Posts: 31 from 2011/10/25
Guys, the only thing I'm trying to say is, if you compare benchmarks, you need a optimized version for a new core. If you use benchmark programs, then this programs has to optimized, too. Otherwise, a comparison is useless.
All these benchmarks and apps are optimized for a G4. If the compiler isn't optimized for a specific core, then the developer has to optimize the code.
If the code is optimized, then:
7448 vs. 7447 = slightly faster; pro: 7448 bigger cache, higher FSB, out of order AltiVec
750GX vs. 7448 = on par (without AltiVec), clock by clock; pro: 750 TDP; con: 750 no AltiVec, scaleability
PA6T vs. 7448 = on par (clock by clock); pro: PA6T TDP, memory bandwidth
970 vs, 7448 = 1.2:1 (clock by clock); pro: 970 scaleability, memory bandwidth; con: 970 TDP
P5 vs. T4 = 1:1.1 (without AltiVec) (clock by clock); pro: P5 scaleability
970 vs. P5 = 1:1 (without AltiVec) (clock by clock); pro: 970 AltiVec; con: 970 TDP
BUT ... all these CPUs are alot slower than Intel best offerings. Because, NXP nor IBM is selling these CPUs for home computer (or they are ten years old). Surprise? I think not.
Is PowerPC or POWER dead? I think not. Otherwise morphOS or AmigaOS is twice as dead.
If you would like to run the cheap train, buy a x86 box for 400$ and start morphOS on an emulator and write with a permanent marker "Amiga" on the case
Everybody who is jelling about the price of the current (new) PowerPC hardware should think about twice. These machines are for a niche market and the word niche is for this market just too big.
Editing typo: P5 vs. T4 = 1:1.1 and 970 vs. P5 = 1:1 [ Editiert durch AltiVeced 26.01.2016 - 16:09 ]