Re:TI-H: (OT about Grant's 486/68000)
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re:TI-H: (OT about Grant's 486/68000)
The prices of the processor are still not comparable though. You can get
a nice PIII system and still have moeny left over fort he price of a
moderate speed g3. THe macs are way overpriced for people to want to buy
them when they can get a pc that has more performance(or what most people
think is more performance) for the price. Plus MacOS bites, and so does
windows. Thats the reason linux runs on 3 of my boxes and NetBSD on an
old mac I got for free.
On Tue, 22 Jun 1999, Rosyna wrote:
>
> Different tests show different results, BYTE showed one thing and
> MacAddict showed another (G3 40% faster than PIII) but the fact is,
> what Mac users use their macs for (audio,video,graphic creation) the
> just whips any pentiums buttocks. The tests you say show the PIII
> faster are with Word and Word Scrolling times, these tests do not
> count. Real Mac users are in bed with BBEdit anywho.
>
> At approximately 2:05 PM -0700GMT on the day Earth People call
> 6/22/99, J D declared:
>
> >OK, Grant, that's just not true. I mean, really now. MAYBE a
> >G3/400 and a PII/400 might be somewhat on par as far as gfx
> >operations and multimedia go, but the Pentium III is just plain
> >better than G3 chips. Benchmarks have proved it. I love how
> >Macintosh compares its laptops with G3 processors to Pentium-I class
> >laptops! They're not SUPPOSED to be competitive with G3s, the P/IIs
> >are with their P-Pro core logic!
> >
> >I think, on the other hand, since the two architectures have
> >different strengths, combining them well would unleash an ENORMOUS
> >amount of performance....how to do it, though....
>
Follow-Ups:
References: