PDA

View Full Version : is 1.4 GHz too slow? Macbook Air




viperGTS
Dec 8, 2010, 10:10 PM
^title^
i mean, the iPad is 1GHz, sure its fast but its running iOS...
is 1.4 GHz good enough for a "full on" notebook? and 2GB RAM? :confused:



alphaod
Dec 8, 2010, 10:20 PM
All the current MacBook Pros have 2.4GHz or faster processors.

Also the processor in the iPad has a different architecture than the x86 processor used in the laptops; furthermore these x86 processors are dual-core which is more than twice the performance of the iPad processor.

Don't forget the iPad processor is designed to maximize power savings. The processor in your computer is designed to maximize performance.

viperGTS
Dec 8, 2010, 10:25 PM
All the current MacBook Pros have 2.4GHz or faster processors.

Also the processor in the iPad has a different architecture than the x86 processor used in the laptops; furthermore these x86 processors are dual-core which is more than twice the performance of the iPad processor.

Don't forget the iPad processor is designed to maximize power savings. The processor in your computer is designed to maximize performance.

Sorry, posted this in the wrong section. My bad, i was talking about the macbook Air.
But still. is 1.4 GHz too slow or...?
it just seems slow, i mean netbooks have 1.6 GHz processors, but then again they have intel atom :confused:

Intell
Dec 8, 2010, 10:28 PM
1.4Ghz is fine for an Air. MBA's aren't designed to be a production machine or do any heavy work. They are also duel core. And remember, a 1.6Ghz C2D is faster then a 1.6Ghz Atom of the same age/generation.

viperGTS
Dec 8, 2010, 10:30 PM
1.4Ghz is fine for an Air. MBA's aren't designed to be a production machine or do any heavy work. They are also duel core. And remember, a 1.6Ghz C2D is faster then a 1.6Ghz Atom of the same age/generation.

but, if you MUST rely on it for heavy work, say with 4GB of RAM and not 2, would it be able to do those tasks without too much of a stuggle?

Intell
Dec 8, 2010, 10:32 PM
Sure, an old Pentium 4 or even a 3 can do hard work, so why can't a C2D?

alust2013
Dec 8, 2010, 10:34 PM
but, if you MUST rely on it for heavy work, say with 4GB of RAM and not 2, would it be able to do those tasks without too much of a stuggle?

It may take a while, but it will do some moderately heavy work. Basically, if you need to do anything heavier than basic/casual usage on a regular basis, don't get the 11" MBA. It's designed for portability and basic usage.

viperGTS
Dec 8, 2010, 10:34 PM
Sure, an old Pentium 4 or even a 3 can do hard work, so why can't a C2D?

Oh, cool! Im still new to processors and whatnot, so its gets rather confusing to me.
Thank you for your replies. (and alphaod too, thank you.)

thejadedmonkey
Dec 8, 2010, 10:35 PM
but, if you MUST rely on it for heavy work, say with 4GB of RAM and not 2, would it be able to do those tasks without too much of a stuggle?

What sort of heavy work? Anything processor intensive (photo editing, video editing, software development, number crunching) will benefit from a faster CPU.

Granted I have a Dell version of the MBA, with a 1.4ghz CPU and Intel graphics, and it's never failed me, so really it depends on how long you're willing to wait for it to do its thing.

viperGTS
Dec 8, 2010, 10:36 PM
What sort of heavy work? Anything processor intensive (photo editing, video editing, software development, number crunching) will benefit from a faster CPU.

Granted I have a Dell version of the MBA, with a 1.4ghz CPU and Intel graphics, and it's never failed me, so really it depends on how long you're willing to wait for it to do its thing.

Im not sure, im just wondering because 1.4 GHz just sounds.... wrong at $999...

Meric
Dec 8, 2010, 10:58 PM
^title^
i mean, the iPad is 1GHz, sure its fast but its running iOS...
is 1.4 GHz good enough for a "full on" notebook? and 2GB RAM? :confused:

mba 1.4 scores 2000 in geekbench

I think I pad was 500 or less..

so mba is 4 x faster

mba 13.3" 1.86 scores 2700..

mba's are very fast for surfing, office, emails, accounting....

if u will be using any CPU intensive app.... go with the faster CPU... mbp 15 or 17

Alvi
Dec 9, 2010, 11:58 AM
The MacBook Air is an Amazing premium NetBook, It has way more power than usual ones because it has two cores, It's really slim and good looking. But it won't be doing stuff as fast as a MBP even with an SSD

mark28
Dec 9, 2010, 01:36 PM
The MacBook Air is an Amazing premium NetBook, It has way more power than usual ones because it has two cores, It's really slim and good looking. But it won't be doing stuff as fast as a MBP even with an SSD

You know there are Intel Atoms with 2 cores right? :confused:

poobear
Dec 9, 2010, 04:09 PM
Seems like the thread starter looks too much at just the amount of hertz.

darrellishere
Dec 9, 2010, 04:24 PM
Well my 2 year old 1.6 with an ssd was amazing! Did everything a macbook would do!

