Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

MacBook Pro Benchmarks

CmdrTaco posted more than 8 years ago | from the no-surprises-here dept.

234

jfpoole writes "Geek Patrol has benchmarked a MacBook Pro and a PowerBook G4 using Geekbench, their benchmarking utility. It's impressive to see how well the MacBook Pro performs compared to the PowerBook G4 (at least when it comes to Universal Binary performance)." Their benchmarks aren't particularly surprising, and they lack the most important benchmark: Frames Per Second during Molten Core Combat (or as it is more commonly referred to since I made it up 5 seconds ago, the FPSDMCCMark, which is the only number I'm waiting for).

cancel ×

234 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Feline Poop! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14787788)

Fuck you, all you motherfucking LambdaMOOers, you! That's right, fuck y'all! Damn!

It's nice to see improved benchmarks, but... (1, Insightful)

XxtraLarGe (551297) | more than 8 years ago | (#14787790)

Having owned a Powerbook G4 for almost a year now, I have no regrets. It's still going to take a while for them to get the kinks out. It's gonna be great when the 2nd revision comes out though!

Re:It's nice to see improved benchmarks, but... (3, Funny)

realmolo (574068) | more than 8 years ago | (#14787937)

Yeah, yeah.

You're not fooling anyone. We all know that every time you boot your antiquated G4, you think about selling one of your kidneys to buy a new MacBook.

Rationalization is a beatiful thing. ;)

Re:It's nice to see improved benchmarks, but... (1)

iguanarama (612171) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788208)

Having owned a Powerbook G4 for almost a year now, I have no regrets. It's still going to take a while for them to get the kinks out. It's gonna be great when the 2nd revision comes out though!

I refer you to the "it's almost the same enclosure as years of Powerbooks, all that hinge stuff is fixed" vs. "new architecture d00d, everything inside has changed, can't you see that????" from previous posts. Personally, I reckon it's a sweet machine and will avoid any major architecture problems, although I reckon some muppet will manage to scratch/break the camera and blame the latch or something to do with opening the laptop. Somehow. :) Buying decision still comes down to whether your apps have been... universalised? dualed? chi balanced?

As an aside... almost first post, carefully dodging the -1 redundant while stating the obvious, and then getting beaten to the punch by 'f y'all' dude. Life is cruel. :)

Re:It's nice to see improved benchmarks, but... (1)

MBCook (132727) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788231)

Ditto

I bought one last January when they announced the new updates and I'm quite happy with it. I expect it to last me quite a while if I wait. I may buy the next iteration (I like games and haven't had a great gaming computer in quite a while), but my PowerBook is an excelent machine.

I'm glad I futureproofed it though. 1GB of ram, 1.67 GHz, extra graphics memory, etc.

molten core combat (2, Funny)

la htris (955271) | more than 8 years ago | (#14787793)

rofl. so true.
not really surprised though, i think the major objection to intel chips for most applications was stability not speed. ditto for the graphics cards. more boxes = more games = more devs on the cards.
props to the amusing summary though.

survive (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14787799)

could it survive a first post?

Amazing (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14787805)

A new product that's an improvement over the model it replaces. Wow! That's news!

Re:Amazing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14787899)

A new product that's an improvement over the model it replaces. Wow! That's news!

I take it you never owned a Centris or a Performa...

Re:Amazing (1)

Daniel_Staal (609844) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788012)

Or one of the previous couple generations of PowerBooks...

yep, great benchmarks, but lacking in features. (-1, Troll)

plasmacutter (901737) | more than 8 years ago | (#14787806)

lets see here, what was it again, no firewire 800 for one thing, that's standard on powerbooks, what were the others? a/v jacks?

oh well the point is that vital features were "removed" from the macbook, and they added in a DRM'ed chipset.

DRM nullifies all benchmarks because benchmarks mean nothing if you can't use that power as you wish.

Re:yep, great benchmarks, but lacking in features. (1)

noewun (591275) | more than 8 years ago | (#14787855)

lets see here, what was it again, no firewire 800 for one thing, that's standard on powerbooks

Actually, it's a relatively recent addition to the Powerbook line. My older Powerbook doesn't have it.

oh well the point is that vital features were "removed" from the macbook, and they added in a DRM'ed chipset.

