Aqua-Soft ForumsI wanted to make a new thread here so that people who wrote off the other thread will see it.
Thinksecret's Mactel benchmarks:
Intel Mac Benchmarks
Too early to draw any conclusion in my opinion... Thank you for the link!
Unfortunately those tests as stated are only benchmarking apps being emulated in Rosseta and nothing in the native apps. So of course a native PPC app will be much faster than an emulated one... obvious from the outset so I'm not sure why they even bothered to compare.
I'd rather know if it's useable and not some random XBench score that I can't relate to real usage.
They are all meaningless.... until you can actualy compare "Apples to Apples", no pun intended, the benchmarks are irrelevant.
Can a mod please close this pointless thread?
There is a reason why this topic is getting closed on boards everywhere.
All we have is speculation about stuff that's not even finished yet. The PPC/Intel fanboy crap is getting out of hand.
It's just like we have in the console threads. Until the "released" product hits the street, speculation is all you have.
As much as i think the information in these benchmarks is worthless rubbish, I will not close the thread unless this seems to go towards a flame war.
Members can speculate all they want and discuss their opinions freely as long as they dont infringe the rules.
Don't worry, before the "fanboy crap" gets out of hand, the thread will be closed.
Now, as a mod warning: Please keep this clean - I dont want to have to suspend anyone because of flames, clear?
This is an article to read... but it still is too early to compare the differences. OSX on an Intel using Rosetta shouldn't be compared because OSX has been optimised for a PowerPC only. And at this point Rosetta is being used as a step stool to run OSX applications.
We'll see where they stand on this issue by the time next year comes around or when the full implementation is completed.
PUHLEAAAAAAAAAAAASE!!! FIrst off it's about time Apple gives in and switches over to Intel processors b/c God knows that what they been using up to this point DEFINITELY ain't getting the job done fast enough.............of my many friends who use Macs (varying in model) there is not one that has an actual processor speed that impresses me........regardless of whether I am using one app or a number of apps at the same time............................it's always a relief to get back to the real world of PC's where I don't have spend the majority of time watching the hourglass (or circular rainbow) thinking............
Nate Dogg
Natedogg, funny - if you used my computer you'd spit on your x86 pc when you got back home 
Very uneducated of you to say that macs are slow and you are always watching the spinning beachball. Shows that you have never used a mac as it should.
g5 2.0 does not equal p4 2.0
that's one of the major downsides of apple's computers. tons of people are still in the "megahertz myth." they would rather buy a p4 at 3 ghz rather than a 2.0 ghz just because the mhz speed is not impressive compared to 3.0. i won't say which one is faster though, but they are definetlly diffrent.
i'd say..........the benchmark is very high for a "translating and not native" CPU. even though it's not pure emulation, it is not pure native cpu optimized thingie.
Just to clarify:
I never posted the link to "prove" Apple is making a mistake, it was merely a cool bit of info I wanted to share.
If anything, I'm impressed by the scores Rosetta can pump out.
How would this chage apple format, will it make it better or make it worse? Does this mean there will be more games selection in the future and also which is better of the two the intel or G5 processor, Can we upgrade our current apple to this intel or do we need to buy a new computer when mac launches this next year :slant:
You're gonna have to buy a new computer.
Ain't now way you're gonna stick an Intel anything onto a G5 motherboard.
and do you know the werid side is? microsoft is doing exactlly the oposite. from x86 to ppc archetechture for their xbox.. weird....
and do you know the werid side is? microsoft is doing exactlly the oposite. from x86 to ppc archetechture. weird....
What crystal ball told you that? 
nah. only the xbox 360
but it's a weird coincidence. and no i don't even have a glass ball
and other companys are doing the same too. it's because of the cell processor. playstation 3 uses cell processor too. right?
nah. only the xbox 360but it's a weird coincidence. and no i don't even have a glass ball
and other companys are doing the same too. it's because of the cell processor. playstation 3 uses cell processor too. right?
When did MS abandon their OS & applications and became a fully devoted console company?
Xbox is using a PPC CPU cause it`s better streamiled for games than x86 ones.
Windows and ALL of the MS apps run on x86 AFAIC.
ok. sorry. only the gaming section then. but microsoft used ppc (actually the mac) for demoing the xbox 360 games while apple did the oposite with their future products with tehir intel computers. so maybe it's not that complete but it's kinda cool.
All right, I think the switch is not made yet.. and I honestly believe that when it's made.. the Hardware and the story will be different altogether to guess anything right now.
Check this editorial out : http://www.techtree.com/techtree/jsp/artic...4436&cat_id=517
I can't help but agree with this guy, I don't have anything against AMD (I was actually going to buy one).. but when I bought a new system myself I ultimately ended up buying INTEL after lot of thinking between INTEL and AMD.
The article looks too much at sweeping generalizations and not enough about smaller details. I don't want to have to go through all of them unless someone wants me to, but there are both pros and cons to the "whole platform" approach.