Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Hardware - Troubleshooting and Discussion > Mac Desktops > PMac vs. AMD vs. BS reporting by PCWorld

View Poll Results: Bad Numbers?
Poll Options:
DEFINATELY!!! 11 votes (44.00%)
Could be...very suspect. 8 votes (32.00%)
Nah, they did their homework 6 votes (24.00%)
Voters: 25. You may not vote on this poll
PMac vs. AMD vs. BS reporting by PCWorld
Thread Tools
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Oct 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2003, 01:04 PM
 
BOGUS NUMBERS!!! I CALL SHENANEGANS!!!

The PowerMac G5 numbers both show *128* megs of RAM--I've got more memory in my *iBOOK* then that! I'd love to see those numbers with RAM maxed out on all systems--give those namby-pamby AMDs a run for there britches against 8 GIGABYTES. Freakin' hackware.
     
Forum Regular
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2003, 01:34 PM
 
Umm... the 128MB are graphics RAM. Sorry, dude.
     
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2003, 01:40 PM
 
Thats 128meg of Video RAM. Why they showed that number over system RAM is beyond me.
<This space under renovation>
     
Forum Regular
Join Date: Aug 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2003, 01:44 PM
 
Originally posted by haharich:
...give those namby-pamby AMDs a run for there britches against 8 GIGABYTES. Freakin' hackware.

You need to relax.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2003, 02:13 PM
 
512MB RAM on the G5 MacWorld ran benchmarks on. 1GB RAM on the PC's PCWorld ran their benchmarks on. Going from 512MB RAM to 1GB RAM makes a lot of difference. It's not even a valid benchmark. If I ran the Athlon 64 on 256MB RAM, I bet you the G5's are like 10 times faster.
     
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jul 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2003, 06:01 PM
 
The 1.8 GHz G5 didn't have a Radeon 9800 Pro in it... hence the drastically lower Quake III scores. Macworld did the benchmarks, and the numbers were almost identical to the macworld review and they stated only the DP 2.0 GHz G5 had the Radeon 9800... so that is pretty jacked.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Highland Park, IL / Santa Monica, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2003, 06:08 PM
 
Also, the slashdot headline for this was "G5 trounced by Athlon64."

The only "trouncing" I saw was in MS freakin' word. Which is plenty fast on my old iMac 350 Do I really care how well MS word runs more than I care about Quake or PS? (you didn't provide a link, but IIRC the G5 beat everything but the faster Opteron in the PS test).
Be happy.
     
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 16, 2003, 12:08 AM
 
I always love how FCP is never even considered, not even as a side note just showing that G5s can do a great job encoding/video editing.
Powerbook 15.2" G4 1.5Ghz
1GB RAM, 80GB 5400rpm
4GB iPod Mini, Rev 2, Green
     
   
Thread Tools
Forum Links
Forum 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 On
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:53 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2011 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.7 © 2000-2011, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2