[flukewurm]

i currently have a 1ghz powerbook with a gig and a half of ram.

it is NOT powerful enough for what i want to do.

my applications call for big realtime CPU processing.

what i am doing works SPECTACULAR on my 1.8ghz 2500+ athlon barton system with 512megs of ram.

when will the powerbooks get as powerful as my current (slightly outdated) desktop?

i would like to keep an osx machine around. but if the powerbooks arent powerful enough. or wont BE powerful enough within the next revision... then i need to just move on to a windows machine for my next laptop. cuz im sick of this computer holding me back.

[jamil5454]

My guess is that a 1.6 ghz G5 would be roughly equivalent to your XP2500+. But realistically, it all depends on how well-optimized the program is. What specifically are you using it for?

In some cases, my 1.2ghz G4 iBook is faster than my XP1800+, but most of the time they're about the same.

[olePigeon]

Originally posted by flukewurm:
... then i need to just move on to a windows machine for my next laptop. cuz im sick of this computer holding me back.

Err... you're complaining about your laptop being too slow compared to a desktop system, so you're getting another laptop?

You're only setting yourself up for another disappointment.

[flukewurm]

so youre saying a 3.3ghz p4 laptop with a gig of ram wont spank my current powerbook (or any other powerbook for that matter)'s ass?

what im doing specifically is computer music. lots of softsynths and fx. piled high. lots of CPU strain. my 1ghz powerbook cant even handle a couple of high quality reverbs at the same time..

[iDu]

so youre saying a 3.3ghz p4 laptop with a gig of ram wont spank my current powerbook (or any other powerbook for that matter)'s ass?

Yes that's exctly what they're saying...

[flukewurm]

sorry. but desktop replacement laptops are too close to their tower counterparts in terms of power. a desktop may have the slight edge. but not by a whole lot.

i dont believe you for a second if you say a 1ghz powerbook is as fast as a 3.3ghz toshiba.

i would love for anybody to prove me wrong. i love so many things about my powerbook.

[arjay]

Originally posted by flukewurm:
sorry. but desktop replacement laptops are too close to their tower counterparts in terms of power. a desktop may have the slight edge. but not by a whole lot.

i dont believe you for a second if you say a 1ghz powerbook is as fast as a 3.3ghz toshiba.

i would love for anybody to prove me wrong. i love so many things about my powerbook.

I doubt you'll see a G5 PowerBook soon, so if you need that level of processing power, I'd suggest a desktop. You can, as you state, get desktop replacement PC laptops with considerable processing power (wouldn't stray far from A/C though) which if you need that form factor may suffice.

FWIW, I'd get a G5 desktop.

[Filburt]

Let's just call a spade a spade. PowerBook G4 is not a speed demon. Anybody who thinks G4 on PowerBook can perform as well as comparably equipped Centrino notebook is deluding him/herself. It may be fast enough for some people, but its aging architecture and performance won't please everyone. It probably won't be until dual-core G4 or dual-core G5 PowerBook comes out (single-core G5 will NOT put PowerBook on equal footing with Centrino, as it's not significantly faster than G4 at equal clock speed).

That said, I don't know what exactly you are trying to do so it's hard to say whether 1.67 GHz G4 will be sufficient for running a task that runs "SPECTACULAR" on 1.8 GHz Athlon. For what it's worth, 1.67 GHz PowerBook G4 is significantly faster than 1 GHz PowerBook G4. While I doubt it would be as fast as 1.8 GHz Athlon, it may be fast enough for your needs. Or perhaps not.

[mbryda]

Originally posted by flukewurm:
so youre saying a 3.3ghz p4 laptop with a gig of ram wont spank my current powerbook (or any other powerbook for that matter)'s ass?

You do realize the P4 is a dog - Your Athlon can probably come close to spanking that P4. The P4 was designed for high clockspeeds, not high performance.

what im doing specifically is computer music. lots of softsynths and fx. piled high. lots of CPU strain. my 1ghz powerbook cant even handle a couple of high quality reverbs at the same time..

That's odd - lots of musicians use Macs and the PB is fast enough to encide video and make a great editing platform. I'm surprised that music is killing it...

[Wiskedjak]

Originally posted by iDu:
Yes that's exctly what they're saying...

and they're wrong ...

