14" iBook 1.42 OUTPERFORMS 12" 1.5GHz powerbook!!!

[Chrispy]

You read that right. I was able to get my hands on a 12" powerbook latest revision today and I decided to run a little test. I setup my 14" iBook and the 12" powerbook right next to each other. First thing I noticed was how much brighter and more colorful the sceen was on the 14" ibook. Then I fired up WoW and ran my character to a set location and stood still. I waited a good 30 serconds and recorded the highest and lowest FPS reading I got. Here are the results...

14" iBook with 1.5GB Ram
lowest FPS = 24.7
highest FPS = 30.6

14" iBook with 512MB Ram
lowest FPS = 22.8 FPS
highest FPS = 30.2 FPS

12" Powerbook with 512MB Ram
lowest FPS = 16.4
highest FPS = 19.8

The iBook kicked the crap out of the powerbook (game performance is the only thing being measured here keep in mind). I even played the game for awhile running around and fighting and the iBook still held a consistantly higher framerate than the powerbook. This should be a sign to Apple that they REALLLLLLY need go get the GeForce FX 5200 out of the 12" powerbook!!! Just thought I would share my findings :eek:

[tekmoe]

yes, but your 14" ibook is also ugly (imo).

let's call it a sleeper. kind of like a '72 mercury marquis stationwagon with a 454 under the hood.

[tuartboy]

yes, but your 14" ibook is also ugly (imo).

let's call it a sleeper. kind of like a '72 mercury marquis stationwagon with a 454 under the hood.

fight fight fight :p

[Chrispy]

yes, but your 14" ibook is also ugly (imo).

Wow harsh words haha :p I will say I think the 12" powerbook is a very very sharp looking computer but I wouldn't say the iBooks are ugly haha.... well unless you don't like white.. then I guess they would be ass ugly ;)

[mjstew33]

GOD! I just hate it, hate it, hate it, and hate it some more! when people say the 14" god damn iBook is ugly!!!!!!!!! GRRRRRRRRRRRRR... I've gotten REALLY sick of that, litterally. Oh, so you get a bigger screen w/ 1024x768 resolution, ANY 15" laptop i've seen (not widescreen ;) ) has had 1024x768, in fact i have to Toshibas in front of me that do. The image on the screen is NOT blurry, i mean wtf? HOW THE HELL IS IT BLURRY?

I just hate it when people say the 14" iBook is ugly when I just worked my fricken ass ALL SUMMER LONG, ALL DAY, AND....., and you say it's ugly?

wow
sorry if i'm like... going balistic over nothing, it's just people who have the 12" iBook or PowerBook (ITASOR, haha) COMPLETLY criticize the 14".

What the hell do you expect?? It's targeted for educational purposes! Educators/students don't always need top of the line Resolutions!

sorry.. just had to say that

[ITASOR]

GOD! I just hate it, hate it, hate it, and hate it some more! when people say the 14" god damn iBook is ugly!!!!!!!!! GRRRRRRRRRRRRR... I've gotten REALLY sick of that, litterally. Oh, so you get a bigger screen w/ 1024x768 resolution, ANY 15" laptop i've seen (not widescreen ;) ) has had 1024x768, in fact i have to Toshibas in front of me that do. The image on the screen is NOT blurry, i mean wtf? HOW THE HELL IS IT BLURRY?

I just hate it when people say the 14" iBook is ugly when I just worked my fricken ass ALL SUMMER LONG, ALL DAY, AND....., and you say it's ugly?

wow
sorry if i'm like... going balistic over nothing, it's just people who have the 12" iBook or PowerBook (ITASOR, haha) COMPLETLY criticize the 14".

What the hell do you expect?? It's targeted for educational purposes! Educators/students don't always need top of the line Resolutions!

sorry.. just had to say that

Hmm.....12" iB is better. :D



JUST KIDDING!

[Chrispy]

Wow lilstewart92 try not to blow a blood vessel haha. I do agree that it is crazy that people go nuts about how ugly the 14" ibook is. I find the white next to the keyboard a little odd but I LOVE the larger screen (of course this is just my opinion). I do find the powerbook to be better looking but the iBooks (both models) look great too.

