Dual 2.5Ghz G5

[killershroom]

Originally posted by: deathkoba
Right. You can't compare an underperforming Opteron with a G5. There's just no contest. A single G5 will STOMP a dual Opteron anyday.

Your information smells. I advise you to wash it after pulling it out of your ass, then post it.

:thumbsdown:

 

[thirdlegstump]

I don't think so. Got any unbiased links, proof that the Opteron can outperform a G5?

 

[The Godfather]

Originally posted by: killershroom

Originally posted by: deathkoba
Right. You can't compare an underperforming Opteron with a G5. There's just no contest. A single G5 will STOMP a dual Opteron anyday.

Your information smells. I advise you to wash it after pulling it out of your ass, then post it.

:thumbsdown:

AHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAAHHAHAAH NICE POST... YOURE RIGHt...AHAHAHHA..... You cant compare them, theyre not the same type of processors.

 

[killershroom]

Originally posted by: deathkoba
I don't think so. Got any unbiased links, proof that the Opteron can outperform a G5?

I believe you were the one to say a single g5 stomps a dual opteron set up. How about some nice, unbiased proof from you?

 

[The Godfather]

No i wasnt... It was the guy with a picture of a turkey.... I was saying you CANT compare them... maybe you misunderstood my last post.... i meant i LIKED your post because that guy doesnt know what hes talking about...

 

[killershroom]

Originally posted by: The Godfather
No i wasnt... It was the guy with a picture of a turkey.... I was saying you CANT compare them... maybe you misunderstood my last post.... i meant i LIKED your post because that guy doesnt know what hes talking about...

I didn't qoute you.

 

[KoolDrew]

Originally posted by: The Godfather
No i wasnt... It was the guy with a picture of a turkey.... I was saying you CANT compare them... maybe you misunderstood my last post.... i meant i LIKED your post because that guy doesnt know what hes talking about...

He was not refering to you. Notice how he quoted the other guys post...?

 

[Childs]

Originally posted by: killershroom

Originally posted by: The Godfather
No i wasnt... It was the guy with a picture of a turkey.... I was saying you CANT compare them... maybe you misunderstood my last post.... i meant i LIKED your post because that guy doesnt know what hes talking about...

I didn't qoute you.

lol

 

[ohnnyj]

Originally posted by: killershroom

Originally posted by: deathkoba
Right. You can't compare an underperforming Opteron with a G5. There's just no contest. A single G5 will STOMP a dual Opteron anyday.

Your information smells. I advise you to wash it after pulling it out of your ass, then post it.

:thumbsdown:

priceless

 

[0roo0roo]

well they are nice and fast..no bogging down during multi tasking like with single cpu

 

[Dennis Travis]

Actually 2 8080's will stomp all over even an 8 Way Opteron and a Mac 128 with 8Mhz 68000 will blow down a Dual G5 even if it were at 3Ghz per CPU!

Hey, why not since we are all being crazy here today anyway! I remember Jobs saying the Mac 128 was perfect the way it was with 128k RAM. We sure have come a long way since then.

Seriously, don't Dual CPU's with Apps that take advantage of the Dual CPU get more like 30-40% more performance or or so over a single CPU? I know it's not 100%.

If your friend seriously believes a Dual 2.5 G5 is 100% faster he is reading the wrong info!!



Oh and for the few here that don't know, Deathkoba is just having fun. He does that from time to time especially when it's a Mac thread. It took me a few days to figure that one when he first started doing it.

 

[TerryMathews]

Originally posted by: Dennis Travis
Seriously, don't Dual CPU's with Apps that take advantage of the Dual CPU get more like 30-40% more performance or or so over a single CPU? I know it's not 100%.

You, my friend, are quite wrong. 30-40% would be the speedup in non-multithreaded applications. Depending on the specifics of the task, a program engineered to take advantage of multiprocessing can be 100% efficient (RC5DES). Typically, 80% is the ballpark for a modern SMP implementation. Opterons will be a little more efficient, Xeons a little less.

 

[Dennis Travis]

Originally posted by: TerryMathews

Originally posted by: Dennis Travis
Seriously, don't Dual CPU's with Apps that take advantage of the Dual CPU get more like 30-40% more performance or or so over a single CPU? I know it's not 100%.

You, my friend, are quite wrong. 30-40% would be the speedup in non-multithreaded applications. Depending on the specifics of the task, a program engineered to take advantage of multiprocessing can be 100% efficient (RC5DES). Typically, 80% is the ballpark for a modern SMP implementation. Opterons will be a little more efficient, Xeons a little less.

Yes RC5 is one that does do that but few real applications that I have seen run on a Dual Vs Single machine are anywhere near that much faster.

 

[The Godfather]

Ah.. Hes angry.. Still.

 

[amol]

Originally posted by: killershroom

Originally posted by: deathkoba
Right. You can't compare an underperforming Opteron with a G5. There's just no contest. A single G5 will STOMP a dual Opteron anyday.

Your information smells. I advise you to wash it after pulling it out of your ass, then post it.

:thumbsdown:

THAT IS SIG MATERIAL!! :thumbsup:

 

[The Godfather]

Ok.. Still mad.

 

[The Godfather]

.

