Charlie White Spreads More Apple FUD

coscos
Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
Many of you remember Charlie White's last attempt at spreading Apple FUD with his unfair bechmarking as listed on Adobe's (now missing) PC prefered page . Some of you may even remember last July, only days before Mac World New York, Mr. White did a comparison between an end-of-life model PowerMac and a cutting edge PC, a PC, which had coincidentally been introduced only a week or two before his article was published. As a matter of fact, one of the PC models he included in his report was one that had not even started shipping yet! Now, Mr. White has created a new FUDicle (FUD article) which details Apple's single processor 2GHz G5 machine against a single processor 1.8 Opteron. Either somebody forgot to tell Charlie that Apple wont be shipping a single procesor 2GHz machine or he simply wanted to muddy the waters of Apple's victory. Something tells me (judging from Mr. White's past history) that the latter is most likely true.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 28
    wow, this guys a friggen genius. hes accusing a computer company of making their products seem superior to what ever else is out there! *GASP!* Thank you mr. holmes for spotting this obscure detail.



    all i have to say is does anyone ever question the validity of AMD or Intel's benchmarks?
  • Reply 2 of 28
    chu_bakkachu_bakka Posts: 1,793member
    First I'd like to know if the BOXX is really considered a desktop... or a workstation.



    Well even BOXX calls it a workstation... here's the specs.



    http://www.boxxtech.com/asp/cf_step2...InstanceID=180



    Base System:

    3DBOXX M4 v1



    Total Price : $2,344.00



    Base System Specifications

    Dual AMD® Opteron® Processor Capable

    AMD-8111 HyperTransport PCI Tunnel

    AMD-8151 HyperTransport AGP Tunnel

    128-bit Dual Channel Memory Bus

    Up to 8GB ECC Registered 333MHz DDR

    (4) DIMM Slots

    Dual Channel UltraDMA 133 IDE Controller

    6 Channel Audio

    (1) 8x AGP Pro Full Length Slot

    (5) Full Length 32bit/33MHz PCI Slot

    (1) Onboard 10/100/1000Mbs Ethernet Adapter

    (4) USB Ports: (2) Front USB 1.1, (2) Rear USB 2.0

    (4) 3.5" x 1" Internal hard drive bays

    (3) 3.5" Exposed drive bays

    (2) 5.25" Exposed drive bays

    460W Power supply

    (2) 92MM, (1) 80MM Cooling fans

    1.44MB Floppy drive

    Tower Chassis (Optional 4U Rackmount kit)





    Now the Opteron may be fast... but this system doesn't exactly look like it's the fastest. And it hasn't been even TEST by the Digital video site... he's just Saying the opteron is faster because of those Spec scores.



    Man I hope he runs a G5 Dual against this and watches the BOXX get spanked!
  • Reply 3 of 28
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,268member
    Charles White is a Certified Mac Basher. He references the Haxial Bufoons link but mentions nothing about Apple rebuttal which destroys most of the Haxial Buffons arguements.



    He'll find a way to prove PCs are faster so it's best just to ignore him.
  • Reply 4 of 28
    chu_bakkachu_bakka Posts: 1,793member
    Oh... and the system's base config does not include firewire or etehrnet... and only a 40 gig HD and a CD-ROM drive and the standard AGP 8X card on it is a NVIDIA Quadro4 380 XGL (whatever that is... I know nothing about AGP cards)
  • Reply 5 of 28
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    [edit: The Quadro is nVIDIA's line of high-end workstation graphics cards, some of which cost as much as Macs.]



    I love the way he completely misses the most basic requirement of benchmarking, which is to show your work. He "obtained" these SPEC numbers from AMD, and if they gave him any information about the test conditions (which machine, which compiler, which settings, which OS) he didn't relay it.



    Unfortunately for him, unless AMD followed the test conditions and procedures that Apple's contractor used, AMD's numbers can't be compared to Apple's. And then he buys into the idea that Apple had "hobbled" the PCs.



    White doesn't seem to have posted a price for that BOXX, either. That information would go a long way toward determining whether Apple is fudging the distinction between a "personal computer" and a "workstation," since at this point raw performance no longer distinguishes them.