[Gwendolyn]

Out of curiosity, if your 14" iBook has 1.5 GB of RAM, how much RAM was in the competing 12" PB? It seems to me that comparable amounts of RAM would lead to a more comparable test, and you didn't specify the RAM in your competing machines. So if the 12" PB only had the stock 512 MB of RAM, then the test might be showing us that RAM is good.

(not to say that I don't support a graphics card update for the 12" PB, of course, because I do!)

[California]

Uh, my brand new 1.33ghz iBook 14" screen ain't ugly. It's pretty. especially with the blue iSkin protector that matches the blue screen whilst protecting my pearly white keyboard. It's a lot cuter than the ti's or als -- she's actually streamlined, while the pbs look industrial - machine age out of the 40's, the ibooks are Eames era looking, something like a Kartel plastic design of the 70s. Very cool. And she also KICKS BUTT. LOVE it.

[Chrispy]

Out of curiosity, if your 14" iBook has 1.5 GB of RAM, how much RAM was in the competing 12" PB? It seems to me that comparable amounts of RAM would lead to a more comparable test, and you didn't specify the RAM in your competing machines. So if the 12" PB only had the stock 512 MB of RAM, then the test might be showing us that RAM is good.

(not to say that I don't support a graphics card update for the 12" PB, of course, because I do!)

Very very good point and I thought of this before running the test. When I first got my iBook I ran WoW for a few days before the upgrade and in open areas I noticed my framerate didn't really change at all. Now, in cities there was a noticable difference. I made sure to go into an open area before running the test since I know that I saw a negligable difference when I upgraded the ram in open areas.

[lopresmb]

interesting,

even though you have 1.5 GB Ram, the video card in the 12" pbooks, are pretty old, compared to a 9550 in you iBook, even with less VRAM. And lets not forget that the iBook can physically take 1.5 GB RAM, which is less than you can say for the 12" pbook (max 1.25GB) :confused:

congrats on your new, apparently speedy ibook


--by the way, how much ram did the powerbook have?

[Chrispy]

Thanks for the kind words. The powerbook had 512MB. I made sure of that to be sure the test would be a fair representation since I knew how the iBook performed at 512 in the given area where I ran the benchmark.

[jamie329]

Did you do any other benchmarks besides ones for framerates in games ? I don't play computer games at all and would like to know how they compare in other areas, such as compile times or rendering times in photoshop.

[Chrispy]

No the game was all I did. I would imagine the PB would beat out the iBook in things like rendering in Photoshop. The PB has a faster HD, faster system bus and faster CPU.

[Ti_Poussin]

That fairly possible, the NVidia 5200 crap in the PB 12' are a total archeologic stuff. At least, they could have put a decent radeon 9600 inside them. Great video card and Apple word never have fit into the same sentence. They use over and over old tech as usual. It's always and still be my main complain about Apple machine, look at the powermac, what a pro machine is doing with a 9650?!? seriously worthless. The worst part is that most Apple machine can't upgrade there video card, make them obsolete before they should. I would have prefer to see Apple focusing on the video card problem than switching to Intel IMO.

[AJ Muni]

My ibook completes me...

[Sprite]

Wow. This is quite a revelation! I was about to purchase a Powerbook 12" based off of the benchmarks given on macworld.com, but this post has me second-guessing myself.

Does this mean that Mac OS X's interface is faster on the iBook due to the Radeon chip vs. the Geforce? Would this mean that the iBook is better for 3D and 2D graphics work than a PB 12"? I'm a heavy Photoshop/Illustrator/Maya student and user and typically have 10 applications open at once on my Ti Powerbook 867 MHz.

Any insight would be appreciated. Thank you!

[mkrishnan]

Thanks for the kind words. The powerbook had 512MB. I made sure of that to be sure the test would be a fair representation since I knew how the iBook performed at 512 in the given area where I ran the benchmark.

Are the posted iBook specs at 512MB or 1.5GB? Also, what's installed on the PB?

