Shocking New For Macs Vs Pc.

This months Computer Graphics World has on page 9, a report about a company that were Mac loyalists for a long time... switching to PC's since they are much faster / stronger now in graphics than Mac's are.

And to dispell the old myth about how programs like Adobe After Effects runs faster/better on Mac, they say it doesnt. PCs run that program alot faster and better than Macs have.

They switched their Apple G4 dual 800's for PC Dual Xeon systems company wide and it seems a trend is starting in graphics companies doing this as this is the 3rd report I have seen, but first time in CGW. Mainly I have seen these reports in local newspaper editorials regarding local graphic firms.

And to think I almost got a Mac, now I got to re-think this.

#25370

Mac's are slower than PC's for a long time now , but if Apple switches to Intel then they might have some hope.

Sky

#25386

I agree skyliner34, it could make for a very powerful combo.

Those Intel Xeon's and hyperthreading is awesome.

I still like the Mac Aqua look, and brushed look. Other than that Im happy with a pc.

#25392

maybe slow now, but how long did it take for the pc to catch up? about 2 yrs?

#25398

hum... here we go again.

PC's have ALWAYS (I believe ) been faster than Macs. They have always had the speed edge.

BUT - Macs are not about speed. For me, at least, my mac isn't about speed. For that, I can rely on my 3 other PC's ..

And yet, I ask myself, do the extra digits really help? UT and Starcraft run AS WELL on my iBook as they do on my 1.8GHz PC in my basement.

Also, after a certain speed, any extra is overkill. I'm pretty sure no one here has any use for, lets say.. 99999GHz. Altho it would be nice.

Bottom line, numbers look good. That's about it..

#25403

They didn't have to catch up at all. When the new iMacs came out, Apple gave this comparision: 800Mhz G4 = 2.2Ghz P4. C'mon. I was buying 2Ghz P4s at lower prices months before the new iMacs came out. And this is Apples own chart, so you know that the scales are a little bias anyway.

#25404

Originally posted by contrasutra@May 9 2003, 03:47 PM

They didn't have to catch up at all. When the new iMacs came out, Apple gave this comparision: 800Mhz G4 = 2.2Ghz P4. C'mon. I was buying 2Ghz P4s at lower prices months before the new iMacs came out.  And this is Apples own chart, so you know that the scales are a little bias anyway.

I, too, think the whole 'Megahertz Myth' thing is a pile of cowdung.. and yet I wonder why the new Pentium M processors are focusing less on mere clock speed... hmmm...

anyway, like I said, you dont have to be proud of numbers. If you were boasting about the size of your schlong, that would be another thing. That would matter

But processor speed, thats a different topic. For me, my 800MHz mac is more than enough. And my two dells (733 and 1.8) are enough too. I know that I don't need to waste my precious money on anything more than that. I know that I can do everything (for now) on my computers.

Altho my 750MHz Dell Latitude is kinda slow now..

#25407

Megahertz myth is real - its based on solid processor design. Intel has everyone over a barrel with its megahertz rating system.

On the other hand, Apple is smoking crack if they think their Motorola 800mhz CPUs = 2.2ghz Intel CPU's. At best, you can fairly accuratly rate a G4s performance as 1.75x the megahertz when comparing to an Intel chip. For example, a 1ghz G4 = 1.75ghz P4. Along the same scale, you would use a 1.45 to 1.5x rating for equivilant Athlons (probably lower for the new Bartons), so the same chip lineup would compare like this:

1ghz G4 = 1.75ghz P4 = 1.46ghz AthlonXP (not exact, but close).

The reason is that AMD has adopted specific elements of Motorola chip design and incorporated these schemes in the design of Athlons over the past few years. AthlonXPs adopted a realistic performance rating as a result, and time and again AMD has proven that a 2.25ghz chip can benchmark and perform at an equivilance to a 3ghz rated Pentium4. The benefit is that AMD can squeeze out more solid performance, while reducing their past heat problems, by incorporating other design elements other than constantly making giant frequency rating jumps.

