New To Mac-Forums?

Welcome to our community! Join the discussion today by registering your FREE account. If you have any problems with the registration process, please contact us!

Get your questions answered by community gurus Advice and insight from world-class Apple enthusiasts Exclusive access to members-only contests, giveaways and deals

Join today!

 
Start a Discussion
 

Mac-Forums Brief

Subscribe to Mac-Forums Brief to receive special offers from Mac-Forums partners and sponsors

Join the conversation RSS
OS X - Operating System General OS operation information and support

OS 10.5 - Confirmed - Leopard is SLOWER than Tiger...


Post Reply New Thread Subscribe

 
Thread Tools
Zoolook

 
Zoolook's Avatar
 
Member Since: Sep 24, 2006
Location: Brooklyn, New York
Posts: 2,751
Zoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud of
Mac Specs: 15" MacBook Pro, i7 2.66Ghz, 8GB RAM, 512GB SSD; iPad 3, iPhone 5

Zoolook is offline
... at least on a G5

If you have a C2D (i.e. 64-bit Intel), it will be quicker in 64-bit mode. Hardly a surprise eh?

If you run Leopard in 64-bit mode on a G5, you lose a lot of performance, vs Tiger.

http://arstechnica.com/journals/appl...-to-beat-tiger

Thoughts?

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is stoned to death.
- Joan D. Vinge

QUOTE Thanks
Sobe

 
Sobe's Avatar
 
Member Since: Aug 24, 2005
Posts: 175
Sobe will become famous soon enough
Mac Specs: 17" 2.8ghz Macbook Pro, 32GB iPhone 4

Sobe is offline
My CD Mini and G4 Powerbook feel much faster with Leopard.

:shrug:
QUOTE Thanks
Zoolook

 
Zoolook's Avatar
 
Member Since: Sep 24, 2006
Location: Brooklyn, New York
Posts: 2,751
Zoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud of
Mac Specs: 15" MacBook Pro, i7 2.66Ghz, 8GB RAM, 512GB SSD; iPad 3, iPhone 5

Zoolook is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sobe View Post
My CD Mini and G4 Powerbook feel much faster with Leopard.

:shrug:
Indeed, and if you read the full review of Leopard over at Ars, you will see why. OS X is very good at ensuring the user sees the maximum performance, only a benchmark will reveal the slower 'under-the-bonnet' performance.

You have to love a GUI that appears faster slower over OS performance!

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is stoned to death.
- Joan D. Vinge

QUOTE Thanks
Kash

 
Kash's Avatar
 
Member Since: Dec 03, 2006
Location: Irvine, CA
Posts: 9,385
Kash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant future
Mac Specs: Black Macbook C2D 2GHz 3GB RAM 250GB HD iPhone 4 iPad 3G

Kash is offline
New operating systems are expected to be slower than their predecessors, so I'm not entirely surprised at this news. Though you have to give credit to Apple for not making the slowdown apparent to the user, as is the case with Vista.


June 2007
July 2009
QUOTE Thanks
Zoolook

 
Zoolook's Avatar
 
Member Since: Sep 24, 2006
Location: Brooklyn, New York
Posts: 2,751
Zoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud of
Mac Specs: 15" MacBook Pro, i7 2.66Ghz, 8GB RAM, 512GB SSD; iPad 3, iPhone 5

Zoolook is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kash View Post
New operating systems are expected to be slower than their predecessors, so I'm not entirely surprised at this news.
Actually 10.0 through to 10.4 resulted in faster performance, so it's been expected that 10.5 would continue this.

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is stoned to death.
- Joan D. Vinge

QUOTE Thanks
Sobe

 
Sobe's Avatar
 
Member Since: Aug 24, 2005
Posts: 175
Sobe will become famous soon enough
Mac Specs: 17" 2.8ghz Macbook Pro, 32GB iPhone 4

Sobe is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoolook View Post
Indeed, and if you read the full review of Leopard over at Ars, you will see why. OS X is very good at ensuring the user sees the maximum performance, only a benchmark will reveal the slower 'under-the-bonnet' performance.

You have to love a GUI that appears faster slower over OS performance!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoolook View Post
Actually 10.0 through to 10.4 resulted in faster performance, so it's been expected that 10.5 would continue this.
1) My programs over faster, my searches are quicker, and even Frontrow is improved.

I must be dreaming all of this, with a stop-watch in my hand.

2) 10.0.0 or 10.0.* ?

