Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 25
  1. #1


    Member Since
    Apr 02, 2006
    Posts
    51
    Processor Speeds
    The fastest intel mac you can buy is the 2.16ghz mbp right now. My old laptop was 3.0ghz intel processor and it was not fast enough for me. How is apple charging so much for a paltry 2.16ghz processor computer? Does OSX use the speed differently or something i just cant understand spending 3 grand for a computer much slower than a much cheaper one.

  2. #2


    Member Since
    Mar 25, 2006
    Location
    Minneapolis
    Posts
    7
    Specs:
    12" ibook g4 1.33ghz 512mb ram 40 gb hard drive
    The 2.16 ghz intel mac is a dual core processor. Your 3.0 ghz is not.

  3. #3


    Member Since
    Mar 20, 2006
    Location
    Petaluma, CA
    Posts
    573
    Specs:
    20" iMac 2.0 GHz Intel Core Duo, 12" iBook G4 1.07 GHz
    out of curiosity, what were you doing that 3ghz wasn't fast enough for you?

  4. #4


    Member Since
    Apr 02, 2006
    Posts
    51
    gaming and photoshop.

  5. #5


    Member Since
    Apr 02, 2006
    Posts
    51
    dual core processors only run programs faster if the program is dual threaded. photoshop is i beleive, but most arent at this time.

  6. #6

    baggss's Avatar
    Member Since
    Oct 10, 2004
    Location
    Margaritaville
    Posts
    10,311
    Specs:
    27" 3.4 Ghz i7 iMac-13" C2D Macbook-OSX 10.10.2 -64Gb iPad 2-64 Gb iPhone 6+-ATV 2-14Tb of Storage
    All Apple Apps that come on the Mac Intel boxes are designed to take advantage of the dual threading, including the OS. Many 3rd part Apps are moving there as more things go Universal Binary compliant. PS still runs under Emulation on the Intel boxes (Rosetta) so it may not take advantage of dual threading.

    Also, keep in mind that speed is not the only or even the biggest factor in chip performance. Intel quit their "Ghz is everything" ad campaign when they started making slower Ghz chips that actually outperformed their higher Ghz chips.

    What kind of chip was your 3.0Ghz, a P4?


  7. #7
    lil
    Guest
    Photoshop won't run dual treaded via Rosetta as it only emulates a single G4 class PowerPC processor.

    As Baggs says—there is much, much, much more to a computer's speed than just the central processor unit's clock rate.

    And a Pentium 4m isn't exactly the world's greatest mobile chip.

    It seems apparent to me at last that maybe the reason I don't find my G4s slow is because I'm patient, that or a lunatic *tongue firmly in cheek*

    Vicky

  8. #8

    D3v1L80Y's Avatar
    Member Since
    Feb 02, 2004
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    12,456
    Specs:
    MacBook
    Quote Originally Posted by lil

    It seems apparent to me at last that maybe the reason I don't find my G4s slow is because I'm patient, that or a lunatic *tongue firmly in cheek*

    Vicky
    I wouldn't say 'patient' as much as I would call it just being realistic.
    I have no idea why people complain about older G4's and G3's being "slow" when it comes to running Photoshop. I have never had a problem using it, or any app for that matter and I have never found it "slow".
    Just because something doesn't happen instantaneously doesn't mean it is slow. I would really like to know what some of these folks are doing that they have to have Photoshop (or whatever app they are using) respond in .00002938778 seconds and render their results in half that time.
    *shrug*
    __________________________________________________
    Posting and YOU|Forum Community Guidelines|The Apple Product Cycle|Forum Courtesy

    mac: a waterproof raincoat made of rubberized fabric
    MAC: a data communication protocol sub-layer, also known as the Media Access Control
    Mac: a brand name which covers several lines of personal computers designed, developed, and marketed by Apple Inc.


  9. #9

    Discerptor's Avatar
    Member Since
    Aug 02, 2005
    Posts
    1,229
    Specs:
    2.6GHz Core i7 15" MacBook Pro - 8GB DDR3 SDRAM - 750GB 7200 RPM HDD - GeForce 650M GT 1GB VRAM
    Quote Originally Posted by gh11
    The fastest intel mac you can buy is the 2.16ghz mbp right now. My old laptop was 3.0ghz intel processor and it was not fast enough for me. How is apple charging so much for a paltry 2.16ghz processor computer? Does OSX use the speed differently or something i just cant understand spending 3 grand for a computer much slower than a much cheaper one.
    Please tell me you're not serious...

  10. #10

    baggss's Avatar
    Member Since
    Oct 10, 2004
    Location
    Margaritaville
    Posts
    10,311
    Specs:
    27" 3.4 Ghz i7 iMac-13" C2D Macbook-OSX 10.10.2 -64Gb iPad 2-64 Gb iPhone 6+-ATV 2-14Tb of Storage
    Quote Originally Posted by D3v1L80Y
    I wouldn't say 'patient' as much as I would call it just being realistic.
    I have no idea why people complain about older G4's and G3's being "slow" when it comes to running Photoshop. I have never had a problem using it, or any app for that matter and I have never found it "slow".
    Just because something doesn't happen instantaneously doesn't mean it is slow. I would really like to know what some of these folks are doing that they have to have Photoshop (or whatever app they are using) respond in .00002938778 seconds and render their results in half that time.
    *shrug*

    This is all completely subjective and depends on what the user is used to. That being said, try rendering a graphic on a Quad G5 and then on a single G3, you will see a substantial difference and understand what they mean by "slow". Each user is different, you and lil may be satisfied with what your machines do for you, others would/might not be and desire more. Either way, there is no right or wrong answer or attitude here, it is all simply based on the desire of the user.

