[Ti] R E A L L Y SLOW performance...

[Chris Olson]

On Mar 13, 2005, at 5:04 PM, T.L. Miller wrote:

> but it's the G5 iMac that beats the mini in virtually every comparison 
> I've seen.

Overall, sure.  But we're talking raw cpu performance here.  Barefeats 
published this awhile ago.  Of course, the iMac will outperform the 
mini on graphics tests because it has a more powerful gpu, but it's the 
G5 cpu being lusted after here for no real reason over a G4.  The Mac 
mini's 1.42 GHz cpu stomps the G5 clock cycle for clock cycle.  It 
compares very favorably with, and even beats the [higher clocked] G5 in 
Photoshop tests:

http://barefeats.com/mini01.html

And this is borne out by my own experience as well.  I have both a dual 
1.42 PowerMac and a PowerMac G5/2.5.  On anything that doesn't take 
advantage of the G5's floating point power, the dual G4, running at 
much lower clock speed, either very favorably compares or on some tasks 
beats the dual G5.

I'll take a dual core G4 PowerBook any day before I'd be interested in 
a G5.  The G5 is a floating point monster, but it's not the all-around 
general processing powerhouse that the marketing hype has made it out 
to be.
--
Chris