Which processor is faster?

CaptainCaveMann

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Oct 5, 2004
1,518
0
Hp dv1000 with a 1.5 pentium m vs. ibook 1.33 g4? Also both machines have 512 memory. These are the two notebooks i have a choice between. :confused:
 

edesignuk

Moderator emeritus
Mar 25, 2002
19,077
1
London, England
The 1.5 P-M will be faster, but not so much faster that I'd say you'd be stupid to get the iBook.

Which OS do you want, that is the question? :p
 

blackfox

macrumors 65816
Feb 18, 2003
1,208
4,029
PDX
As your question was phrased, the HP will be faster. In some cases probably considerably so. In other Altivec-optimized apps (for mac) the difference may be negligible.

Still, there are more important things than raw speed, and the ease-of-use and functionality should more than make up for time lost encoding or rendering, especially considering the time you will have to take to properly secure your XP system.

Without knowing more, that is all I can suggest.
 

CaptainCaveMann

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Oct 5, 2004
1,518
0
i want macs os but a year or two down the road i dont want to be like omg my computer sucks its sooooo slowwwwwww you guys know what i mean? So i was thinking maybe i should buy the faster windows comp so i get more for my money for a long period of time i am not what you would call rich. However i love macs os :cool:
 

blackfox

macrumors 65816
Feb 18, 2003
1,208
4,029
PDX
CaptainCaveMann said:
i want macs os but i a year or two down the road i dont want to be like omg my computer sucks its sooooo slowwwwwww you guys know what i mean?
Again, what will you be doing, and what do you mean by "slow"?

I am writing on my four-year-old Pismo, which is a converted G4 500. I do not think it is slow. Sure, if I am doing some hardcore rendering it is not fast, but with plenty of RAM, 90% of the activities I do on it work well and quickly.

Do not worry about the future and being "cutting-edge". There will always be something newer and faster available, but most computers, mac and pc alike, are useable (in terms of power) for a long time.
 

tveric

macrumors 6502
Jun 23, 2003
400
0
Windows alone will slow down your computer enough to wipe out the slight clock-speed advantage that the non-mac laptop would have. I have a 667 powerbook and it wipes out my brother's Dell 2.4 GHz Celeron machine at web browsing, photoshop, whatever. Okay, not exactly the same situation, I know, but there's a lot to be said for how much inherently faster the Mac OS is than Windows.
 

edesignuk

Moderator emeritus
Mar 25, 2002
19,077
1
London, England
tveric said:
Windows alone will slow down your computer enough to wipe out the slight clock-speed advantage that the non-mac laptop would have. I have a 667 powerbook and it wipes out my brother's Dell 2.4 GHz Celeron machine at web browsing, photoshop, whatever. Okay, not exactly the same situation, I know, but there's a lot to be said for how much inherently faster the Mac OS is than Windows.
Celeron = Complete and utter *****.
P-M = Very good CPU.
 

Westside guy

macrumors 603
Oct 15, 2003
5,385
2,207
The soggy side of the Pacific NW
CaptainCaveMann said:
i want macs os but a year or two down the road i dont want to be like omg my computer sucks its sooooo slowwwwwww you guys know what i mean?
Only you know what sort of personality you have.

If you're the type of person who buys a cutting edge x86 system and then, two years down the road, says "omg my computer sucks its sooooo slowwwwww" then you will be equally dissatisfied with Macs two years down the road.

But having worked in both worlds, I don't think the average person will have this reaction to a Mac after two years any more than they would to a PC.

The whole processor speed argument of PPC vs. x86 has been beaten to death in this forum many times. :D People will initially try to answer your questions once they figure out your specific concerns - but at some point the Mac and PC fanboys will come in and the thread will degrade into "does not" / "does too".
 

CaptainCaveMann

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Oct 5, 2004
1,518
0
OK these are the applications and progs i run right now on my amd 1800 with 512 memory at 400 megs with a 128 nvidia video card and a 120 gig hard drive at 7200 rpm. As follows; Studio mx,photoshop,microsoft office,web browsing and e-mail,aim messenger and msn messenger.Also games like wc3,halflife,ut2004
 

daveL

macrumors 68020
Jun 18, 2003
2,425
0
Montana
I'm not understanding how you make this decision based on CPU speed. You either like OS X and everything that goes along with it, or you like Windows XP with all the things (mostly bad) that goes with it.
 

