[johnmc]

Just wondering if anyone has a sense of what the speed hit is for not having L3 cache vs having it might be in the new PB12s?

Also, what are the differences with the new DDR Ram vs the older SDRAM?

I ask this because I'm trying to get a sense of the potential speed difference between a new 12" PB and my current TiPB 800 DVI which as L3 Cache.

[icruise]

My guess is that the 12" will be somewhat slower than your powerbook. The extra mhz will not make up for the lack of L3 cache, and the DDR probably won't do much at all for speed (certainly not enough to make up for the lack of the L3 cache). But it should still be quite fast.

[euphras]

Just two sentences: stay with your Ti 800MHz. It�s undoubtable faster than the 12" Alubook (not to mention the bigger screen, DVI, PC-card slot,.....).

[CheesePuff]

The 867 MHz PowerBook G4 12.1" with 256 MB DDR RAM is about 10% faster then an iBook G3 800 MHz with 640 MB RAM.

Not too much for the price.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by CheesePuff:
The 867 MHz PowerBook G4 12.1" with 256 MB DDR RAM is about 10% faster then an iBook G3 800 MHz with 640 MB RAM.

Not too much for the price.

Unless you need Altivec. In which case, I'd assume the performance gains to be pretty dramatic.
And it evens out the deal considerably if your primary objective relies heavily on Altivec (mine does. )

It *is* a Powerbook, after all.

-s*

[Hozie]

The 867 MHz PowerBook G4 12.1" with 256 MB DDR RAM is about 10% faster then an iBook G3 800 MHz with 640 MB RAM.

And you know this...how? Linkage please!

[seanyepez]

According to the Xbench database, the 12-inch PowerBook scores 15 points higher than an 800-megahertz PowerBook with a final score of 70 running Xbench 1.0b7. The PowerBook is thus a little over 20% faster than the iBook.

[issa]

johnmc,

Don't be mislead by what I think must be a typo on Sean's part above. For some reason the last few posts in this thread have been comparing the 800MHz (G3) iBook to the new 12" PowerBook, and that includes Seans' reference to benchmark scores.

Getting back to your TiPB 800 DVI vs. the 12" PB...

Real-world tests are hard to quantify without reference points, but rest assured that the 800 MHz G4 with the L3 cache will perform faster overall. The presence of the 1MB DDR L3 cache makes a significant difference. The Mobility Radeon 7500 graphic board in your 800 DVI is no slouch, either. You also asked about DDR RAM. While the RAM itself has the potential to increase speed in future models, the way it is currently implemented on the 12" and 17" PB will not increase speed by a noticeable amount.

The only reason you would want to move to the 12" PB is if the compact form factor is of ultimate importance to you. Of course, you'd have to be willing to give up the following for the sake of saving a few cubic inches and 300 grams of weight:

• Your larger, brighter display with greater screen real estate. The 256x86 difference between 1024x768 and 1280x854 is a big one. The pixel density (dpi) is also lower on your display, which is a good thing because that makes text, icons, etc. appear larger on the screen. (I believe the 15.2" TiBook is 101 dpi as opposed to 106 dpi on the 12" PB).
• 1MB DDR L3 cache
• PC card slot
• Greater battery capacity (55.3 watt-hour vs. 47 watt-hour)

[Hozie]

According to the Xbench database, the 12-inch PowerBook scores 15 points higher than an 800-megahertz PowerBook with a final score of 70 running Xbench 1.0b7. The PowerBook is thus a little over 20% faster than the iBook.

Yeah, I've taken a look at it on the xBench site, but I don't know if I believe those figures. Do you really believe the 867 sans L3 is faster than the Ti800? If it is, all the better, but it just...I don't know...feels wrong.

If anyone has both, please post a subjective 'overall feel' opinion.

[issa]

Hozie,

I think that's what you call a typo. I'm quite sure that Sean meant to compare the 12" PowerBook with the 800MHz iBook, not the PB800 DVI.

FWIW

[johnmc]

I was the original poster of this thread.

I tried something which is interesting. I read somewhere that with my PB800 DVI when running on the battery could make an adjustment in the energy saver options as to whether to run the processor on "highest" or "reduced."

Somehwere I'd heard that running it on "reduced" effectively turned off the L3 Cache.

So, I tried this out and have done some testing. Though not extensive testing, I have found it has really only slightly affected some "snappiness" in Adobe GoLive. All other applications I've been using give me now difference that I can tell.

I have not done giant image file manipuation in Photoshop and maybe I'd notice it there.

Or, perhaps the "highest" vs "reduced" setting has nothing to do with L3 Cache.

John

[egilDOTnet]

[Hmm, repeating myself here, so snipped this one]

[egilDOTnet]

Originally posted by johnmc:

Somehwere I'd heard that running it on "reduced" effectively turned off the L3 Cache.

