New To Mac-Forums?

Welcome to our community! Join the discussion today by registering your FREE account. If you have any problems with the registration process, please contact us!

Get your questions answered by community gurus Advice and insight from world-class Apple enthusiasts Exclusive access to members-only contests, giveaways and deals

Join today!

 
Start a Discussion
 

Mac-Forums Brief

Subscribe to Mac-Forums Brief to receive special offers from Mac-Forums partners and sponsors

Join the conversation RSS
Apple Desktops Discussion of Apple's desktop machines including Mac Pro, iMac, Power Mac, and mini

iMac Dissapointment


Post Reply New Thread Subscribe

 
Thread Tools
Matt
Guest
 
Posts: n/a

According to this, the iMac G5 is only 16% faster than the previous model. Not much of a breakthrough in my eyes.

http://www.lowendmac.com/musings/04/0901.html
QUOTE Thanks
Bmode

 
Bmode's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jan 26, 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 72
Bmode is on a distinguished road
Mac Specs: Mac Pro 3.2ghz/4TB/16GBram - Mac Book Pro 2.4ghz Intel 2 duo core/4GBram/750GB

Bmode is offline
You could possibly be looking at the wrong things? There's more than meets the eye!
QUOTE Thanks
Matt
Guest
 
Posts: n/a

Like What? The case? I hope those benchmarks are wrong though, anyone think this might be a fault?
QUOTE Thanks
citystar2k

 
citystar2k's Avatar
 
Member Since: Feb 18, 2004
Location: North Derbyshire, United Kingdom
Posts: 178
citystar2k is on a distinguished road
Mac Specs: 12" 1.33 GHz PowerBook w/SuperDrive, 60GB HDD, 1.25G RAM.

citystar2k is offline
according to what apple are saying here, it runs applications a lot more faster than the "16%" quoted.

QUOTE Thanks
schweb

 
schweb's Avatar
 
Member Since: Oct 27, 2002
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Posts: 13,198
schweb has a reputation beyond reputeschweb has a reputation beyond reputeschweb has a reputation beyond reputeschweb has a reputation beyond reputeschweb has a reputation beyond reputeschweb has a reputation beyond reputeschweb has a reputation beyond reputeschweb has a reputation beyond reputeschweb has a reputation beyond reputeschweb has a reputation beyond reputeschweb has a reputation beyond repute
Mac Specs: MacBook Pro | LED Cinema Display | iPhone 4 | iPad 2

schweb is offline
The other thing that everyone needs to realize about the G5 processor is that as a single unit, it's not all that much more powerful than a G4 (except clock speed). The real benefit of a G5 is when it's in a multi-processor configuration.

schweb | community leader
flickr facebook twitter tumblr google+ about.me

Mac-Forums: On Twitter | On Facebook | On Flickr

QUOTE Thanks
Avalon

 
Avalon's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jun 25, 2004
Location: Luxemburg, Europe
Posts: 1,779
Avalon is just really niceAvalon is just really niceAvalon is just really niceAvalon is just really nice
Mac Specs: PowerMac G5 Dual 2GHz (June 2004), 2.5GB, Airport, black 5G iPod 30GB, white MacBook 2.0 2GB

Avalon is offline
At least this is true until OS and software will be converted to 100% 64bit applications, because this is a major advantage of the G5.
BTW, this is also true for actual AMD 64bit CPUs... as long as Windows is 32bit, there's not much advantage but the clock speed...

The PowerMacs also have the advantage of the faster system bus, which can make a major difference in overall performance. So the iMac G5 will definitely not be as fast as the single CPU PowerMac G5.
But I'm pretty sure it outperforms any iMac G4, by more than 16% (overall performance, not raw CPU performance).
What really is a big disappointment is the nVidia FX5200 graphics...why did they put the slowest nVidia chip in it?!?
QUOTE Thanks
Matt
Guest
 
Posts: n/a

I thought the clock speed was the speed of the processor? Whats clockspeed then? :confused:

Yeah, the nVidia chip isn't good, you would think Apple would have put a big effort into this, the first average consumer G5.
QUOTE Thanks
Avalon

 
Avalon's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jun 25, 2004
Location: Luxemburg, Europe
Posts: 1,779
Avalon is just really niceAvalon is just really niceAvalon is just really niceAvalon is just really nice
Mac Specs: PowerMac G5 Dual 2GHz (June 2004), 2.5GB, Airport, black 5G iPod 30GB, white MacBook 2.0 2GB

Avalon is offline
The clockspeed is a big part in CPU speed, but not all.

