and as for the G3 somehow magically bieng faster because it says motorola on it..thats a crock...if any of you went to specbench.org or theregister.co.uk you could see the truth about that G3..... G3=inferior to G4=inferior the P4/Athlon........simple math.......
And no doubt you'll be comparing a 700Mhz G4 to a 2.4GHz P4 yes, like its some kind of amazing comparison. If the G4 @ 700Mhz can take on a P4 at around double its clock speed (say a 1.4GHz P4) and keep a pretty close performance record, then that would indicate that the G4 is overall a better build design/quality per clock cycle. If you want to start comparing clock speeds, why not slap a 700MHz P3 (since you cant get a P4 that slow) against a 700MHz G3 and then see how much "better" your beloved x86 is.
Just because the Intel/AMD cpu runs at 3 times the clock speed, does not make it 3 times faster. In fact its probably less than two times as fast for most things. I have seen benchamrks of a G4/700 against a P4/2GHz, and the difference wasn't so great in favour of the P4. Ramp up the clock speed of the PPC (like Intel etc seem so keen on doing with their chips) and the PPC would outperform the x86.
The G3 will be inferior to the G4, just as the P3 is to the P4, they are newer generations of a design, and as such you would expect them to perform better. However, you cannot say a PPC is inferior to a P4 when your argument bases around clock speeds. Thats like comparing a 600Mhz AMD to a 1.6GHz P4 and saying "look how crap this AMD is".
