PPC is better better better!!!!

[meerschaum]

X86 is a fine architecture its solid, its stable (relatively), its very very cheap...and components are everywhere... I know its a generally a better price/performance ratio...and when people talk of watts and power consumption I often find myself thinking 'well yeah thats true, BUT if 1  3ghz X86 is doing the work of two or more PPC's and it's initial cost is less then a quarter the price, and its more reliable because if it breaks it can be replaced 4 times over and not cost more there, then the power consumption argument is bunk' ...

The reason thing that makes PPC viable is its reliability/stability its low noise (noise bothers alot of computer users), its clean assembler (so I'm told),...it has its merit ... OSX/MorphOS are the two reasons I will go PowerPC... I want a PPC970 to run OSX (good stable, mainstream Unix) and MorphOS (fast/lite amiga compatible OS)... I hope by this time next year I'm running  a Peg2 and  Dual G5 2ghz mac!... thats my dream for later this year!... I can keep hoping! ...

[Jaruzel]

Hammer said:

Note that Intel has IPC bias “Pentium M” for “thin and light” and embedded markets. It's available from 400Mhz to 1.6Ghz. From tech news sites (e.g. ZDNET),“Pentium M” @ 1.6Ghz is said to be equal with Intel's Pentium 4 @ ~2.2Ghz-2.5Ghz on integer performance (benefits office type applications).

I have a brand spanking new centrino 1.6Ghz laptop, and I can say quite definately that 1.6Ghz on these new Pentium Ms match a P4 2.2Ghz.

Runs bloody hot tho...

-Jar.

[Hammer]

Jaruzel wrote:

Hammer said:

Note that Intel has IPC bias “Pentium M” for “thin and light” and embedded markets. It's available from 400Mhz to 1.6Ghz. From tech news sites (e.g. ZDNET),“Pentium M” @ 1.6Ghz is said to be equal with Intel's Pentium 4 @ ~2.2Ghz-2.5Ghz on integer performance (benefits office type applications).

I have a brand spanking new centrino 1.6Ghz laptop, and I can say quite definately that 1.6Ghz on these new Pentium Ms match a P4 2.2Ghz.

Runs bloody hot tho...

Note that, @ 1.6Ghz it jumps to 24.5 watts from 1.1Ghz's 12 watts. Other factors may contribute with the heat generation.

[Hammer]

PPC vs x86 is pretty much a no brainer. PPC is a better architecture, overall.

Refer to http://ars-technica.com/cpu/4q99/risc-cisc/rvc-1.html

Modern X86 processors are merely post-RISC like CPU with a hardware decoders/translators/emulators.  You will also notice that PPC 970 has a crush/decode stage.

Referring to http://www.arstechnica.com/cpu/03q1/x86-64/x86-64-4.html

In addition to fattening up the x86 ISA by increasing the number and sizes of its registers, x86-64 also slims it down by kicking out some of the older and less frequently used features that have been kept thus far in the name of backward compatibility.

When AMD's engineers started looking for legacy x86 features to jettison, the first thing to go was the segmented memory model. Programs written to the x86-64 ISA will use a flat, 64-bit virtual address space. Furthermore, legacy x86 applications running in long mode's compatibility sub-mode must run in protected mode. Support for real mode and virtual-8086 mode are absent in long mode and available only in legacy mode. This isn't too much of a hassle, though, since, except for a few fairly old legacy applications, modern x86 apps use protected mode.

//AMD's clean up of X86 ISA. It will not affect most WinNT/Win32/Linux based applications. **It can still run at least from DOS 3.30 to DOS 7.

[uncharted]

meerschaum wrote:

The reason thing that makes PPC viable is its reliability/stability its low noise (noise bothers alot of computer users), its clean assembler (so I'm told),...it has its merit ... OSX/MorphOS are the two reasons I will go PowerPC... I want a PPC970 to run OSX (good stable, mainstream Unix) and MorphOS (fast/lite amiga compatible OS)... I hope by this time next year I'm running  a Peg2 and  Dual G5 2ghz mac!... thats my dream for later this year!... I can keep hoping! ...

I wouldn't be so sure about the noise issue, my G4 eMac is by far the noisiest computer I've ever owned.  I've also heard complaints about G4 PowerMacs causing too much noise as well.  Personally for a Pegasos or A1 I'd go for a quieter G3 model as you don't need the same grunt that OS X requires with an Amigaiod OS.

My main reason for going for a G4 computer was nowt to do with PPC or harware design, but rather OS X and the whole "lifestyle computer" package Apple are so good at.  Similarly I'd only get an PPC amiga if OS 4 turns out how I hope it will, if not I'd be better off going for x86 and AROS and UAE.

[dammy]

by meerschaum on 2003/6/26 4:09:07

The reason thing that makes PPC viable is its reliability/stability its low noise (noise bothers alot of computer users),

The CPU itself is not noisey, it's the fans that are used.  Start using Zalman's very low noise cooling fans (or better yet, their flower design) and their low noise PSU and I think you would be greatly suprised on how quiet a X86 can be for an extra $50 or so dollars.  Liquid bearings for the HD, and your set.

Zalman

Dammy