Just a little math example:
the smallest entity in the digital world is 1 Bit, right?
So, 8 Bits = 1 Byte
This means, a 32-bit CPU can get 32 Bits (4 Bytes) of information in one cycle (called 1 Hz), while a 64-bit CPU could get twice the size (8 bytes) in the same cycle.
This means a 64-bit CPU like the G5 would outperform a 32-bit like the G4, even at the same clockspeed. But for this, the OS and the application must take completely advantage of those 64-bit.
I know this is an over-simplification, and there are more factors, but it's just to show you that raw clockspeed isn't everything.
Sun's SPARC CPUs are running quite low clockspeeds, compared to actual Intel, AMD or PowerPC, but yet they are very fast. That's why they are still used in powerfull workstations.

It's like the maximum speed of a car doesn't only depend of the horsepower, but a lot more factors (weight, aerodynamics etc).

As OS X actually, and still with Tiger, isn't yet completely a 64-bit OS, and neither are available applications, I expect a noticeable speed bump once it gets there...
I'm pretty sure that if a 100% 64-bit OS (like Sun's OS for example) would be ported on the G5, it's performance would just outperform any actual 32-bit CPU.
QUOTE Thanks
PinkPhishDoors
Guest
 
Posts: n/a

There is much more than just "clock speed", There is the frontside bus, which in the G4(all models, not just iMac) the FSB sucked, it was like 166 mhz, ir something. On the G5 iMacs it is 600 mhz, and on the Powermacs, it goes up to 1.25... And don't forget it had 3 times more Frames Per Second in both UT 2004, and Halo. Also it is much much much ,much ,much ,much , cheaper than the G4 iMac especially than in context with what you get. Don't forget how much Macs were just 7 years ago, a mac couls cost you over 5000 dollars, apple has come a long way!
QUOTE Thanks
Avalon

 
Avalon's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jun 25, 2004
Location: Luxemburg, Europe
Posts: 1,779
Avalon is just really niceAvalon is just really niceAvalon is just really niceAvalon is just really nice
Mac Specs: PowerMac G5 Dual 2GHz (June 2004), 2.5GB, Airport, black 5G iPod 30GB, white MacBook 2.0 2GB

Avalon is offline
The frames-per-second thing doens't say much about a CPU, as it mainly depends of the graphics card. Especially on a Mac, which still isn't the best gaming machine (not even the PM G5), FPS isn't really a good comparison.

Anyway, what's the deal whit that FPS hype? The human eye's reaction being quite slow, it doesn't see a difference between 50 fps and 100 fps... only when you turn on a FPS-counter in your game, you see the value...so who cares?!?
QUOTE Thanks
Slammin_SoSo
Guest
 
Posts: n/a

Hi Guys,
Can anyone help me here? What is the difference between a G5 1.6 ghz computer and a Pentium 4 2.80ghz or more?

Whats is better a Intel PC or a macintosh imac?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Avalon
The frames-per-second thing doens't say much about a CPU, as it mainly depends of the graphics card. Especially on a Mac, which still isn't the best gaming machine (not even the PM G5), FPS isn't really a good comparison.

Anyway, what's the deal whit that FPS hype? The human eye's reaction being quite slow, it doesn't see a difference between 50 fps and 100 fps... only when you turn on a FPS-counter in your game, you see the value...so who cares?!?
QUOTE Thanks
Avalon

 
Avalon's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jun 25, 2004
Location: Luxemburg, Europe
Posts: 1,779
Avalon is just really niceAvalon is just really niceAvalon is just really niceAvalon is just really nice
Mac Specs: PowerMac G5 Dual 2GHz (June 2004), 2.5GB, Airport, black 5G iPod 30GB, white MacBook 2.0 2GB

Avalon is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slammin_SoSo
Hi Guys,
Can anyone help me here? What is the difference between a G5 1.6 ghz computer and a Pentium 4 2.80ghz or more?

