@Karlos
You have good points there.
However, it has to be pointed out that the obviously incorrect initial benchmark results were readily accepted as facts by many. This I believe shows the amount of unrealistic expectations some might have had of X1000.
The PA6T is a OOO PPC with a 2MB cache and a memory interface much better than any G5. It was designed by some of the best people in the industry so it should be competitive with a G5 at the same clock rate, if not faster.
There are any number of reasons the tests are coming out as they are. One pretty big possibility is it's the first release of the HW/OS and it's not been properly set up yet. The memory benchmarks might indicate this - they are good but they should be far higher.
Another problem is it's not always clear what people are testing against what. Tests should at least be repeatable. OTOH running different binaries on different OSs is a pretty good way of *not* testing a processor.
It'd certainly be interesting to see some Linux benchmarks. These should do:
http://www.phoronix-test-suite.com/http://www.primatelabs.ca/geekbench/BTW I've recently seen some some benchmarks of a Pandaboard which came out pretty badly. A couple of kernel changes later and the results are wildly different. All but one of the test was over 50% faster.