Interesting, anyway. Very interesting. But I'm curious to know more about the specs of the two computers, before I completely agree that the reason is the horsepower of the 9550....

[bodeh6]

I love my iBook. It is my powerful portable. For my needs, I find it blazing. Copying stuff to CDs and especially USB drives is much faster on my iBook then my brothers Dell 8600 and sister's 5150.

[Chrispy]

Ok here is the scoop on the system specs...

12" Powerbook 1.5GHz Superdrive with 512MB RAM and GeForce 5200 64MB VRAM

14" iBook 1.42GHz Superdrive with 1.5GB RAM and Radeon 9550 32MB VRAM

Due to the concerns about the RAM playing a part in the speed I'm going to remove the 1gig chip from the iBook and run the same benchmark again. Give me about 15 mins...

[dubbz]

12" Powerbook 1.5GHz Superdrive with 512MB RAM and GeForce 5200 64MB VRAM

14" iBook 1.42GHz Superdrive with 1.5GB RAM and Radeon 9550 32MB VRAM

Radeon 9550 > GeForceFX 5200

The 5200 has always been a low-end chip. The 9500/9600 (which I assume the 9550 is similar too) is/used to be a mid-end chip.

No wonder the iBook is faster in games.

[Fuchal]

My 1.5ghz 12" powerbook destroys the 1.33ghz 12" ibook in xbench. (ie. over 12 points higher)

[Chrispy]

Ok for the sake of macrumors science I downgraded my computer for a bit to run this test. I am now running the same iBook as above with 512MB Ram. Benchmark results were the following..

highest framerate = 30.2 FPS
lowest framerate = 22.8 FPS

The RAM really doesn't seem to play a big part in performance in open areas in WoW. It does, however, make a fairly large difference in larger cities. And as far as other types of work goes such as photoshop, FCP and the like I would say you are still better off with a powerbook. As I said, the faster HD, faster bus and increased MHz will serve you well.

[Merf]

Crazy stuff. I wonder what the deal with it is.

Merf

[eXan]

My 1.5ghz 12" powerbook destroys the 1.33ghz 12" ibook in xbench. (ie. over 12 points higher)

Hmm thats strange... Aren't iBooks' GPUs clocked higher than 5200?

[Chrispy]

Does xBench do more than just graphics? If so then I can easily see how it beats out the iBook. Still, the graphics performance of the iBook has really increased in the recent update :D

[mkrishnan]

Hmm thats strange... Aren't iBooks' GPUs clocked higher than 5200?

I kind of guessed he's talking about XBench overalls, and not graphic scores. I don't think it would shock anyone if the PB outperformed the iBook in low-graphics productivity.

Ahhh, now if Photoshop only supported CI.... :(

[Chrispy]

What I would really like to see is someone run this same test on a 15" 64MB VRAM model powerbook. All you need to do is go to an open area and stand still for about thirty seconds. Display the frame-rate by pressing either ctrl + R or option + R (I can't remember exaclty) and write down the highest and lowest FPS you get. If you could post those scores I will put them up on the first post so we can see the difference between the GeForce 5200, Radeon 9550 and the Radeon 9700. THANKS in advance for whoever does this :D

[gwuMACaddict]

GOD! I just hate it, hate it, hate it.....

you need to find something else to worry about... and was all of the cursing really neccessary?

as for the test... interesting results- have there been any benchmark tests, running photoshop? things like that? i'd be interested to see some of those results... the iBooks are definitely impressive little machines

[persianpunisher]

What cursing? :confused:

[Chrispy]

as for the test... interesting results- have there been any benchmark tests, running photoshop? things like that? i'd be interested to see some of those results... the iBooks are definitely impressive little machines

I have not run any test but I can be almost certain that the powerbook will be faster for photoshop, FCP and other processor/hard drive intensive applications. Also, I would imagine the 15" and 17" powerbooks beat the iBook in all tests including the (unofficial) WoW benchmark. Again, I would love to see a 15" user and even a 17" user (most recent revision) post their scores as well.

