Intel will not be The Panacea for Mac

If you’re one of those who think that Mac’s switch to Intel will be a panacea for all of the Mac’s problems, you might want to head over to Barefeats.com and click on the link that leads to the Dual Core Windows PC versus Dual Core Mac shootout. The comparison links up benchmarks with dual processor but single-core G5’s and dual core G5’s (including the Quad) with Pentium dual-core and AMD dual core processor PC’s. The Intel based PC’s don’t come off too well. They are, in fact, some of the worst of the lot.

Anyone who’s been running Windows PC’s for a while knows that AMD consistently outperforms Intel anymore. This test shows that. The most telling part of the test, though, is the performance of G5 CPU’s in comparison; and the test shows that they are competitive and often outperform the higher clocked Intel except in 3d gaming. I don’t use my Mac for the latter. That’s one reason why I keep a PC.

Yes, the Intel CPU’s do give Apple the “roadmap” the company is looking for in both the notebook and digital media appliance areas. From those perspectives, the switch makes sense. But the PowerMac and iMac lines may actually suffer performance hits at first due to lackluster Intel performance combined with a lack of native x86 OS X software that will exist when the first Intel based machines hit the market. In time, as the Intel CPU’s gain clock speed and deliver dual core performance, the performance will return. The fundamental question will be, though, whether Apple can weather that interval.

I also believe switching to x86 will lead to more security problems for Apple, and the company will find itself dealing with spyware and viruses like it never has had to before. The brag that Macs don’t have to contend with these critters will become a thing of the past except for those who remain behind and run the PowerPC platform.