CaptainCaveMann

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Oct 5, 2004
1,518
0
Westside guy said:
Only you know what sort of personality you have.

If you're the type of person who buys a cutting edge x86 system and then, two years down the road, says "omg my computer sucks its sooooo slowwwwww" then you will be equally dissatisfied with Macs two years down the road.

But having worked in both worlds, I don't think the average person will have this reaction to a Mac after two years any more than they would to a PC.

The whole processor speed argument of PPC vs. x86 has been beaten to death in this forum many times. :D People will initially try to answer your questions once they figure out your specific concerns - but at some point the Mac and PC fanboys will come in and the thread will degrade into "does not" / "does too".
I agree with most of that.Maybe i should ahve been more specific.In two years what im saying is i dont want my 1500 dollar computer to be so outdated im almost forced to buy another one and litterally have to throw the old one in the trash can because its lost every single utter value because there are programs and other os's that require far superior hardware
 

CaptainCaveMann

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Oct 5, 2004
1,518
0
daveL said:
I'm not understanding how you make this decision based on CPU speed. You either like OS X and everything that goes along with it, or you like Windows XP with all the things (mostly bad) that goes with it.
I like fast! Thats what i like.Snappy and fast mac osx is awesome but slow is not
 

Sun Baked

macrumors G5
May 19, 2002
14,874
57
If you want the fastest processor today, buy the PC.

If you want the machine that tends to age better with the newest OS as the years go by, buy the Mac.
 

UnixMac

macrumors 6502
Oct 1, 2002
326
0
Phoenix, AZ
CaptainCaveMann said:
OK these are the applications and progs i run right now on my amd 1800 with 512 memory at 400 megs with a 128 nvidia video card and a 120 gig hard drive at 7200 rpm. As follows; Studio mx,photoshop,microsoft office,web browsing and e-mail,aim messenger and msn messenger.Also games like wc3,halflife,ut2004
Dude, get the Mac. The 1.33 G4 IS faster than a 1.5 Pentium in every one of those apps. Clock for Clock a G4=1.3 P4's ... in most apps.

Also, OS X kicks ass over Winblows.. Mac's have a lot longer shelf life than winblows computers... thus their much higher re-sale value.

get the Mac and don't look back.
 

CaptainCaveMann

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Oct 5, 2004
1,518
0
Sun Baked said:
If you want the fastest processor today, buy the PC.

If you want the machine that tends to age better with the newest OS as the years go by, buy the Mac.
Thanks
 

blackfox

macrumors 65816
Feb 18, 2003
1,208
4,029
PDX
CaptainCaveMann said:
OK these are the applications and progs i run right now on my amd 1800 with 512 memory at 400 megs with a 128 nvidia video card and a 120 gig hard drive at 7200 rpm. As follows; Studio mx,photoshop,microsoft office,web browsing and e-mail,aim messenger and msn messenger.Also games like wc3,halflife,ut2004
Well, I hate to suggest it, but you may want to stick with a PC. Studio MX and Photoshop are expensive programs to replace with mac versions, and some of the MX suite runs fairly poorly on the mac side. Also gaming will be relatively poor.

If you can afford to replace the programs and can deal with fairly anemic gaming, macs are so much more enjoyable to use. Still, considering, I reluctantly have to recommend a PC.

One important note, however. If you want your machine to last and be useable for a long time, then pay attention to build-quality as well as specs.

A friend of mine bought a much faster PC laptop when I bought my Pismo four years ago, but it broke last year. So my computer wins the longevity contest. Also consider warranties and customer support.

I think HP builds pretty good machines, but I do not know. I do know that IBM laptops are among the best in the WinTel world, but you pay for them.

Good luck.
 

CaptainCaveMann

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Oct 5, 2004
1,518
0
UnixMac said:
Dude, get the Mac. The 1.33 G4 IS faster than a 1.5 Pentium in every one of those apps. Clock for Clock a G4=1.3 P4's ... in most apps.