[Sprite]

There are comprehensive benchmark tests on Macworld.com for Cinema 4D, Photoshop, Unreal Tournament, etc. but they only test the 15" Powerbook (which has a faster GPU: the ATI Mobility Radeon 9700). They don't have scores for the 12" Powerbook's Geforce Go FX5200 GPU, which interests me most.

Interestingly enough, the iBook's score == Mac Mini, but the eMac score > Powerbook score. :\ How sad...

[mjstew33]

What cursing? :confused:
yeah ...really

[California]

"Quote:
Originally Posted by persianpunisher
What cursing?

yeah ...really"

He probably meant "blasheming" or taking the Lord's name in vain. To do so is breaking one of the Ten Commandments, though I can't remember which one.

[Chrispy]

So.. anyone want to take part in this "scientific" benchmarking experience with their 15" powerbooks? I would really appreciate it :)

[Sutekidane]

This is kinda misleading, I mean the iBook is only better in video performance, everything else it would be equal or noticeably worse in. I had a 1.33ghz 15" powerbook and WoW didn't run too great on it in windowed mode. Macs just aren't the best for gaming, though I'm sure everyone has realized that. It was funny, I was playing WoW on a windows notebook with intel extreme graphics and a 1.4ghz Centrino, and it ran better than it did when I had my powerbook with Radeon 9700 64mb.

[mcarnes]

Lots of other things can affect performance. Did you check Activity Monitor? There might be something in the background sucking resources on the PB.

HP Printer software will do that (which is why you should never install that disc that comes with your printer unless you absolutely have to). Some widgets suck resources too, even though they are not supposed to. That crappy radio widget hogged my processor by 80% even when dashboard was closed. I knew something was up when my iBook was running hotter than hell.

[leekohler]

GOD! I just hate it, hate it, hate it, and hate it some more! when people say the 14" god damn iBook is ugly!!!!!!!!! GRRRRRRRRRRRRR... I've gotten REALLY sick of that, litterally. Oh, so you get a bigger screen w/ 1024x768 resolution, ANY 15" laptop i've seen (not widescreen ;) ) has had 1024x768, in fact i have to Toshibas in front of me that do. The image on the screen is NOT blurry, i mean wtf? HOW THE HELL IS IT BLURRY?

I just hate it when people say the 14" iBook is ugly when I just worked my fricken ass ALL SUMMER LONG, ALL DAY, AND....., and you say it's ugly?

wow
sorry if i'm like... going balistic over nothing, it's just people who have the 12" iBook or PowerBook (ITASOR, haha) COMPLETLY criticize the 14".

What the hell do you expect?? It's targeted for educational purposes! Educators/students don't always need top of the line Resolutions!

sorry.. just had to say that

Thank you! I have a 14" too and I love it!

[TheMonarch]

Lots of other things can affect performance. Did you check Activity Monitor? There might be something in the background sucking resources on the PB.

HP Printer software will do that (which is why you should never install that disc that comes with your printer unless you absolutely have to). Some widgets suck resources too, even though they are not supposed to. That crappy radio widget hogged my processor by 80% even when dashboard was closed. I knew something was up when my iBook was running hotter than hell.



Ugh. Activity monitor pisses me off sometimes. Did you know it uses about 20% cpu? WTF? (The activity monitor process doesn't, its the "pm_tool" that activity monitor uses to probe for info) That is just dumb. The famous windows task manager uses about 4% or less

[Chrispy]

I have noticed that this thread keeps going in circles. I have acknowledged that the powerbook is superior in almost every other performance aspect a few times in this thread. However, the point of this thread is to get the results of my little test on as many different GPUs in apple laptops as possible. I just find it interesting how much the performance fluctuates between different GPUs. Also, I'm just pointing out how crazy it is that the GeForce 5200 is still in commission in the powerbook line if the GPU in their iBooks beats it out.

And the powerbook 12" was fresh out of the box and WoW (plus updates to OS X) were the first things on it. If anything there were less processes running on the powerbook than on the iBook.

