Yesterday I posted an article about the new 64 bit Apple G5, well today it seems there is quite a bit of drama across the net based on those benchmarks.

See what The Register had to say

Benchmark results cited by Apple at the launch of its Power Mac G5 desktops yesterday have already come under fire for seeming to not only tweak the Mac test system to improve its performance beyond anything an ordinary user might experience, but crippling rival systems to deliver below-par average user performance.

The tests described by Apple CEO Steve Jobs were conducted on the company's behalf ("under contract") by VeriTest. The benchmarks used are SPEC CPU 2000 integer and floating-point tests. Apple asked VeriTest to compare a pre-release a dual 2GHz Power Mac G5 with a Dell Precision 650 workstation based on twin 3.06GHz Intel Xeon CPUs and a Dell Dimension 8300 based on a 3GHz Pentium 4.


Check out the rest of the article HERE

What kinda shizit is that, dam.d00d you beat a dell...not!!!

FRaggin Apple-heads...
I quote MaxPC:
"Mac users that rave over the speeds of thier worksations are simply so full of crap, they could double over as a septic tank"

And maxpc is discussing a G4, lets keep things in perspective here nikon, we are talking about a G5 which is a far different beast

I certainly don't defend Apple in the least. But it's still nothing Nvidia, MSI, Asus, AMD and a host of other companies haven't done in the past. But the flurry of Apple bashing is certainly amusing. Amdmb condemned Apple for using a 64 bit cpu, fast fsb, DDR400 ram, serial ATA, PCI-X and 8x AGP. Oh....the bastards, how dare they.

I don't buy Apple's claims as the fastest PC. And as long as it took IBM to get to this point, I can't see 3 GHz in the near future. But as someone who works in one of the few fields where Apple still blows away the competition in terms of actual production value. Even with much slower platforms. It's nice to see them actually enter the 21st century with a viable platform.

When the G5 hits the streets with a working 64-bit OS, then the real comparisons can begin. Until then it's meaningless speculation all around.

It's all pretty meaningless because pure speed was never a concern for the Apple crowd. Apple never even tried to perfect a system built to be faster than a good old Windows machine with AMD or Intel processors. Even back in the first G4 days they tried to flaunt being faster which didn't last very long because Apple has always been left in the dust in terms of the latest technology. I'm just surprised they didn't test a dual Athlon64 (hammer, or whatever they want to call it) server since the G5 is supposed to be a 64-bit processor.

I honestly don't know what Apple is trying to accomplish by posting benchmarks of any sort because they'll always be for the user who only wants ease of use rather than power. One more false promise or bad product from Apple and we may soon see it file for chapter 11

That will never happen because there are still Apple purists out there who mistakenly believe their Mac is better at audio and video production than a pc, not because of any specific feature but just because theyve been told that for years by people "who know"

Quote: Originally posted by abyssling That will never happen because there are still Apple purists out there who mistakenly believe their Mac is better at audio and video production than a pc, not because of any specific feature but just because theyve been told that for years by people "who know"

They actually used to be (at least for video production) because the industry standard software was only made for Macs a while back. Same goes for Photoshop and QuarkXPress, they were initially just put out for Mac platforms.

Never knew about that before but photoshop and the like have been on PCs for some time now. I guess back in the day the programmers also believed the same thing (whether it was true or not - Macs being faster than PCs), so way back when, people could say Macs are better for audio and video production...but that was before everything had been ported to Windows, and they still believe it's best (though it was sad to hear about how it was only recent that they actually starting using DDR SDRAM! only PC2100 though and at the time there were mobos that supported DDR400 in the PC world).

Apple is still slowly dying as Steve Jobs can no longer rely on marketing plots and supposed advantages (though producing a hilarious outcome of many various quicktime videos of apple.com/switch commercials). Lately they've been trying to introduce new gadgets and new software (besides iTunes, which is doomed to fail with a falling computer market share), which is a sign of a desparate reach towards enthusiasts.

They will soon go the way of Gateway sadly...and in history we will all remember such a thing as a metaphor of how stupid people can be

Shortly put "Apple Sucks!"-Me
all that speed and a handle for tossing when you find out it plays no good games and is limited to Apple Compatable junk. What a waste of money, and for what? A faster Better built handle for chucking right.....

well Apples DID own that title of best multtimedia pc at one point, but those days are long past and it saddens me to see the Mac addicts clinging so tightly to inferior architecture. I am not so sure however, that the new G5s are all that inferior. As someone earlier posted, it will take some real world benchmarks by reputable sites like Pimprig I dont necessarily buy into all the marketting hype, and I think when the Athlon64s hit the streets they will make the G5 look silly, but at least this Apple/IBM alliance might pose the beginnings of new contender to keep Intel and AMD on their toes even more.

whoops, cant edit my message on this forum, previous post was by abyssling, not dr death heh

Oh and people, lets not forget that Linux apps work on Macs too.

yeah i guess apple has to lie now. motorola cant keep up so apple will have to eventually come to a x86 chip like intel or amd. to bad RISC is dieing .