PDA

View Full Version : Doom3 Mac benchmarks...


Pages : [1] 2

Riptide
03-04-05, 02:33 PM
http://www.macworld.com/news/2005/03/02/doom3/index.php

So the bottom line is this: If you were hoping that your dual-processor G5 was going to be a Pentium or Athlon-killer when it comes to Doom 3 framerates, you're going to be disappointed. But there are some important factors to consider.

We've often heard about the "Megahertz Myth" -- the idea that Macs can perform as well as or better than PCs despite their lower clock speeds, and that's true for some operations. Games don't work that way, though: there's no substitute for CPU cycles when it comes to games like this. Many tests we've seen are based on Pentium systems working at higher clock speeds than this Power Mac G5, so that should be considered -- scaling up the G5's framerate numbers proportionally helps reduce that gap.

Also consider that there are core differences between Macs and PCs like bus architectures, memory speed, different graphics chips that support faster memory and clock speeds, and other factors that make a direct apples-to-apples comparison exceedingly difficult.

Sazar
03-04-05, 03:48 PM
apple should stick to promoting their prodcts for what they are...

and their ads are more misleading than most others from the top tech companies...

six_storm
03-04-05, 03:53 PM
Wow, that sucks. I'm glad I'm not buying a Mac because of gaming or I'd be screwed. Gaming is what a PC is for huh?

Riptide
03-04-05, 05:54 PM
Wow, that sucks. I'm glad I'm not buying a Mac because of gaming or I'd be screwed. Gaming is what a PC is for huh?Well yeah... and it's also what the xbox is for as well. But then again isn't that a PC sort of? :)

GlowStick
03-04-05, 06:23 PM
The sad thing is that mac probly cost upwards of 3k just for the unit alone ; )

Happy gameing at 640x480

MustangSVT
03-04-05, 06:40 PM
Holy crap, 47fps at 640x480 noAA. That's absolutely terrible. I get like 70fps on my 6800GT at 1152x864 4xAA 8xAF and that's with a crappy Athlon XP. Thanks for the link. Now time to rub it in to my apple fan friend. :D

Banko
03-04-05, 07:21 PM
Thing is when they turned off 3d rendering it was about equal to the PC equivalent, I'm just going to go with the trend with opengl related drivers and say that since ATi blows in Linux, it will blow in OS X too. They should've gotten a MAC 6800 U instead.

BrianG
03-05-05, 10:18 AM
My comments from the news...
Now I know I am asking for it, but come on, Apple. They really need to challenge the PC platform on all aspects of computer use before they can get rid of the market impression of the Apple only being for email and Photoshop. How much longer can Apple keep their backs turned on gamaing?

shabby
03-05-05, 10:32 AM
Wow those are some pathetic scores, my geforce 4 was putting out those kind of numbers.

Acid Rain
03-05-05, 01:41 PM
Now time to rub it in to my apple fan friend. :DNo need to rub it in. I am sure he's being punished enough already. ;)

oldsk00l
03-05-05, 01:51 PM
ATI hw in any Unix is a well known disaster.

I think I've documented that well enough here http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=44291

I really believe they should have tried ANY nVidia hardware, and it would have been an improvement.

oldsk00l
03-05-05, 01:53 PM
btw, it was Apache from Voodooextreme/IGN who coined

"Whoever's responsible for Apple's deal with ATI should be flogged and castrated in public"

terraboy
03-05-05, 03:35 PM
the worst part was, when the new power mac G5's came out, the majority of the benchmarks they used to prove it were developed for apple pcs in the beginning. they didnt use a single benchmark i would use to compare the two. plus at that time you were paying over 2k for a pc that had a 9600pro ati card, which they finally upgraded later.

the only argument i can see a mac user winning is that apples are stable with OSx and fairly immune to virii. other than that they talk bs about having a couple more colors than pcs (that you would never use anyway) which makes them better art boxes as well. stupid apple using hippies =P

Sazar
03-05-05, 07:00 PM
apples are not immune to virus's...

the only reason the wintel platform has a disproportionate number of security flaws is coz it is THE dominant platform... nothing else comes even close...

comparing apples to apples (pardon the pun) the osx/nix platforms would have an equal number of issues because no matter how secure one's app may be... the coding is not going to be perfect...

oldsk00l
03-05-05, 07:53 PM
apples are not immune to virus's...

the only reason the wintel platform has a disproportionate number of security flaws is coz it is THE dominant platform... nothing else comes even close...

comparing apples to apples (pardon the pun) the osx/nix platforms would have an equal number of issues because no matter how secure one's app may be... the coding is not going to be perfect...

