Linked by Nicholas Blachford on Wed 9th Jul 2003 16:43 UTC
Talk, Rumors, X Versus Y This article started life when I was asked to write a comparison of x86 and PowerPC CPUs for work. We produce PowerPC based systems and are often asked why we use PowerPC CPUs instead of x86 so a comparison is rather useful. While I have had an interest in CPUs for quite some time but I have never explored this issue in any detail so writing the document proved an interesting exercise. I thought my conclusions would be of interest to OSNews readers so I've done more research and written this new, rather more detailed article. This article is concerned with the technical differences between the families not the market differences.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Dawnrider your wrong
by stingerman on Wed 9th Jul 2003 20:19 UTC

Your Quartz Extreme observations are wrong, offloading more and more processing to the GPU is state of the art in computer science circles and much research is being done on it at the university level. Every time OS X directs work to the GPU the more the CPU is free to do other work and Apple's implementation is not to wave windows around (like in the longhorn demos) but to actually speed up the whole system. And Quartz extreme does.

Your referring to old PC tricks to speed up screen draws, Apple's quartz extreme is implementing university level research for the future of computing. One MIT study showed that using the GPU for indexing a database can increase performance by up to 30 times with current GPU's. Apple promised at the 2002 WWDC that they have only begun to exploit the GPU for the OS and they are showing even more work in Panther. Why do you think Microsoft is so lauding similar technology for their future WIndows 2007.