Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Invalid Person · Jul 15, 2003, 08:58 PM

Well, I've been lurking about this forum for the last week or two in preperation of my first Mac purchase. I'm already pretty set on getting a PB, but I'm not quite able to wait much longer on my purchase.
Call me a skeptic, but I'm unsure about any near future powerbook updates and the optimal time for me to buy one is almost here.

The question that has been plaguing my mind, assuming that the 15" does not get updated anytime soon, is which would you all suggest: The 15" Tibook or the 12" AL.

I can't afford the 17" and, honestly, I'm not sure what I'd do with that much machine. Both the 12" and 15" should be more than enough, especially considering the fact that I've been using a 650mhz athlon for the last 4years that also happens to be on its last leg.

I'm hoping that you all could help me make up my mind, giving compelling reasons for or against either of the PBs.

urrl5201 · Jul 15, 2003, 09:29 PM

If at all possible I would recommend waiting a bit longer. If faced with the decision I would probably choose...the Ghz Ti simply because of its 64 MB graphics chip, faster CPU and arguably bigger better quality screen image. Sounds like I am pushing outdated technology but I really think the Ti is the better choice, especially as a desktop replacement. Besides, it runs OS9. Meanwhile I have no regrets over my 17" and would be happy to spend the extra money for it again.

schmoe · Jul 15, 2003, 09:29 PM

I like the Ti 15".

The only reason I see for buying the 12" is if you plan constant travel with it. It is about a pound lighter, more compact, and the casing may be more resistant to damage. Then again it doesn't feel as high of quality as the Ti 15"...

The 15" internals are much better: faster CPU with L3 cache, faster GPU with more RAM, user replaceable HD and keyboard. The screen is much larger. About the only downside is lack of Airport Extreme and Bluetooth, neither of which are required imho.

Right now is a great time to buy the 15", the top model's price is down to $2,600. I started a thread about a possible Al 15" vs Ti 15" and there doesn't seem to be a real big benefit even if a slightly updated Al 15" is released, unless you need AE, BT, or a possibly better case.

urrl5201 · Jul 15, 2003, 09:35 PM

Check out the comparison tests of the two laptops from MacWorld:

http://www.macworld.com/2003/04/revi...inchpowerbook/

Even the 867 Mhz Ti out does the 12" in this comparison.

todrain · Jul 15, 2003, 10:07 PM

After two years with a 1024x768 iBook, I got a 15 mostly because of the larger screen (the 500mhz G3 to 1GHZ G4 didn't hurt either

The 15 is still fine for travel, not too big, and the speed is outstanding.

That said, there is a part of me that does miss the iBook's size. While the 15 is not that bad, the iBook was so small that it was a pleasure to bring anywhere.

If you can afford the 15 and don't mind the larger size/weight you will get more out of the TIBook. If travel, not speed is your main concern, then the 12 is the way to go.

wildcard · Jul 16, 2003, 11:26 AM

Having owned both units (12" P-book, 15" 800 Tibook), I'd say that you're not going to be hurting performance-wise with either unit. It's really how much you value certain features. If you travel a lot, I'd recommend the 12"-it's a lot less fragile, especially with the hinge design. If you frequently swap external devices, the 12" would be a better choice as well. If you need the RAM overhead, the 15" is a more economical choice (2x 512 DIMMS is cheaper than the 1 GB DIMM the 12" would need). The 12" side mounted slot-drive is more convenient than the front loading 15", especially if you used your laptop ON YOUR LAP. The video drivers for the ATI cards in the 15" are more mature at this time than the NVIDIA cards in the 12", so you can expect some speed edge there (nothing major). The heat issue in the 12" may be something to consider-the 15" does not heat around the top/trackpad area at all. Airport Extreme vs. Airport seems to be a wash for me-no noticeable advantage for either. Bluetooth is not built into the 15".

wildcard · Jul 16, 2003, 11:35 AM

Having owned both units (12" P-book, 15" 800 Tibook), I'd say that you're not going to be hurting performance-wise with either unit. It's really how much you value certain features. If you travel a lot, I'd recommend the 12"-it's a lot less fragile, especially with the hinge design. If you frequently swap external devices, the 12" would be a better choice as well. If you need the RAM overhead, the 15" is a more economical choice (2x 512 DIMMS is cheaper than the 1 GB DIMM the 12" would need). The 12" side mounted slot-drive is more convenient than the front loading 15", especially if you used your laptop ON YOUR LAP. The video drivers for the ATI cards in the 15" are more mature at this time than the NVIDIA cards in the 12", so you can expect some speed edge there (nothing major). The heat issue in the 12" may be something to consider-the 15" does not heat around the top/trackpad area at all. Airport Extreme vs. Airport seems to be a wash for me-no noticeable advantage for either. Bluetooth is not built into the 15".

