MahdiM Posted November 2, 2005 Share Posted November 2, 2005 Is it a big leap between a 1.3 GHz Intel CPU and a 1.3 GHz PPC CPU? how do they compare, is my 1.3 GHz OSx86 going to be faster than my 400MHz Imac DV? (asuming that the intels have SSE3, and all of the other support it can get) (asuming that they have the same HW config on all other areas) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MahdiM Posted November 5, 2005 Author Share Posted November 5, 2005 PLEASE! cant anyone provide any answers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin R. Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 Be patient and someone will answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m4ff3w Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 Looking at Synthetic benchmarks (xbench) my PentiumM 1.7 scores the same overall as a Titanium Powerbook 1.67, even scoring horribly low on the graphics tests because of no drivers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kday Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 What CPU do you have? If it's an older pentium, it may not support SSE2 or SSE3. You need atleast an SSE2 processor to run OS X. If you have windows, you can use cpuz (http://www.cpuid.com/cpuz.php), to check if you have an SSE2 or SSE3 processor. If you were to have an SSE2 or SSE3 processor, OS X will most likely be faster than your Imac DV 400. However, since there is only accelerated video support for Intel GMA900/915/945 chipsets, it might feel quite sluggish on your 1.3 ghz processor. If you really want an Intel OS X computer that you can use to it's full potential, I suggest investing a couple hundred dollars on a motherboard with Intel GMA900 graphics and an Intel Pentium 4 processor. An Intel Celeron D will work fine, but since it only has 256 KB of L2 cache, it will feel significantly slower than the Pentium 4 when using PPC applications. A 3.0 ghz Pentium 4 processor with GMA900 graphics will be about twice as fast as a Mac mini, and about the same speed as a G5 with the new 10.4.3 files. A dual core G5 is a lot faster than any of our Intel configurations at the moment. I have not seen Pentium D (dual core), benchmarks yet, so I couldn't tell you how it compares to a Dual Core G5. So if you have a couple hundred bucks to spare, don't mind tinkering a bit, want to run OS X smoothly, and enjoy doing illegal activities, I suggest upgrading to 100% compatible hardware. For half the price of a Mac Mini and about twice the speed, I think it's worth it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MahdiM Posted November 5, 2005 Author Share Posted November 5, 2005 Looking at Synthetic benchmarks (xbench) my PentiumM 1.7 scores the same overall as a Titanium Powerbook 1.67, even scoring horribly low on the graphics tests because of no drivers. Thanks very much! What CPU do you have? If it's an older pentium, it may not support SSE2 or SSE3. You need atleast an SSE2 processor to run OS X. If you have windows, you can use cpuz (http://www.cpuid.com/cpuz.php), to check if you have an SSE2 or SSE3 processor. If you were to have an SSE2 or SSE3 processor, OS X will most likely be faster than your Imac DV 400. However, since there is only accelerated video support for Intel GMA900/915/945 chipsets, it might feel quite sluggish on your 1.3 ghz processor. If you really want an Intel OS X computer that you can use to it's full potential, I suggest investing a couple hundred dollars on a motherboard with Intel GMA900 graphics and an Intel Pentium 4 processor. An Intel Celeron D will work fine, but since it only has 256 KB of L2 cache, it will feel significantly slower than the Pentium 4 when using PPC applications. A 3.0 ghz Pentium 4 processor with GMA900 graphics will be about twice as fast as a Mac mini, and about the same speed as a G5 with the new 10.4.3 files. A dual core G5 is a lot faster than any of our Intel configurations at the moment. I have not seen Pentium D (dual core), benchmarks yet, so I couldn't tell you how it compares to a Dual Core G5. So if you have a couple hundred bucks to spare, don't mind tinkering a bit, want to run OS X smoothly, and enjoy doing illegal activities, I suggest upgrading to 100% compatible hardware. For half the price of a Mac Mini and about twice the speed, I think it's worth it. I have a intel i915P chipset on my motherboard, but no VGA/DVI port on my motherboard (i use a GeForce 6800 on PCI-E). is there any way to get QE and CI on my Geforce through my motherboard? thanks for the thourogh answer (btw, my english might be bad, im from sweden....) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
habitual Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 I have a intel i915P chipset on my motherboard, but no VGA/DVI port on my motherboard (i use a GeForce 6800 on PCI-E). is there any way to get QE and CI on my Geforce through my motherboard? thanks for the thourogh answer (btw, my english might be bad, im from sweden....) you will need to switch to the onboard 915 video to get QE and CI working... geforce cards are not supported at this time (well they do have basic vesa support). There is an alpha driver being worked on by some folks at macvidia and it does allow osx86 to recognize my card, but none of the advanced features work yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idream Posted November 6, 2005 Share Posted November 6, 2005 (btw, my english might be bad, im from sweden....) that' all right,i'm from China. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts