PC Peripherals The Mac Thread

ah... mon ami... can u even compare this piece of $hit to mac mini? have u seen the mac mini? if you would have.. you wouldn' have posted this. Look at the holes at the top of this piece-a-$hit.... go to ur local mac dealer and get a demo... u'll know what mac mini actually is.
 
anand said:
ah... mon ami... can u even compare this piece of $hit to mac mini? have u seen the mac mini? if you would have.. you wouldn' have posted this. Look at the holes at the top of this piece-a-$hit.... go to ur local mac dealer and get a demo... u'll know what mac mini actually is.
Click to expand...
hehe mac mini is good for ntn. Other than browsing and dvd playback. In pure number crunching performance, its slower than a 1.5 GHz P4. It even struggles to render the quartz based interface with more than 3-4 windows open. Granted that the aopen looks ugly with those holes but it has a modern pentium m chip under its hood that'll beat the crap out of the mac mini. Hell why am i fighting :p even apple knows x86 chips are faster than ppc g5. So g4 doesnt even come into the picture :rofl:
 
anand said:
ah... mon ami... can u even compare this piece of $hit to mac mini? have u seen the mac mini? if you would have.. you wouldn' have posted this. Look at the holes at the top of this piece-a-$hit.... go to ur local mac dealer and get a demo... u'll know what mac mini actually is.
Click to expand...
you should have taken my post(thread title) with a pinch of salt ;) .. anyway yeah it isnt as well sculpted but i'm sure ppl will go for it especially if it comes with a good cpu
 
x86 is faster than G5? Which world are u living in? Apple moved to x86 just because of the inability to use g5 in the portables i.e. (i/p)book

Do u mean to say a dual G5 2.7 ghz is slower than a p4? Heck it is faster than an Fx-57/x2 4800+

The G4 1.25ghz chip is equivalent to P4 2.4ghz in performance. I don't say this, benchmarks say this. This is because applications are optimized on Macs whereas they are more generally coded for PEE CEEs

Dear Chaos, u sure will get flamed if u post the thing abt a dual g5 in MR, AI or TS :lol:
 
anand said:
x86 is faster than G5? Which world are u living in? Apple moved to x86 just because of the inability to use g5 in the portables i.e. (i/p)book

Do u mean to say a dual G5 2.7 ghz is slower than a p4? Heck it is faster than an Fx-57/x2 4800+

The G4 1.25ghz chip is equivalent to P4 2.4ghz in performance. I don't say this, benchmarks say this. This is because applications are optimized on Macs whereas they are more generally coded for PEE CEEs

Dear Chaos, u sure will get flamed if u post the thing abt a dual g5 in MR, AI or TS :lol:
Click to expand...
Show me one benchmark where its faster :rofl: . Looks like ur an apple fanboy. For your kind info i have a 14" G4 Powerbook with a MR9700 in my lab here and to say the least it sucks. In most 3d apps its slower than an 2000+ AXP with onboard NF2 graphics which is my standard test candidate for a low end pc.

Edit: There you go... opteron pwnage of dual g5s
http://anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2436&p=5

Final nail in the coffin: Try running Doom 3 with the same graphics card on the great Dual G5 of urs ;). It'll struggle to run it even at 640x480 on a X800XT GPU. Now how much does a single A64 3000+ give on the same card?
 
EDIT : Chaos beat me to it.
Even its Ipod is just a craze, there are much better products there at a much better price. Not to mention the crazy pricing it follows, well lets see its acclaimed OS since now its being ported to X86.
 
Try encoding a movie on ur shitty 3000+. Dude a dual g5 2.7ghz is some serious thing. It's not a joke. 640x480? are u kidding? Mac users are not 2 year old kids gaming or using some silly water cooling kits. They are serious users.

Btw, i may be a fanboy but ur just the average MAc-ignorant individual who thinks a $35 billion company is a roadside vendor.

That's why u will never go beyond your Wintels.
 
put ur money where ur mouth is.. 'enlighten' us with some links to benchies as proof.. tall talk is just as good as gay talk.. I aint interested :p
 
anand said:
http://www.barefeats.com/macvpc.html Dual g5 2.5ghz... lemme find something for a dual 2.7ghz too

http://www.barefeats.com/pentium4.html

Compare a dual 2.5 and 2.7 here: http://www.barefeats.com/g527.html
Click to expand...
Well I see the mac getting owned there as well.. that too with mac optimized software on a mac fanboy site :p. BTW this is from the same site
http://www.barefeats.com/mac2pc.html

Now see where the mac is in doom 3 benches and see where the FX55 is. Also u must be a real moron to talk abt water cooling kits. All powermacs are watercooled themselves cos no aircooling system will keep them at normal temperatures. Inspite of the watercooling, they reach 70 degrees temps :p.
 
I just wanted to say that Apple didn't optimize their stuff for gaming. MACs are NOT meant for gaming.

Btw, this topic has drifted.. let's not take it into MAc v/s PC because by WWDc in June, 06... macs will use intel too :p

I got disturbed about the point you made about G5z.... they are mean processors in their own right.

Yes, apple switched because of the portables....

BTW, can u tell me where did u see an imac g5 using a water cooling kit? The powermac does use it.

EDIT- Doom3 results being bad on a G5 are the fault of poor porting in a major way. This happens with all games. :sigh:
 
The point being is they are way too expensive for the performance they provide. If you read the Anandtech review it shows that MAC are pathetic servers too. So aside from video encoding and a few gfx software MAC has nothing to offer that a Pee Cee can do better.
Besides you like it or not MAC OS is gonna work on an AMD 3000+ too ;)
 
The point being is they are way too expensive for the performance they provide. If you read the Anandtech review it shows that MAC are pathetic servers too. So aside from video encoding and a few gfx software MAC has nothing to offer that a Pee Cee can do better.
Besides you like it or not MAC OS is gonna work on an AMD 3000+ too ;)
 
^^ Exactly, me dont wanna test it too. Security chips or not once they are coded for x86 its gonna be cracked period. M$ with its billions cant stop that what do you think Apple with its millions can stop it ?
 
Actually, they can if they use security chips. IBM has some really neat security chips on their PCs.
U may have to install a mod chip for ur PC then, to be able to run MAC OS, and who knows if that is even possible (an encrypted chip cud be just about impossible to crack).

And that TIGER on BT is a FAKE.
 
Aha Mr aces at it again... you think apple is a million dollar company? dude open your eyes... its net worth is $35 billion

Well M$ with its "billions" can still manage BSODs, viri and spyware.... yeah appple can't do that :( poor ol'apple

All the stuff that goes on the torents is FAKE. A few days back on neowin, a guy posted a video claming he ran tiger on his dell.... when the video was zoomed into, it showed VNC running in the task bar.

You guys should realize, Apple has done it till now... and they will do it in future. Their operating system is the un-disputed leader, quality wise.

@KingKrool... one of the very few sensible posts in this thread. So actually there are sensible guys here :) :p
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Its net worth is in Billions, but I am talking about revenues here. You cannot deny the fact that M$ is way bigger then Apple.

I have not tried MAC hence wont comment on its OS, but ppl do say that Linux is as good, if not better.

You guys should realize, Apple has done it till now... and they will do it in future.
Click to expand...

They could do cause it wasnt coded for x86. You may in all probability be true but again I feel there is gonna be a workaround.
 
Back
Top