Professional Web Applications Themes

Apple's speed comparisons G5 v Dell - Mac Applications & Software

In article <240620031100332503%pkill_check_the_newsgroup.com >, Pique wrote: > Any idea why apple used Linux for the Dell machine v the G5? > [url]http://www.veritest.com/clients/reports/apple/apple_performance.pdf[/url] > If it makes it slower won't the windows people cry foul? Well, Linux tends to run faster on the same hardware than Windows for one thing. The other reason that I suspect is that SPEC is very heavily unix-based. I'm not even sure if the SPEC benchmarks have even been ported to Windows. By testing on Linux, it makes it easier to get the benchmarks up and running. -- -------------------- [url]http://www.techhouse.org/lou[/url] ---------------------- "Dragonmaster Lou" | "Searching for ...

  1. #1

    Default Re: Apple's speed comparisons G5 v Dell

    In article <240620031100332503%pkill_check_the_newsgroup.com >, Pique wrote:
    > Any idea why apple used Linux for the Dell machine v the G5?
    > [url]http://www.veritest.com/clients/reports/apple/apple_performance.pdf[/url]
    > If it makes it slower won't the windows people cry foul?
    Well, Linux tends to run faster on the same hardware than Windows for
    one thing.

    The other reason that I suspect is that SPEC is very heavily unix-based.
    I'm not even sure if the SPEC benchmarks have even been ported to
    Windows. By testing on Linux, it makes it easier to get the benchmarks
    up and running.

    --

    -------------------- [url]http://www.techhouse.org/lou[/url] ----------------------
    "Dragonmaster Lou" | "Searching for a distant star, heading off to
    lou at techhouse org | Iscandar, leaving all we love behind, who knows
    Tech House Alum | what dangers we'll find..."
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Dragonmaster Lou Guest

  2. #2

    Default Re: Apple's speed comparisons G5 v Dell

    In article <bearclaw-EC8D03.07232624062003corp.supernews.com>,
    [email]bearclawcruller.inva[/email]lid wrote:
    > In article <slrnbfgm6f.dlh.loutechhouse.brown.edu>,
    > Dragonmaster Lou <louSPAM.ME.AND.DIE.techhouse.org> wrote:
    >
    > > In article <240620031100332503%pkill_check_the_newsgroup.com >, Pique
    > > wrote:
    > > > Any idea why apple used Linux for the Dell machine v the G5?
    > > > [url]http://www.veritest.com/clients/reports/apple/apple_performance.pdf[/url]
    > > > If it makes it slower won't the windows people cry foul?
    > >
    > > Well, Linux tends to run faster on the same hardware than Windows for
    > > one thing.
    > >
    > > The other reason that I suspect is that SPEC is very heavily unix-based.
    > > I'm not even sure if the SPEC benchmarks have even been ported to
    > > Windows. By testing on Linux, it makes it easier to get the benchmarks
    > > up and running.
    >
    > Would a better speed test (for comparison to windoze machines) be to run
    > one of the Mac Windows emulation programs on the new processor and see
    > how it stacks up against a fast wintel machine?
    Hardly. This is a test that the Mac would be guaranteed to lose. Even
    if the G5 is twice the performance of the fastest PC (as indicated by
    the application benchmarks), emulation would cost so much more.
    Besides, if all that matters is the performance of Windows software, a
    Mac wouldn't be in the running.

    --
    Hank Shiffman [url]http://www.disordered.org[/url]
    Have Opinion, Will Travel [email]hankdisordered.org[/email]
    Mountain View, California
    Hank Shiffman Guest

  3. #3

    Default Re: Apple's speed comparisons G5 v Dell

    Pique wrote:
    > Any idea why apple used Linux for the Dell machine v the G5?
    > [url]http://www.veritest.com/clients/reports/apple/apple_performance.pdf[/url]
    > If it makes it slower won't the windows people cry foul?
    > PK

    Very possibly because this "compares Unix to Unix."

    This also helps to eliminate the accusation that Apple is "out to get
    Windows."

    And... since Windows sometimes has difficulty just getting out of its own
    way, :-), this probably is a more un-biased testing scenario.