    People expect results for their money, especially when it comes to computers, but the former Intel Ad campaign convinced millions of people (like the OP apparently) that speed in Mhz or Ghz was the most important thing in the world when buying a computer. Understanding why that isn't true is something that millions of folks can't, don't or won't understand, perhaps ever.


  11. #11


    Member Since
    Apr 02, 2006
    Posts
    51
    Quote Originally Posted by Discerptor
    Please tell me you're not serious...
    Why whats the big deal? I didnt know if osx's architecture used the power much more efficiently or something so I asked. My old laptop was an hp pavillion zd800 with a P4HT 3ghz processor. I recently sold it and built a beast of a desktop super tower. When I go to college I am concidering buying a laptop to take to college instead because this thing is the biggest computer ive ever seen and weighs 65lbs thanks to its all steel case. I was looking at the macbook, but for the hardware you get it seems overpriced. A macbook costs more than this computer I just built and it would outperform the **** out of a macbook. yes i do realize comparing a notebook with a tower is not a fair comparison but even so, the gap in power is quite large. For 1300 bucks I built a computer with 100gighdd, 2gig ram, AMD athlonX2 +3800 processor, and the most powerful ATI card available right now.

  12. #12


    Member Since
    Apr 02, 2006
    Posts
    51
    Quote Originally Posted by baggss
    This is all completely subjective and depends on what the user is used to. That being said, try rendering a graphic on a Quad G5 and then on a single G3, you will see a substantial difference and understand what they mean by "slow". Each user is different, you and lil may be satisfied with what your machines do for you, others would/might not be and desire more. Either way, there is no right or wrong answer or attitude here, it is all simply based on the desire of the user.

    People expect results for their money, especially when it comes to computers, but the former Intel Ad campaign convinced millions of people (like the OP apparently) that speed in Mhz or Ghz was the most important thing in the world when buying a computer. Understanding why that isn't true is something that millions of folks can't, don't or won't understand, perhaps ever.
    People compare in GHZ because its the closest thing we have to a standard that we can compare different CPU's with.

  13. #13

    baggss's Avatar
    Member Since
    Oct 10, 2004
    Location
    Margaritaville
    Posts
    10,311
    Specs:
    27" 3.4 Ghz i7 iMac-13" C2D Macbook-OSX 10.10.2 -64Gb iPad 2-64 Gb iPhone 6+-ATV 2-14Tb of Storage
    Quote Originally Posted by gh11
    People compare in GHZ because its the closest thing we have to a standard that we can compare different CPU's with.

    The problem with that is it's not a valid measure of actual power or performance and both Intel AND AMD recognize that. Right now the 2.16Ghz Core Duo is wiping the floor with your old P4 and Intels upcoming chips are only going to be better and are likely to give AMD a run for their money again.

    As far as building your own, you will always be able to do so cheaper than buying one, no question about it. The power gap you're worried about is more or less only a perceived gap vice an actual one. Again, Intels Ad campaign brainwashed (the CPU makes the internet faster, right?) million and now they can't figure out what's going on.


  14. #14

    sarahsboy18's Avatar
    Member Since
    Jan 30, 2005
    Location
    Fort Worth, Texas
    Posts
    1,069
    Specs:
    Mac Pro, 8-Core 2.8Ghz, 10GB RAM, 2x1TB HDDs, iPod U2 Edition
    Quote Originally Posted by baggss
    The problem with that is it's not a valid measure of actual power or performance and both Intel AND AMD recognize that. Right now the 2.16Ghz Core Duo is wiping the floor with your old P4 and Intels upcoming chips are only going to be better and are likely to give AMD a run for their money again.

    As far as building your own, you will always be able to do so cheaper than buying one, no question about it. The power gap you're worried about is more or less only a perceived gap vice an actual one. Again, Intel Ad campaign brainwashed million and now they can't figure out what's going on.
    *puts on flame retardant suit*

    And before the AMD guys get all riled up.... within a few years it will be the other way around again... It's a cycle.
    "If you had a friend who was a tightrope walker, and you were walking down a sidewalk, and he fell, that would be completely unacceptable." -Mitch Hedberg

  15. #15

    baggss's Avatar
    Member Since
    Oct 10, 2004
    Location
    Margaritaville
    Posts
    10,311
    Specs:
    27" 3.4 Ghz i7 iMac-13" C2D Macbook-OSX 10.10.2 -64Gb iPad 2-64 Gb iPhone 6+-ATV 2-14Tb of Storage
    Quote Originally Posted by sarahsboy18
    *puts on flame retardant suite*

    And before the AMD guys get all riled up.... within a few years it will be the other way around again... It's a cycle.
    Agreed, not trying to ping on AMD here so please don't take it that way.


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Processor and HD speeds on New Macbook Pro - 2 questions
    By snoopnick in forum Apple Notebooks
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-28-2008, 08:05 PM
  2. Question regarding processor speeds
    By philosopher01 in forum Apple Desktops
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-25-2008, 08:26 PM
  3. Swapping an 800 mhz processor with a 1 ghz dual processor??
    By tsnyder007 in forum Other Hardware and Peripherals
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 01-18-2008, 04:54 PM
  4. Comparing processor speeds
    By Nagger Pumper in forum Other Hardware and Peripherals
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 11-15-2007, 11:35 AM
  5. Question about dual processor over single processor
    By CaptainStandish in forum Apple Desktops
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 03-24-2004, 07:28 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •