PDA

View Full Version : Powerbook ---> Comparable speeds?




dranakin
Oct 9, 2007, 07:39 PM
I was wondering if there was any chart out there or something that compares the speed of a Powerbook G4 to a Macbook?

Or more specifically, does anyone know how zippy a PB G4 1.5 w/ 2GB ram (and a ATI Mobility Radeon 9700 128mb) is compared to the current line of Macbooks?

And a related question: I've read some of the threads regarding Leopard on G4s...how do you think my laptop will do if I decide to upgrade from Panther to Leopard?

Thanks.



flopticalcube
Oct 9, 2007, 07:42 PM
MacBook will be at least twice as fast as the PB in everything that doesn't require a GPU. In GPU tasks, the MacBook will lag woefully behind.

Dustman
Oct 9, 2007, 08:26 PM
I was wondering if there was any chart out there or something that compares the speed of a Powerbook G4 to a Macbook?

Or more specifically, does anyone know how zippy a PB G4 1.5 w/ 2GB ram (and a ATI Mobility Radeon 9700 128mb) is compared to the current line of Macbooks?

And a related question: I've read some of the threads regarding Leopard on G4s...how do you think my laptop will do if I decide to upgrade from Panther to Leopard?

Thanks.

You get a better chip architecture and 2 cores with the Macbook.. and a lousy GPU. A Macbook would be atleast 2-3 times faster for real world use (probably more in terms of specs)

EDIT: And most Powerbooks will barely break the minimum requirements line, so while leopard would probably run for you (if you have a 867mhz+ powerbook) it'll be a lot slower than running it on a shiny new macbook

dukebound85
Oct 9, 2007, 11:23 PM
if i remember, the original core duos were on par if not faster than dual g5's

dranakin
Oct 10, 2007, 07:57 PM
Hmmm. I was hoping that I could at least run Leopard pretty easily...didn't know that Intel processors were that much faster. :(

AlBDamned
Oct 10, 2007, 08:16 PM
Hmmm. I was hoping that I could at least run Leopard pretty easily...didn't know that Intel processors were that much faster. :(

Depends what PowerBook you have really. I have 1.67Ghz last revision, with a 128MB graphics card and 2GB RAM and I anticipate Leopard running absolutely fine on it.

In every day use –web browsing, e-mails, word processing, photo viewing etc – there's barely any real difference between my 2.0Ghz C2D iMac and my PowerBook. When it comes to processor/GPU intensive tasks like rendering a picture, encoding video etc, or games (which I don't use it for) then sure there'll be a difference.

I also ran Tiger on a 400Mhz G4 Sawtooth and while it wasn't snappy it was perfectly usable, although some of the graphical niceties didn't work (like the ripple effect on dashboard. Boo hoo...).

dranakin
Oct 11, 2007, 12:53 AM
How do you think a PB G4 1.5 w/ 2GB ram would fare?

Quiara
Oct 11, 2007, 01:19 AM
How do you think a PB G4 1.5 w/ 2GB ram would fare?

I think you could definitely use it. AS has been mentioned before, you might have to turn off some eye-candy or some dual-core specific funness, but honestly, I don't think it would crawl or make you cry or tear your eyes out with your bare hands or anything.

Just my guess. What I've heard from dev's, though, is that even though there's a lot new under-the-hood in Leopard, it's not Apple's way of telling all the "older" (and really, a G4 @ 1.5GHz isn't that "old") Macs to piss off, y'know?

Anyway, just my $.02

AlBDamned
Oct 11, 2007, 07:05 PM
How do you think a PB G4 1.5 w/ 2GB ram would fare?

I think you'll be absolutely fine with that.

dranakin
Oct 12, 2007, 02:32 AM
Thanks, I'll tough it out with my PB for awhile.

Unless a Macbook-esque tablet computer is released...

Sly
Oct 12, 2007, 04:55 AM
I was wondering if there was any chart out there or something that compares the speed of a Powerbook G4 to a Macbook?

Or more specifically, does anyone know how zippy a PB G4 1.5 w/ 2GB ram (and a ATI Mobility Radeon 9700 128mb) is compared to the current line of Macbooks?

And a related question: I've read some of the threads regarding Leopard on G4s...how do you think my laptop will do if I decide to upgrade from Panther to Leopard?

Thanks.

Try this one Mac chart (http://www.primatelabs.ca/blog/2007/08/mac-performance-august-2007/)

TheStu
Oct 12, 2007, 05:16 AM
I think it is pretty cool that with the exception of the Dual Dual-2.5GHz G5 PowerMac, my MacBook at 1.83GHz beats all old Macs in terms of performance. Sweeeeeeet.

I have used one of those Dual Duals, they are smokin, especially for vid conversion or DVD ripping, and when you hook it up to a pair of 23" Cinema Displays, it is straight gorgeous.

But o well, it looks like on this benchmark your PowerBook rates at around 800 something. The current Core 2 Duo Macs come in around 2600+ in the scores. So, like others have said, in anything but video, the MacBook will run the table on the PowerBook G4. All the same though, if you are content with the current level of performance, then keep your PowerBook. It should run Leopard more than well enough, since it seems to be keeping in line with making the hardware that it runs on faster than the previous OS.

Quiara
Oct 12, 2007, 06:24 AM
I think it is pretty cool that with the exception of the Dual Dual-2.5GHz G5 PowerMac, my MacBook at 1.83GHz beats all old Macs in terms of performance. Sweeeeeeet.

I have used one of those Dual Duals, they are smokin, especially for vid conversion or DVD ripping, and when you hook it up to a pair of 23" Cinema Displays, it is straight gorgeous.

But o well, it looks like on this benchmark your PowerBook rates at around 800 something. The current Core 2 Duo Macs come in around 2600+ in the scores. So, like others have said, in anything but video, the MacBook will run the table on the PowerBook G4. All the same though, if you are content with the current level of performance, then keep your PowerBook. It should run Leopard more than well enough, since it seems to be keeping in line with making the hardware that it runs on faster than the previous OS.

Running GeekBench, my 2.16GHz MacBook came in at almost 2900.

Anyway, the one thing we're neglecting to mention is that these "smokin' machines" don't run all apps natively yet - and in the rosetta simulated apps, his PowerBook will kick the shiny little MacBook's buttocks. Sad but true.

There are worse things in life than "toughing it out" with a shiny PowerBook. ^_~

bentleyag
Mar 28, 2008, 11:06 AM
MacBook will be at least twice as fast as the PB in everything that doesn't require a GPU. In GPU tasks, the MacBook will lag woefully behind.

i have a 550 powerbook and a new macbook personally i think they would be equally fast if i threw them out my window! has anyone tried this?

Azmordean
Mar 28, 2008, 03:54 PM
I think you could definitely use it. AS has been mentioned before, you might have to turn off some eye-candy or some dual-core specific funness, but honestly, I don't think it would crawl or make you cry or tear your eyes out with your bare hands or anything.

Just my guess. What I've heard from dev's, though, is that even though there's a lot new under-the-hood in Leopard, it's not Apple's way of telling all the "older" (and really, a G4 @ 1.5GHz isn't that "old") Macs to piss off, y'know?

Anyway, just my $.02

I can confirm this as I have a 1.5 GHz 12" PB, and Leopard runs just fine. With the 9700 video card in OPs PB, I bet even the eye candy would work just fine.