PDA

View Full Version : Powerbook G4 v Macbook pro 2.16




hubble1990
Jul 14, 2006, 09:40 AM
Hello everybody. I've Just joined the forum and need some advice. I'm an owner of a Powerbook G4 1.25ghz with 2gig ram and I'm considering purchasing a Macbook Pro 2.16. I appreciate the the new processor inside the MBP but will I benefit from the speed. I do a lot of Photoshop work anything from 50-250mb files and of course Quark and Macromedia Freehand. Will there be a considerable difference in speed/data crunching?? your comments are appreciated. Thanks Hubble.



xfiftyfour
Jul 14, 2006, 09:41 AM
in a word, yes.

DKZ
Jul 14, 2006, 10:06 AM
in a word, yes.

Not so fast, if I had to limit myself to one word, it would be no at this point. I don't know about the two other apps, but photoshop hasn't gone universal binary yet, which means that performance is serverely decreased, some test says even slower then the powerpc machines.

As of the rest of the machine, yes it would be faster, but if you do a lot of work i photoshop, I would wait until it is translated into universal binary, plus there is still some problems with heat with the new intel machines.

GreatDrok
Jul 14, 2006, 10:21 AM
Hello everybody. I've Just joined the forum and need some advice. I'm an owner of a Powerbook G4 1.25ghz with 2gig ram and I'm considering purchasing a Macbook Pro 2.16. I appreciate the the new processor inside the MBP but will I benefit from the speed. I do a lot of Photoshop work anything from 50-250mb files and of course Quark and Macromedia Freehand. Will there be a considerable difference in speed/data crunching?? your comments are appreciated. Thanks Hubble.

I have three macs, two PPC and one Intel. For Photoshop the PPC macs are far quicker. Even my humble 1st gen iBook G4 (933Mhz) is quicker that my MacBook Pro. The MBP is very fast with universal apps and runs a lot cooler and longer on battery now than it did when I first got it (April so it is a fairly early one). However, PPC only apps, especially big ones like Photoshop, are not something I would want to use on this machine for any length of time. Brilliant that they work at all, but dog slow by comparison with native apps. From my experience I would say my MBP is equivalent to about a 500Mhz G4 for PPC apps. If you were moving from a G3 then yes, you would probably be a happy camper, but a fairly recent G4 PB is still a better choice for your needs IMHO.

dextertangocci
Jul 14, 2006, 10:36 AM
I have three macs, two PPC and one Intel. For Photoshop the PPC macs are far quicker. Even my humble 1st gen iBook G4 (933Mhz) is quicker that my MacBook Pro. The MBP is very fast with universal apps and runs a lot cooler and longer on battery now than it did when I first got it (April so it is a fairly early one). However, PPC only apps, especially big ones like Photoshop, are not something I would want to use on this machine for any length of time. Brilliant that they work at all, but dog slow by comparison with native apps. From my experience I would say my MBP is equivalent to about a 500Mhz G4 for PPC apps. If you were moving from a G3 then yes, you would probably be a happy camper, but a fairly recent G4 PB is still a better choice for your needs IMHO.

I don't beleive that! My MB is faster than my mom's 12" 1.5Ghz PB in non UB apps, like games;)

QCassidy352
Jul 14, 2006, 10:38 AM
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Apple/?p=104
http://www.macworld.com/2006/02/reviews/mbpromain/index.php
http://www.barefeats.com/rosetta.html

the macbook pro should be a little bit slower (but only a little bit) at photoshop than a 1.25 Ghz G4. Certainly you're not going to see a "considerable difference" in any rosetta apps.

I would say my MBP is equivalent to about a 500Mhz G4 for PPC apps.

No, a 2 Ghz core duo would obliterate a 500 mhz G4 at any emulated task. See the benchmarks above. The MBP even beat the 1 Ghz Tibook pretty handily in that first link.

bbrosemer
Jul 14, 2006, 10:47 AM
Hello everybody. I've Just joined the forum and need some advice. I'm an owner of a Powerbook G4 1.25ghz with 2gig ram and I'm considering purchasing a Macbook Pro 2.16. I appreciate the the new processor inside the MBP but will I benefit from the speed. I do a lot of Photoshop work anything from 50-250mb files and of course Quark and Macromedia Freehand. Will there be a considerable difference in speed/data crunching?? your comments are appreciated. Thanks Hubble. Quark is UB and Photoshop Rosetta runs better then any of the Macromedia apps under Rosetta.

hubble1990
Jul 14, 2006, 11:23 AM
Thanks chaps. I appreciate you comments. Keep them coming.

benthewraith
Jul 14, 2006, 11:55 AM
Thanks chaps. I appreciate you comments. Keep them coming.

I'm not sure if it's an option, but you could always try Gimpshop.

GIMPshop is a modification of the free/open source GNU Image Manipulation Program (GIMP), intended to replicate the feel of Adobe Photoshop. Its primary purpose is to make users of Photoshop feel comfortable using GIMP.

It shares all GIMP's advantages, including the long feature list and customisability, while addressing some common criticisms regarding the program's interface: GIMPshop modifies the menu structure to closely match Photoshop's, adjusts the program's terminology to match Adobe's, and, in the Windows version, uses a plugin called 'Deweirdifier' to combine the application's numerous windows in a similar manner to the MDI system used by most Windows graphics packages. From March 2006, it supports Photoshop plugins, through a host plugin, called pspi, and all GIMP's own plugins, filters, brushes, etc. remain available.

Due to the changes to the interface, many Photoshop tutorials can be followed in GIMPshop unchanged, and most others can be adapted for GIMPshop users with minimal effort.

GIMPshop was created by Attack of the Show's Scott Moschella. It was originally developed for Mac OS X, and has now been ported to Windows and Linux.

As of May 17, 2006, it is now a Universal Binary.

;)

DKZ
Jul 14, 2006, 02:50 PM
I don't beleive that! My MB is faster than my mom's 12" 1.5Ghz PB in non UB apps, like games;)

I don't know what gfx that is in your mothers machine, but other then that, I seriously doubt that. Especially because the gfx in a MB sucks donkey ass, not much better then the 9550 thats in the newest ibooks.

dextertangocci
Jul 15, 2006, 12:50 PM
I don't know what gfx that is in your mothers machine, but other then that, I seriously doubt that. Especially because the gfx in a MB sucks donkey ass, not much better then the 9550 thats in the newest ibooks.

Do you actually own a MB? Because the integrated graphics is not that bad! I play Quake 4 and Doom 3 on medium to high settings without a problem!:)

xfiftyfour
Jul 15, 2006, 07:55 PM
on my MB I just loaded CS2 into XP through bootcamp, and it works perfectly.

hubble1990
Jul 16, 2006, 10:08 AM
I think I'll take the plunge. MacBook Pro coming up. Watch this space for future posts. Thanks to all with your comments. H1990:)