Intel Macs only one fourth, not four times faster - Macworld

[piedad]

http://www.macworld.com/2006/01/feat...est1/index.php

"Macworld has gotten hold of the x86 iMacs and run some benchmarks. There's lots of good news for speed-starved Mac users. The iMac boots in 25 seconds, and shaves the time taken to perform some mathematically-intensive tasks by a third.
But on the whole, the results show a speed bump of only a measly quarter over today's overclocked G4 and new G5 processors.

"Unfortunately, our tests suggest that the remarkable results of Apple's published tests aren't reflected in most of the real-world applications we tested. Based on our initial tests, the new Core-Duo-based iMac seems to be 10-20 per cent faster than its predecessor when it comes to native applications, with some select tasks showing improvement above and beyond that," writes Macworld's Jason Snell"

Hmmm...maybe selling my Powerbook is premature?

[Dave_D]

That's the benchmarks I've been waiting for.

There was no doubt in my mind the MacTels would be faster, but 2-4x is just unrealistic.

10-20% improvement is still no slouch and is a genuine improvement enough to attract those who need more processing power, but not enough for the existing base to junk all their PPC based macs.

[piedad]

That's the benchmarks I've been waiting for.

There was no doubt in my mind the MacTels would be faster, but 2-4x is just unrealistic.

10-20% improvement is still no slouch and is a genuine improvement enough to attract those who need more processing power, but not enough for the existing base to junk all their PPC based macs.

Yes, and considering the loss of firewire800, modem, and svhs on the MacBook Pro, plus the performance hit for most apps which have to run on Rosetta, its a definite "not yet" for me.

[berniej]

But we all have to consider the fact that this is a "Revision A" hardware and I'm sure that the "Revision B" will be much better than this batch.

[doblezeta]

maccast also noted that other tests done by other sites show that the new intel books are not yet fully taking use of its processor power. the said tests conducted by macworld show that the mac was only using 7-8% (while rendering imovie clips) of its processor power, still with increased rendering time compared to the g5 which were using 42% processor power. future optimization of the software will surely increase the benchmarks of the core duos

[muddybanks]

But we all have to consider the fact that this is a "Revision A" hardware and I'm sure that the "Revision B" will be much better than this batch.

Touche

I'm a firm believer in Rev B's. I've taken the early adopter route too often in the past.

[King]

Could it be possible that the MacBoook Pro suffers from the slow hard disk? The chip may be 4-5 faster under synthetic benchmaks but the other components are the same.

As of the moment Intel's chipset doesnt natively support Firewire 800 thus it isnt part of the MacBook. According to Apple 90% of their customers use everything but the built-in modem as a ways to go online. So like the parallel port it was given the boot.

Seeming Intel's Oregon office did the internal work for Apple I dont see much of a hardware issue. Apple does the external industrial design.

Now the challenge is to find a reseller who will be selling this lovely thing at US price + VAT.

maccast also noted that other tests done by other sites show that the new intel books are not yet fully taking use of its processor power. the said tests conducted by macworld show that the mac was only using 7-8% (while rendering imovie clips) of its processor power, still with increased rendering time compared to the g5 which were using 42% processor power. future optimization of the software will surely increase the benchmarks of the core duos

[Gomi]

Could it be possible that the MacBoook Pro suffers from the slow hard disk? The chip may be 4-5 faster under synthetic benchmaks but the other components are the same.

As of the moment Intel's chipset doesnt natively support Firewire 800 thus it isnt part of the MacBook. According to Apple 90% of their customers use everything but the built-in modem as a ways to go online. So like the parallel port it was given the boot.

Seeming Intel's Oregon office did the internal work for Apple I dont see much of a hardware issue. Apple does the external industrial design.

Now the challenge is to find a reseller who will be selling this lovely thing at US price + VAT.

the hard drive is 5400... just like in most powerbooks.

i dont think apple booted off the parallel port, we never had it in the first place.

and yes, i think buying a macbook pro rev a immediately is ill advised. witness the first revision of the powerpc the 601, the first pentium with no mmx., etc. so instead of buying one, id rather complain about the cheeky name

[King]

As I mentioned in my previous post the components are the same except for the Intel Core Duo, logicboard & memory. Steve even mentioned that in his keynote.

When I said "booted" I mean removed.

The 601 internals was probably done by Apple themselves or farmed out to a non-PowerPC manufacturer. Seeming it was the first PowerPC personal computer it isnt surprising it would have problems. Intel on the other hand was contracted to do the internals for Apple so the chance of failures is far lower than one would expect. The external design of the MacBook Pro is virtually the same as the Powerbook G4s. Intel has many years of experience in doing logicboards for a lot of OEMs. Intel Core isnt a new product but was derived from the Pentium M. If ever there will be problems it would probably come from software. This isnt a G3, G4 or a G5 anymore but an Intel Core Mac. If ever the Mactels will have problems then all PC OEMs would have problems as well. So far the only problem I've heard about Intel Core Duo laptops is that Windows XP drains the battery whenever a USB device is plugged in.

The question is when will software be fully optimized for Intel? Adobe/Macromedia will offer universal apps by the end of 2006 at the earliest. No word yet from Microsoft for MSO Universal binaries either. If I was a creative pro I'd stick it out with my PowerPC Macs until 2007.

the hard drive is 5400... just like in most powerbooks.

i dont think apple booted off the parallel port, we never had it in the first place.

and yes, i think buying a macbook pro rev a immediately is ill advised. witness the first revision of the powerpc the 601, the first pentium with no mmx., etc. so instead of buying one, id rather complain about the cheeky name

[hubes]

"Should I buy now or wait?" This is a question most people ask when they are considering a computer. For some people speed really matters especially if they're doing processor intensive tasks but for a lot of people (those who work with documents and spreadsheets come to mind) won't really need to upgrade just to get a 10% speed increase. Even if the Core Duo was 2-4 times faster I don't think I would get one if the PowerBook that I'm using is doing the job that I need it to. You should get a new computer only if you need it.