You're right in that they are not immune to virii.

The only real tangible security advantage is in Linux distros that REQUIRE the use of a root password. This is only due to the methodology of usage, by most users running on administrative accounts and opening crap emails and opening files downloaded from malicious websites...or p2p programs.

I honestly think, security-wise, Windows/OSx/Linux are all on the same playing field. FreeBSD, however, IS far more secure than the "big three". However, to run and use a FreeBSD requires a technical competency, that would make such a user safe on just about any OS anyways.

nutcrackr
03-05-05, 08:47 PM
We've often heard about the "Megahertz Myth" -- the idea that Macs can perform as well as or better than PCs despite their lower clock speeds, and that's true for some operations. Games don't work that way, though: there's no substitute for CPU cycles when it comes to games like this
AMD 64's are clocked much lower than G5's yet perform much better in games than even the 3.4ghz p4 monsters. Just not suited for gaming I guess.

Viral
03-05-05, 09:06 PM
We've often heard about the "Megahertz Myth" -- the idea that Macs can perform as well as or better than PCs despite their lower clock speeds, and that's true for some operations. Games don't work that way, though: there's no substitute for CPU cycles when it comes to games like this. Many tests we've seen are based on Pentium systems working at higher clock speeds than this Power Mac G5, so that should be considered -- scaling up the G5's framerate numbers proportionally helps reduce that gap.

What a moron. It's been a while since I've heard from one of these people stuck in the Intel vs. Apple world.

Yep, only Macs have processors with a higher IPC than the P4. No other processor exists! Yep, there is certainly no processor out now that totally owns P4's in games despite it's much lower clock speed! MHz > All for games!

Sazar
03-05-05, 09:11 PM
AMD 64's are clocked much lower than G5's yet perform much better in games than even the 3.4ghz p4 monsters. Just not suited for gaming I guess.

it's the MAC MYTH...

their proc's perform better in their advertising than others... it's in real world apps and games that they are simply not up to scratch...

reality sucks :cool:

ChrisRay
03-05-05, 10:09 PM
My god thats awful.. I get well over 150 FPS with the tic disabled.. in Doom 3 @ 1156x864.. with no Anti Aliasing..

Dot50Cal
03-06-05, 06:02 AM
Well I guess im the only one who noticed the "superiority complex" by the news poster. It really makes nvnews look bad imo. Its well known that mac's just cant compete with PC's but why do you feel the need to add dickhead comments like "hang with the big boys now" "#of fps playable!?". :thumbdwn:

MUYA
03-06-05, 06:28 AM
..feel the need to add dickhead comments ...
The use of expletives also do not carry any weight here dot50cal. It doesn't lend/add any credibilty for you with anyone here. Be warned use of such expletives is strictly forbidden.

It was hardly a "nyeer nyeer nyeerrr" post, just something you didn't see eye to eye. Something you maybe making a big deal out of for nothing.

And seriously the one post make looks nV news bad? Honestly.

Sgt_Pitt
03-06-05, 07:13 AM
why all the laughter ? its obvious macs arent meant for gaming, at least they have the option of playing the game now. They gotta start somewhere, im sure if you give it a few more years they'll get it sorted out.

ChrisRay
03-06-05, 07:21 AM
why all the laughter ? its obvious macs arent meant for gaming, at least they have the option of playing the game now. They gotta start somewhere, im sure if you give it a few more years they'll get it sorted out.


I dont think people are particularly "laughing". Its just apple has been touting the MAC CPUS as the fastest thing ever built. Which bury PCS in perfornance. Obviously. Thats not the case. I dont understand the point of having a fast processor if you dont game. "Most" applications dont require it. Admittedly there are some exceptions. But I cant see paying top of the line for some mac system that cant even game. You'd be better off buying just a slower mac system. The point I think alot of people have been emphasizing is it really draws alot of questions into apples marketing scheme currently.

Seoulstriker
03-06-05, 08:39 AM
I am shocked at the numbers there. After so many months of optomization, that's the best they can do? That's really sad for my mac brethren. It's extremely puzzling, but at the heart of the matter, I think ATi just sucks at making drivers for mac. Apple needs to move to nVidia.

saturnotaku
03-06-05, 08:45 AM
Since OS X is Linux-based and ATI sucks at writing drivers for Linux, well, you can do the math. That said, ATI is supposedly doing the same thing for Linux that it does for Windows (monthly driver updates) so it remains to be seen just how much the drivers will improve, if at all. By extension, if they can improve their Linux support, hopefully Macs won't lag too far behind.