How much faster is 2.3 Macbook vs 1.67 PB?

Discussion in 'MacBook' started by zRedbullz, Mar 24, 2008.

  1. zRedbullz macrumors regular

    zRedbullz

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2006
    Location:
    UK
    #1
    I am thinking of shifting my 17'' 1.67 powerbook while I can still get some money back.

    I want to know, how much faster is the latest 2.3ghz macbook compared to my current 1.67ghz powerbook? Is the speed going to be that noticeable?

    Is it worth selling my PB at this stage?
     
  2. Phil A. Moderator

    Phil A.

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2006
    Location:
    Shropshire, UK
    #2
    I think you'll notice a very definite increase in performance.
    The MB has 2 cores, each running 50% faster than the single G4 in the PB (although not directly comparable due to the different processor architectures). On top of that, the C2D chip is 64 bit and has a front side bus speed of 800Mhz vs the 167Mhz of the powerbook. Finally, you have a SATA rather than a PATA disk in the MB.
    TUAW ran some tests comparing a 2Ghz MB Pro against a 1.5Ghz Powerbook and that came out over 4 times faster. The MB and MB Pro are very similar apart from the dedicated graphics in the MB Pro so you should expect to see similar massive performance increases.
     
  3. richard.mac macrumors 603

    richard.mac

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2007
    Location:
    51.50024, -0.12662
    #3
    if you dont need a dedicated graphics card sell the PB and get a MB albeit the integraded graphics card is probably faster than the dedicated in your PB.
     
  4. DoFoT9 macrumors P6

    DoFoT9

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2007
    Location:
    Singapore
    #4
    i think you will find very a very excessive speed increase. somewhat in between the 4-7x faster area in some cases.

    take for example converting videos in handbrake, my dad's g4 ibook (1.25ghz g4) converted at around 30fps. my core duo (cpu has now been outdated twice) converts at around 100fps on the same video file.

    now if you think that you would be getting a penryn processor, which is somewhat better than the C2D, which is better than my CD, which is much faster than the G4's, there is bound to be a quite impressive speed increase.

    woops gpu wasnt important
     
  5. zRedbullz thread starter macrumors regular

    zRedbullz

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2006
    Location:
    UK
    #5
    Sounds convincing enough, Phil. Thanks for that. It is a question of whether opting for a 13'' screen will be bearable, as I'm very much used to a 17''.

    I thought about a MBP, but the price difference over MB, being 2'' bigger with a better graphics card doesn't cut it for me - too much for not a lot.The new iMac looks brilliant, but the thought of a permanent machine is restrictive.

    I can probably get £500 max for my powerbook, only a £400 less than a brand new Macbook.

    Tough choices.
     
  6. netdog macrumors 603

    netdog

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2006
    Location:
    London
    #6
    While the MacBook will be waaayyyyyy faster. as someone with a Mac Pro 2.8 Octo at home, I find the 1.0 G4 iMac that I am writing this on to be plenty fast for everyday tasks such as email, browsing-based activities, word processing and the like. In fact, for mundane tasks, speed isn't even an issue on this machine and I notice no difference between this machine and my Mac Pro. It's a joy to use.

    It all comes down to what you are really going to be using the machine for.
     
  7. DoFoT9 macrumors P6

    DoFoT9

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2007
    Location:
    Singapore
    #7
    i even find that is the case for my g3 imac. it compares to my gf's 2.3ghz P4, i dont know how that works but it just seems that it works efficently just for web-browsing, emails and word processing.
     
  8. nick9191 macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2008
    Location:
    Britain
    #8
  9. DoFoT9 macrumors P6

    DoFoT9

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2007
    Location:
    Singapore
  10. Chundles macrumors G4

    Chundles

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2005
    #10
    The MacBook will absolutely smash the PowerBook in most things. It's going to be in the region of 6x faster in Handbrake rips, much faster in importing photos and music, it will actually run iMovie 7...

    It's damned quick I guess is the general gist of this post.
     
  11. nick9191 macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2008
    Location:
    Britain
    #11
    Oh and the graphics in the 1.67 PB will smash that of the macbook. The last ibooks have better graphics than the current macbooks apparently.
     
  12. Chundles macrumors G4

    Chundles

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2005
    #12
    Well, sort of. The PowerBook will struggle with HD playback whereas the MacBook will do it just fine, it might be better in 3D stuff but it's negated by the massively slower processor.

    A MacBook Pro of any ilk will completely annihilate the PowerBook
     
  13. DoFoT9 macrumors P6

    DoFoT9

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2007
    Location:
    Singapore
    #13
    i wouldnt say smash. more double. lol

    http://www.barefeats.com/pbcd.html
     
  14. Chundles macrumors G4

    Chundles

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2005
    #14
    Wow... and that's just a regular old Core Duo. The new Core 2s would improve greatly on those figures.

    And we were all really sceptical of the Intel switch...
     
  15. hipsheik macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2008
    #15
    I've been splitting time between a first gen macbook and a PB G4 1.67. The PB just feels slow. I believe the Intel Macbooks were the first Apple laptops to run OS X's UI responsively. The UI on the 1.67 just lags. So yeah, for everyday tasks, the Macbook is nicer. But if you've been using the PB for awhile, then it might be fine since you don't know what you're missing. I won't even get into my Mac Pro, which is buttery smooth.
     
  16. DoFoT9 macrumors P6

    DoFoT9

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2007
    Location:
    Singapore
    #16
    oh and especially with penryn (if and when). ohhh yea it would have x3100 aswell (as opposed to x1300). so yea nice.
     
  17. Chundles macrumors G4

    Chundles

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2005
    #17
    If and when? Penryn chips went into the laptops about two or three weeks ago.
     
  18. DoFoT9 macrumors P6

    DoFoT9

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2007
    Location:
    Singapore
    #18
    oh.... duh. :(:rolleyes:
     
  19. Pacer69 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2008
    #19
    I just upgraded from a 1.67 PB to a 2.4 MB and I can tell you the difference is HUGE. I've only had my MB in service about a week but everything is much snappier. Even running Quark in Rosetta seems every bit as fast if not faster than my 1.67. Web browsing is an amazing difference, pages load almost instantly if not instantly. My fans don't come on all the time. I'm not getting beachballs. Video loads quickly and plays extremely well, no hiccups or pauses. Using my computer is totally enjoyable again.

    You may want to think about a MBP, though, if you really like the 17" footprint you're currently in. I had a 17" PB 1.5ghz three years ago and went to the 1.67 15" two years ago b/c the 17 was too unwieldy for mobile use. After about a year with the 15", I found myself wishing for my 14" Pismo again. Now I'm finding (thus far) that the 13" BlackBook suits me just fine as my main machine. It's very Pismo-esque -- sturdy, gets the job done, small footprint. YMMV.
     

Share This Page