What brunch of useless crap you've tried to carry out.
Cell, like Xenon, has no OoOE and is tied to 512Kb cache, while G5 are full of cache.
Cell isn't a general purpose processor but can perform quite well, and it of course (you FUD spammer) play HD with no problems at all (because most of the work is going to be made by SPE and the GPU, things really difficoult to bench with a unoptimized linux with video drivers that doesn't exploit the card's full power... i.e. every video driver on linux).
As for the rest I don't really mind... a low end G5 (or high end G4) suffice for most of the people out there and is a matter of time until a compiler and an optimized kernel will be able to use the modified AltiVec and the SPEs.
As for the rest I'd like to know how the other people is trying to "exploit" the full potential of a Xenon with 1Mb cache and three cores... more cores you use, less cache each core gets... and C2D have two cores and 2/4 Mb cache exactly for that reason...
More about this... CELL "CPU" is almost the same as Xenon "CPU" (core wise) so they benched something like 1/3 of a Xenon (well, with 512Kb cache instead of 1Mb) so you can expect the same results on a Xenon core (either the AltiVec is a "customized version", and both CPU are from IBM).
Difference lies in the additional features, Xenon has 3 cores and an ATi GPU, Cell has 7 SPE and a nVidia GPU.
In the world of "general purpose processors" Xenon could get some advantage, but when it comes to games things are getting different (a game is a differend kind of beast) and seven SPE's could carry out better results than two cores.
This post has been edited by ConteZero76: Nov 23 2006, 12:20 PM