    Sundial Services Guest

  4. #4

    Default Re: Apple's speed comparisons G5 v Dell

    Dragonmaster Lou <louspam.me.and.die.techhouse.org> wrote:
    > The other reason that I suspect is that SPEC is very heavily
    > unix-based. I'm not even sure if the SPEC benchmarks have even been
    > ported to Windows. By testing on Linux, it makes it easier to get
    > the benchmarks up and running.
    [url]http://www.spec.org/cpu2000/[/url]

    A search for "Windows" as the OS for a SPECcpu2000 seems to yield 660
    results. This is across the four metrics - int/fp speed and int/fp
    rate. SPEC goes to great pains to make sure the benchmarks are
    "portable."

    rick jones
    --
    portable adj, code that compiles under more than one compiler
    these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway... :)
    feel free to post, OR email to raj in cup.hp.com but NOT BOTH...
    Rick Jones Guest

  5. #5

    Default Re: Apple's speed comparisons G5 v Dell

    In article <bearclaw-EC8D03.07232624062003corp.supernews.com>,
    <bearclawcruller.invalid> wrote:
    >In article <slrnbfgm6f.dlh.loutechhouse.brown.edu>,
    > Dragonmaster Lou <louSPAM.ME.AND.DIE.techhouse.org> wrote:
    >
    > > In article <240620031100332503%pkill_check_the_newsgroup.com >, Pique wrote:
    > > > Any idea why apple used Linux for the Dell machine v the G5?
    > > > [url]http://www.veritest.com/clients/reports/apple/apple_performance.pdf[/url]
    > > > If it makes it slower won't the windows people cry foul?
    > >
    > > Well, Linux tends to run faster on the same hardware than Windows for
    > > one thing.
    > >
    > > The other reason that I suspect is that SPEC is very heavily unix-based.
    > > I'm not even sure if the SPEC benchmarks have even been ported to
    > > Windows. By testing on Linux, it makes it easier to get the benchmarks
    > > up and running.
    >
    >Would a better speed test (for comparison to windoze machines) be to run
    >one of the Mac Windows emulation programs on the new processor and see
    >how it stacks up against a fast wintel machine?
    I think that if the OS X version of SoftWindows had been available, that
    is precisely what SJ would have done. It wouldn't have been as fast,
    true, but it might have been pretty impressive nonetheless.

    It is like the description of Samuel Johnson with respect to women giving
    the sermon at Sunday services: which he likened to a dog walking on its hind
    legs. It is not that it is done well; one is astonished to see it done
    at all.

    David Derbes [lokiuchicago.edu]


    david raoul derbes Guest

  6. #6

    Default Re: Apple's speed comparisons G5 v Dell

    Rick Jones <foobar.baz.invalid> wrote in news:mD%Ja.3271$yt.2326
    news.cpqcorp.net:
    > Dragonmaster Lou <louspam.me.and.die.techhouse.org> wrote:
    >> The other reason that I suspect is that SPEC is very heavily
    >> unix-based. I'm not even sure if the SPEC benchmarks have even been
    >> ported to Windows. By testing on Linux, it makes it easier to get
    >> the benchmarks up and running.
    >
    > [url]http://www.spec.org/cpu2000/[/url]
    >
    > A search for "Windows" as the OS for a SPECcpu2000 seems to yield 660
    > results. This is across the four metrics - int/fp speed and int/fp
    > rate. SPEC goes to great pains to make sure the benchmarks are
    > "portable."
    >
    > rick jones
    But... but... but...

    Why didn't apple run SPEC against a similar stock G4 running the same OS?

    Forgive my ignorance.

    Andy
    Buteo Lagopus Guest

  7. #7

    Default Re: Apple's speed comparisons G5 v Dell

    david raoul derbes <lokimidway.uchicago.edu> wrote:

    > >Would a better speed test (for comparison to windoze machines) be to run
    > >one of the Mac Windows emulation programs on the new processor and see
    > >how it stacks up against a fast wintel machine?
    >
    > I think that if the OS X version of SoftWindows had been available, that
    > is precisely what SJ would have done.
    Why didn't he do it with Virtual PC?
    > It wouldn't have been as fast, true, but it might have been pretty
    > impressive nonetheless.
    I don't think it would have been. Why do you think it would have?




