Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 1st Mar 2006 11:58 UTC, submitted by mcsimpson
Mac OS X Geekpatrol benchmarks Rosetta performance, and concludes: "I'm impressed with Rosetta; Geekbench performance running under Rosetta is 40% to 80% of what it is running natively. Plus, running Geekbench under Rosetta is comparable to running Geekbench natively on a Power Mac G5 1.6GHz (our baseline system), at least in the single-threaded tests."
Permalink for comment 100533
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

One of the most excellent posts I've seen on G5 vS CoreDuo. Hats of to you rayiner - I'll save your post as soon as I hit `submit' here. Just a quick question. The two processors have a 40% gap right? How much founding in R&D and years of development did Intel put in it's processors to achieve this and how difficult would it be for the G processor to close it (if not surpass it). I think you know the answer as well as I. You mentioned:

"One reason why POWER5 performs much better than POWER4 on integer code is that those formation rules were tweeked heavily. "

This is what I am trying to say: Every next vintage the performance skyrockets. Really how difficult would it be to improve RISC processors like these? My guess: `(relatively) not at all'. Sticking with a processor that is inherently hard to improve is what I find suspicious and what bothers me.

Reply Parent Score: 1