[jonomo]

I had a 1.5 12 " powerbook for a few weeks and ran WoW... now I have the new 12" ibook... I took the 1 gig ram chip from the pb and put it in my ibook..

I've been playing WoW now on my Ibook.. i expected a dramatic decrease in performance... but so far i've noticed nothing....

and interesting thing you mentioned is that the frame rate between 512 ram and 1.5 gigs of ram seems to be exactly the same.. i spent 100 bux trying to get better performance for WoW on my Ibook.... was it a waste of money???

I tried running wow w/o the extra ram and I didn't really notice a dramatic difference...

[biohazard6969]

so the only thing making this happen is that the video card in the ibook is better...right?

[IEatApples]

I know the eMac isn`t really a popular topic, but I just ordered one and I was wondering about how it performs compared to the iBooks, Mac Minis and PowerBooks? (Mainly the graphics part).

I hope I`m not disturbing this thread, but I thought that writing this in a new thread would not be well recieved. :D

[bodeh6]

Thank you! I have a 14" too and I love it!

I am with you guys. Who ever says that the 14" looks bad is insane. The resolution is perfect for a laptop. I used to run my 17" CRT on my PC at 1024x768. Then I got a 19" CRT and I had it set to 1600x1200, perfect for photo editting. But people have to look at all the 15" PC laptops that ship with VGA displays.

[godbout]

Hey Guys,
I have the PB that you need for your little test and I would be willing to run it for you but I don't have a copy of WoW. Does anyone know a quick way to get a demo? Or we can do the same test in Halo... I have that here.

[Artful Dodger]

Chrispy
I have noticed that this thread keeps going in circles. I have acknowledged that the powerbook is superior in almost every other performance aspect a few times in this thread. However, the point of this thread is to get the results of my little test on as many different GPUs in apple laptops as possible.
Maybe by the 3rd page it will get there ;) One Q and it may not even matter but was the iBook using the AirPort or did you have it plugged in and the same with the PB since I'm thinking you were online with WoW and would frame rates suffer under interference?
Nice buy with the 14" iBook by the way Chrispy :D

[Yvan256]

Have you guys checked if the video settings in WoW are exactly the same, for your tests? Video resolution, rendering depth, etc...

I mean, doesn't WoW automagically set the values depending on the CPU/RAM/GPU/VRAM the first time you run it?

[Yvan256]

Maybe by the 3rd page it will get there ;) One Q and it may not even matter but was the iBook using the AirPort or did you have it plugged in and the same with the PB since I'm thinking you were online with WoW and would frame rates suffer under interference?
Nice buy with the 14" iBook by the way Chrispy :D

The frame rate won't be affected by network speed/problems. You could still get 100FPS on a 14.4k dial-up connection.

[BlizzardBomb]

WoW isn't a very good benchmark because there is a massively variable amount of players (and triangles) the graphics card needs to draw. Also, you need to check the settings you've used, and what's running in the background at the same time. Oh and try getting an average FPS. Highest and lowest can be a bit unaccurate.

[BlizzardBomb]

I get my benchmarks here. iMac, eMac, you name it, its there. http://www.macworld.com/products/apple/

[Moxiemike]

GOD! I just hate it, hate it, hate it, and hate it some more! when people say the 14" god damn iBook is ugly!!!!!!!!! GRRRRRRRRRRRRR... I've gotten REALLY sick of that, litterally. Oh, so you get a bigger screen w/ 1024x768 resolution, ANY 15" laptop i've seen (not widescreen ;) ) has had 1024x768, in fact i have to Toshibas in front of me that do. The image on the screen is NOT blurry, i mean wtf? HOW THE HELL IS IT BLURRY?

I just hate it when people say the 14" iBook is ugly when I just worked my fricken ass ALL SUMMER LONG, ALL DAY, AND....., and you say it's ugly?

wow
sorry if i'm like... going balistic over nothing, it's just people who have the 12" iBook or PowerBook (ITASOR, haha) COMPLETLY criticize the 14".

