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. 😕
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.
Which processor is faster?
- Thread starter CaptainCaveMann
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
blackfox
macrumors 65816
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.
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.
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 😎
blackfox
macrumors 65816
CaptainCaveMann said:
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.
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.
Westside guy
macrumors 604
CaptainCaveMann 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. 😀 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".
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
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 hardwareWestside guy said:
UnixMac
macrumors 6502
CaptainCaveMann 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.
blackfox
macrumors 65816
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.CaptainCaveMann said:
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 alsoblackfox said:
Jovian9
macrumors 68000
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?
Sabbath
macrumors 6502a
CaptainCaveMann said:
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
edesignuk said:
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
edesignuk said:
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?