    At least he's consistent...
  • Reply 6 of 28
    chu_bakkachu_bakka Posts: 1,793member
    But he has a strong voice as one of the leading DV websites... DV.com is much more reputable in my opinion.



    His AE bake-off was a farce. I look forward to when Adobe comes out with a 64-bit optimised AE for OS X and it smokes everyt other machine out there.



    I'm sure Apple was splitting hairs when it said it was the first to bring a 64 bit desktop machine to the market.

    Boxx has a machine... but they don't even call it a Desktop... more like DESKSIDE.
  • Reply 7 of 28
    coscos Posts: 99member
    Apple was not lying....



    Microsoft STILL doesn't have a 64 bit consumer OS. Their only 64 bit OS is XP Pro. Hence... no consumer
  • Reply 8 of 28
    chu_bakkachu_bakka Posts: 1,793member
    here's a machine I configured... 4 gigs ram.. better AGP card and a 200 gb HD. Look how cheap! hehe



    3DBOXX M4 v1\tQty

    3 Port IEEE 1394 PCI Firewire (3 rear) \t1

    Dual Opteron Model 240 \t1

    Intel Pro/1000 MT Desktop Adapter NIC \t1

    2GB PC2700 ECC Reg DDR (2- 1GB DIMMS) \t1

    NVIDIA Quadro FX 2000 128MB DDR \t1

    2GB PC2700 ECC Reg DDR (2- 1GB DIMMS) \t1

    200GB 7200 rpm ATA133 hard drive 8MB Cache \t1

    Windows XP Professional Edition \t1

    3 Button Kensington PS2 Mouse \t1

    Pioneer A05 DVD-R/-RW Burner w/Software (white Bezel) \t1

    Black 104 key keyboard \t1

    Ê

    System Total: $5,632.00

    Accessory Total: $0.00



    *Grand Total: $5,632.00
  • Reply 9 of 28
    yevgenyyevgeny Posts: 1,148member
    Not to mention the fact that the Spec rate tests are probably comparing totally different compilers. AMD is likely using either their own or Intel's compiler. If we are going for such a comparison, then why not break out SPEC scores for Metrowerks or IBM's AIX compiler.



    My guess is that the G5's bandwidth will allow it to kick rear on the BOXX system. The G5 has faster RAM and a faster bus. This makes a real difference as we saw in the real world demoes.



    As for why Opterons are not considered to be desktop systems, well, duh, they are either marketed as workstations or servers, neither of which are desktops. You could place a Sun E10k on a (well fortified) desk, but that would NOT make it a desktop. A computer is a desktop computer if it has an OS that is a desktop OS (Windows or Mac, not Linux- sorry, but we all know that it is not the OS for end users). The OS is the determining factor for whether or not a computer is a desktop computer. Apple is going to be the first to bring 64 bit computing to the masses and for that, they rightly can call the G5 the first 64 bit desktop.
  • Reply 10 of 28
    bodhibodhi Posts: 1,424member
    I didn't hear ANY mention during the keynote that Panther is 64-bit.



    BTW: This is Future Hardware why?



    Going to GD.
  • Reply 11 of 28
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    Everyone has cooked tests for the better part of ten years now. Intel is famous for optimizing the test rather than the arcgitecture and AMD now invents numbers out of nowhere. Seems unfait to single out Apple.



    He is right on one count though. OPteron is the platform to compare against, not Xeon/P4. Interestingly, Opteron's have recently trounced Xeons to the tune of 2X just like the G5 recently did, that test should be a lot closer.



    Really the only tests that count are timed tests of the same actions in a suite of applications common to both platforms. Apple looked pretty good on that score, much better than they did last month.



    Once you compared timed tests, the only tests that mean anything because they represent what you experience when you use the machine, then you just have to compare prices to find out how much hat speed is worth to you.



    Apple actually comes out ahead for once, though as per ussual, the other guy offers more configuration flexibility.