There's no proof Apple's using any of the DRM, so your point is moot.

I'm lusting after one of these puppies, but there's no way the purchase makes sense for me until there's more software available.

Re:yep, great benchmarks, but lacking in features. (2, Insightful)

plasmacutter (901737) | more than 8 years ago | (#14787902)

i guess those kexts, the existence of fairplay and the itunes store, the expansion of itunes to video, and the AACS standards are not convincing enough?

Weather or not jobs likes it, these things are being loaded with DRM. I'm a loyal apple user, well used to be, but if this continues my g5 will be the last apple computer i buy.

as for the firewire 800, my friend's 17 inch was bought in 2003(if my chronology is right) and had fw800. 3 years is a long time in the computing world.

Re:yep, great benchmarks, but lacking in features. (1)

DurendalMac (736637) | more than 8 years ago | (#14787955)

The kext issue was a misunderstanding blown out of proportion. The ITMS DRM isn't Apple's idea. They have no choice but to add DRM to appease the record companies. If they don't, then no more ITMS because the labels will pull all the songs out. You have Firewire800, but did you actually USE it? I doubt it. If you need FW800, get an ExpressCard for it. You know why? IT NEVER CAUGHT ON. A few hard drive enclosures use it, but beyond that, nada. You're getting worked up over nothing.

Re:yep, great benchmarks, but lacking in features. (1)

plasmacutter (901737) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788293)

Have you ever heard of a soldier's discression? In short, in war a soldier has the discression to determine for himself if an order is in conformity with the laws of war or not, and to refuse that order if he believes they do violate those laws. He may be tried, he may be demoted or sent to prision, but the point is a soldier who excercises this is standing up for his principles and actually having a spine, and anyone who doesnt stand up for their principles, who cowtows to someone more powerful but obviously wrong, does not deserve respect.

Apple is toting the DRM line when they dont have to. They are a serious player in the personal computing market, if they refused to tow the line they could easily break this cycle by pointing out the anticompetitive nature of DRM, but they dont because somewhere along the line they lost their spine.

I love their software, and own their PPC platform proudly, but i have lost a great deal of respect and any compulsion to buy their new systems because of this move and am voicing that in my commentary on this product.

Re:yep, great benchmarks, but lacking in features. (1)

dwm (151474) | more than 8 years ago | (#14787940)

>>oh well the point is that vital features were "removed" from the macbook, and
>>they added in a DRM'ed chipset.

>There's no proof Apple's using any of the DRM, so your point is moot.

This is hilarious. They added the chipset so it wouldn't be used? Wow, that's creative.

Re:yep, great benchmarks, but lacking in features. (1)

Yaztromo (655250) | more than 8 years ago | (#14787907)

lets see here, what was it again, no firewire 800 for one thing, that's standard on powerbooks

It was standard on the 15" and 17" models, but has never been available on the 12" model. And somehow, we've survived.

Besides which, for those few who need it, I'd imagine a slot-card for the new MacBook Pro that features FW-800 will be available in the near future.

Yaz.

Re:yep, great benchmarks, but lacking in features. (1)

plasmacutter (901737) | more than 8 years ago | (#14787942)

why after paying 2600 bucks for a laptop which is supposed to be "sexy" should i then have to get an after market fw800 card that will not only take up the card slot, but add this ugly bulbous protrusion to said macbook and a potential point by which the thing may be accidentally broken or mishandled?

Especially when previous generations had this standard. technology is supposed to evolve, not de-volve. That would be like BMW releasing ther great new model of m3, now with twice the horsepower, but no traction control, no stereo, no ipod control, and no rear view mirrors.

Re:yep, great benchmarks, but lacking in features. (1)

DurendalMac (736637) | more than 8 years ago | (#14787983)

WHEN HAVE YOU EVER USED FW800??? Jesus, it was a standard that never caught on! A few FW HD enclosures used it, and that was it. Very few people will feel the need to spring for an ExpressCard. God, it just seems to be yet another non-issue that the Apple bashing trolls are assfucking without end...

