Quote:
It's hard to believe, that page blatently Tosses out all the former propaganda about PPC mhz being more efficient than the intel variaty.


What propaganda? It was true, the same as AMD has been saying for years with their Athlons, and the same that Cyrix said back in the Pentium 1 days. Clock speed doesn't matter as much as how much you can get done with that clock cycle. And now Intel has fully switched to that ideology and done a damn good job of it too. The Pentium-M started them on this path, and by years end, you will have slow clock speed chips from Intel across their entire product space replacing older, faster clocked chips. The G4 was a decent processor for its time, but it stalled out big time. The G5 was a step up clock efficiency wise, but it was a horrible power draw much like the high speed P4 chips.

The specific 4x claim is explained right on that page. It came from a benchmark that also benefited from the dual core nature of the new chips. So 2x faster per core, and two cores makes the 4x number. (though that was based on the 1.83. The 2.13 they are showing at a 5x increase) Real world results are of course different, but having made the jump from a G4 Powerbook to a Macbook, there is a huge speed increase. Much more noticeable then any previous CPU upgrade out of Apple.

I still find it funny that the MacBook running Windows is outpacing nearly every other laptop out there on the market in the benchmarks multiple sites have thrown against it. And the best part is that the MacBook tends to be the cheeper system in those situations too. Maybe one day the myth that Apple products carry a premium price tag might go away, especially now that an apples to apples comparison can be made (pardon the pun).