[jamil5454]

If you're thinking of getting a PC to do music on, stop.

Macs are music machines. Desktops are the power machines. Notebooks are mobile machines.

You've got to realize this.

That said, the G5 is great for music mainly because of its >600 mhz bus. That G4 on your PB has no greater than a 333 (266?) mhz bus. The PB is not meant as an ultimate power machine, but rather as a machine that you can use to make a quick edit on the fly. This does not include opening up Reason and Live! and Logic and firing up 50 plugins. For that, I'd recommend an iMac G5 or even better, a DP PowerMac.

Also, your PB is 1 ghz. Faster PBs are out now that will noticeably help you in your situation. I doubt a 1ghz Athlon/Centrino/P3 would be much faster than your G4.

You're not really giving your PB a fair chance.

[zerock]

i find my 1Ghz PB to be great, i see myself using for some years to come, till i get a new one of course.

[bark0de]

Originally posted by jamil5454:
That said, the G5 is great for music mainly because of its >600 mhz bus. That G4 on your PB has no greater than a 333 (266?) mhz bus.

G4 bus is 166mhz (or 133mhz for the older ones). That's the bottleneck. Compare that to the Banias at 400mhz (or 533mhz for the Dothan).

Just a quick question: are the current G4 laptop CPUs 90nm or still 130nm?

[Wiskedjak]

Originally posted by jamil5454:
I doubt a 1ghz Athlon/Centrino/P3 would be much faster than your G4.

Except, of course, that AMD and Intel CPU's are significantly faster that 1ghz

[flukewurm]

Originally posted by jamil5454:
If you're thinking of getting a PC to do music on, stop.

what you talkin about homie? i produce a TON of music on my PC desktop. in fact thats basically all i use to produce because my powerbook is so weak. all i seem to be able to use my powerbook for is tracking audio away from my desktop.

ive owned my powerbook for nearly 2 years now. i feel like ive given it plenty of chances.

other people may be able to produce using powerbooks but thats partially because they are mostly running audio tracks..

im sorry if i sound bitter and testy. the powerbooks are the best deals out there in terms of hardware, features, form factor, and operating system. its just the blasted CPU.

thanx for all the responses so far!!

[mbryda]

Originally posted by bark0de:
G4 bus is 166mhz (or 133mhz for the older ones). That's the bottleneck. Compare that to the Banias at 400mhz (or 533mhz for the Dothan).

You mean the quad-pumped 100 or 133 Mhz? The Bus speed is only responsible for 0-15% of the performance of a system at any given task. It's important, but not as important as everyone thinks.

I'd imagine his issues are the result of:
1) slow HD (laptop HD's are not speed demons by any stretch of the imagination)
2) slow CPU - The 1Ghz G4 is at best ~ 2Ghz P4, which is significanly slower than an AthlonXP 2300+

To the OP:

Why don't you take your apps and such to an Apple store and try them on the new Powerbooks? That way you will know what the performance is like.

[flukewurm]

Originally posted by mbryda:


Why don't you take your apps and such to an Apple store and try them on the new Powerbooks? That way you will know what the performance is like.

thats a phenom idea. actually my sis has a 1.2ghz ibook and i plan on installing some of my apps to see how they run. if the performance is that much better than my powerbook then i will most definatly look further into the current revision PBs.

[iDu]

and they're wrong ...

I was actually being sarcastic, but it was difficult to express that without sounding like a jackhole. The funny thing is, my buddy thinks my PB 1.5 is as fast or faster than his P4 3.2 laptop. I don't know how he got that idea, but that's what he thinks.

[flukewurm]

lol oHHHhhhhhh... yeah. a would have helped there quite a bit

[iDu]

Yeah, probably, but I didn't think of it at the time, I was too stressed trying to figure out how to do a quote with the author's name (which I still haven't figured out, unless its just a manual coding thing).

[jamil5454]

Originally posted by jamil5454:
If you're thinking of getting a PC to do music on, stop.

To OP:

I guess I should clarify a little bit.

I'm not comparing the PB to a PC desktop. If you want a fair comparison, compare the PC to a DP 1.8 or higher. I'm saying that performance aside, Macs are generally better for audio production. But, if the PC has worked great for you, and you don't feel the need to get a faster Mac for your audio work, then don't. But to those of you who want to start learning all this audio junk, do yourself a favor and get a Mac. GarageBand is a really good beginner's app. It may cost more at first, but you won't regret it in the long run.