Re:yep, great benchmarks, but lacking in features. (1)

plasmacutter (901737) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788005)

my friend uses it all the time.

He bought the powerbook for portability, but that doesn't mean he doesnt want space when it's required.

he has 2 lacie super capacity externals which use fw800, and another with fw400. the firewire 800 is leagues better than firewire 400 in throughput, which is important when youre downloading straight to that drive because your audiobooks take up most of the space in your book.

Re:yep, great benchmarks, but lacking in features. (1)

DurendalMac (736637) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788037)

Then he can get an ExpressCard and keep it with the drives if bumping it or having an ugly extrusion is an issue.

Re:yep, great benchmarks, but lacking in features. (1)

plasmacutter (901737) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788187)

yep, i'm an "apple bashing troll", with my ADC premium membership, my dual 2.7 G5, my dual 1.25 g4, my friends who use mac, my school which uses mac, my cousins who use mac. look at my sig for god sakes man before blurting something like that out =/

Re:yep, great benchmarks, but lacking in features. (1)

Yaztromo (655250) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788120)

Especially when previous generations had this standard. technology is supposed to evolve, not de-volve.

Look, like it or not very few Mac users have ever used the FW800 port. I have both a 12" PowerBook G4 and a PowerMac G5. I have a few FW400 devices, but not a single FW800 device. If I had FW800 on the PowerBook, about the only use it might be put to would be to transfer very large data files between the PB and the PM.

This certainly isn't the first time Apple (or any other laptop maker for that matter) removed ports from their system. I doubt that even 1% of PowerBook owners use their FW800 ports. The majority will live just fine without it in this generation of systems.

Nobody has ever said that the removal of FW800 in the MacBook Pro line is final. It could still make its appearance in the 17" model (or whatever size might replace the 17" model -- as Apple hasn't announced anything yet, I'm not going to assume anything). It may just be a matter of getting Intel to support FW800 in its board controller chipsets used in the new system. Whatever it is, it's hardly the end of the world for most Mac owners.

Yaz.

Re:yep, great benchmarks, but lacking in features. (1)

DurendalMac (736637) | more than 8 years ago | (#14787909)

Firewire 800 never caught on. Those who want it will be able to buy an ExpressCard for it if they really need it. No video out? Funny, you can get DVI/VGA to A/V adapters all over the place, including Apple's own store. Yeah, they really removed all those "vital features". DRM? The only DRM is the one that keeps you from putting OS X on a PC. It doesn't affect the Mac. In short, you're simply a troll. You need to go back under the bridge and stay there.

Re:yep, great benchmarks, but lacking in features. (0)

damsa (840364) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788486)

DRM also prevent a future OSX release from being used on an older Mac. But then again Apple has been doing this for a while. My iMac can no longer run Tiger.

Re:yep, great benchmarks, but lacking in features. (2, Insightful)

NetJunkie (56134) | more than 8 years ago | (#14787913)

If you want FW800 get an ExpressCard with it. Have you seen the inside pics of the MacBook? There is *NO* room for any other ports. It's packed full. They dropped the things that the fewest people use. Do people still use AV outs on a notebook? Every projector I've seen in the last several years had DVI/VGA hookups.

Media PCs (1)

brunes69 (86786) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788029)

I know lots of people (including me) who routinely plug their laptop into the TV to watch a movie they just downloaded.

Re:Media PCs (1)

DurendalMac (736637) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788058)

DVI/VGA -> RCA/Svideo adapters are plentiful and pretty cheap.

Re:yep, great benchmarks, but lacking in features. (1)

plasmacutter (901737) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788046)

maybe they should add the 1cm it would take to make the room? not every innovation requires a reduction in form factor.

btw.. my friend uses express cards for other things, and there are limited slots, he should just abandon whatever else he is doing because apple removed what was standard?

additionally, most people cannot afford a "projection unit". most people have this thing called a tv, which uses coax, component, or svhs.

Re:yep, great benchmarks, but lacking in features. (1)

ObiWanKenblowme (718510) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788148)

...he should just abandon whatever else he is doing because apple removed what was standard?

