G5 Commercial on NBC (and web)

[galactica]

http://www.apple.com/hardware/ads/g5/

Just thought incase any of you have not seen this, id point it out.

I love it! Man I cant wait to get one.

Your thoughts on the commercial.....................

[disturbed1]

Your thoughts on the commercial.....................

False advertisment!

IBM's own test results state that the G5 dual CPU is slower than a number of other Intel based Personal Computers.

[galactica]

False advertisment!

IBM's own test results state that the G5 dual CPU is slower than a number of other Intel based Personal Computers.

CLICK CLICK CLICK (yellow card warning!)

Its a very heated debate on the actual testing of these G5's to other PC's

Id like to see the "speed" test you are referring to, got any links?

[tgpo]

Id like to see the "speed" test you are referring to, got any links?

No reply.....

[disturbed1]

http://www.ibm.com/Search?v=11&lang=en&cc=us&q=power+pc970



Plenty of info there.

To parapharse.......
(Direct quotes from the PDF http://www-3.ibm.com/chips/techlib/techlib.nsf/techdocs/A2CE393ABF2CE99787256D21006AE8A2/$file/PPC970_MPF_Review.pdf )
However, the x86 processors have bidirectional
64-bit FSBs instead of unidirectional 32-bit
FSBs. For individual read or write transactions,
the 970 has 3.2GB/s of peak data bandwidth, compared
with 4.2GB/s for the Pentium 4 and 2.7GB/s for the Athlon
XP. In some instances, the Pentium 4 would have an advantage
over the 970.


IBM’s SPECfp2000 estimate would put the 1.8GHz
970 in third place on our most recent chart of workstation
processors, trailing Intel’s 1.0GHz Itanium 2 by 29% (1,356
vs. 1,051) and the 1.3GHz Power4 by 4% (1,098 vs. 1,051).

Two examples where the G5 is not the fastest PC. If you need more proof than that, search IBM. The fact the the throughput is a full 1gig/s slower than a P4 is enough for me. Also the fact that Apple had false test reports posted that unequally compared the various systems in another reason I'd rather line Gates pockets instead of Jobs. They're both evil, buy at least there are some choices with the Windows platform.

Keep in mind, these tests were done with a "beefed up" PPC 970, which included a much larger L2 cache than the production chips. Which means the production chips are even slower.



@TGPO,
Hey MAC boy, just because I can't monitor this forum 24hours a day and don't respond with in seconds to a reply doesn't mean I won't. (just a sarcastic reply, matching the sarcastic reply you made NOT AN ATTACK!! :P )

[BJ_M]

You mean these ones:

http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1107_2-1021672.html?tag=fdfeed
http://www.luxology.net/company/wwdc03followup.aspx
http://www.haxial.com/spls-soapbox/apple-powermac-G5/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/39/31416.html
http://www.wininformant.com/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=39381
http://www.digitalvideoediting.com/2003/06_jun/editorials/cw_editorial79.htm

[ZippyUK]

Two examples where the G5 is not the fastest PC. If you need more proof than that, search IBM. The fact the the throughput is a full 1gig/s slower than a P4 is enough for me. Also the fact that Apple had false test reports posted that unequally compared the various systems in another reason I'd rather line Gates pockets instead of Jobs. They're both evil, buy at least there are some choices with the Windows platform.

Just because the throuhput is slower, can the P4 actually process data at the speed...... Also I'm sorry Mr Gate$ has had too much of my time, with unreliable operating systems, and poorly designed user interfaces.

Keep in mind, these tests were done with a "beefed up" PPC 970, which included a much larger L2 cache than the production chips. Which means the production chips are even slower.

Have I missed this, I have not seen anything to say that the Spec tests were done with beefed up chips....

Neil

Swapped to Mac 3 months ago after 6 years with Window$, and never looked back.

[disturbed1]

Have I missed this, I have not seen anything to say that the Spec tests were done with beefed up chips....

The tests were done with 1.5mb of L2 cache. I've read that the production 970 had a smaller L2 cache (512kb).

Is this true? I haven't read any final specs on this matter.