Biiiiiiiig difference
QUOTE Thanks
Zoolook

 
Zoolook's Avatar
 
Member Since: Sep 24, 2006
Location: Brooklyn, New York
Posts: 2,751
Zoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud of
Mac Specs: 15" MacBook Pro, i7 2.66Ghz, 8GB RAM, 512GB SSD; iPad 3, iPhone 5

Zoolook is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sobe View Post
1) My programs over faster, my searches are quicker, and even Frontrow is improved.

I must be dreaming all of this, with a stop-watch in my hand.

2) 10.0.0 or 10.0.* ?

Biiiiiiiig difference
The GUI is very slick, agreed.

If I meant 10.0.x I would have said that. 10.0.x to 10.4.x showed benchmark and GUI improvements for each major release. Leopard bucks the trend, but as far as I am concerned, this just shows that Leopard really is probably the biggest leap OS X has taken so far. It's a next gen OS.

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is stoned to death.
- Joan D. Vinge

QUOTE Thanks
technologist

 
Member Since: Mar 30, 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 4,744
technologist has a reputation beyond reputetechnologist has a reputation beyond reputetechnologist has a reputation beyond reputetechnologist has a reputation beyond reputetechnologist has a reputation beyond reputetechnologist has a reputation beyond reputetechnologist has a reputation beyond reputetechnologist has a reputation beyond reputetechnologist has a reputation beyond reputetechnologist has a reputation beyond reputetechnologist has a reputation beyond repute
Mac Specs: 12" Apple PowerBook G4 (1.5GHz)

technologist is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoolook View Post
Actually 10.0 through to 10.4 resulted in faster performance, so it's been expected that 10.5 would continue this.
I don't know that they necessarily did...certainly the user experience was more responsive, as with Leopard, but not necessarily the entire OS.

The slow-but-steady upward march of the system requirements since 10.2 belies increasing bloat and complexity.
QUOTE Thanks
Kash

 
Kash's Avatar
 
Member Since: Dec 03, 2006
Location: Irvine, CA
Posts: 9,385
Kash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant futureKash has a brilliant future
Mac Specs: Black Macbook C2D 2GHz 3GB RAM 250GB HD iPhone 4 iPad 3G

Kash is offline
Zoolook, did you read the Leopard review at Ars? Here's a quote from that article that may explain our Leopard experience:

Quote:
There's a big difference between being "fast" and being "responsive," and Apple's focus is on the latter.
If what the author said is true, that could explain why Leopard "feels" faster but may not do as well in benchmarks.


June 2007
July 2009
QUOTE Thanks
Zoolook

 
Zoolook's Avatar
 
Member Since: Sep 24, 2006
Location: Brooklyn, New York
Posts: 2,751
Zoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud of
Mac Specs: 15" MacBook Pro, i7 2.66Ghz, 8GB RAM, 512GB SSD; iPad 3, iPhone 5

Zoolook is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kash View Post
Zoolook, did you read the Leopard review at Ars? Here's a quote from that article that may explain our Leopard experience:



If what the author said is true, that could explain why Leopard "feels" faster but may not do as well in benchmarks.
Yeah I read the article, and I said what you've just said in my 2nd post...

Quote:
Originally Posted by zoolook
Indeed, and if you read the full review of Leopard over at Ars, you will see why. OS X is very good at ensuring the user sees the maximum performance, only a benchmark will reveal the slower 'under-the-bonnet' performance.

You have to love a GUI that appears faster slower over OS performance!

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is stoned to death.
- Joan D. Vinge

QUOTE Thanks
dtravis7

 
dtravis7's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jan 04, 2005
Location: Modesto, Ca.
Posts: 27,561
dtravis7 has a reputation beyond reputedtravis7 has a reputation beyond reputedtravis7 has a reputation beyond reputedtravis7 has a reputation beyond reputedtravis7 has a reputation beyond reputedtravis7 has a reputation beyond reputedtravis7 has a reputation beyond reputedtravis7 has a reputation beyond reputedtravis7 has a reputation beyond reputedtravis7 has a reputation beyond reputedtravis7 has a reputation beyond repute
Mac Specs: iMac 2.4 C2D 10.9.4, iMac 2.16 C2d 10.6.8, Macbook2007 10.8.4, Mac Mini 10.8.4, iPhone 3GS Note 8!!

dtravis7 is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by technologist View Post
I don't know that they necessarily did...certainly the user experience was more responsive, as with Leopard, but not necessarily the entire OS.

The slow-but-steady upward march of the system requirements since 10.2 belies increasing bloat and complexity.
Agreed completely.