Whats is better a Intel PC or a macintosh imac?
Search the forum...there have been an excessive amount of threads and posts about this...an eternally unanswered question...
What's better for you depends on what you want, and what you want to do, there is no general answer to this.

And BTW, it's called Apple iMac, not Macintosh iMac
QUOTE Thanks
MoltenLava
Guest
 
Posts: n/a

Quote:
Originally Posted by schweb
The other thing that everyone needs to realize about the G5 processor is that as a single unit, it's not all that much more powerful than a G4 (except clock speed). The real benefit of a G5 is when it's in a multi-processor configuration.
Please elaborate for everyone why the real benefit of G5 is when it's in a multi processor config.
QUOTE Thanks
MoltenLava
Guest
 
Posts: n/a

Ok, here's the deal with "MHz myth". Read carefully, as I won't repeat twice.

The CPU clock in MHz is an indication of how fast the CPU can move, so to speak. MHz is usually a very good indicator of speed _only_for_the_same_CPU_family_. Again, only for the same CPU family. G3/G4/G5 are in the same family. CPU clock among those processors are a good indicator of relative speed. Same goes for Intel P2/P3/P4. I said "usually", because even in the same family, the performance can be improved drastically by the use of more pipelining, branch prediction, superscalar, etc, which is not the scope of this article.

The CPU clock is a VERY poor indicator of performance across different processor family. 1GHz G5 and 2GHz P4 can't be compared with just clock rate. The reason for that is the "work" that each processor can do per clock cycle is different. I said earlier that the clock rate is how fast the processor can move. Guess what, each processor have different "efficiency", so to speak. For example, to perform a simple arithmetic multiply may take one processor 1 clock cycle, while another processor 10 clock cycles. Yet the third processor may perform addition and muptiply in one clock cycle! That's why you can't just compare MHz vs MHz, because the work that the processors can perform in each MHz are different.

32bit vs 64bit processor, IMHO, is a big marketing hype. 64bit processors are not twice faster than 32bit processors as they might (wrongly) imply. The advantage of 64bit processor is what Avalon has explained. In order to add two 64bit numbers, it takes one clock cycle for 64bit processor, while it takes several (not just two) clock cycles for 32bit processors. But then, we don't generally deal with 64bit numbers. The maximum addressable number in 32bit space is 2 (or 4) billions. That's certainly big enough for me, although certain applications may need larger address space.

Having said all these, I'm not surprised to find 16% increase or whatever with iMac G5. Look at their benchmark. One is completely disk IO bound, which has very little to do with processing power, and the other two are completely CPU bound. They are not "good" benchmarks because they are biased towards certain subsystem, rather than measuring overall system performance.
QUOTE Thanks
Avalon

 
Avalon's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jun 25, 2004
Location: Luxemburg, Europe
Posts: 1,779
Avalon is just really niceAvalon is just really niceAvalon is just really niceAvalon is just really nice
Mac Specs: PowerMac G5 Dual 2GHz (June 2004), 2.5GB, Airport, black 5G iPod 30GB, white MacBook 2.0 2GB

Avalon is offline
Wow, that IS a really good explanation...couldn't say it better
QUOTE Thanks

Post Reply New Thread Subscribe


« Whats Better Intel PC or a macintosh Imac..etc | G4 upgrades. »
Thread Tools

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Apple Pulls Plug on Original iMac schweb Apple Rumors and Reports 7 09-13-2006 04:38 PM
imac or powermac? atacinus Switcher Hangout 14 05-07-2005 02:52 PM
iMac or iBook? Petronome Apple Desktops 3 01-31-2004 07:32 AM
The Return of an Apple Cube... as an iMac? [Updated] Murlyn Apple Desktops 10 11-13-2003 10:50 AM

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:23 PM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
X

Welcome to Mac-Forums.com

Create your username to jump into the discussion!

New members like you have made this community the ultimate source for your Mac since 2003!


(4 digit year)

Already a member?