1.Just because the throuhput is slower, can the P4 actually process data at the speed...... 2.Also I'm sorry Mr Gate$ has had too much of my time, with unreliable operating systems, and poorly designed user interfaces.

1. Don't know. I'm sure Tom's Hardware would have a good article on this though.

2. Personal Oppinion. Though very popular. I'm one of the few who don't have serious complaints about Windows.

[Thargok]

I think NASA cleared this up. The G5 is the fastest personal computer.

[BJ_M]

I think NASA cleared this up. The G5 is the fastest personal computer.

what has nasa to do with this ? (they are still using p2 machines in the space shuttle) ....

also - the G5 is NOT a personal computer -- how many people buy 3-4000$ ++ personal computers ?

in that price range it is a workstation and in light of that it is not the fastest (read my post above with the links) by a long shot , though it is a very nice system for sure ... as soon as it can come with a 64bit OS that is - which isnt right away ..

it wasnt even the first 64bit workstation -- not even close by several years .. SUN , HP , SGI , ALPHA and others had that area for years ..

I still use a 3 year old sgi 64 bit system in fact... plus you cant dismiss the fact that you can buy today a dual amd 64 bit system with a 64 bit os of your choice (win or linux) at places like BOXX tech .. vs. having to wait untill the fall to buy a G5


apple is all marketing hype -- but then is much of everyone else ..

[brian_reilly]

How many people buy $3000-4000 personal computers? Hmmm...how many active Mac users are there? About 20 million? Yeah, that's how many...

[tgpo]

Hey I've got the best bit of infor of them all.

PC users: Use your PCs and love them to death

Mac users: Use your Mac and love it to death *ME*

Everyone Else: Use whatcha got and love it to death

Non-computer people: What are you doing? Get a computer grandpa!

The way I see it no matter what PC users will always hate* mac users, mac users will always hate* PC users. And no amount of charts or benchmarks will ever sway them the other way.


*hate isn't used in the hateful sense of the word, ya'll know what I mean.

[BJ_M]

apple holds between 2.5 and 4 % of the us market share depending on who you believe and less than 1 % of the world market share ..

that means , since there are about 60 million in use computers in usa , about 2- 3 million mac users ..

world wide that would mean about 6 million active mac users i guess ..

[BJ_M]

oh i should add - i use a mac (a lot more now for dvd pro and also for protools) , a pc (many) , and sgi's ..


i like to cover all bases ..

[tgpo]

i like to cover all bases ..

Even shortstop? :P

[BJ_M]

ever heard of getting to "home base"

[tgpo]

ever heard of getting to "home base"

Oh yeah. Bats, Balls, Gloves.....baseball is a kinky sport. 8)

[ZippyUK]

However, the x86 processors have bidirectional
64-bit FSBs instead of unidirectional 32-bit
FSBs. For individual read or write transactions,
the 970 has 3.2GB/s of peak data bandwidth, compared
with 4.2GB/s for the Pentium 4 and 2.7GB/s for the Athlon
XP. In some instances, the Pentium 4 would have an advantage
over the 970.

I have just checked, and you have not read the G5 specs correctly...

The G5 has up to a 1 GHz bi-directional frontside bus resulting in 16 GBps of total bandwidth - thats much more than the P4 or Athlon you have as an example.

The system board has a dual 800 Mhz hyper transport bus that is used to integrate the I/O systems such as USB2 serial ATA etc - that has a 1.6 GBps throuput.

Neil

[tgpo]

I finally saw the commercial. With the house being torn apart and everything. Good stuff. Can't wait to have one by my cube.

[galactica]

The G5 has up to a 1 GHz bi-directional frontside bus resulting in 16 GBps of total bandwidth - thats much more than the P4 or Athlon you have as an example.

The system board has a dual 800 Mhz hyper transport bus that is used to integrate the I/O systems such as USB2 serial ATA etc - that has a 1.6 GBps throuput.

Neil

Im no expert, but that sound like a slap in the face to the "other Intel based Personal Computers."

Either way you look at it, this machine is going to ROCK!
I cant wait until i get one!

