On 07.09.2006, at 20:36 , Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: > Yes. The PowerPC chip set was always a better overall performer than > the Intel equivalent. The problem that Apple is responding to with > the move to Intel was lack of commitment on the part of the chip > vendors (Motorola and IBM) to develop the PowerPC line in such a way > as to pose a business advantage to Apple, not any lack in the current/ > recent PowerPC offerings themselves. Even a PowerMac G5 2.0Ghz DP > system is a stunningly capable, powerful system. Thanks for interesting insights Godfrey :-) But I doubt if there was a real problem with development of higher spec PowerPC. Right now Microsoft's XBOX 360 uses tri core PowerPC running at 3.2 GHz - imagine having two such a CPUs in Mac - six cores in total, each running at 3.2 GHz - I guess it would easily outperform the fastest Xeon configuration... I guess one of the reasons for switching to Intel was lack of G5 processors suitable for portable use - after all no Powerbook was available with this CPU.
Cheers, Sylwek -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
