Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: PPC is bad bad bad  (Read 34841 times)

Description:

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline AmigaMac

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2002
  • Posts: 559
    • Show all replies
Re: PPC is bad bad bad
« on: May 03, 2002, 07:16:47 PM »
MHz isn't an issue and we all know that Intel's chips are overclocked for marketing purposes... x86 is slower than PPC clock for clock and it's 'SIMD' implementation is even worse.  Besides Amiga doesn't need to worry about clockspeed as much since they have one of the lightest and fastest OSes around. I think the last thing that Amiga should think about is the x86 world (except for AmigaDE). x86 is a boring and diluted market governed by Microsoft and Intel... Amiga wouldn't last long toying with the Darkside of life. The PowerPC technology is on fertile ground now, whereas x86 is getting long in the tooth and has a unpredictable future ahead. I think Amiga Inc. made an excellent decision to go PPC and that the Amiga community will reap the benefits of PowerPC technology in the near future... just sit back, relax and enjoy the ride.
 

Offline AmigaMac

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2002
  • Posts: 559
    • Show all replies
Re: PPC is bad bad bad
« Reply #1 on: May 03, 2002, 07:24:18 PM »
IBM's G3 (contrary to popular belief) is tailored for both Embedded and Desktop implementations. IBM does want to stick it out with the G3 line longer than Motorola, since Moto is pushing for the G5. Better technology is yet to come for the PowerPC technology as you can see here;

http://www.eetimes.com/story/OEG20011115S0052
http://www.eetimes.com/story/OEG20011115S0055
http://www.eetimes.com/story/OEG19991108S0039

The PCI stuff will be replaced since it was a slow bottleneck tech since day one!
 

Offline AmigaMac

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2002
  • Posts: 559
    • Show all replies
Re: PPC is bad bad bad
« Reply #2 on: May 03, 2002, 07:25:31 PM »
"That has been said for the last 5 years and still they fall further behind."

Only in clockspeed, not performance!
 

Offline AmigaMac

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2002
  • Posts: 559
    • Show all replies
Re: PPC is bad bad bad
« Reply #3 on: May 03, 2002, 09:32:22 PM »
Quote
Oh, and to say that the modern x86 (eg Athlon) is unoptimised and inefficient is blatent FUD!!! I suggest you get yourself a good book on cpu design, and read it.


Actually it isn't.  Yeah the chips that AMD and Intel are getting fast, but not because of a good or efficient design.  The sad part is that I have seen Sun Boxes outperform Athlon Machines that had almost 3 times the clockspeed, I work around both platforms 50+ hours a week, I also love working with both platforms regardless of Sun's performance superiority.  I also own 2 PCs and 3 Macs, I know first hand about the pros and cons of both and I am convinced by the PowerPC technology, regardless of the overhyped and overclocked Intel chips and the propaganda that follows behind it.  Like it or not x86 is not a superior design, it is almost reaching its end, with Intel trying to figure out how to go about it with the IA-64 bit era.  Yeah I have also read that SPEC article from ct' and since someone was posting 'arstechnica' articles they might as well read this one as well;

http://www.arstechnica.com/cpu/2q99/benchmarking-1.html

SPEC is Intel's playground just like those totally unbelievable Photoshop tests are Apple's playground plain and simple.  SPEC's benchmarks doesn't show anything more politically correct than someone doing some Photoshop tests.  There hasn't been a good benchmark to go by yet.  Especially when you have to figure in software and its optimizations, or lack of (OSes included)!  The really funny thing is that PC (x86) folks sit here and ask why do we supposedly run more expensive and slower hardware, when they are running more expensive and slower software, it's almost like an oxymoron... Windows is the slowest OS running on the x86 platform, take Windows and BeOS on the same machine and tell me which is faster... that question has only one correct answer (I'll give you a hint... it's not Windows)!  Amiga OS is also going to put Mac OS to shame when you see its speed on PowerPC, I know that, but that wont make me sell my Macs nor will it make me sell my PCs running whatever!