[BJ_M]

However, the x86 processors have bidirectional
64-bit FSBs instead of unidirectional 32-bit
FSBs. For individual read or write transactions,
the 970 has 3.2GB/s of peak data bandwidth, compared
with 4.2GB/s for the Pentium 4 and 2.7GB/s for the Athlon
XP. In some instances, the Pentium 4 would have an advantage
over the 970.

I have just checked, and you have not read the G5 specs correctly...

The G5 has up to a 1 GHz bi-directional frontside bus resulting in 16 GBps of total bandwidth - thats much more than the P4 or Athlon you have as an example.

The system board has a dual 800 Mhz hyper transport bus that is used to integrate the I/O systems such as USB2 serial ATA etc - that has a 1.6 GBps throuput.

Neil

that quote is from IBM - who makes the cpu -- i think you have to take thier quote as fact ...

[thayne]

How many people buy $3000-4000 personal computers? Hmmm...how many active Mac users are there? About 20 million? Yeah, that's how many...

Ummm, most Mac users use iMac's, never seen a $4000 iMac, have you?

[thayne]

Hey I've got the best bit of infor of them all.

PC users: Use your PCs and love them to death

Mac users: Use your Mac and love it to death *ME*

Everyone Else: Use whatcha got and love it to death

Non-computer people: What are you doing? Get a computer grandpa!

The way I see it no matter what PC users will always hate* mac users, mac users will always hate* PC users. And no amount of charts or benchmarks will ever sway them the other way.


*hate isn't used in the hateful sense of the word, ya'll know what I mean.

What about people who use both? Like me....

[galactica]

How many people buy $3000-4000 personal computers? Hmmm...how many active Mac users are there? About 20 million? Yeah, that's how many...

Ummm, most Mac users use iMac's, never seen a $4000 iMac, have you?

Ive never seen a $4000 Mac ever!!!!!!!!!!

The most top of the line Mac is currently $3000.

The most expensive iMac is $2,348.00 (which is close to $3000)

And where do you get this that most mac users are iMac users?!?!?

[galactica]

What about people who use both? Like me....

People who use both are

1. Use your mac 99% of the time and have a PC also but use it only rarely. *ME*
2. Use your PC 99% of the time and have a Mac also but use it only rarely.

which one are you??

[ZeroSix]

This thread is retarded.

The good old mac vs pc debate has made its way into a mac only forum, and a VIDEO forum at that.

It's simple -- according to IBM the G5 processor is superior in ***MOST*** areas when compared to a x86 processor. In ***SOME*** areas, the x86 architechture is superior. When you compare "apples" to "lemons" the areas where the G5 excels outweigh the areas where the x86 excels.

Some apps will perform better under x86, some will perform better under PowerPC.

Jesus Christ, people... leave it alone. If you are a Mac user, you want one. If you are a PC user, you want to a reason to not want one.

But the bottom line is this:

WHAT DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH VIDEO?

[tgpo]

WHAT DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH VIDEO?

Simple, it's their idea for the dvdrhelp video contest :P

[thayne]

What about people who use both? Like me....

People who use both are

1. Use your mac 99% of the time and have a PC also but use it only rarely. *ME*
2. Use your PC 99% of the time and have a Mac also but use it only rarely.

which one are you??

Neither, I use my PC about 75% or the time and my Mac 25% only cause my PC smokes my Mac. I like OSX much better than any Windows version though

[thayne]

How many people buy $3000-4000 personal computers? Hmmm...how many active Mac users are there? About 20 million? Yeah, that's how many...

Ummm, most Mac users use iMac's, never seen a $4000 iMac, have you?

Ive never seen a $4000 Mac ever!!!!!!!!!!

The most top of the line Mac is currently $3000.

The most expensive iMac is $2,348.00 (which is close to $3000)

And where do you get this that most mac users are iMac users?!?!?

Apple says iMac is the most popular machine they have ever sold, more than 75% of mac users use iMacs....

For those who have never seen a $4000 Mac, here's one:

[BJ_M]

Very close in price to the best dual 64bit AMD with the same equipment and memory (price inlcudes a sony dvd-r/+r writer also)