RE: [microsound] Reaktor PC vs. Mac was: Re: [microsound] Re: max/msp for pc

[Ryan Heard <ryan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Overall, since Reaktor was developed on the PC, its performance is greater
on the PC platform currently.  This hasn't stopped many artists from using
it with their Macs however.


Ryan Heard

-----Original Message-----
From: pH_______ [mailto:disck@xxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2001 11:56 AM
To: microsound
Subject: [microsound] Reaktor PC vs. Mac was: Re: [microsound] Re:
max/msp for pc


Keep in mind that Reaktor is not yet Altivec optimized to take full
advantage
of the G4, so those "benchmarks" you stated should change pretty
dramatically
when(if?) that happens.
Also, it would appear that some patches vary greatly on the CPU power from
mac
to PC-- about a year ago I compared a G3 300mhz next to  K62-450, and the
CPU
usage meters varied greatly on the same ensembles-- Some using much less CPU
on
the G3 and some using less on the AMD.  I would guess the same thing would
be
true from Intel to AMD...?

BTW: Apple announced the 733mhz G4 today in the demo it showed it 33% faster
than a 1.5ghz Pentium4... with Photoshop I think ..for whatever that's
worth.
(and you can write consumer DVD's with the 733mhz G4--as a standard
feature...)

best,
pH



Terry Engelbrecht wrote:

> I've been  looking out for comparisons - i'm planning on putting Reaktor
on
> a dedicated machine, with the most beefy processor I can find. For Reaktor
> (_not_ necessarily anything else), a PC looks to be the best bet <Open
> flame-proof umbrella>. For example, A G4/450 manages 33 voices on the
3-Osc
> ensemble, while a PIII 700 manages 55 voices (both at 80% CPU usage, 44k
> sampling rate). A G4/400 runs the 4Dex ens at 11% CPU usage, an Athlon 800
> runs it at 6% (default voices & sampling rate). These figures come from
> users & from the Zzounds.com website. So my plan is to get a 1.1Ghz
Athlon,
> dedicated to Reaktor. (Again, CPU optimisation for various software
packages
> may make a huge difference - this is _not_ a 'my computer is bigger than
> your computer' post.)
>
> >>
> >>Yeah they 'look' fast.
> >
> >I read an interesting article recently about how Macintosh admitted they
> had
> >lost out in sales due to consumer perception of Intel winning the
> >MHz/Processor
> >"race". i.e. a lot of people are put off buying Macs due to the percieved
> >difference between a 1GHz PC and a 500MHz, it almost sounded like
> >Mac were about
> >to change their processor design just to 'pump up the MHz'. (I think
> >the article
> >may have been on www.theregister.co.uk but I cant find it)
>
> yeah..
>
> www.macosrumors.com
>
> also mentioned something about this... people still think a 1GHZ pc
> is faster than a 500mhz G4 (which, in most cases, it's NOT)..
> however, your general consumer is wowed by numbers.. they see a
> bigger number, so they buy that machine... there is even a rumor (as
> stated by Mac OS Rumors) that mac is abandoning the dual processor
> scheme already, just to concentrate on higher Mhz single processor
> machines... to "wow" people with a bigger number..
>
> (+)
>
> --
> + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
> taylor deupree/12k/line
> taylor@xxxxxxx
> http://www.12k.com
> <<
>
> ~terry
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> website: http://www.microsound.org


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
website: http://www.microsound.org