---------- Original message ---------- Subject: Re: Apple inside? Date: Sonntag 24 Oktober 2010N From: Daniel Stewart <[email protected]> To: [email protected]
> The thing was though the new PPC processor apparently made the Core2 > duo look like a Celeron in terms of performance The Core 2 Duo was a real performance boost comparted to the PowerPC G4 which was stuck at 1.5 GHz. I know, witch third party CPU upgrades 2 GHz is possible without overclocking – altough I'm not sure if they aren't overclocked by default? Anyway, with the G4 stalled at speed/performance and the G5 running too hot and being too power hungry – Intel was the best move at this time. If you don't believe it, search some for some benchmarks. Don't go comparing a Quad G5 which is the most expensive desktop/workstation you can get to an Intel MacBook! http://www.primatelabs.ca/blog/2007/08/mac-performance-august-2007/ Geekbench scores: 2012 MacBook Air (2008), Intel Core 2 Duo P7500 1.6 (2 cores) 2064 Power Mac G5 “Late 2005” G5 2.3DC (2 cores) You can see that the lamest Intel Core 2 Duo (in a low-power portable variant!) is at the level of the 2nd in line high performance desktop model from 2005/2006. Two years later the power that you get with a G5 in an ultra- thin Notebook – all thanks to Intel. Geekbench scores: 3290 Power Mac G5 “Late 2005” Dual-G5 2.5DC “Quad” (4 cores) 3855 Mac Pro (2006) Intel Xeon 5130 2.0 (4 cores) The top-of-the-line G5 is outperformed by the weakest of the Intel-based Mac Pro's. Doesn't this say it all? BTW, some more Geekbench scores: 951 Power Mac G5 (2003) G5 1.6 (1 core) – /Geekbench score 1000/ 1165 Power Mac G4 FW800 (2003) G4 Dual-1.42 (2 cores) – /fastest stock G4/ 2295 MacBook (2006) Intel Core Duo 1.83 (2 cores) – /slowest MacBook/ 1015 PowerBook 2005() G4 1.67 (1 core) – /fastest PowerBook/ The lamest Core Duo (NOT Core *2* Duo) is faster than the fastest PowerBook ever was. And all that within one year (2005-2006)! Okay, the PowerBook has only one core, but the MacBook is even as fast with only one core (2295÷2=1146 which is better than 1015). All this with the same requirements: low power consumption, low heat emission. Do I have to go on? > I don't know many > Apple users who want to Use Windoze unless they absolutely have to I have a lot of friends who run Windows next to Mac OS X. Remember, an Operating System is not all by itself – it is merely the platform from which applications launch. If you need to work with a Windows application (or game, although rarely a need as such) you are happy that this is possible so easily… natively… officially… without third party emulators… > there are emulators that would have run XP or the Vista virus on the > PPC platform if you absolutely insist on it. Emulation is always slow. Running a virtualization software on the other hand is almost as fast as if the operating system was running natively. Actually it is running natively, but in a window on your desktop. Well, Windows in a virtualization software on an Intel Mac is always faster as in an emulation software on a PowerPC Mac. Some software can do both: emulation and virtualization. With Intel Macs you have to emulation a PowerPC to run Classic applications. Sheepshave can do this, although I hear it is not that easy and sometimes unstable. Anyway, since most Intel Macs are performing so well, this emulation results in native speed compared to a real PowerPC. Amazing, isn't it? > Ultimately Apple ended > up looking like impatient dummies and paid the price. Yes, made them have the best financial quarter in their history. They are rich now. Who knows what might be Apples situation if they had still PowerPCs in their computers? Cheers, Andreas aka Mac User #330250 p.s. the newest Geekbench results: http://www.primatelabs.ca/geekbench/mac-benchmarks/ -- You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, 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] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list
