From MacWorld tests (ex Speedmark) -
MacBook (MB) 2.16GHz v iMac 20 inch 2GHz - iMac better for Photoshop (PS) and much better for gaming, other tests = similar (OTS)
MacBook Pro (MBP) 2.2GHz v iMac 2GHz - iMac better for PS, OTS
MB 2.16GHz v MBP 2.2GHz - MBP much better for gaming, OTS
MBP 2.2GHz v iMac 2.4GHz - iMac better for PS and gaming, and has the edge in the other tests
MBP 2.4 GHz v iMac 2.4GHz - iMac better for PS and gaming, OTS
MBP 2.2GHz v MBP 2.4GHz - 2.4GHz = as the iMac 2.4GHz except for closer on PS and gaming.
(Gaming = Unreal Tournament 2004. Other games?)
The units are standard specification.
How well do the MacWorld tests describe real world performance?
Trying to get an understanding of the real world differences with regard to computing power/speed. I'm okay re form - size, weight, portability, materials, screen, connections, and also Santa Rosa -> able to recognise more RAM.
Upgrading RAM and hard disk - user ease - how would you order the MB, MBP and iMac?
Thank you for your help.
MacBook (MB) 2.16GHz v iMac 20 inch 2GHz - iMac better for Photoshop (PS) and much better for gaming, other tests = similar (OTS)
MacBook Pro (MBP) 2.2GHz v iMac 2GHz - iMac better for PS, OTS
MB 2.16GHz v MBP 2.2GHz - MBP much better for gaming, OTS
MBP 2.2GHz v iMac 2.4GHz - iMac better for PS and gaming, and has the edge in the other tests
MBP 2.4 GHz v iMac 2.4GHz - iMac better for PS and gaming, OTS
MBP 2.2GHz v MBP 2.4GHz - 2.4GHz = as the iMac 2.4GHz except for closer on PS and gaming.
(Gaming = Unreal Tournament 2004. Other games?)
The units are standard specification.
How well do the MacWorld tests describe real world performance?
Trying to get an understanding of the real world differences with regard to computing power/speed. I'm okay re form - size, weight, portability, materials, screen, connections, and also Santa Rosa -> able to recognise more RAM.
Upgrading RAM and hard disk - user ease - how would you order the MB, MBP and iMac?
Thank you for your help.