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.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Powerbook G4 v Macbook pro 2.16
- Thread starter hubble1990
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
xfiftyfour said:
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.
Not with PPC apps, no.
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.
hubble1990 said:
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.
GreatDrok said:
I don't beleive that! My MB is faster than my mom's 12" 1.5Ghz PB in non UB apps, like games
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.
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.
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.
GreatDrok said:
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.
hubble1990 said:
I'm not sure if it's an option, but you could always try Gimpshop.
Wikipedia said:
dextertangocci said: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.
DKZ said:
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!
I think I'll take the plunge. MacBook Pro coming up. Watch this space for future posts. Thanks to all with your comments. H1990