairsluf Posts: 1,861member
  • Reply 7 of 8
    nevynnevyn Posts: 360member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by AirSluf

    Take each of those arguments and turn them around. Instead of comparing equivalent code, they want to compare unoptimized GCC code against highly optimized Intel compiler code (same story for performance libraries). Just the same crime they are accusing Apple of perpetrating.



    I think it's better than that, and masterful also.



    Apple's benchmarks weren't _that_ bad, and I don't really see them as favoring the 970 as much as the spooked-folk claim.



    So they went out and dredged up "the best" x86 benches. Great.



    But _IBM_ hasn't benchmarked the 970 yet - and their estimated benchmarks for the _1.8GHz_ part are up with these 'best' x86 claims. IBM _has_ an optimize-the-heck-out-of-it compiler you see. And they were mentioning 'autovectorization' -> _I_ want to see what IBM's specmark claims are. Because the one thing I guarantee is that they'll be _higher_ than what Apple's claimed.
  • Reply 8 of 8
    gilschgilsch Posts: 1,995member
    They guy who wrote that is OBVIOUSLY pretending to be a "disappointed" Mac fan. Pretty funny actually. Someone at ARS was saying that Apple's benchmarks were actually slower than the ones IBM has for the G5s. He posted a link and some numbers but I don't have the time to go look for them right now. He said that he found them via Google.
Sign In or Register to comment.