What I pray for (as an enthusiast) is the universal adoption of AMD's rating system by companies like Motorola, Apple, IBM and Transmetta. This would help out these other companies compete with Intels giant megahertz sales pitch, increase consumer confidence in off brand processors, and force Intel to change up how they sale chips (think about if they were the only chipmaker holding on to an outdated standard...that wouldnt impress consumers or investors).

Of course, it would be amazingly funny to see Apple systems with a 3.5ghz XP rating. I really doubt we would ever see MotorolaXP chipsets, or even G5XP chips. Maybe they could change the name of the rating system...CPU X or something similar.

#25410

I think the driving issue I was trying to point out was that if the PCs are starting to convert loyal Mac people and whole video/graphic companies to PC's for graphics and multimedia because it is more inexpensive and alot more powerful, then what will happen to Apple? What would be the point of owning an Apple then?

The article goes as far as to say (quoting)

" If increased processing power doubles your productivity, but costs you twice as much, that isn't cost-effective. What makes our move to Windows a no-brainer is that PCs are less expensive than Macs, so we can have more of them in-house.... when you take the time saved at one PC, and multiply that by 10, 20 or 30 workstations in the shop, it adds up to significant productivity gains that enable us to produce more processor-intensive effects shots, with higher quality results than before."

"What we found is that Microsoft, Intel, Dell, etc... have demonstrated a commitment to making Adobe After Effects and our other key applications run blazingly fast on the Windows platform... In fact, because of this cooperation, our applications are actually better optimized and better supported on the PC side."

These people create visual effects for movies like Vanilla Sky, Jackass, Jeepers Creepers2, and Hero, as well as many national commercials, including playstation2.

Article is called "Profile of the Orphanage"

The guy interviewed worked for ILM prior.

#25411

I don't think we'll see apple adopt a proper ratings scale, cause they'd be forced to outright lie (Like they do when the say 1.42Ghz is faster than 3.06Ghz) or tell everyone how slow there processors are.

I think speed isn't the most important thing, but then again, Taha, do you think you'll be able to play UT2K3 on your ibook. Its unlikely without removing all of that eyecandy which makes it the game it is.

#25415

On the Intel Centrino Processors:

The reason Intels new mobile chip is clocked lower is because they are focusing on Battery Power and heat. These new processors run MUCH cooler and use MUCH MUCH less battery. I don't know what else they do to them, but they also run much faster than their clocks (now doesnt that confuse you). A 1.4Ghz Centrino is about as fast as a 2Ghz P4-M. Odd.

#25419

I have to say I can see a massive speed difference between my AthlonXP 1800+ and my AthlonXP 2100+, also I can see a unbelivable speed difference between my PIII 700Mhz and those Athlons. I get so impatient with the PIII that im buying a new Mesh compuer with the AthlonXP 3000+ Barton for the living room to retstore and edit music through my Sony VA555ES AV Amp and my Acoustic Energy Evo Three floorstander speakers, cant wait till I buy the Mesh comp.

Anyway I love mac's even if they are slower, I dont care because they look amsingly good and work good.

There's a fact out at the moment that Intel are trying to push the speed technology so mutch on their latest P4 chip that they're running into problems, and Dell have a few hundred computers waiting to be shipped and can't because Intel wont ship the chips intil they sort the problems. How Ironic is that

See ya guys

Sky

#25422

Originally posted by contrasutra@May 9 2003, 05:19 PM

On the Intel Centrino Processors:

The reason Intels new mobile chip is clocked lower is because they are focusing on Battery Power and heat. These new processors run MUCH cooler and use MUCH MUCH less battery. I don't know what else they do to them, but they also run much faster than their clocks (now doesnt that confuse you). A 1.4Ghz Centrino is about as fast as a 2Ghz P4-M. Odd. 

DING!!!!

That was exactly my point.

Intel's marketing tactic was to focus on clock speed, and clock speed alone..

And that is why I like G4's and AMD better, because they are sensible and they focus on other important stuff too.

#25423

You guys are idiots.. Clock speed means NOTHING.

Its the quality of the machine.... Sure a 3.01 ghz P4 with hyperthreading has better benchmarks than a 1.42 Mhz G4 powermac, but what about the quality of the product? The MOBO, Video Card , Superdrives, etc. Apple hardware is treasure.