Sold it :( Cant wait to get my 1.4!!!!!!

wisty
Dec 9, 2010, 05:45 PM
On a crappy netbook with a crappy hard drive and a crappy graphics card with crappy memory, the 1.4 GHz C2D would be great. The MBA gets 2000 on geekbench; vs 1300 for a 2-core 1.6GHz Atom. But on a cut-down Macbook Pro (i.e. the MBA); the processor will be a big performance bottleneck.

It's still a great computer for some uses, but the processor is definitely a limiting factor.

Mars478
Dec 9, 2010, 07:36 PM
bought a lo0ow end macbook air 11.6 until the Sandy Bridges come out. 1.4GHZ is serving me well. I do notice occasional hiccups but they are definitely livable. Needless- I am in love with this little computer.

hcho3
Dec 9, 2010, 08:14 PM
Im not sure, im just wondering because 1.4 GHz just sounds.... wrong at $999...

Then MBA isn't device for you...

You are paying for 999 dollars for these reasons.

1. Build quality.
2. Laptop that will have high resale value.
3. Apple logo
4. Thin and light laptop with nice specs for netbook size. Yes, I said netbook. Steve and apple can say whatever, so 11.6 inch is designed to compete with netbooks. iPad is for people who don't want keyboard. MBA is for people who want keyboard.

hcho3
Dec 9, 2010, 08:15 PM
Personally, I bought 13 inch MBA and I don't like 11 inch MBA at all because it has 5 hours of battery life. I want more.

wirelessmacuser
Dec 9, 2010, 08:55 PM
Other than having a high price which is typical for Apple, it's a nice machine.

Anyone can pick apart any computer. Just ignore that. If it has what you need buy it and enjoy it.

That's what I did... :)

T4R06
Dec 9, 2010, 09:05 PM
i have 1.4 and i love playing call of duty modern warfare 2 on full resolution :)

fswmacguy
Dec 9, 2010, 11:03 PM
If I may provide some insight:

The Intel C2D series requires less physical space on the logic board than the Intel Core i-series (even the mobile series). According to Intel's spec sheet, the i3M/i5M chips require almost double the amount of space that the C2D does.

It simply wouldn't have been possible to keep the appropriate thinness and have an i-series processor.

viperGTS
Dec 9, 2010, 11:24 PM
i have 1.4 and i love playing call of duty modern warfare 2 on full resolution :)

you can play mw2 without hiccups?

@poobear, sorry i may not have half the technological knowledge you have, but a person new to these kinds of things, like ME, will simply look at 1.4 GHz vs a 1.6 GHz netbook and assume the netbook is faster. ;)

@hcho3, i havent even said what I would use it for, you cant assume it isnt for me.
@mars478, what are "sandy bridges?"

Kaiser Phoenix
Dec 10, 2010, 03:00 AM
Hi there, I use a Macbook Air 1.4ghz 11inch Air:

The stuff that I do:

Run VMWARE Fusion and have windows open, along with several web browsers both in Safari in macosx and internet explorer in windows, itunes, watching a streaming video etc.

Runs completely fine, in fact I am very surprised that it runs so smoothly!

However I did upgrade to 4GB which might give you higher benefits rather than going for 1.6.

my 2 cents

KnightWRX
Dec 10, 2010, 04:19 AM
What sort of heavy work? Anything processor intensive (...software development,...) will benefit from a faster CPU.

I think we peaked on processor usage for running a text editor sometime back in the 80s. Software development is not processor intensive unless you're developing processor intensive software (which most software isn't these days).

OP : your question is incomplete. Is 1.4 Ghz too slow for what exactly ?

poobear
Dec 10, 2010, 04:48 AM
@poobear, sorry i may not have half the technological knowledge you have, but a person new to these kinds of things, like ME, will simply look at 1.4 GHz vs a 1.6 GHz netbook and assume the netbook is faster. ;)

No problem, just remember that there are TONS of important factors other than the number of hertz. Especially when you compare Macs to PC netbooks.

I'm myself playing Starcraft 2 (on low quality, but anyway) without any lag on my 11", wouldn't be possible on a random 1,4 GHz atom netbook.

T4R06
Dec 10, 2010, 08:36 AM
you can play mw2 without hiccups?


yes. i am really amazed what this thing can do. full resolution 1366x768 :)