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)
nsap @ filesharingtalk.com
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.
Communism: "We pretend to work and they pretend to pay us."(old Russian saying)
____________________________
Successfully Traded With: Tom, Dick, Harry, Jane, John, Bob, Billy, Bubba,
Fileztradingzf0rl1fe, s00perdoopershareman, seeder55,000,000: and everyone else you have never heard of, trust, or give a shit about.
thank you ^ this is the type of post i wanna see.
666 posts? psilaxs, are you hiding something?
nsap @ filesharingtalk.com
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.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.
interesting too... osx has many features i dont think ms would even try... look at quartz extreme: real time double buffering, shadows, font smoothing...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.
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.
nsap @ filesharingtalk.com
You've got to be kidding me, is all i can say..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.
Lets see a G3 run something like Soldier of Fortune 2 Quake 3 Unreal 2003 etc etc.
Communism: "We pretend to work and they pretend to pay us."(old Russian saying)
____________________________
Successfully Traded With: Tom, Dick, Harry, Jane, John, Bob, Billy, Bubba,
Fileztradingzf0rl1fe, s00perdoopershareman, seeder55,000,000: and everyone else you have never heard of, trust, or give a shit about.
slow down... dont get hostile in here. id rather not have a thread closed bc peopple got in an argument.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.
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...)
nsap @ filesharingtalk.com
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.Originally posted by Psilaxs
Lets see a G3 run something like Soldier of Fortune 2 Quake 3 Unreal 2003 etc etc.
Official Power Post
http://elitethinking.net/p00n1s.gif
lol!!!osx has many features i dont think ms would even try... look at quartz extreme: real time double buffering, shadows, font smoothing...
font smoothing and shadows!!!!!
come on now i think a safer os is better than prettier
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.
Communism: "We pretend to work and they pretend to pay us."(old Russian saying)
____________________________
Successfully Traded With: Tom, Dick, Harry, Jane, John, Bob, Billy, Bubba,
Fileztradingzf0rl1fe, s00perdoopershareman, seeder55,000,000: and everyone else you have never heard of, trust, or give a shit about.
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
lol thats about as likley as ES5 :P
hehe... not to go ot but es5 is a piece of crap.. really... ffs... what were they thinking?
ok... like i said, id like to see opinions, not people get involved in battles about it and then see my thread closed.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.
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)...
nsap @ filesharingtalk.com
Apple...
Killer CPU...
Sounds like a oxymoron to me..
Much like Mac Gaming.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks