apple's killer cpu?

[isus]

apple's new cpu, the ppc970 (from ibm... not motorola) may be coming out soon.

after reading through the rumor mill, i have seen that some recent benchmarks for this cpu will blow even the newest intel and amd processor's out of the water... up to a 252% increase in common tasks...

so what is your take on the situation?

on the possibility that apple will unveil this beast at june's wwdc show?

and what about the (less realistic) rumor that os10.3, aka panther, will only run on these ppc970 macs?

(ps, im not just posting this bc i am a 'mac fanboy'... so dont flame. read up at www.macosrumors.com, www.macrumors.com... etc)

[Psilaxs]

About as revolutionary as their "Pentium Crushing" G3 processor a few years back?

And IBM has already expressed A LOT of interest with AMD's 64 Bit opteron. Saying they want to use it in a new line of PC because of it's efficient legacy support for 32 bit applications.


No doubt it will be a good chip, but no, it wont compare to amd or even intel chips.

[isus]

thank you ^ this is the type of post i wanna see.

666 posts? psilaxs, are you hiding something?

[autiggertoo2005]

Originally posted by Psilaxs
About as revolutionary as their "Pentium Crushing" G3 processor a few years back?...no, it wont compare to amd or even intel chips.

HA I BEG TO DIFFER! I own a P4 1800 Processor. but I love macs. Apple's G3 is FAR superior to ANY processor made currently. Have you even THOUGHT of the strain that is put on a G3 processor when you even scrol OVER the icons on the Desktop of OSX? I don't think that any Pentium could attain the complexity and beauty of a G3 Processor...The End. I mean...I am an avid Intel chip user...only because I can't afford an Apple computer.

[isus]

Originally posted by autiggertoo2005
HA I BEG TO DIFFER! I own a P4 1800 Processor. but I love macs. Apple's G3 is FAR superior to ANY processor made currently. Have you even THOUGHT of the strain that is put on a G3 processor when you even scrol OVER the icons on the Desktop of OSX? I don't think that any Pentium could attain the complexity and beauty of a G3 Processor...The End. I mean...I am an avid Intel chip user...only because I can't afford a Apple computer.

interesting too... osx has many features i dont think ms would even try... look at quartz extreme: real time double buffering, shadows, font smoothing...

i use an ibook 500 and since the gpu isnt up to it, quartz sits the load of graphics on the cpu. 100% during games, but the quality is great.

[Psilaxs]

Originally posted by autiggertoo2005
HA I BEG TO DIFFER! I own a P4 1800 Processor. but I love macs. Apple's G3 is FAR superior to ANY processor made currently. Have you even THOUGHT of the strain that is put on a G3 processor when you even scrol OVER the icons on the Desktop of OSX? I don't think that any Pentium could attain the complexity and beauty of a G3 Processor...The End. I mean...I am an avid Intel chip user...only because I can't afford an Apple computer.

You've got to be kidding me, is all i can say..

Lets see a G3 run something like Soldier of Fortune 2 Quake 3 Unreal 2003 etc etc.

[isus]

Originally posted by Psilaxs
You've got to be kidding me, is all i can say..

Lets see a G3 run something like Soldier of Fortune 2 Quake 3 Unreal 2003 etc etc.

slow down... dont get hostile in here. id rather not have a thread closed bc peopple got in an argument.

psilaxs: all those games are relatively new... i haven't personally tried the new ibooks (with 800 and 900mhz g3's)... but you cannot say that it is the g3's fault it does not perform well with graphics-intense games.

like i said, once you have a good enough graphics accelerator, it becomes the same as ati vs. nvidia. quartz will offload all gpu parts to the gpu if you have more than 16mb vram.

besides, look at all osx does that windows does not, with the window buffering, etc...

windows is for gamers... microsoft lulled a bajillion people into using their os, and the developers use that. cuz hey, even a shitty game will have at least one customer (haha... not gonna go there...)

[p00n1s]

Originally posted by Psilaxs
Lets see a G3 run something like Soldier of Fortune 2 Quake 3 Unreal 2003 etc etc.

The performance in any game will depend mostly on your GPU. If you got a nice new video card to do all that fancy rendering, there is not much work left for the CPU to do. Maybe it has to do some AI and stuff like that, but the hardest part is the rendering.

[SUprEMeBeiNg]

osx has many features i dont think ms would even try... look at quartz extreme: real time double buffering, shadows, font smoothing...

lol!!!

font smoothing and shadows!!!!!

come on now i think a safer os is better than prettier

[Psilaxs]

Isus....

I don't know how you thought I was being hostile, but i assure you I wasn't.
As far as games go, There is a misconception that, after you processor reaches a certain point it is all up to the graphics card.

This isn't true. in fact, the opposite, the faster the cpu, the more the graphics card can offset instructions to the CPU for pre calculation.

I have several systems at my house, one of which is an old P2 400 processor, with fast ram good motherboard and a fairly high end graphics card.

And it does not perform nearly as well in games as the other computers with a much faster cpu and the same card. (hell even
the amd Athlon XP 1600 with a GeForce 2 mx out performs an amd 500 with a radeon 128 meg 8500)

This is an extreme example i know, but the point is, the faster your cpu the better your games will be, to say there isn't much left for the cpu with a high end video card is erroneous.