Thats why I use a mac, not for the speed or the look. But for the quality computer i receive for my money.. A powerhouse OS that hasnt crashed on me ONCE (well, i had to relaunch the finder once, but no reboot.) t ,has a Unix kernel, and not to mention a Beautifully designed GUI and Rendering system.

So f*** movie producers, Designers, Image Developers, etc.. They can go ahead and use their PC's with there crappy Movie programs (Final Cut Pro OWNS).

Put your 3 ghz P4 against that.

(BTW i own an iBook 800 MHz G3 and an iMac 800 MHz G4, and im damn proud of it.

#25425

I hate these arguments comparing the incomparable.

#25426

Originally posted by juniperlater@May 9 2003, 05:59 PM

I hate these arguments comparing the incomparable.

We have a winner!!

Yes, I do too..

#25427

yeah true but:

if the graphics company says they can use photoshop more productively on pc, that is comparable.

The end application is comparable, if mac users don't want to believe that, they're just burying their heads in the sand.

The MOBO, Video Card , Superdrives, etc. Apple hardware is treasure.

Can all be had at better quality and cheaper for pc.

The mac's just have better cases

fissy

ps i want a mac no matter what i say

#25429

If my PC performs a certain PS7 filter 1/10th of a second faster than my Mac, I really dont give a damn.

All I know is that my mac is something that I would have gladly spent my money on again if I had to buy a computer. I can sacrifice a microsecond for the stability, beauty and simplicity..

#25432

amen brotha Taha.

And btw fissyb.. Why waste your time emulating the look of Mac OS if you dont like the computers themselves.. Sure the computers are gorgeous.. but so is the hardware! You hear more stories on fried Wintel motherboards than G4 Logic Boards, and dont bring up that there are more PC users than Apple users.. cause that doesnt mean anything.

#25433

I think its more like twice as fast, so if a filter takes half an hour to do, using a pc will save lots of time.

Why waste your time emulating the look of Mac OS if you dont like the computers themselves.

lol, what are you talking about?

I didn't say i didn't want the hardware anyway, i just think its crap value for money. How can they justify charging double the price for half the speed. The "just works" factor does make a difference, but not thousands $ worth.

You hear more stories on fried Wintel motherboards than G4 Logic Boards, and dont bring up that there are more PC users than Apple users.. cause that doesnt mean anything.

There are 9 times as many pc users, i think that does mean a thing.

anyway, i said i want a mac, i just think there are a lot of things wrong with it.

fissy

#25437

The Superdrive and Video card are just off the shelf PC parts. In fact, 95% of Mac parts are Generic. The only custom parts are the mobo/processor.

There are loads of companies that make PC parts, and most are reputable, and only one that makes Mac mobos, so if there is a problem, your stuck. C'mon, how many fried Asus Mobos do you hear about? Its the users fault 99% of the time.

Mac Stability + PC = Linux/BSD.

#25440

Ah its not the same thing! You wouldnt understand until you have a mac for a week.. then you'll agree with me.

#25471

You won't know true stability/fluidity of use until you run Linux for a week.

Ive used macs for short periods of time (a couple weeks), and I can say, their OS is beautiful and pretty cool, but the hardware IS slow. Now in daily use, you won't notice it, but start to get into the higher end, then it shows. Either way, im still getting an iBook next year. (My schools giving them to us )

#25473

*My Jaw drops*

I'm getting myself back to school!

#25476

Ive used Slackware for 5 months, BeOS for 3 Years, Mac OS since 7.5.3 and OS/2 since it came out.. I know how linux works and i know its fluidity.. its the same hting as if you install X11 on Mac OS X. X is very linux like, you came compile \ recompile Kernels and Binaries, etc..

The hardware is top notch, Not generic. Best NVidia and ATI cards, Best chips (That dont require Fans for cooling mind you) and the Logic Cards are so ahead of there time that they can be UPGRADED.. Beige G3 Powermacs can be upgraded with Sonnet cards to dual 1 GHZ WITHOUT the need of a new Logic Board. The PC Cannot upgrade from a 486DX to Pentium 4..

#25479