Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: PPC vs x86 performance comparison  (Read 8217 times)

Description:

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline bhoggett

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2002
  • Posts: 1431
    • Show all replies
    • http://www.midnightmu.com
Re: PPC vs x86 performance comparison
« on: April 25, 2003, 12:33:28 PM »
There's nothing worse than using the wrong programs to reach  "benchmark" comparisons, and the stuff at distrubuted.net is the worst you could use.
Bill Hoggett
 

Offline bhoggett

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2002
  • Posts: 1431
    • Show all replies
    • http://www.midnightmu.com
Re: PPC vs x86 performance comparison
« Reply #1 on: April 29, 2003, 01:10:37 PM »
@Nightcrawler

Quote
The part that I like about PPC is that i doesn't get as hot as an x86 type cpu... I have a 600Mhz PIII machine at home now and it isn't very fast but it's really nice to put your feet on for a while.


Whilst it's true that the full blown x86 CPUs run hotter than the PPC, you need to remember that the CPU is only part of the heat generated in a computer box. Modern graphics cards and hard drives give off a helluva lot of heat too, and they will do so whether the CPU is an x86 or a PPC regardless.

Quote
How about the power consumption? x86 has to use more power, so PPC would be more economical?


The economy angle is meaningless unless you plan to run thousands of systems. Where the power consumption comes in is in heat generation and motherboard reliability.

Less power == less heat and less strain on the motherboard.

As with system heat, there are other factors to consider in determining motherboard reliability besides the power it has to carry.
Bill Hoggett