[mrlipring]

if it's that fast maybe people will start writing stuff for it that people will want to use, and people will buy them! :D

[SUprEMeBeiNg]

lol thats about as likley as ES5 :P

[mrlipring]

hehe... not to go ot but es5 is a piece of crap.. really... ffs... what were they thinking?

[isus]

Originally posted by Psilaxs
Isus....

I don't know how you thought I was being hostile, but i assure you I wasn't.
As far as games go, There is a misconception that, after you processor reaches a certain point it is all up to the graphics card.
...
This isn't true. in fact, the opposite, the faster the cpu, the more the graphics card can offset instructions to the CPU for pre calculation.

ok... like i said, id like to see opinions, not people get involved in battles about it and then see my thread closed.

yea, i understand what you are saying about the graphics and cpu thing, im saying though, that quartz, which is apple's thing, will use the video card much the same way windows would... but only if it has + 16mb vram. a shitty computer like my school's ibook that i use (with 8mb ati rage and a g3) would suck at playing games, bc the cpu is used to do EVERYTHING in place of the gpu.

a g3 with a good gpu, probably wouldnt be horrible with games though.

and a g4 would be even better...

but back to the 970 (ibm made), which is not anywhere near a g3 or a g4 (motorola made)...

[Sephiroth]

Apple...

Killer CPU...

Sounds like a oxymoron to me..

Much like Mac Gaming.

[isus]

Originally posted by Sephiroth
Apple...
Killer CPU...
Sounds like a oxymoron to me..
Much like Mac Gaming.

did you even look at the benchmarks, or did you just need to leave a childish comment?

leave something worthwhile, or dont leave anything.

i expect this from supremebeing, not you.

[ATLien]

Guys, it's "apples and oranges".

You have one type of a computer(Apple), for doing certain things, having different types of software, etc. Vice vera with the IBM based computers. I have a G4, that i got to learn video editing with,and because i wanted Final Cut. I have an AMD base computer, that i'm on 90% of the time, that i do all sorts of other stuff, including filesharing and gaming. So basically it's what you want to do with the computer. I must admit that fucking G4 was cheap!

[Sephiroth]

Originally posted by isus
did you even look at the benchmarks, or did you just need to leave a childish comment?.

You mean the rumors from the mac rumor sites?

Its one of those things that sound too good to be true..

[tackdaddy]

are good for some things like graphics,but ther is hardly any software for it and even less games.i'm not slamming macs they have there good and bad points but until it becomes popular i will stick with windows based computers and i prefer AMD over intel.even if macs were the best made i would stick with pc's just because of the lack of software and try to find people to repair macs is even worse.

[matstao]

Originally posted by Sephiroth
Apple...

Killer CPU...

Sounds like a oxymoron to me..

Much like Mac Gaming.

Originally posted by isus
did you even look at the benchmarks, or did you just need to leave a childish comment?

leave something worthwhile, or dont leave anything.

i expect this from supremebeing, not you.

I thought Seph's comment, if not particularly on-topically constructive, was at least humorous. Leagues above anything SB could type.

[d-koolest]

I just got a g4 eMac on eBay, I'm trying to download some graphics apps for it. One thing nobody seems to have mentioned yet is that if you have a good enough Mac you can run Windows or Linux (or both) on it. That way you can have the best of both worlds. Its freakin slow on my g3 but hopefully it wont be on the new one.

[isus]

Originally posted by matstao
I thought Seph's comment, if not particularly on-topically constructive, was at least humorous. Leagues above anything SB could type.

alright, ill give ya that...

but seph, the rumor sites are really the only place to find apple news ahead of time. most of it turns out true. macbidouille (sp?) got these numbers, and one of the sites said that an apple person said they weren't far from accurate.

also, the ppc970 is 64-bit... so is the amd opteron, which is many times faster than any current intel or amd xp processor...

[Psilaxs]

I do not believe it is anywhere near many times faster then what
Intel or AMD has.

Simply because IBM WANTS to use AMD's New 64 Bit Opteron in their new line of PC's.

If their chip was so much more powerfull, they would have no interest in what AMD is offering.

Oh, and I agree 100% With Seph

I also wish i could find the benchmarks i came accross 7 months ago, compairing apples dual processor G4 system against single chip Intel and AMD offering, and how badly it got stomped in video editing and Photoshop

[isus]

Originally posted by Psilaxs
Simply because IBM WANTS to use AMD's New 64 Bit Opteron in their new line of PC's.

If their chip was so much more powerfull, they would have no interest in what AMD is offering.

what?


I also wish i could find the benchmarks i came accross 7 months ago, compairing apples dual processor G4 system against single chip Intel and AMD offering, and how badly it got stomped in video editing and Photoshop

yea, apple was FINALLY overtaken by intel and amd about a year ago... you can find pretty much any set of benchmarks dealing with video or photoshop that compares a recent mac and a recent winbox...

but the question isn't even about g3 or g4 proc's anyway... the question was on the ppc970.

try to stick with the topic, at least a little bit. please?