It was consumer level when we had one of the CPUs out. There was onboard SCSI, but we were only using the IDE controller.
Try a fresh video card. Just swapping to a Geforce 2MX level card made the old dual seem much snappier.
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.
Please Help! [CPU comparison: G4 vs. Intels]
- Thread starter Feanor2004
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It was consumer level when we had one of the CPUs out. There was onboard SCSI, but we were only using the IDE controller.
Try a fresh video card. Just swapping to a Geforce 2MX level card made the old dual seem much snappier.
Originally posted by Feanor2004
Maybe it's possible to give a rough estimate?... couse I'm finaly lost in these nombers
This is can be a really difficult and technical question, but argueably, the G4 is at least 1.5 times the equivalent clock speed of the P4. However, because of the way the G4 can handle computations it can be faster in the handling of certain numeral sets. I will find a link from Apple explaining this if I can.
But, other things come into play as well, clock speed being just one number like horsepower. In a car, horsepower is a useful number, but some cars with 160h can be as fast or faster than cars with 220h, this number is checked by the weight of the vehicle, the amount of torque, the transmission, etc. In a computer this has the same sets of complications, regarding FSB, memory, etc. Plus, there is the accounting of the 'throttle-down' effect that P4s experience in portables, that 3.0 Ghz number is typically the fastest the machine can get, but not an acutal measure of performance.
In my experience, my 550mhz G4 TiBook is as useful as a 2.0 Ghz P4 desktop in doing almost everything, however I get more done because of the ease of use in OSX. That's more a measure to me than anything else.
Remember two things about clock speed:
1. The internet isn't any faster with a 3.0 Ghz chip than a 2.2.
2. Your printer won't print any faster.
http://arstechnica.com/cpu/index.html
You may want to look at some of the Jon "Hannibal" Stokes articles, like ...
http://arstechnica.com/cpu/01q2/p4andg4e/p4andg4e-1.html
and there are some more comparisons in his 970 stuff, which is up to chapter 5.
You may want to look at some of the Jon "Hannibal" Stokes articles, like ...
http://arstechnica.com/cpu/01q2/p4andg4e/p4andg4e-1.html
and there are some more comparisons in his 970 stuff, which is up to chapter 5.
If you're not going to do any processor-intensive operations, I think you should look all past that and just ask yourself this question:
"Would I rather use OS X or Windows XP?"
Trust me, it's a no-brainer.
"Would I rather use OS X or Windows XP?"
Trust me, it's a no-brainer.
Originally posted by neoelectronaut
If you're not going to do any processor-intensive operations, I think you should look all past that and just ask yourself this question:
"Would I rather use OS X or Windows XP?"
Trust me, it's a no-brainer.
I agree. Despite what some diehard Apple fans may believe, there is simply no way an 800MHz G4 iBook can come close to competing with a recent Centrino or Pentium 4 notebook. That said, the iBooks (and iMacs and eMacs) have more than enough grunt to cope with almost all day-to-day computing tasks, ie: precisely the market at which they are aimed.
OS X is a great operating system, and integrates with the hardware in a way which is very difficult for Windows or Linux to achieve on x86. Apple's manufacturing quality is (usually) excellent. The iBook is designed to survive routine physical abuse at the hands of clumsy students. The hardware also has the advantage of mostly looking incredibly techno-sexy as well
It's the whole package that is the winner (even if it's going to get its rear-end kicked in an all-out CPU slug-fest with a brick shaped 1.8GHz Centrino from IBM or Dell ;-) )
Re: Gravity Benchmarks...
Based on the laws of physics, they both seem to accelerate towards the ground at the same speed when thrown out the window.
For some strange reason there are more PC users enjoying the satisfying crunch at the end of the gravity test than Mac users.
Maybe it's because the PC users can't handle a Mac being just as fast as the PC, and keep having to repeat the tests expecting a different result.
Based on the laws of physics, they both seem to accelerate towards the ground at the same speed when thrown out the window.
For some strange reason there are more PC users enjoying the satisfying crunch at the end of the gravity test than Mac users.
