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.
Re: Power consumption
by drsmithy on Thu 10th Jul 2003 01:52 UTC

Why do you use arstechnica.com to prove your point?
Because it was the first decent link my search returned.
That figure is also for a 1Ghz G4, which is significantly slower than both a 2.8Ghz P4 and a 1.6Ghz Pentium M (except for a few corner cases).
Incidentally, the page you link to is rather unclear as to which figures apply to which processor.
There are no power consumption figures for the (most likely overclocked) >1Ghz G4s Apple are currently using, so it's somewhat more difficult to give comparable performance/power usage figures. Undoubtedly the P4 is still going to be higher, but a Pentium M won't (the 25W figure is a maximum).
As I said elsewhere, the power consumption argument is largely bogus, as the tiny amount of money saved in power will be vastly overshadowed by the extra expense involved in purchasing Apple hardware (and that's not even counting the costs of a platform migration). Electricity is cheap, Macs are not.