What the hell do you expect?? It's targeted for educational purposes! Educators/students don't always need top of the line Resolutions!

sorry.. just had to say that

I don't think anyone knocks the screen size, but after you've felt a Pismo/Lombard series laptop, you'll look at that 14" likes it's a fat, overweight american as opposed to the sleek, svelt europeans that are the powerbook and ibook 12"er's.

The pismo still is the definitive powerbook design overall, and is way high and far above the ibook 14 in terms of design. The poster who said the ibook looks like an Eames design is...well...i don't agree. ;)

hehe. ;)

That said, i've been tempted by the 14"er if only because the 15" AL's are pretty shoody in terms of Q.C. and the 12" PB/iB's are maybe a smidge too small (when used in comparison with the 23" cinema on my desk).

[Chrispy]

That said, i've been tempted by the 14"er if only because the 15" AL's are pretty shoody in terms of Q.C. and the 12" PB/iB's are maybe a smidge too small (when used in comparison with the 23" cinema on my desk).

That is the exactly how I ended up with my 14" iBook haha. I had two bad 15" powerbooks in a row (within a week of each other) and I just decided not to deal with it anymore.

[Chrispy]

Have you guys checked if the video settings in WoW are exactly the same, for your tests? Video resolution, rendering depth, etc...

I mean, doesn't WoW automagically set the values depending on the CPU/RAM/GPU/VRAM the first time you run it?

Good point and I almost forgot to do this. The computer set the powerbook's settings lower than the iBooks from what I remember so I turned the iBooks environmental detail down to be sure they matched exaclty. Both machines were running from airport extreme.

[TheSisko]

Some of you guys seem to know very little about graphics cards, and just make statements without basis in facts.

1. The technology in the R9550 (R300 based) is just as old (in fact, a few months older) than the FX5200 (NV30 based).
2. The FX5200 has a huge advantage because of it's 128-bit memory bus.
3. Benchmarks in Quake3, a 99% GPU dependent game, shows the R9550 is only 20% faster than a R9200.
4. Your benchmarks of WoW (both GPU and CPU dependent game) show the iBook as more than 50%(!!!) faster than a PB, which would indicate that even the old iBook with R9200 should be 25% faster than a PB (which it obviously isn't).

Conclusion: Either there is something fishy with your benchmarks, or WoW has a problem with FX5200. I guarantee you that other games run faster on the PB's FX5200. Try Quake3.

[Abstract]

Wow. This is quite a revelation! I was about to purchase a Powerbook 12" based off of the benchmarks given on macworld.com, but this post has me second-guessing myself.


:D

[Abstract]

However, the point of this thread is to get the results of my little test on as many different GPUs in apple laptops as possible. I just find it interesting how much the performance fluctuates between different GPUs. Also, I'm just pointing out how crazy it is that the GeForce 5200 is still in commission in the powerbook line if the GPU in their iBooks beats it out.


Do us a favour.

Go into System Prefs>Energy saver, and in the OPTIONS tab, turn the processor settings on both computers to HIGHEST.

Restart both computers, and then play WoW. Make sure all settings are identical. Something is wrong with this "test," not that it's conclusive in any way.

[tekmoe]

Some of you guys seem to know very little about graphics cards, and just make statements without basis in facts.

1. The technology in the R9550 (R300 based) is just as old (in fact, a few months older) than the FX5200 (NV30 based).
2. The FX5200 has a huge advantage because of it's 128-bit memory bus.
3. Benchmarks in Quake3, a 99% GPU dependent game, shows the R9550 is only 20% faster than a R9200.
4. Your benchmarks of WoW (both GPU and CPU dependent game) show the iBook as more than 50%(!!!) faster than a PB, which would indicate that even the old iBook with R9200 should be 25% faster than a PB (which it obviously isn't).