Also, It's no secret that the PBs are lagging behind a little in the CPU arena. I can agree with you on this. Apple better do something next revision or two to keep the PB competitive for certain people.

[macgyvr64]

Get a dual G4 or G5 tower for music. All the big recording studios rely on Macs for recording audio. I work for two different recording studios, and they both use dual G4s day in and day out. PowerBook portability is nice, but if you're serious about audio, you can't beat a tower - for speed, storage, and more speed.

[flukewurm]

i dont know why people are suggesting a mac desktop solution (or maybe i do ). im not in the market for a desktop right now. sure it would be nice to have a dual G5 tower. but my current athlon system serves me well enough. plus a few of my favorite freeware softsynths are pc only. doh.

i want something fast and portable. im playing around with the idea of biting the bullet and picking up one of theeeese along with maybe an ibook off of ebay to keep an osx system around.. as well as something a little less unwieldy that i can carry to work and have in bed with me.


but ill definatly have to check out the current PBs first. just to give them a fair chance and all.

thanx again for the responses

oh yea. and excuse me if i sound sceptical and grouchy.

[skelotar]

just get the pc and trash your mac.

use what works for you.

good job generating a thread that has 10+ posts...

[Scooterboy]

Originally posted by flukewurm:

i want something fast and portable. im playing around with the idea of biting the bullet and picking up one of theeeese along with maybe an ibook off of ebay to keep an osx system around.. as well as something a little less unwieldy that i can carry to work and have in bed with me.


but ill definatly have to check out the current PBs first. just to give them a fair chance and all.

thanx again for the responses

oh yea. and excuse me if i sound sceptical and grouchy.

How about this?

[SEkker]

I would hesitate to recommend using an iBook for a measure of the current Mac laptop performance.

I went from a 1GHz PB17 (temporarily) to a 1GHz G4 iBook, same HD specs (slow, 4200 rpm). Both had over 512 M RAM.

I was stunned by how much quicker the PB17 implementation was using the same 1GHz CPU, same OS, no external monitors to drag the iBook, etc. Nothing against the iBook, but it was not built for speed -- durability and cost were its design constraints. Go to the Apple store and make sure you test a PB with 512MB RAM.

On the other hand, I think the latest high end pc portables are going to blow away even the high end PBs for performance - and size. That Alienware machine has to weigh at least 9.5 lbs -- come to think if it, I could not find it listed anywhere, so it could be even 10 lbs or more, especially adding in the power brick. In contrast, I could fit almost two of these PB17 machines (in terms of volume at least) in the same bag you will use to carry that (albeit cool for gaming) monster.

Apple COULD make such a G5 portable, and in many ways they do -- it's called a G5 iMac.

What we ALL want to see if the dual core CPUs installed in Apple la[top form factors -- then we'll have the best of both worlds.

[Scooterboy]

PowerBooks used to be "The fastest notebook computers on the planet". That was how Apple advertised the G3 Wallstreet. PC notebooks were far behind in technology and design. I think Apple is still miles ahead in design (functional and aesthetic) and implementation of features in the current PowerBooks, but the PowerBook G4, Apple's flagship notebook computer, is falling woefully behind in power and speed. Dual core G4's won't be produced for quite some time, and if Apple can't produce a G5 notebook relatively soon, the PowerBook may need to be renamed the AdequateBook. The PowerBook used to be a portable PowerMac. Now it isn't even a portable iMac.

On the Windows side, the PowerBook is getting heat from both ends. For sheer power and speed, theres the P4 and Athlon 64 laptops, some with PCI Express and nVidia 6800 or ATi X800 graphics and 800 MHz FSB. For portability and long battery runtime (much longer than PowerBook and with arguably faster CPU's) there are the Pentium M Centrino laptops.

There is demand for a mobile PowerMac, not a mobile eMac. The PowerBook needs a serious kick in the arse and from the comments on this forum, in the press, and from Apple, it doesn't sound like they can deliver, at least not anytime soon.

I still love my PowerBook but I know it can't go toe to toe against the latest PC offerings.