    --
    Andrew J. Brehm
    Fan of Woody Allen
    PowerPC User
    Supporter of Pepperoni Pizza
    Andrew J. Brehm Guest

  8. #8

    Default Re: Apple's speed comparisons G5 v Dell

    DaveC <dave+usenet3016mailblocks.net> wrote:
    > On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 9:31:38 -0700, Sundial Services wrote
    > (in message <vfgv7amqr83p3dcorp.supernews.com>):
    >
    > > Very possibly because this "compares Unix to Unix."
    > >
    > > This also helps to eliminate the accusation that Apple is "out to get
    > > Windows."
    > >
    > > And... since Windows sometimes has difficulty just getting out of its own
    > > way, :-), this probably is a more un-biased testing scenario.
    >
    > I agree. Short of porting OS X to the PC,
    But OS X has been ported to the PC, at least in as much as was required
    here. The Mac booted into Darwin only. The same could be done on the PC.
    > running a UNIX variant on the PC is the best way to get a "level playing
    > field" test of the two hardware platforms.
    No. I think it was only more convenient for the testers.

    --
    Andrew J. Brehm
    Fan of Woody Allen
    PowerPC User
    Supporter of Pepperoni Pizza
    Andrew J. Brehm Guest

  9. #9

    Default Re: Apple's speed comparisons G5 v Dell

    Buteo Lagopus <lblpbzpnfg.arg> wrote:
    > Rick Jones <foobar.baz.invalid> wrote in news:mD%Ja.3271$yt.2326
    > news.cpqcorp.net:
    >> [url]http://www.spec.org/cpu2000/[/url]
    >>
    >> A search for "Windows" as the OS for a SPECcpu2000 seems to yield 660
    >> results. This is across the four metrics - int/fp speed and int/fp
    >> rate. SPEC goes to great pains to make sure the benchmarks are
    >> "portable."
    > But... but... but...
    > Why didn't apple run SPEC against a similar stock G4 running the
    > same OS?
    No idea. All I wanted to do was show that it is possible to run
    SPECcpu2000 under Windows, along with Linux, MacOS X, HP-UX, Solaris,
    AIX, etc etc etc. As for why any one individual or group decides to
    publish numbers for any one platform will vary with the individual or
    group.

    rick jones
    --
    Wisdom Teeth are impacted, people are affected by the effects of events.
    these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway... :)
    feel free to post, OR email to raj in cup.hp.com but NOT BOTH...
    Rick Jones Guest

  10. Moderated Post

    Default Re: Apple's speed comparisons G5 v Dell

    Removed by Administrator
    Andrew J. Brehm Guest
    Moderated Post

  11. #11

    Default Re: Apple's speed comparisons G5 v Dell

    > Would a better speed test (for comparison to windoze machines) be to run
    > one of the Mac Windows emulation programs on the new processor and see
    > how it stacks up against a fast wintel machine?
    What I'd like to see:
    Powerful Mac with a slave Pentium and hardware/software
    support for letting the Pentium run Windoze code
    while Mac OS X in in charge.

    (In other words, don't emulate, just time-slice to
    the other processor, with traps to switch back
    when they try to get to the hardware)

    Wesley Groleau Guest

  12. #12

    Default Re: Apple's speed comparisons G5 v Dell

    In article <240620031100332503%pkill_check_the_newsgroup.com >,
    Pique <pkill_check_the_newsgroup.com> wrote:
    > Any idea why apple used Linux for the Dell machine v the G5?
    > [url]http://www.veritest.com/clients/reports/apple/apple_performance.pdf[/url]
    > If it makes it slower won't the windows people cry foul?
    > PK
    Apple's Hardware VP says Linux made the Dell faster than running Windows
    on it....