juanpacolopez · Jul 16, 2003, 02:17 PM

Originally posted by wildcard:
Having owned both units (12" P-book, 15" 800 Tibook), I'd say that you're not going to be hurting performance-wise with either unit. It's really how much you value certain features. If you travel a lot, I'd recommend the 12"-it's a lot less fragile, especially with the hinge design. If you frequently swap external devices, the 12" would be a better choice as well. If you need the RAM overhead, the 15" is a more economical choice (2x 512 DIMMS is cheaper than the 1 GB DIMM the 12" would need). The 12" side mounted slot-drive is more convenient than the front loading 15", especially if you used your laptop ON YOUR LAP. The video drivers for the ATI cards in the 15" are more mature at this time than the NVIDIA cards in the 12", so you can expect some speed edge there (nothing major). The heat issue in the 12" may be something to consider-the 15" does not heat around the top/trackpad area at all. Airport Extreme vs. Airport seems to be a wash for me-no noticeable advantage for either. Bluetooth is not built into the 15".

Don't underestimate the power of driver optimization too quickly. Aside from normal driver optimizations, the RADEON 9000 in the 15" Ti has programmable pixel and vertex shaders, which the GeForce 440 (and 420) Go cards currently lack.

While not a HUGE deal, in quite a few games (newer ones especially) the 15" can have a fairly significant speed advantage over the 12" and even the 17".

So, if you're into gaming... it's something to consider. The 1ghz 15" IS the best PB for gaming at the moment.

You're also right about the heat. Say what you will about TiBook heat... but at least it doesn't get hot on the parts where you rest your wrists all day. That's one of the only things (besides the size/performance thing) that kept me from getting a 12", as it's a DYNAMITE machine otherwise IMO.

nayr x · Jul 16, 2003, 02:25 PM

It depends what you are doing with it... My younger sister just got a 12" for college, and it is the perfect choice for her. Lightweight, easiy to carry around and has more than enough power to run Office and safari and itunes, or whatever else college students use their computers for. However, if you are more into the creative fields, you will most likely want the added screen space (12" is just too small IMHO for any serious layout software or FCP), as well as the ability to boot to OS9, and on and on. I am still using my 500Ti and wouldnt trade it for a 12" even if it were a staright up trade. That's how much I love working on my Ti... But its all relative, personal preference. Either machine is a great choice!

urrl5201 · 04:07 PM

I doubt the post that the 15" bests the 17" in the gaming dept, at least as far as frame rates go. Wish factual statistics would be posted. MacWorld seems to think differently in the Quake III gaming test:

http://www.macworld.com/2003/06/revi...inchpowerbook/

Although such a difference is negligible it does show the 17" a hair quicker.

juanpacolopez · 06:21 PM

Originally posted by urrl5201:
I doubt the post that the 15" bests the 17" in the gaming dept, at least as far as frame rates go. Wish factual statistics would be posted. MacWorld seems to think differently in the Quake III gaming test:

http://www.macworld.com/2003/06/revi...inchpowerbook/

Although such a difference is negligible it does show the 17" a hair quicker.

Ignore Quake3.... as the game is RATHER old now.

Head over to the games forum here... people have posted all sorts of numbers for UT2k3 specifically that show the 15" doing much better...

Warcraft III was also mentioned as performing better (though it's impossible to get a "hard" number in war3) over there.

I'd believe it too... nVidia's Mac drivers are notoriously bad compared to their windows counterparts, and it's a technical FACT that the Go's lack any sort of pixel/vertex shaders.

Aside from games...

That very same Macworld review (which I've read once before, when I was first in the market for my PB and trying to decide between the 17/15 after I ruled out the 12).... look at the performance chart.

The performance difference is negligble to the point that it's nill. Notice the 15 actually beats the 17 in 1 or 2 tests, and when the 17" wins it's by a TINY amount.

Don't get me wrong, I think the 17" is an amazing piece of hardware... but let's at least be realistic about the differences.

urrl5201 · 10:58 PM

Ignore Quake III? Why didn't MacWorld? Seems they had a reason to use it. But yes, perhaps we should throw out any professional organization's comparo if it does not agree with our own opinion.

If I only had a few links to some professional organizations besides Macworld...but you seem to be avoiding that and referring me to a game forum? Hey I am interested in whatever is the realistic truth, but you seem to be basing your opinion on UT2K3 and are not even sure about war3. I think if you are not sure you should not be so quick to say " The 1ghz 15" IS the best PB for gaming at the moment." and admit that certain games will work better on either GPU. In my opinion no one has really tested and published a comparison using many different gaming examples for both chips. At least I can be realistic enough to say different games can give different results instead of giving the trophy to the chip that runs the newest game faster. I agree; yes, let's be realistic about this. Convince me and post some realistic links. I will be happy to check them out. Didn't see anything on the gaming forum to prove what you are saying either.

You say the 17" won only by a tiny amount when I already said the 17" surpassed the 15" by a hair on that particular comparo. Are you trying to start a controversy here? Sure seems that way. Thought us Mac users should be on the same side. Nitpicking over little or nothing does not make sense; both laptops are great machines and in my opinion basically pretty much equal in general performance.