Also, OS X kicks ass over Winblows.. Mac's have a lot longer shelf life than winblows computers... thus their much higher re-sale value.

get the Mac and don't look back.
Awesome thanks for the good advice :)
 

CaptainCaveMann

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Oct 5, 2004
1,518
0
blackfox said:
Well, I hate to suggest it, but you may want to stick with a PC. Studio MX and Photoshop are expensive programs to replace with mac versions, and some of the MX suite runs fairly poorly on the mac side. Also gaming will be relatively poor.

If you can afford to replace the programs and can deal with fairly anemic gaming, macs are so much more enjoyable to use. Still, considering, I reluctantly have to recommend a PC.

One important note, however. If you want your machine to last and be useable for a long time, then pay attention to build-quality as well as specs.

A friend of mine bought a much faster PC laptop when I bought my Pismo four years ago, but it broke last year. So my computer wins the longevity contest. Also consider warranties and customer support.

I think HP builds pretty good machines, but I do not know. I do know that IBM laptops are among the best in the WinTel world, but you pay for them.

Good luck.
What do you mean his laptop "broke"? Do you mean it crashed because crashes can be fixed and if it was a hardware issue like viruses destroying the mb then you can send it back to the factory and they can repair it also
 

Jovian9

macrumors 68000
Feb 19, 2003
1,950
99
Planet Zebes
Buy a 12" PowerBook 1.33GHz instead of the iBook 1.33GHz. The speed difference b/t the Mac or PC will be negligible. The speed and efficiency of the OS for Mac will be greater than that of XP. The time saved on a Mac by not downloading anti-virus/updates/blahblahblah will be huge. The PC will be a bit faster, but how much time do you want to spend securing your PC?
 

blackfox

macrumors 65816
Feb 18, 2003
1,208
4,029
PDX
CaptainCaveMann said:
What do you mean his laptop "broke"? Do you mean it crashed because crashes can be fixed and if it was a hardware issue like viruses destroying the mb then you can send it back to the factory and they can repair it also
Logic board failure. After 3+ years, it was no longer covered by any warranty and it was cheaper for him to replace it with a new machine. His optical drive and battery also had ceased to function.
 

Sabbath

macrumors 6502a
Sep 18, 2003
534
0
London
CaptainCaveMann said:
I agree with most of that.Maybe i should ahve been more specific.In two years what im saying is i dont want my 1500 dollar computer to be so outdated im almost forced to buy another one and litterally have to throw the old one in the trash can because its lost every single utter value because there are programs and other os's that require far superior hardware
Well if you look at the prices on ebay of a two year old iBook you will find they hold their value remarkably well for a computer. However the PC will be quicker for most tasks straight off, the pentium M is a really good chip. I personally would not go for the PC based on the OS but thats an issue for you to weigh up.

I dont know what the PC you are looking at is like, but I would presume it would have a higher resolution than the 14" iBook. I personally do not like the size of the 14" iBook, when you consider the low resolution and that may be an issue to you too. If you don't require a superdrive I would go for the portability of the 12" iBook instead, the resolution is the same and the portability of the machine is great.

Really you just have to weigh up what matters to you, but now the PC should be faster, where as 2 years down the line I would expect the mac to be faster as with each new OS your mac will get faster not significantly slower. Your mac would also be worth more 2 years down the line. Oh and just in case you want to play games, get the PC for gaming (its not that the iBook will be a lot slower its just games come slower to mac, there are fewer of them and they're more expensive) or better still get the a console.
 

UnixMac

macrumors 6502
Oct 1, 2002
326
0
Phoenix, AZ
edesignuk said:
Really don't think so...:rolleyes:
Even the most fanatical of PC defenders and lovers will tell you that a G4 puts out more flops per clock cycle than a P4... where do you think the whole Megahertz Myth marketing campaign was born? It became harder and harder to sell that the G4 was faster when the P4 was more than double the speed of the G4 sure, but otherwise at similar clock speed... it is a computer engineering fact that the G4 has more processing power for a given clock cycle.. The number 1.3 was cited in a comparison aggregate of several apps and came up with a 1.3 differential for Mhz... but this guy in this post tells it better than me... read carefully.

http://www.macopinion.com/columns/engine/01/07/25/talk/96.html
 

tveric

macrumors 6502
Jun 23, 2003
400
0
edesignuk said:
Really don't think so...:rolleyes:
what's it like to just stalk the macrumors forums day after day, for 10 hours a day, in order to put down macs and promote windows, without ever offering anything of substance to the rest of the readers?