12" Powerbook = lame

that machine also probably had the stock 256MB of RAM. I have a 12" PB, and did okay with the stock RAM for two months, and it has sped up now that I've added an additional 512MB

Apologies for the messy formatting. Here are Xbench 1.1.3 results for my 1GHz 12" PowerBook, with 768MB RAM, running OS X 10.3.2. Energy Saving settings were set to Maximum performance, and the system was running from AC power. Can you post Xbench 1.1.3 scores for your Pismo to compare?

I'd be willing to bet the 12" PowerBook you used in the store was running something in the background, or its configuration had been messed around with. I'd be interested to see your Pismo Xbench results as a comparison.

Results 89.09
System Info
Xbench Version 1.1.3
System Version 10.3.2 (7D24)
Physical RAM 768 MB
Model PowerBook6,2
Processor PowerPC G4 @ 1.00 GHz
L1 Cache 32K (instruction), 32K (data)
L2 Cache 512K @ 1.00 GHz
Bus Frequency 133 MHz
Video Card GeForce FX Go5200 32MB
Drive Type Hitachi IC25N040ATMR04-0
CPU Test 95.84
GCD Loop 103.67 4.05 Mops/sec
Floating Point Basic 62.33 225.41 Mflop/sec
AltiVec Basic 122.53 3.56 Gflop/sec
vecLib FFT 121.19 1.88 Gflop/sec
Floating Point Library 99.32 3.98 Mops/sec
Thread Test 76.89
Computation 54.98 742.16 Kops/sec, 4 threads
Lock Contention 127.87 1.61 Mlocks/sec, 4 threads
Memory Test 98.64
System 102.84
Allocate 507.52 331.06 Kalloc/sec
Fill 109.97 875.36 MB/sec
Copy 55.22 276.12 MB/sec
Stream 94.77
Copy 97.23 710.73 MB/sec [altivec]
Scale 98.29 725.34 MB/sec [altivec]
Add 94.13 602.42 MB/sec [altivec]
Triad 89.90 549.27 MB/sec [altivec]
Quartz Graphics Test 116.35
Line 101.62 2.59 Klines/sec [50% alpha]
Rectangle 114.91 8.08 Krects/sec [50% alpha]
Circle 113.62 2.62 Kcircles/sec [50% alpha]
Bezier 105.83 1.15 Kbeziers/sec [50% alpha]
Text 161.83 2.64 Kchars/sec
OpenGL Graphics Test 91.50
Spinning Squares 91.50 64.03 frames/sec
User Interface Test 138.91
Elements 138.91 44.68 refresh/sec
Disk Test 54.74
Sequential 60.15
Uncached Write 43.91 18.31 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write 55.73 22.82 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read 141.15 22.34 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read 53.46 21.60 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Random 50.23
Uncached Write 47.88 0.72 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write 49.17 11.09 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read 49.78 0.33 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read 54.56 11.23 MB/sec [256K blocks]

ill tell you right now that store demos are terrible to judge by, too many people mess with them and they have too many computers for the employees to keep them in tip top condition.

iJon

If you equate the Pismo to an iBook 500, then I can assure you the 12" PowerBook is miles faster.

My 1GHz 12" got a 99.58 on xBench last time I ran it. I've got 768 MB RAM. That's faster than many TiBooks.

The new PowerBooks definitely have some muscle. My 15" scores in the high 120's consistently which is higher than some dual PowerMac G4s I've seen. I bet if I put my Lombard G3 PowerBook through XBench it'd barely crawl through with 15-20 and that is just a step down from a Pismo, which is the last revision before the G4s game out.

Also looking to buy

I'm torn between the 12" and 15" PowerBooks. I currently have an iBook and love the 12" form factor. I live in NYC and carry it all over the place so size is a serious factor. But I will be using it for video editing and graphics work, so the functionality is a serious factor too. I have and Apple LCD that I can hook it up to, so the screen real estate isn't really a problem. I dislike that it has 32 instead of 64mb video RAM. But if you soup it up with the bigger drive and airport card, the price difference between the 12 and 15 gets much smaller. What I really want is the 15" machine in the 12" form factor.

I'm looking for anyone's expereinces, good or bad, specifically dealing with video editing on the 12" PB, and any other issues that should be considered that I have not considered. Thanks.

The 12" could be good for you. Seriously, the 250 MHz difference isn't going to be a massive gap and you don't need a 64 meg Radeon 9600 unless you are looking to play games on it. You said you really need/want the smaller footprint of the 12" and have an external screen you could use when you need the extra space, so it sound like the best compromise. Just get the 12", load it with RAM, and add an external HD and you'll have one nice mobile setup.

Originally posted by MoparShaha
My 1GHz 12" got a 99.58 on xBench last time I ran it. I've got 768 MB RAM. That's faster than many TiBooks.

Click to expand...

Hmmm I wonder where the difference comes from. Was it the same version of Xbench as I ran? Same version of OS X?

Did you have any background applications running while doing the tests? That can make a difference.

Re: Also looking to buy

Originally posted by ericsoup

I'm looking for anyone's expereinces, good or bad, specifically dealing with video editing on the 12" PB, and any other issues that should be considered that I have not considered. Thanks.

Click to expand...

Also don't forget that in addition to the screen size and video RAM difference between the 12" and 15", you should also consider:

- The 15" has FireWire 800, the 12" only FireWire 400
- The 15" has a PC Card slot for future expansion, the 12" doesn't
- The 15" has a gigabit ethernet controller, the 12" only has a 100Mbit controller
- The 15" has a maximum official RAM capacity of 2GB, the 12" has only a max official capacity of 1.25GB.
- The 15" includes an S-Video adapter, it is an option on the 12"
- Even accounting for differences in VRAM size, the Radeon 9600 in the 15" is a much faster graphics chip than the nVidia GeForceFX 5200 in the 12"
- A 5400rpm drive is available from Apple as an option on the 15", but not on the 12" (not sure how much difference the HDD speed makes in real life anyway).


Just a few other things to consider. In many respects, the 15" and 17" PowerBooks are closely related, whereas the 12" PowerBook seems to be more closely related to a G4 iBook underneath its aluminium skin. How important those things are to you, I'm not sure. With video editing, I would guess that perhaps having the option of FW800 for fast external drive access, and having the possibility of a maximum of 2GB RAM, versus 1.25GB might be prominent.

Originally posted by oingoboingo
Hmmm I wonder where the difference comes from. Was it the same version of Xbench as I ran? Same version of OS X?

Click to expand...

I'm running xBench 1.1.3, and OS 10.3.2. Try running all the cron maintainence scripts and logging out, then run xBench.

I have the 12" 1GHz and it's a super machine. It was ok with 256MB RAM but it really flies now I have 768!

I use FCE 1 and it works very well with it (even with 256MB RAM I have to say). I can't wait to get the upgrade for the real-time effects!

It must be noted that I used to have Jaguar and I have 'upgrade-installed' Panther with no problems whatsoever. I like to keep my Mac tidy though. It screams with 10.3.2.

I have never used the 15 or 17" PowerBooks, and would expect them to be faster, but I don't think the difference is that bad. And the interface is as snappy as a G5 I used in the store.