imported_Lucifer
Diamond Member
- Oct 12, 2004
- 5,139
- 1
- 0
Is there anything wrong with defending the platform I use? Is Burbot not doing the same thing? Defending the platform he uses? Why didnt you tell him to stop being a PC fanboy?
Same.Originally posted by: Wuzup101
I find it's much easier to have a ton of stuff open on the mac as it manages memory much better...
You are using a *reader letter* to The Register as a confirmation of your position? First of all, the letter author's problem is not really with SSE2, but rather with Pentium 4 Wilamette implementation of it. P-M shares most of traits of P3 and offers SSE2 capabilities, and Northwood and Prescott are quite a lot better from memory bandwidth point of view. Second, I'd really prefer a whitepaper of some sort to El Reg letter to editor. Letters to Reg are frequently just as opinionated and intentionally biased as their articles.Read This
Quoted from that page.
You were not defending platform you use. You were spreading lies and disinformation about Pentium M (such as Pentium M being unable to support SSE2, SSE being unable to produce data in 128 bit fragments, and Pentium M limited to "32-bit chunks"). I caught you in the act.Is there anything wrong with defending the platform I use? Is Burbot not doing the same thing? Defending the platform he uses? Why didnt you tell him to stop being a PC fanboy?
SSE registers are 128 bit, so G4 has no advantage here.
G4 is nothing special.
That G4 does not happen to produce data in "bigger chunks" as some fanboys tried to prove.How does the G4 not have an advantage? What are you trying to say here?
That's more then you know about architectures you try to badmouth.Well, obviously you dont know anything about the G4 architecture to say something like this.
That's more then you know about architectures you try to badmouth.
It seems to be saying that neither is better than the other, as far as I can tell.It might help you to think about these two approaches in terms of a McDonald's analogy. At McDonald's, you can either walk in or drive through. If you walk in, there are five or six short lines that you can get in and wait to have your order processed by a single server in one, long step. If you choose to drive through, you'll wind up on a single, long line, but that line is geared to move faster because more servers process your order in more, quicker steps: a) you pull up to the speaker and tell them what you want; and b) you drive around and pick up your order. And since the drive-through approach splits the ordering process up into multiple, shorter stages, more customers can be waited on in a single line because there are more stages of the ordering process for different customers to find themselves in. So the G4e takes the multi-line, walk-in approach, while the P4 takes the single-line, drive-through approach.
That's why chip engineering is that hard. You can make a powerful "wide" design and hit clockrate brickwall, or could try slimming design down and hope you could get it to clock higher. You can't have both - it's like trying to design a humwee that fits in a closet. So all the statements like "if Gx/Kx/whatever else would reach 3 Ghz, it would rip Intel apart" are akin to "everybody would get a dirt bike if they offered limo grade comfort" - both true and meaningless at the same time.IMO, if the PPC's had faster clock speeds (closer to that of the P4's), then they'd whip anything that Intel could throw at them.
Originally posted by: MoneyMINTR
Just chiming in.
The Pentium M Dothan chips have SSE2.
Originally posted by: randumb
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=85347
It's actually a forum. I'm just showing that a lot of Mac people admit that the P-M is faster than the G4. And since I haven't seen anyone post benchmarks or any hard numbers yet, their arguments are just as valid...Originally posted by: Thin Lizzy
Originally posted by: randumb
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=85347
Why are you using a rumors site to back up your statement? Its all opinionated and cannot be used as a valid arguement.