Another point is, I really do not have much respect for Synthetic benchmarks at all. I have seen Xbench for one score lower after a major upgrade where the machine is clearly faster running real applications and timing the work being done. I wonder what would happen if say you compiled something, Converted a video, a Music file in itunes or something real world and see then how Tiger and Leopard would compare speed wise.

I do know that many things are faster using Leopard that I have tried, but most like Time Machine is due to the improved design of TM itself.
QUOTE Thanks
Sobe

 
Sobe's Avatar
 
Member Since: Aug 24, 2005
Posts: 175
Sobe will become famous soon enough
Mac Specs: 17" 2.8ghz Macbook Pro, 32GB iPhone 4

Sobe is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoolook View Post
The GUI is very slick, agreed.

If I meant 10.0.x I would have said that. 10.0.x to 10.4.x showed benchmark and GUI improvements for each major release. Leopard bucks the trend, but as far as I am concerned, this just shows that Leopard really is probably the biggest leap OS X has taken so far. It's a next gen OS.

I never said that a "slick" GUI was the reason my programs opened faster, and my experience was quicker.

So there is nothing we agree on.
QUOTE Thanks
brian67

 
Member Since: Oct 28, 2007
Posts: 136
brian67 is on a distinguished road
Mac Specs: 24" iMac, 2.4GHz C2D, 4 GB RAM, 320 GB hard drive, OS X 10.5.1

brian67 is offline
Your Thread title is misleading. I have a Core 2 Duo therefore it will be faster on my mac.
QUOTE Thanks
Zoolook

 
Zoolook's Avatar
 
Member Since: Sep 24, 2006
Location: Brooklyn, New York
Posts: 2,751
Zoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud ofZoolook has much to be proud of
Mac Specs: 15" MacBook Pro, i7 2.66Ghz, 8GB RAM, 512GB SSD; iPad 3, iPhone 5

Zoolook is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sobe View Post
I never said that a "slick" GUI was the reason my programs opened faster, and my experience was quicker.

So there is nothing we agree on.
Slick is a poor word. The user experience is better and things do seem to open quicker, the GUI does appear faster. I think we do agree, and that's not such a bad thing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by brian67 View Post
Your Thread title is misleading. I have a Core 2 Duo therefore it will be faster on my mac.
You're right, this is mentioned in the 1st sentence of the actual post.

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is stoned to death.
- Joan D. Vinge

QUOTE Thanks
baggss

 
baggss's Avatar
 
Member Since: Oct 10, 2004
Location: Margaritaville
Posts: 10,309
baggss has a reputation beyond reputebaggss has a reputation beyond reputebaggss has a reputation beyond reputebaggss has a reputation beyond reputebaggss has a reputation beyond reputebaggss has a reputation beyond reputebaggss has a reputation beyond reputebaggss has a reputation beyond reputebaggss has a reputation beyond reputebaggss has a reputation beyond reputebaggss has a reputation beyond repute
Mac Specs: 27" 3.4 Ghz i7 iMac-13" C2D Macbook-OSX 18.8.2-64Gb iPad 2-32 Gb iPhone 5-ATV 2-14Tb of Storage

baggss is offline
Maybe I'm missing something here, but did they do a test between a single core G5 (1.6Ghz) and a C2D Intel (2 Ghz)? Is anyone surprised at ALL that a dual core processor beat a single core processor?

This is simply an unfairly lopsided test for any number of reasons:

1) 1.67Ghz SINGLE core vs 2.0Ghz DUAL core.

2) 333Mhz RAM vs 667Mhz RAM

Maybe a 2Ghz Dual Core G5 vs a 2Ghz C2D would be a bit more realistic AND revealing.


QUOTE Thanks

Post Reply New Thread Subscribe


« Have you recieved osX.5 from Apple? | Network Problems »
Thread Tools

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Posting 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
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Upgrading from Tiger to Leopard (question for reference) Left Face Down Switcher Hangout 20 04-08-2010 07:51 PM
Tiger or Leopard rew70 OS X - Operating System 8 10-16-2007 09:26 AM
Tiger upgrading to Leopard FAQ MacHeadCase Switcher Hangout 0 09-22-2007 05:53 PM
iMac with Leopard or Tiger? vettnutt OS X - Operating System 5 08-09-2007 04:39 AM

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:13 PM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
X

Welcome to Mac-Forums.com

Create your username to jump into the discussion!

New members like you have made this community the ultimate source for your Mac since 2003!


(4 digit year)

Already a member?