Maybe it's because the PC users can't handle a Mac being just as fast as the PC, and keep having to repeat the tests expecting a different result.
ok, now I'm realized that iBook is a fine build, beauty designed, small and light, but... have a poor perfomance against PC laptops in the same price (Toshiba m20 - 257, IBM thinkPad R40e, etc..) am I right?
No,
not poor performance, a bit slower on SOME task and probably a bit faster on some other task (maybe fewer).
iBooks are not the speed demon of laptop, they are consummer product targeted at students mainely.
Basicaly, it means that for normal use (office, internet, mp3), you will never see any speed difference between an iBook or any other laptop. This is why contrary to popular believes, speed is the less important factor for consumer computer (unless gaming is involved). What a consumer product need is: reliability, strong built, good life expectancy, ease of use, good software, long life battery, light weight and possibly good look. All these points are were Apple shines.
If you still unconvinces, just go to a store where you can try out an iBook and play with it for a while, doing what you would mostly do on a normal day. This will allow you to see OSX, see how fast/slow the iBook is and also see if you like the product or not. I should also point out that its the best way to sell a, iBook since everyone I know who tried one wanted one afterward ;-)
Good luck. If you have any more questions, feel free to ask.
not poor performance, a bit slower on SOME task and probably a bit faster on some other task (maybe fewer).
iBooks are not the speed demon of laptop, they are consummer product targeted at students mainely.
Basicaly, it means that for normal use (office, internet, mp3), you will never see any speed difference between an iBook or any other laptop. This is why contrary to popular believes, speed is the less important factor for consumer computer (unless gaming is involved). What a consumer product need is: reliability, strong built, good life expectancy, ease of use, good software, long life battery, light weight and possibly good look. All these points are were Apple shines.
If you still unconvinces, just go to a store where you can try out an iBook and play with it for a while, doing what you would mostly do on a normal day. This will allow you to see OSX, see how fast/slow the iBook is and also see if you like the product or not. I should also point out that its the best way to sell a, iBook since everyone I know who tried one wanted one afterward ;-)
Good luck. If you have any more questions, feel free to ask.
New iBook G4 yesterday
I just bought my wife a new iBook G4 yesterday, for her to use at work. She teaches biology at a major midwestern university, and has a desktop peecee to use.
I would rather spend $1500 of my own money and have her happy using OSX... her life is now better by unplugging that peecee and stuffing it in a corner.
12" screen (that's what she wanted... me, I would have gotten a 14)
Combo
640 RAM
60GB HD
BlueTooth
Airport Extreme
Office X educational (now with free upgrade, decent)
I don't CARE if it is slightly slower than a peecee... peecees do not run OSX... and Panther is where it's at, baby!
She will use the internet, run Excel & Word, and that's about it. For those items, there is no significant speed difference, for the good or bad.
She will use Final Cut and Keynote on it, too. You just can't do that on a PeeCee.
I just bought my wife a new iBook G4 yesterday, for her to use at work. She teaches biology at a major midwestern university, and has a desktop peecee to use.
I would rather spend $1500 of my own money and have her happy using OSX... her life is now better by unplugging that peecee and stuffing it in a corner.
12" screen (that's what she wanted... me, I would have gotten a 14)
Combo
640 RAM
60GB HD
BlueTooth
Airport Extreme
Office X educational (now with free upgrade, decent)
I don't CARE if it is slightly slower than a peecee... peecees do not run OSX... and Panther is where it's at, baby!
She will use the internet, run Excel & Word, and that's about it. For those items, there is no significant speed difference, for the good or bad.
She will use Final Cut and Keynote on it, too. You just can't do that on a PeeCee.
size matters
one thing the ibook has going for it is size. there is no equivalent for the price in the pc world.
im still using my thinkpad 240x (8" x 10" x 1.2") because i need something small and the wintel world charges an arm and a leg for a 12" semi-ultra portable (thinkpad x), never mind the ultra portables (that .5" thick vaio)
one thing the ibook has going for it is size. there is no equivalent for the price in the pc world.
im still using my thinkpad 240x (8" x 10" x 1.2") because i need something small and the wintel world charges an arm and a leg for a 12" semi-ultra portable (thinkpad x), never mind the ultra portables (that .5" thick vaio)