Forums | MacLife

PowerMacMan wrote:

Xbench. Is. Worthless.

Why does everybody keep relying on it?

Cause till something else comes out that can be taken as a standard that is all we got.

Cyberpawz wrote:

PowerMacMan wrote:

Xbench. Is. Worthless.

Why does everybody keep relying on it?

Cause till something else comes out that can be taken as a standard that is all we got.

...what?

You're goign to rely on something that you now know to be unreliable because you can't help but feel a need to rely on something?

That is the stupidest thing I have heard in a while here.

Last edited by PowerMacMan (2005-06-03 10:48 am)

Because it's still suitable and accurate for testing two machines against each other, or testing a machine after it has been overclcoked, to see where the biggest improvements are made.

No it isn't perfect, but until is is improved upon, or someting beter caomes along, it is hat we have, and really, it isn't all that horrible, so long as you understand its limitations.

If you look primarily at CPU tests, especially between machines, especially between G# and G4 machines, you'll see the numbers show a pretty accurate comparison between those machines.

Hey Cyberpawz,

http server? what type of internet connection do you have? what type of traffic do you expect to receive to this website?

Personally, I would use the lowergrade of the two for a webserver. Especially if you use cable or DSL and have only a 128 - 768kbps upload speed. either of the two can handle that type of traffic just fine.

You are not going to see any real difference against either box with that type of throughput. Now if you were to expect major traffic and T1 or greater upload speeds I would most definately go to the system with larger cache and more RAM  (G4).

The G4 is upgradeable and can be used for anything you want, so use that as your personal machine.

Hope that helps,
-Me