Redaelli Paolo wrote:
> 
> >Mathias Broxvall wrote:
> >Seriously though, you can't compare photoshop on the G3 and PII as
> >photoshop is native to the mac platform...
> ... you're quite wrong. The inner core on Photoshop is written in C or C++,
therefore the Mac and Win version are as fast as they can be being native code (PPC
for Mac, x86 for Win).
> It is a fact that last Intel chips are slower than PPC.

I'm not disputing that Intel chips are slower than PPC, but...

I really have to take exception to using Photoshop overall as a
benchmark. True, the core is most probably C or C++, but that's not the
main factor.

Photoshop was designed around the MacOS and graphics, and it's the basic
assumptions and algorithms that are a major factor. If you follow
optimization threads in comp.graphics.algorithms, you'd see a general
acceptance that changes in algorithms yield more marked performance
differences than low-level C/C++ execution.

One has to consider that the MacOS did not have virtual memory as good
as Windows, so Photoshop does it's own thing. There are also other
things that make Windows Photoshop more of a port to Windows than a
native Windows app.

One way to observe the problem is to run Windows Photoshop 3.x and then
try to navigate any menus with the keyboard. Performance gets blown out
of the water. Symptom of an app that is not working well with the OS.

I just don't trust Photoshop performance as a decent benchmark. And
don't even get me started on the early versions of Director! (or how
about MS Word, 5 or 6 was it, on the Mac).


Can you tell I'm a frustrated Windows Photoshop user? And don't even get
me started on their older 8-bit support for .PCX, .BMP, .TGA...

Post a reply to this message