 

[SunSamurai]

Originally posted by: The Godfather
GUES WHAT?????? HES NOT TALKING TO ME AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA.... actually he wasnt ever since i told him he's wrong...THESE AMERICANS HAVE TO GROW UP ahahahhahahaha he cant take a little argument... such a KID

I like this. Its like fighting fire with fire, except in this case, fighting a dumbass with stupidly ignorant statement. You and everyone with your hair color need to grow up. Eh? wtf?

 

[Eug]

I should point out that while 2.5 + 2.5 does not equal 5 most of the time, some of the time it indeed does. On a lot of software (esp. on the Mac) where speed does matter, duals help quite a bit cuz the software has been optimized for it.

On a lot of the lower end software the second CPU isn't all that helpful for the app, but the OS seems much faster. If you're a pro, duals rule.

And yeah, the G5 is 64-bit. And there are two of them. But 32+32 does not equal 64 here. And unfortunately, OS X 10.3 Panther is a 32-bit OS. OS X 10.4 Tiger is a 64-bit OS, but that's not out for a few months yet.

 

[The Godfather]

Originally posted by: aeternitas

Originally posted by: The Godfather
GUES WHAT?????? HES NOT TALKING TO ME AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA.... actually he wasnt ever since i told him he's wrong...THESE AMERICANS HAVE TO GROW UP ahahahhahahaha he cant take a little argument... such a KID

I like this. Its like fighting fire with fire, except in this case, fighting a dumbass with stupidly ignorant statement. You and everyone with your hair color need to grow up. Eh? wtf?

I edited it.. sorry. I meant to say.. THESE PEOPLE AT SCHOOL HAVE TO GROW UP...most of them (with exceptions ) are mindless and act like they know everything. They call ME immature while they have seen nothing of life yet. Their common sense can be compared to a fly's. And they believe every single statement before they look it up it has become a fact. Sorry i didnt mean the one before.

NO BAD FEELINGS TOWARD AMERICANS... I LOVE AMERICA!! I MEANT TO SAY PEOPLE AT SCHOOL

 

[halfadder]

Originally posted by: Dennis Travis
Hey, why not since we are all being crazy here today anyway! I remember Jobs saying the Mac 128 was perfect the way it was with 128k RAM. We sure have come a long way since then.

You have to admit, the original Mac was pretty impressive for 128 KB. The 512x384 double buffered display consumed 48 KB, leaving only 80 KB for the operating system, main application, and desk accessories. You could stick in a floppy and boot do the "Finder" destkop in about 6 seconds and MacPaint could launch from the desktop in about 3 seconds.
http://www.paolorossini.it/mac/apple_big/macPaint.gif
http://toastdesign.com/apple19...fullsize/d10apps2.jpeg
http://toastytech.com/guis/moremacmacpaintwrite.gif
http://toastytech.com/guis/moremaccloseall.gif
http://toastytech.com/guis/moremacwpworks.gif

MS Word for Mac 1.0:
http://toastytech.com/guis/moremacwrd1desk.gif
http://www.microsoft.com/press...4/OfficeMac/word10.jpg

 

[The Godfather]

Hey... i find it amazing how they can fit a whole computer into a flat paneled display???:S:S:S Anyway i'm going to get the mac mini i love that thing...

 

[Dennis Travis]

Originally posted by: halfadder

Originally posted by: Dennis Travis
Hey, why not since we are all being crazy here today anyway! I remember Jobs saying the Mac 128 was perfect the way it was with 128k RAM. We sure have come a long way since then.

You have to admit, the original Mac was pretty impressive for 128 KB. The 512x384 double buffered display consumed 48 KB, leaving only 80 KB for the operating system, main application, and desk accessories. You could stick in a floppy and boot do the "Finder" destkop in about 6 seconds and MacPaint could launch from the desktop in about 3 seconds.
http://www.paolorossini.it/mac/apple_big/macPaint.gif
http://toastdesign.com/apple19...fullsize/d10apps2.jpeg
http://toastytech.com/guis/moremacmacpaintwrite.gif
http://toastytech.com/guis/moremaccloseall.gif
http://toastytech.com/guis/moremacwpworks.gif

MS Word for Mac 1.0:
http://toastytech.com/guis/moremacwrd1desk.gif
http://www.microsoft.com/press...4/OfficeMac/word10.jpg

I agree, when the 128 came out it was ahead of everything out there. I still have an old 512 Mac and an SE. The SE will get on the net and check Email with Eudora, FTP, Chat with an older AIM. The only thing it can not do due to the 4Megs RAM is run a Graphical Web Browser, just not enough ram. The first macs were WAY ahead of their time.

 

[Goi]

Originally posted by: deathkoba
I don't think so. Got any unbiased links, proof that the Opteron can outperform a G5?

The A64 FX-55 is currently the fastest integer processor according to published SPECCPU2000 results. If you disregard the Itanium2, they are also the fastest FP processors around. Opterons are built upon the same core, so if clocked similarly, they will perform about the same if not better.

The G5's aren't even listed on Spec, and Apple's previous benchmark cheating incident doesn't reflect well on them.

 

[halfadder]

Originally posted by: Dennis Travis
I agree, when the 128 came out it was ahead of everything out there. I still have an old 512 Mac and an SE. The SE will get on the net and check Email with Eudora, FTP, Chat with an older AIM. The only thing it can not do due to the 4Megs RAM is run a Graphical Web Browser, just not enough ram. The first macs were WAY ahead of their time.

MacWeb will run fine on 4 MB but it's only HTML 2.0 compliant.