15 inch Powerbook faster than 17 inch powerbook?

Discussion in 'PowerPC Macs' started by Peyton, May 7, 2006.

  1. Peyton macrumors 68000

    Peyton

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2006
    #1
    I was noticing on http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/

    that on the right hand side, the 1.67 ghz 15 inch is rated at 6.7 integer calculation, while the 17 inch is rated at 6.6. What gives? :confused:
     
  2. Lollypop macrumors 6502a

    Lollypop

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Location:
    Johannesburg, South Africa
    #2
    I didnt even notice that, was to hard to take my eyes off the nice 17inch screen :D I cant think of a reason why the 17inch G4 would be slower than the 15inch? As far as I know both have the same subsystems, memory, HDD and processor. I can think that the increased motherboard size might have made for a difficult design in terms of electronic track length, but not the the point where it could make a big difference.
     
  3. iMeowbot macrumors G3

    iMeowbot

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2003
    #3
    The bits in the 17" PowerBook are going to be larger and present more inertia for the processor to overcome.

    Either that, or the 1% difference is just minor overhead from keeping a larger display updated.
     
  4. Peyton thread starter macrumors 68000

    Peyton

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2006
    #4
    fair enough, I was just a little shocked because its the 'flagship' mobile mac. I suppose I'll let this slip :D
     
  5. Josias macrumors 68000

    Josias

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    #5
    Yet how come the 17" MBP shows faster results same places on the site against a 2.16 GHz 15" MBP?:confused:
     
  6. Peyton thread starter macrumors 68000

    Peyton

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2006
    #6
    we are just too astonishingly observant ;) :D

    I mean enough to make even S Jobs cringe
     
  7. Lollypop macrumors 6502a

    Lollypop

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Location:
    Johannesburg, South Africa
    #7
    I also though the increased size of the laptop itself would be the possible reason, never though about the display itself. Could that really be the reason? I know 1% isn’t that much, but I though quartz extreme was there for the very reason of keeping the graphics nice a fast while reducing the processors workload?
     
  8. iMeowbot macrumors G3

    iMeowbot

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2003
    #8
    The tests for the two MacBook Pro models were performed two months apart, allowing plenty of debugging and minor improvements to sneak in. The latest 15" units could reflect those changes too, even if Apple haven't published new numbers for them.

    On the bigger bits thing, I definitely made that up :) On the display sizes, sure, that can still make a difference. No matter how cool your GPU is, there are still bitmaps that need to be passed through the CPU.
     
  9. disconap macrumors 68000

    disconap

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2005
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #9
    Plus, as far as I know, NO test is 100% accurate. So it could just be a random factor.
     
  10. Lollypop macrumors 6502a

    Lollypop

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Location:
    Johannesburg, South Africa
    #10
    Thats why you gota lova apple and the its users, you will not find something like this at a dell forum! :D
     
  11. NewSc2 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2005
    Location:
    Orange County, CA
    #11
    there are Dell forums??? they must be depressing =(
     
  12. Lollypop macrumors 6502a

    Lollypop

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Location:
    Johannesburg, South Africa
    #12
    Ive only heard rumors, but my shrink must have warned me to stay away from teh dell site for a reason! :p
     

Share This Page