John

If you really want to try out how your machine reacts to the lack of L3 cache, download the CHUD developer tools from Apples developer pages

http://developer.apple.com/tools/debuggers.html

After installation, go to your preferences under t he apple menu and turn off your L3 cache temporarily and do your testing...

[Hozie]

Hozie,

I think that's what you call a typo. I'm quite sure that Sean meant to compare the 12" PowerBook with the 800MHz iBook, not the PB800 DVI.

No doubt that's what he meant, but if you take a look on the xBench site, you'll see that the average 12" PB scores better/about the same than the Ti800! That looks very suspicious to me...

http://ladd.dyndns.org/xbench/compar...nVersion=1.0b7

[issa]

Hozie,

Yes, I looked at the results and they do seem a bit odd.

Of course, my comment about the typo was directed at the fact that Sean was writing of the 12-inch PowerBook outscoring the "other machine" by 15 points, and that surely couldn't have been in reference to the 800 DVI.

[Hozie]

Of course, my comment about the typo was directed at the fact that Sean was writing of the 12-inch PowerBook outscoring the "other machine" by 15 points, and that surely couldn't have been in reference to the 800 DVI.

I know mate. Still, the xBench thing does look strange, dunnit? Any other thoughts on that?

[Sean Li]

I've got both the 12" PowerBook, with 640MB RAM, and the 15" TiBook 800MHz, with 1GB RAM, in front of me, and just ran XBench 1.0 on both simultaneously. The software configuration on both is absolutely identical, as I've only just copied everything over to the 12" from the Ti. Here are some of the stats.

The overall system score is:
12" G4 867MHz - 70.17
15" Ti 800MHz - 67.62

CPU Test:
12" - 95.03
15" - 89.38

Memory Test:
12" - 80.37
15" - 88.33

Quartz Graphics Test:
12" - 73.93
15" - 101.43

OpenGL Graphics Test:
12" - 100.95
15" - 86.38

User Interface Test:
12" - 57.52
15" - 86.81

Disk Test:
12" - 57.03
15" - 34.75

My main reason for getting the 12" is that I carry the PowerBook between home and the office every day, with various papers, gadgets, etc.. so something a bit more portable is quite valuable. I also have a bluetooth phone and PDA, so having built-in bluetooth means one less thing to remember to bring and to have to plug in.

In the short time that I've used the 12" it's felt just as fast as the 15". Additional RAM makes a significant difference though; the 12" that I tried in the shop only had 256MB in it, and was perceivably slower.

Full results are available on the XBench website.

Browsing a few of the reports on that site indicates that one area where the 12" seems usually better than the 15" 800 is in the disk test. That does surprise me as I thought that the disk on the 15" is 5400rpm, while the 12" is 4200rpm.

FWIW

[Eug]

How much does Xbench use the L3 cache anyway? Also, it seems like Xbench really doesn't like Radeon cards for some reason, at least for the OpenGL test.

In any case, the speed differences are not going to be huge. I wouldn't base your purchase on speed so much as general functionality.

One thing I noticed though is that my TiBook 1 GHz has a way nicer screen than the iBook 800. The iBook 800 is supposed to use the same screen as the G4 12".

[johnmc]

Originally posted by Sean Li:

Browsing a few of the reports on that site indicates that one area where the 12" seems usually better than the 15" 800 is in the disk test. That does surprise me as I thought that the disk on the 15" is 5200rpm, while the 12" is 4200rpm.

FWIW [/B]

Sean,

This is great and I appreciate you posting this info.

I have the exact Ti as you and want a 12" for the exact same reason as you do. I would definitely get the RAM up to 640, witout question.

John

[Agent69]

Originally posted by Sean Li:
Browsing a few of the reports on that site indicates that one area where the 12" seems usually better than the 15" 800 is in the disk test. That does surprise me as I thought that the disk on the 15" is 5200rpm, while the 12" is 4200rpm.

I noticed on Apple's website that they list the 15" Powerbook as having an ATA/66 interface while the 12" Powerbook is listed as having an ATA/100 interface. Maybe it really does make a difference, even with a slower hard disk.

[johnmc]

Originally posted by Agent69:
I noticed on Apple's website that they list the 15" Powerbook as having an ATA/66 interface while the 12" Powerbook is listed as having an ATA/100 interface. Maybe it really does make a difference, even with a slower hard disk.

I read that they put the slower hard drives in the new TiPBs that came out a few months ago and that they were in fact faster than the 5400 RPM drives in the older TiPBs like my PB800 DVI.

John

[Eug]

Originally posted by Agent69:
I noticed on Apple's website that they list the 15" Powerbook as having an ATA/66 interface while the 12" Powerbook is listed as having an ATA/100 interface. Maybe it really does make a difference, even with a slower hard disk.

It will make absolutely no difference. The bottleneck is the drive and not the interface. Laptop drives barely even reach theoretical ATA/33 speeds.

However, I know that for sequential transfers, my 60 GB Fujitsu and my 60 GB Toshiba 4200 rpm drives ARE faster than some older 5400 rpm drives.