    Whether you call them workstations or desktops, they're the same class of machine give or take.
  • Reply 12 of 28
    chu_bakkachu_bakka Posts: 1,793member
    BOXX calls them workstations. High performance graphic workstations.
  • Reply 13 of 28
    chu_bakkachu_bakka Posts: 1,793member
    oh and silicon graphics has a Dual 64bit system and no one is calling them Desktops.



    http://sgi.com/workstations/octane2/
  • Reply 14 of 28
    yevgenyyevgeny Posts: 1,148member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Yevgeny

    Not to mention the fact that the Spec rate tests are probably comparing totally different compilers. AMD is likely using either their own or Intel's compiler. If we are going for such a comparison, then why not break out SPEC scores for Metrowerks or IBM's AIX compiler.



    My guess is that the G5's bandwidth will allow it to kick rear on the BOXX system. The G5 has faster RAM and a faster bus. This makes a real difference as we saw in the real world demoes.



    As for why Opterons are not considered to be desktop systems, well, duh, they are either marketed as workstations or servers, neither of which are desktops. You could place a Sun E10k on a (well fortified) desk, but that would NOT make it a desktop. A computer is a desktop computer if it has an OS that is a desktop OS (Windows or Mac, not Linux- sorry, but we all know that it is not the OS for end users). The OS is the determining factor for whether or not a computer is a desktop computer. Apple is going to be the first to bring 64 bit computing to the masses and for that, they rightly can call the G5 the first 64 bit desktop.






    WHO ANNONYMOUSLY POSTED MY RESPONSE TO MACSLASH???



    See the post about using different compilers. It is of course a bit disconcerting to see something that I wrote being reused somewhere else. Nice to see that it has been marked as interesting.



    Whoever did this, I'm flattered, but please don't do things like this- it is disconcerting. Thanks for not taking credit for what I wrote.
  • Reply 15 of 28
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Yevgeny

    WHO ANNONYMOUSLY POSTED MY RESPONSE TO MACSLASH???





    It looks like someone cherry-picked posts from this whole thread. I see one of mine in there too, and some others.







    If you're going to do that, whoever you are, could you at least credit the authors, or provide a link back to the thread you took the posts from? I am not an "anonymous coward."
  • Reply 16 of 28
    yevgenyyevgeny Posts: 1,148member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Amorph

    It looks like someone cherry-picked posts from this whole thread. I see one of mine in there too, and some others.



    I always knew that MacSlash was hurting for some posters, but this is going a bit far.
  • Reply 17 of 28
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    I've actually seen a couple of my posts here in print, I sometimes wonder what the copyright around this business is, hahaha, then I realized the dolt who used them probably got paid 200 a week, so I don't care.



    But back to business, the OPteron is whatever the price lets it be. It runs a modern desktop Windows OS and apps and at the price can fit on your desks. It's as much a desktop as a workstation if you so choose to use it in that way. Same with the G5 which is a much a workstation as a desktop.



    YOu compare similarly priced machines, how manufacturers choose to market them means nothing.
  • Reply 18 of 28
    yevgenyyevgeny Posts: 1,148member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Matsu

    But back to business, the OPteron is whatever the price lets it be. It runs a modern desktop Windows OS and apps and at the price can fit on your desks. It's as much a desktop as a workstation if you so choose to use it in that way. Same with the G5 which is a much a workstation as a desktop.



    YOu compare similarly priced machines, how manufacturers choose to market them means nothing.




    But the opteron running Windows software is running a 32 bit OS. This would be as much fun as running Jaguar on a G5. All that silicon going to waste...



    Yes, the good thing to do is to compare machines at the same price (as long as they are both usable for the task at hand). Sadly of AMD, the high end Opteron costs $794 per CPU. My guess is that a top of the line Opteron costs twice what a top of the line G5 is. This gets bad when you go for dual CPU's...



    note to annonymous poster on MacSlash, this is a good post for you to recycle
  • Reply 19 of 28
    chu_bakkachu_bakka Posts: 1,793member
    But... you can't get the Opteron in any machine that's not a server other than the Boxx... so explain to me how the opteron is a consumer machine?
  • Reply 20 of 28
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by chu_bakka

    But... you can't get the Opteron in any machine that's not a server other than the Boxx... so explain to me how the opteron is a consumer machine?



    I wouldn't call the PowerMac G5 a consumer machine either. The debate is "desktop" vs. "workstation," and as has been pointed out, the distinction is not clear-cut. At this point, it's more a matter of price and support (and high-end details like whether the ASICs have been hardened for reliability) than anything else.
Sign In or Register to comment.