| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 39933 | 2003-11-22 07:33:00 | Off Topic: Apple Lies | Megaman (344) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 193850 | 2003-11-22 07:33:00 | Firstly, if there are any apple fans out there please dont be offended by this post. i luv macs myself. anyway apple doesnt make the "worlds fastest computer." look in guiness world records 2004 under technology. even the label "worlds fastest HOME computer" is a big dodgey for many reasons. 1. they tested apps like nasa science and maths. is there is any family in NZ that uses those apps? no. didnt think so. 2. they only tested intel 32bit pentium 4 and xeon. apple G5 is 64 bit. why didnt they use AMD athalon? they say it is for "high end workstations and servers." what does that make xeon? 3. if pentium was 64 bit how could 2 ghz possibly beat 3.06 ghz. try again please apple. 4. they tested dell. dell is all good, but it only supply win xp. they should have tested 2000 which is faster. 5. in pentium they turned off hyperthreading(naughty ]:) ) apple say it makes intel faster. (cough, cough) rotton apple. now i'm not saying you have to believe me. but consider these. salutations megaman |
Megaman (344) | ||
| 193851 | 2003-11-22 10:32:00 | Sounds to me like they're in league with Micro$oft$ PR management.... Grrr...... | Chilling_Silently (228) | ||
| 193852 | 2003-11-22 22:19:00 | They are just doing what anyone would do. * wants a mac * |
-=JM=- (16) | ||
| 193853 | 2003-11-22 22:47:00 | > 2. they only tested intel 32bit pentium 4 and xeon. apple G5 is 64 bit. why didnt they use AMD athalon? they say it is for "high end workstations and servers." what does that make xeon? Probably because at the time of print or review the AMD athlon 64's weren't out yet? Besides the Xeons would be a closer match. > 3. if pentium was 64 bit how could 2 ghz possibly beat 3.06 ghz. try again please apple. The 64bit apples have dual 2Ghz chips in them. Besides 64bit processing whips 32bit processing, for reasons I can't be bothered explaining because your still stuck in the 'Gigahertz myth'. So the 2ghz Apple chips would still be a good match for the 3Ghz chips. Would be interesting to see the Athlon 64's measured but as above. > 4. they tested dell. dell is all good, but it only supply win xp. they should have tested 2000 which is faster. Well winxp is likely the only one that has the support for those processors, especially the dual Xeon's. It also has the support for hyperthreading and 2000 does not. Also why waste time testing on win2000, it was made like over 4 years ago?? We're nearing 2004! Win2000 isn't always faster either. > 5. in pentium they turned off hyperthreading(naughty ) apple say it makes intel faster. (cough, cough) rotton apple. Yep and turning it off can improve performance. |
aroc (3256) | ||
| 193854 | 2003-11-22 22:48:00 | Um.....Turning off hyperthreading on a P4 does make it faster,Theres never been any atgument over that,Benchies have pvoved it as fact. What makes you think w2000 is faster? |
metla (154) | ||
| 193855 | 2003-11-23 07:27:00 | > Firstly, if there are any apple fans out there please > dont be offended by this post. i luv macs myself. > anyway apple doesnt make the "worlds fastest > computer." look in guiness world records 2004 under > technology. even the label "worlds fastest HOME > computer" is a big dodgey for many reasons. I really like osx too. I probably wouldn't get a mac for a desktop, but I would love a powerbook. In the UK apple actually had their ads banned by the advertising standards people because the claims are dodgy. > 1. they tested apps like nasa science and maths. is > there is any family in NZ that uses those apps? no. > didnt think so. The SPEC numbers are a standard used by all companies. What else is there to benchmark on in a platform independent way? But they also are hardly real world, all companies do what apple did, many of the companies (eg intel) have thier own specialised compiler rather than just the GCC used by apple, and they all will use special libaries that would be almost useless for realworld use. Its kind of like the what the olympics would be if they stopped testing for steroids. > 2. they only tested intel 32bit pentium 4 and xeon. > apple G5 is 64 bit. why didnt they use AMD athalon? > they say it is for "high end workstations and > servers." what does that make xeon? For business systems AMD has a very small market share, so the intel numbers were more important. Instead of generating their own intel SPEC numbers they should have used the intel/amd offical ones. You can probably guess why they didn't, intel makes much better steroids. > 3. if pentium was 64 bit how could 2 ghz possibly > beat 3. 06 ghz. try again please apple. The "MHz myth" and the new "bittedness myth" apply here. Speed is not the reason for the move to 64bit, and 64bits isn't faster than 32bits (generally). BTW, I don't think osX runs in full 64bit mode yet anyway. > 4. they tested dell. dell is all good, but it only > supply win xp. they should have tested 2000 which is > faster. > > 5. in pentium they turned off hyperthreading(naughty > ]:) ) apple say it makes intel faster. (cough, cough) > rotton apple. I think the effect of HT would depend on the application. For a single threaded task having it off would be a benifit. > now i'm not saying you have to believe me. but > consider these. |
bmason (508) | ||
| 193856 | 2003-11-23 08:24:00 | > Firstly, if there are any apple fans out there please > dont be offended by this post. i luv macs myself. > anyway apple doesnt make the "worlds fastest > computer." look in guiness world records 2004 under > technology. even the label "worlds fastest HOME > computer" is a big dodgey for many reasons. > > 1. they tested apps like nasa science and maths. is > there is any family in NZ that uses those apps? no. > didnt think so. Guess they where testing processing. > 2. they only tested intel 32bit pentium 4 and xeon. > apple G5 is 64 bit. why didnt they use AMD athalon? > they say it is for "high end workstations and > servers." what does that make xeon? Hmmm- www.apple.com And tell the whole story - www.apple.com > 3. if pentium was 64 bit how could 2 ghz possibly > beat 3. 06 ghz. try again please apple. Welcome to the real world. Ghz is not a total measure of though put. > 4. they tested dell. dell is all good, but it only > supply win xp. they should have tested 2000 which is > faster. XP is the current MS commercial offering. Along with OSX from Apple > 5. in pentium they turned off hyperthreading(naughty > ]:) ) apple say it makes intel faster. (cough, cough) > rotton apple. Do some more research on HT. To be quite honest it's over "hyped" just two pc chips on one dye so what?. www.intel.com How many apps are available to make use of it? > now i'm not saying you have to believe me. but > consider these salutations > > megaman Over the years Mac and PC architectures have been overtaken by one another. Remember what Apple "innovates", the PC industry immitates ;) And I don't even own a Mac. This is just an observation over the last 14 years of using a PC. |
mark.p (383) | ||
| 193857 | 2003-11-23 08:26:00 | For a more "true" test, couldnt they do something that's truely OS independant and doesnt rely on 3D Graphics card? Such as coverting a 3hr long .wav file into an MP3 using a specific version of the LameEnc, or a codec that's OS Independant? DivX? |
Chilling_Silently (228) | ||
| 193858 | 2003-11-23 09:10:00 | > I really like osx too. I probably wouldn't get a mac for a desktop, but I would > love a powerbook. I'm with you on that one. Heck I'd even settle for a G4 iMac. They make nice laptops. The problem with your idea chilling is that it's still pretty much impossible to do a test like that. About the only thing that is truely OS independant is an HTML file or a text file of some sort. There are large enough differences between one mp3 encoder and another one. |
-=JM=- (16) | ||
| 193859 | 2003-11-23 09:48:00 | Not if you install a Linux distro on each.. And use the same LameEnc library files... ;-) | Chilling_Silently (228) | ||
| 1 2 | |||||