Conclusion: Either there is something fishy with your benchmarks, or WoW has a problem with FX5200. I guarantee you that other games run faster on the PB's FX5200. Try Quake3.

badass. somebody who knows what they are actually talking about!

chrispy, you just got pwned! sucka! hahaha

[persianpunisher]

badass. somebody who knows what they are actually talking about!

chrispy, you just got pwned! sucka! hahaha

^ go die in a fire :D

[Chrispy]

badass. somebody who knows what they are actually talking about!

chrispy, you just got pwned! sucka! hahaha

You don't want to talk tech to me becuase I will own most people in this forum. I am well aware of the technology differences but that doesn't mean crap if real world performance shows the iBook is faster than the powerbook in given areas. I, as well as many others I'm sure, could care less about quake 3 and are more concered with WoW. For us, the speed of that particular game is what is most important. I tested both machines with CPU set to highest and the facts show the iBook is faster for WoW... period.

[PaRaGoNViCtiM]

You tell em' Chris, I'd take your word anyday!

[Xeem]

Some of you guys seem to know very little about graphics cards, and just make statements without basis in facts.

1. The technology in the R9550 (R300 based) is just as old (in fact, a few months older) than the FX5200 (NV30 based).
2. The FX5200 has a huge advantage because of it's 128-bit memory bus.

Sorry to post so late here, but I thought I'd chime in with something TheSisko may have missed: the Radeon 9550 also has a 128 bit memory bus, hence the "huge advantage" of the 5200 not being evident in the tests. Oh, and in case anyone was wondering, the 9550 is actually based on the Radeon 9600 series (RV350 core), not the 9500 series. It is an underpowered 9600, not an overpowered 9500.

[AP_piano295]

GOD! I just hate it, hate it, hate it, and hate it some more! when people say the 14" god damn iBook is ugly!!!!!!!!! GRRRRRRRRRRRRR... I've gotten REALLY sick of that, litterally. Oh, so you get a bigger screen w/ 1024x768 resolution, ANY 15" laptop i've seen (not widescreen ;) ) has had 1024x768, in fact i have to Toshibas in front of me that do. The image on the screen is NOT blurry, i mean wtf? HOW THE HELL IS IT BLURRY?

I just hate it when people say the 14" iBook is ugly when I just worked my fricken ass ALL SUMMER LONG, ALL DAY, AND....., and you say it's ugly?

wow
sorry if i'm like... going balistic over nothing, it's just people who have the 12" iBook or PowerBook (ITASOR, haha) COMPLETLY criticize the 14".

What the hell do you expect?? It's targeted for educational purposes! Educators/students don't always need top of the line Resolutions!

sorry.. just had to say that


I like the 14inch ibook and the 12... theyre shinny :D

[AP_piano295]

ps. You would be crazy to buy a powerbook right now Id say they dont deserve the name pro laptop apple has given them a significant preformance boot in idk 1 to 2 years. The only thing pro about the pbook lineup these days is the price.

[Bern]

You read that right. I was able to get my hands on a 12" powerbook latest revision today and I decided to run a little test. I setup my 14" iBook and the 12" powerbook right next to each other. First thing I noticed was how much brighter and more colorful the sceen was on the 14" ibook. Then I fired up WoW and ran my character to a set location and stood still. I waited a good 30 serconds and recorded the highest and lowest FPS reading I got. Here are the results...

For starters get an Xbox if you want to play games, or a pc :rolleyes:
and as for the resolution of the iBook screen being better than the Powerbook I find that truly hard to believe. It's more than likely neither one are calibrated correctly in any case. I have both here, and both are accurately calibrated, and the powerbook screen is noticeably better than the ibook. It's not just the screen that makes it appear more brilliant.

I really don't understand this whole comparison thing going on between the two Macs. Powerbooks are better than iBooks...

[Stereo 99]

sigh. so did i make a mistake buying my 15 in Powerbook with a combo drive? my only reason for getting that over the 14 in ibook is because of the screen resolution and because it has a little more power. im a tv/film student im not a big editor but would i have really been able to run fcp or at least fc express and possibly motion (not sure if im gonna use it yet) on an ibook.

also since ive only had my powerbook for two days now and i can still return it is there any application or anything that could make the screen resolution of the 14 ibook larger? also is there an alternative for the missing audio in if i were to exchange my pb for the 14 in ibook?