For the Amiga I see no future in the x86 and it being a terrible design is not my argument, it's Microsoft and Intel... they dominate the PCdom and there is no room for outsiders.  Apple is no threat believe me, they got other fish to fry, and the only way to beat the Darkside, is for the Amiga, Mac and Linux communities (developers included) to share our resources, help each other along and get the bits together we need in order to over come this Mono solution that has plagued the computing industry... you know what I am talking about!

I might sound sorta biased, zealot or whatever, but I have been on both sides of the fence, both as a professional and a hobbyist, and I like this side of the fence... it has more to offer and that is why I am staying, PERIOD!

'nuff said
 :-D

[ Edited by AmigaMac on 2002/5/3 20:39:26 ]
 

Offline AmigaMac

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2002
  • Posts: 559
    • Show all replies
Re: PPC is bad bad bad
« Reply #4 on: May 06, 2002, 04:56:45 AM »
Actually the FUD being spread about PowerPC is pure crap.  I just ran across this piece just yesterday on IBM's new PowerPC breed, the 'POWER4' which has just won a major award for its effort in PowerPC design with its POWER4 CPU architecture which is beating both Intel and Compaq's Alpha at a considerable margin, which in affect the engineering tech will trickle down the pipe to the PowerPC brother no doubt.  IBM is also trying to break Moore's law with super clocking the PPC techno with some of their homebrew projects, and we all know how weird IBM can be with their experiments.  Here is a headline about IBM's latest accomplishments...

http://biz.yahoo.com/iw/020430/041372.html

[ Edited by AmigaMac on 2002/5/6 4:01:06 ]
 

Offline AmigaMac

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2002
  • Posts: 559
    • Show all replies
Re: PPC is bad bad bad
« Reply #5 on: May 06, 2002, 05:37:23 AM »
mips_proc maybe you should read up on facts before spreading bad gossip...

http://www-1.ibm.com/servers/eserver/pseries/hardware/whitepapers/power4.html

"explaining how wonderful and also how stupid it is to assume that you will have that cpu on your desktop."

Oh and I never said anything about the POWER4 being run on the desktop, that was your silly assumption... and you know what they say about assumptions!


'nuff said

[ Edited by AmigaMac on 2002/5/6 4:39:52 ]
 

Offline AmigaMac

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2002
  • Posts: 559
    • Show all replies
Re: PPC is bad bad bad
« Reply #6 on: May 06, 2002, 06:04:59 AM »
I didn't compare anything, that was the people who done the article and the folks who gave the award.  Go whine to them and the POWER4 actually has 2 processor cores not 8.  And if you're speaking on power efficiency, you wouldn't be touting the x86 over the PPC since we all know how inefficient the x86 really is on power consumptions, especially for mobile computing solutions!
 

Offline AmigaMac

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2002
  • Posts: 559
    • Show all replies
Re: PPC is bad bad bad
« Reply #7 on: May 06, 2002, 06:32:31 AM »
That part I understand.  I didn't argue the point of them implementing multiple CPUs together.  Intel's Itanium CPU is also 64 bit as well.
 

Offline AmigaMac

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2002
  • Posts: 559
    • Show all replies
Re: PPC is bad bad bad
« Reply #8 on: May 06, 2002, 06:36:50 AM »
"hahhahahahahahahahhahahahahahaha i'll take my crap riddled x86 anyday"

Yeah you can have your 1 1/2 battery life performance wonder and a under performing mobile chip that has been down tuned to be somewhat power efficient.  I'll take my Powerbook G4 over that over glorified paperweight anyday!!!


[ Edited by AmigaMac on 2002/5/6 5:39:11 ]
 

Offline AmigaMac

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2002
  • Posts: 559
    • Show all replies
Re: PPC is bad bad bad
« Reply #9 on: May 06, 2002, 06:59:10 AM »
No it's you being uninformed and ignorant!  No I think all the Amigans will agree that you're a pure zealot and only here to spread pure FUD about!!!
 

Offline AmigaMac

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2002
  • Posts: 559
    • Show all replies
Re: PPC is bad bad bad
« Reply #10 on: May 06, 2002, 07:36:13 AM »
Maybe you should follow your own philosophy for once!