    [url]http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/06/24/2154256&mode=thread&tid[/url]
    =126&tid=181
    F. Todd Wilson Guest

  13. #13

    Default Re: Apple's speed comparisons G5 v Dell

    In article <E5qdnSSkXZAucWWjXTWJkggbronline.com>, Wesley Groleau wrote:
    >
    >> Would a better speed test (for comparison to windoze machines) be to run
    >> one of the Mac Windows emulation programs on the new processor and see
    >> how it stacks up against a fast wintel machine?
    >
    > What I'd like to see:
    > Powerful Mac with a slave Pentium and hardware/software
    > support for letting the Pentium run Windoze code
    > while Mac OS X in in charge.
    >
    > (In other words, don't emulate, just time-slice to
    > the other processor, with traps to switch back
    > when they try to get to the hardware)
    Apple did something like this years ago, and it didn't sell particularly
    well if I recall.

    --

    -------------------- [url]http://www.techhouse.org/lou[/url] ----------------------
    "Dragonmaster Lou" | "Searching for a distant star, heading off to
    lou at techhouse org | Iscandar, leaving all we love behind, who knows
    Tech House Alum | what dangers we'll find..."
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Dragonmaster Lou Guest

  14. Moderated Post

    Default Re: Apple's speed comparisons G5 v Dell

    Removed by Administrator
    Thom Rosario Guest
    Moderated Post

  15. #15

    Default Re: Apple's speed comparisons G5 v Dell

    Dragonmaster Lou <louSPAM.ME.AND.DIE.techhouse.org> wrote in message news:<slrnbfgm6f.dlh.loutechhouse.brown.edu>...
    > In article <240620031100332503%pkill_check_the_newsgroup.com >, Pique wrote:
    > > Any idea why apple used Linux for the Dell machine v the G5?
    > > [url]http://www.veritest.com/clients/reports/apple/apple_performance.pdf[/url]
    > > If it makes it slower won't the windows people cry foul?
    >
    > Well, Linux tends to run faster on the same hardware than Windows for
    > one thing.
    >
    > The other reason that I suspect is that SPEC is very heavily unix-based.
    > I'm not even sure if the SPEC benchmarks have even been ported to
    > Windows. By testing on Linux, it makes it easier to get the benchmarks
    > up and running.
    They have ported SPEC to run under Windows since the NT days. For a
    little history (I'm showing my age) Intel has always been rather
    disrespectful of Windows, particularly the 9x and ME versions, saying
    it didn't push their hardware enough. When Microsoft went Windows
    2000 a company created a special library for running benchmarks called
    the MicroQuill Smartheap Lbrary. Now the exciting thing about this
    library was that like all libraries it speeded up some thing and
    slowed other things down but it always did great for benchmarks. And
    it definitely made Windows look much faster than Linux in the
    benchmark scheme of things. So it was added in everytime you wanted
    to run SPEC. It cost our company $1000 (we got an educational
    discount) but only helped in a couple of routines for our product so
    we ditched it. But we keep it around so we can use it to show off our
    products using a special benchmark, cool huh? Weird thing is, every
    PC pundit accuses Apple of being disingenuous with their benchmark
    claims.

    What you should realize, however, is that Steve Jobs isn't the only
    one saying the G5 is the fastest PC in the world. Pixar's chief
    engineer, who ditched all the SGI computers in favor of dual XEON, has
    publically come out and said the same thing. The bad thing is you and
    I may not be able to get a G5 right away unless we get the low end
    ones. Scuttle butt from all of the scientific developers at all of
    the national labs is that these things are so fast for the price, they
    may be already spoken for. I don't believe Apple will be able to keep
    up with demand.
    der Guest

  16. #16

    Default Re: Apple's speed comparisons G5 v Dell

    > Very possibly because this "compares Unix to Unix."

    It doesn't thought, it compares UNIX to Linux, which is not UNIX -
    it's close, but not the same. What they SHOULD have done, is
    installed Darwin on the intel boxen. That would have made it more
    fair.

    Bob
    Beelsebob Guest

Similar Threads

  1. Dell/Linux vs. Apple Xserve for file server?
    By Scott Vandenberg in forum Linux / Unix Administration
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: June 5th, 01:16 PM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: August 15th, 11:50 AM
  3. chaining comparisons
    By Kurt M. Dresner in forum Ruby
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: July 22nd, 05:03 AM
  4. NASA G5 v PC speed comparisons
    By Pique in forum Mac Applications & Software
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: July 9th, 05:59 PM
  5. Date comparisons
    By melo in forum Microsoft SQL / MS SQL Server
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: July 8th, 11:03 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139