[AP_piano295]

For starters get an Xbox if you want to play games, or a pc :rolleyes:
and as for the resolution of the iBook screen being better than the Powerbook I find that truly hard to believe. It's more than likely neither one are calibrated correctly in any case. I have both here, and both are accurately calibrated, and the powerbook screen is noticeably better than the ibook. It's not just the screen that makes it appear more brilliant.

I really don't understand this whole comparison thing going on between the two Macs. Powerbooks are better than iBooks...

Powerbooks cost about three times as much as ibooks weeeeeeeeee.

[Chrispy]

sigh. so did i make a mistake buying my 15 in Powerbook with a combo drive? my only reason for getting that over the 14 in ibook is because of the screen resolution and because it has a little more power. im a tv/film student im not a big editor but would i have really been able to run fcp or at least fc express and possibly motion (not sure if im gonna use it yet) on an ibook.

also since ive only had my powerbook for two days now and i can still return it is there any application or anything that could make the screen resolution of the 14 ibook larger? also is there an alternative for the missing audio in if i were to exchange my pb for the 14 in ibook?

You did not make a mistake with your 15" powerbook at all. The 15" outperforms the 12" by leaps and bounds (ran some tests on a 15" a few weeks after starting this thread). There are also advantages to the powerbook such as monitor spanning and faster hard drives.

However, the fact of the matter is, in games the 14" (and I'm sure the 12") iBook outperforms the most recent 12" powerbooks. I was able to run Unreal Tournament 2004 at 800x600 with absolutely no slowdowns and at 1024x768 with very very little slowdown. The 15" and 17" powerbooks outperform the 12" PB and 12" and 14" iBooks due to the faster series graphics card. Apple is clearly going to scrap the 12" powerbook in favor of something new (maybe a 13" widescreen) because it has been left in the dust lately. Apple has made no real efforts to make it measure up to the speed of the 15" and 17" models.

I have noticed many 12" powerbook owners getting very defensive of their computers in this thread and it is not necessary. The 12" powerbook is a fantastic computer and has many great features you can't find on an iBook. Just becuase the 12" and 14" iBooks have a faster graphics card does not mean the powerbooks suck. If you are going to be using pro level apps such as FCP or the like you would be much better off going with a powerbook in the long run.

[Abstract]

You don't want to talk tech to me becuase I will own most people in this forum.

Apparently not. :p

also since ive only had my powerbook for two days now and i can still return it is there any application or anything that could make the screen resolution of the 14 ibook larger?

No, sorry bud. I say keep the 15" if you're going to work with FCP because you need a large desktop space to work with FCP well. It'll be really annoying and cramped if you got the 14" iBook. It's a good computer and all, but not for FCP.


also is there an alternative for the missing audio in if i were to exchange my pb for the 14 in ibook?
You can get an external add-on if you want that. I guess if you want true portability, you'd rather have it built-in, but most people don't need an audio-in port wherever they go, say to the library, or on the bus. ;)

[mjstew33]

I like the 14inch ibook and the 12... theyre shinny :D
:D

[eric67]

if one can buy a refurbished 12" PB instead of a brand new iBook 12" for the same price, one should go for the PB12".

[California]

The pismo still is the definitive powerbook design overall, and is way high and far above the ibook 14 in terms of design. The poster who said the ibook looks like an Eames design is...well...i don't agree. ;)

hehe. ;)


Hey, I was the one who said my 14" looks like an "Eames" design. Actually I meant, (i didn't reread it) that it looks like an "Eames-era design" like Italian Kartel plastics or something out of Panton. Or much like the sixties "Swinger" white plastic Polaroid camera. Imagine how mod and swinging sixties our iBooks would be with a carrying handle out of plastic.

I still love pbs. However I love Tibooks. Not Albooks. Weird because I am totally into Russel Wright's 1930's anodized aluminum designs, as well as McArthurs. Have two of his torchieres, all anodized aluminum. Mix/matching with all the 30's Bauhaus inspired chrome in my place.

So it's weird that I don't take more to the Albooks but I think it has to do with the fact I'm hooked on the Tibook/Ibook keyboards which are identical, and work all day at the computer.