Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Hardware - Troubleshooting and Discussion > Mac Notebooks > Powerbook vs MacBook with non-Universal apps

Powerbook vs MacBook with non-Universal apps
Thread Tools
cmillerdesign
Forum Regular
Join Date: Apr 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 18, 2006, 03:36 PM
 
Which is faster? I'm wanting to upgrade my 1ghz PowerBook. I have all non-Intel friendly apps -- Quark 6, CS2, iLife 05, Office, etc. and don't plan to upgrade them any time soon (I like to go every other -- ie CS2 to CS4 and CS3 isn't even out yet). I've read were the MacBooks are actually slower than previous G4s running CS. Considering all my apps are not developed to run on an Intel system what would be faster, the last version 1.67mhz PowerBook or a 2.0mhz MacBook? Used vs new prices are very close. What about a MacBook Pro?
     
deathandtaxes
Junior Member
Join Date: Feb 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 20, 2006, 12:48 AM
 
I just upgraded to a Macbook Pro from a 1.25 Ghz PB and all applications are a LOT faster. Office seems nearly twice as fast. If I hit the delete key, I have to be careful not to hold it down too long because I erase several words instead of just a letter or two. Photoshop CS is snappier. Scrolling thru photos in iPhoto is effortless. Ripping a DVD in Handbrake jumped from 12-15 fps to 75 fps. I haven't played with a Macbook, but the processor is now a Core 2 Duo too, and it's clocked pretty close to the MBP.

Check out Barefeats.com for some hard numbers.
13" MacBook Core 2 Duo versus others
     
phoenix78
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Mar 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 20, 2006, 02:51 AM
 
Go for the macbook/pros. do not go for the powerpc.

Eventually the new release of the software will all be made for intel and if you dont have the intel mac then you will miss the speedups.

The macbooks are a much better laptop than the powerbooks anyways...


regards,

rob.
     
solofx7
Mac Elite
Join Date: Dec 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 20, 2006, 01:00 PM
 
i have had both, and the core 2 duo is faster and getting more support daily...
that is the right way to go if you have the money...
plus you will get updated ilife...
     
SierraDragon
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Truckee, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 21, 2006, 11:57 AM
 
Originally Posted by cmillerdesign View Post
Which is faster? I'm wanting to upgrade my 1ghz PowerBook. I have all non-Intel friendly apps -- Quark 6, CS2, iLife 05, Office, etc. and don't plan to upgrade them any time soon (I like to go every other -- ie CS2 to CS4 and CS3 isn't even out yet). I've read were the MacBooks are actually slower than previous G4s running CS. Considering all my apps are not developed to run on an Intel system what would be faster, the last version 1.67mhz PowerBook or a 2.0mhz MacBook? Used vs new prices are very close. What about a MacBook Pro?
If your m.o. is to wait for PSCS4 to upgrade, your best value probably is the pro PB if you compare to the low end MB. But best of all IMO is to get a MBP, a pro laptop. I chose to invest in a 17" MBP, even though I have a 1.67 GHz G4 PB awaiting repair.

-Allen Wicks
     
zaghahzag
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Aug 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 21, 2006, 12:13 PM
 
my only negative experience with my c2duo mbp was using cs2 illustrator with a big file. It was slow. it's was almost unusably slow. I can't say for sure that my g4 would have handled it better because I didn't try, but i can't believe it would have been brought to its knees like that.

overall, the mbp is so much faster than my g4, that i can live with a few apps that are slow, and what i was doing was probably a worst case scenario, but still, if you're expecting pro level performance from rosetta, think again.
     
phazedowt
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 21, 2006, 12:15 PM
 
I went from a 1GHz PBG4 to a 2.33GHz MBP.
1) I can't comment on Quark since I don't have that.
2) CS2 seems not just faster, but substantially faster when doing a lot, despite it being emulated on my MBP. Also, remember there's a beta of CS3 (photoshop, at least) out, so you can start using that too
3) iLife is a non-issue, since if you buy a new Intel Mac, it'll come with iLife '06 (or '07 if you buy it in a month)
4) Office was never terribly CPU limited on the G4, so it will be at least as fast on an intel mac (I rarely use it, but the few times I do, it seems faster on the MBP).


Just my $0.02.
15" MBP, 2.33 GHz C2D, 120GB HD, 2 GB RAM, OS X 10.4. 4GB iPod Nano.
     
cmillerdesign  (op)
Forum Regular
Join Date: Apr 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 21, 2006, 12:24 PM
 
Thanks for all your reply thus far. This really helps. All this said, the PB is mainly used for internet/iLife. I rarely use it for CS but need it as a back up to my G5 (and a new MB would make a nice 06 tax deduction). I don't know if I can swing the cost of a MBP. How much better is the graphics card/display on the 15" MBP vs the 13" MB? This may be another topic, but IF I do go for a new MB or MBP, is there a big difference between the C1D and C2D versions? Bench tests look like there is on non universal apps but not native Intel apps. Cost is greatly less for a C1D referb!

Thanks.
     
iREZ
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Los Angeles of the East
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 21, 2006, 02:01 PM
 
if youre gonna use aperture, motion or play video games...dont get the macbook. for all else, the macbook is just as capable as the macbook pro.

13 vs 15 is a moot point...theyre both widescreen and not HD and both have enough resolution to handle a few windows. as for quality, apparently the mbp have an anti glare coating that creates a grain look whereas the macbook does not have this and according to some people is far superior. i find the contrast in my mbp far better than the mb but both displays are better than any screens we'd seen before hand in pb's (imho).

the core 2 duo is faster than the core duo and with leopard being 64bit goodness...itd be wise to wait for c2d refurbs if its a refurb you wanna purchase.
NOW YOU SEE ME! 2.4 MBP and 2.0 MBP (running ubuntu)
     
   
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:48 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,