On Jan 2, 2009, at 11:29 AM, Steve R wrote:

>
> At 9:01 AM -0700 1/2/09, Bruce Johnson posted:
>>  On Jan 2, 2009, at 8:25 AM, Steve R wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>  With Apple going the Intel chip route, I'm wondering if the chip  
>>> on a
>>>  purely Mac OS (and not being used for Windows) is faster/better for
>>>  Mac apps?
>>
>>  Huh?? I'm not at all sure what it is you're asking...
>>
>>  Programs run on the CPU they're compiled for; execution speed  
>> depends
>>  on the CPU and the rest of the system. and the Intel Macs are faster
>>  than PPC Macs they have faster memory and CPU, but it doesn't have
>>  anything per se to do with the particular architecture X86 versus  
>> PPC.
>
> It is a vague question I admit because I don't know Intel. I have no
> intention of running Windows applications and the thought came to
> mind that if I wasn't going to be running Windows, does the Intel
> chip run Mac apps faster than the PPC (all things being equal with
> CPU speed, applications optimised for the CPU, and the rest of the
> system)? It appears from your answer that a 2.4 GHz PPC would be
> slower than a 2.4 GHZ Intel, with the same "universal" application ?

Depends on how many cores and what you are doing. Here is a link to  
geekbench results.

http://www.primatelabs.ca/blog/2008/06/mac-performance-june-2008/
or
http://tinyurl.com/49lof3

Yes, any benchmark is an artificial test. Geekbench only tests the  
processor and memory. It does not test video or HD performance like  
xBench does. This makes it a slightly better test for core system  
performance, IMHO.

It does take advantage of multiple processors and/or cores.

For example the fastest G5 has 2 dual core processors at 2.5GHz (a  
total of 4 cores) and rates 3,290. The first Mac Pro had 2 dual core  
processors at 2.0 GHz (a total of 4 cores) and rates 3,855.

For reference, the fastest G4 (MDD dual 1.42) rates 1,160 and the  
slowest G5 (the original crippled 1.6GHz) rates 1,008.

If you are spending any kind of money on a system, I would look hard  
at an Intel Mac. Mainly, 10.6 and all future OSs will be intel only.  
If I would need to upgrade at work, I would be stuck at a G5, which  
are going for as little as $320 on ebay, since I still have a lot of  
classic apps that I run and intel Macs do not run classic apps  
natively. Although many people can get them to run via SheepShaver.

Len


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed Low End Mac's G3-5 List, a 
group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on 
Power Macs.
The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette 
guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list?hl=en
Low End Mac RSS feed at feed://lowendmac.com/feed.xml
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to