Let's not kid ourselves; neither of these laptops are top gaming choices anyway; a good PC desktop would blow them away quite easily. Seems to me like we are in the same raft arguing over which side to row during a race while others are zipping by in speed boats. Seems kinda pathetic...

juanpacolopez · Jul 17, 2003, 10:19 AM

Originally posted by urrl5201:
Ignore Quake III? Why didn't MacWorld? Seems they had a reason to use it. But yes, perhaps we should throw out any professional organization's comparo if it does not agree with our own opinion.

If I only had a few links to some professional organizations besides Macworld...but you seem to be avoiding that and referring me to a game forum? Hey I am interested in whatever is the realistic truth, but you seem to be basing your opinion on UT2K3 and are not even sure about war3. I think if you are not sure you should not be so quick to say " The 1ghz 15" IS the best PB for gaming at the moment." and admit that certain games will work better on either GPU. In my opinion no one has really tested and published a comparison using many different gaming examples for both chips. At least I can be realistic enough to say different games can give different results instead of giving the trophy to the chip that runs the newest game faster. I agree; yes, let's be realistic about this. Convince me and post some realistic links. I will be happy to check them out. Didn't see anything on the gaming forum to prove what you are saying either.

You say the 17" won only by a tiny amount when I already said the 17" surpassed the 15" by a hair on that particular comparo. Are you trying to start a controversy here? Sure seems that way. Thought us Mac users should be on the same side. Nitpicking over little or nothing does not make sense; both laptops are great machines and in my opinion basically pretty much equal in general performance.

Let's not kid ourselves; neither of these laptops are top gaming choices anyway; a good PC desktop would blow them away quite easily. Seems to me like we are in the same raft arguing over which side to row during a race while others are zipping by in speed boats. Seems kinda pathetic...

Wow... considering you're the one who blasted MY post at first...

At any rate, here's an EXCELLENT explanation of why the RADEON 9000 IS a better chip than the GF4 Go's (read Graymalkin's post towards the bottom):

http://forums.macnn.com/showthread.p...hreadid=167745

If you'd like I could do some further research when I get home, break out the whitepapers for the Go's and the Ati chips, do a full feature by feature breakdown.

Hell, I could even do up a flow chart showing the rendering path of each and why the RADEON is more efficient.

But I won't, because I'm at work and have better things to do at the moment.

I'm just stating that for modern games, the 15" is better equipped in the GPU department than the 17", THAT'S ALL.

The reason MacWorld used Quake3 is twofold.

1) it's been around a LONG time, people know what a "good" framerate is and what other machines would get in Q3

2) Quake3 is (was actually) a standard benchmark in the PC world, one that would offer more or less direct comparison w/ PC laptops. Quake3 is one of the few games where the porting effort from x86--->PPC doesn't hurt performance too much, and a more direct comparison w/ our windows cousins could be made.

You're right, we are on the same "side". No powerbook is DESIGNED for gaming... but personally I like to take some time off from my real work every once in a while to play some games so I don't get so worked up over such a silly thing.

urrl5201 · Jul 17, 2003, 10:58 AM

I wasn't looking for an explanation of how the ATI worked, which was at the very end. Full feature breakdowns and white papers are not necessary. Performance figures were what I was looking for and I found none. I did appreciate what djjava posted on that thread though.

"I love my PB17.

simple as that.

You don't like it? Fine. Don't get it.

You wanna wait for the 15" Al Book. Fine. Wait.

You don't like "chrome" keys? Fine. Don't buy an AlBook.

Let's stop the pissing contest. whether you own a 15" TiBook, 17" AlBook, 12" AlBook, or you are waiting for the 15" AlBook, we can all agree... THESE ARE DAMN FINE MACHINES, NO MATTER HOW YOU SLICE THEM."

Sorry if I seemed to be blasting your post. Thanks anyway for trying.

juanpacolopez · Jul 17, 2003, 11:23 AM

Originally posted by urrl5201:
I wasn't looking for an explanation of how the ATI worked, which was at the very end. Full feature breakdowns and white papers are not necessary. Performance figures were what I was looking for and I found none. I did appreciate what djjava posted on that thread though.

"I love my PB17.

simple as that.

You don't like it? Fine. Don't get it.

You wanna wait for the 15" Al Book. Fine. Wait.

You don't like "chrome" keys? Fine. Don't buy an AlBook.

Let's stop the pissing contest. whether you own a 15" TiBook, 17" AlBook, 12" AlBook, or you are waiting for the 15" AlBook, we can all agree... THESE ARE DAMN FINE MACHINES, NO MATTER HOW YOU SLICE THEM."

Sorry if I seemed to be blasting your post. Thanks anyway for trying.

Bottom line is there's a PB for everyone. Pick any one of them and you'll likely not be disappointed.