Should Apple just base their decisions on whether or not it benefits your friend?

Re:yep, great benchmarks, but lacking in features. (1)

plasmacutter (901737) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788161)

yes, he has been a mac user since system 6.

he is at the core of who they are trying to please. He is a power user who wants everything to 'just work' but also wants professonal features from his laptop that the macbook 'pro' will not provide.

Re:yep, great benchmarks, but lacking in features. (1)

jkerman (74317) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788105)

it HAS a FW400 port. it just doesnt do FW800 mode. its a complete mystery why that feature was so hard to add. it certainly wasnt space.

Re:yep, great benchmarks, but lacking in features. (2, Informative)

Yaztromo (655250) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788366)

it HAS a FW400 port. it just doesnt do FW800 mode. its a complete mystery why that feature was so hard to add. it certainly wasnt space.

You're right -- it's the fact that no controller chipset from Intel supports FW800 that is the reason.

Apple went with Intel-based systems, including the chipset. Intel, so far as I've been able to determine through their website, has FW400 support in their chipsets, but no FW800. Adding a custom FW800 chip to the system would be non-trivial (as it's more than just space to drop in a chip -- you have to be able to connect it to the system bus somehow).

Yaz.

Re:yep, great benchmarks, but lacking in features. (1)

Yaztromo (655250) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788189)

Do people still use AV outs on a notebook? Every projector I've seen in the last several years had DVI/VGA hookups.

Get your laptop out of the boardroom once in a while, okay? :). I use composite and S-Video out all the time, often to play videos and video blogs I've downloaded off the net on my TV.

Of course, I do so using the Apple mini-DVI to Composite/S-Video adapter. I don't need a million-and-one ports built into my PowerBook.

Yaz.

Re:yep, great benchmarks, but lacking in features. (-1, Troll)

plasmacutter (901737) | more than 8 years ago | (#14787968)

funny, speak the truth about anything else on slashdot and get +4 insightful, speak the truth about apple doing something wrong and the jobsites descend upon you in droves with their -1 "troll" mods.

Re:yep, great benchmarks, but lacking in features. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14788041)

Judging by your slashdot ID, you must be new here so this must be new for you. (But its true and others have seen this to be the case as well)

Re:yep, great benchmarks, but lacking in features. (1)

tholomyes (610627) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788066)

...and the jobsites descend upon you in droves...

What, do Monster.com and Dice.com have permanent moderation privileges here?

Re:yep, great benchmarks, but lacking in features. (1)

GaryPatterson (852699) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788167)

You were probably modded 'troll' because you started on about DRM as if it actually mattered. If you had ended on the point about missing features, you'd probably have been modded up because that's a solid point to make.

Re:yep, great benchmarks, but lacking in features. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14788247)

and it is not a solid point that apple is handing you a pair of shackles and telling you "theyre nice shiny and new, put em on and you won't ever have to walk again!"

i'm sorry but despite my affinity for the fruit, i will not follow them into this territory, and believe its an important point to make.

Re:yep, great benchmarks, but lacking in features. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14788323)

And whine about moderation and get modded down to oblivion.

"no firewire 800" Thank you Apple, didn't need it (2, Insightful)

AHumbleOpinion (546848) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788434)

... no firewire 800 for one thing ...

Thank you Apple. I prefer not paying for things I do not need, SCSI in the old days, FW800 today. The few pros who need it can add it.

Re:"no firewire 800" Thank you Apple, didn't need (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14788470)

Oh don't worry, you are still paying for it. You just aren't getting it.

Slashdotted while still red (3, Funny)

winkydink (650484) | more than 8 years ago | (#14787811)

Before the aricle even went live, the site was slashdotted. I guess the geek patrol got ambushed.

Maybe they should benchmark web servers next.

Re:Slashdotted while still red (1)

Chrismith (911614) | more than 8 years ago | (#14787869)

Maybe they should benchmark web servers next.

They're already doing it. What better stress test than a slashdotting? In a week we'll see another article about which servers exploded and killed half the IT department, and which merely melted and had to be replaced.

Proxy for MC (1)

benthalus (584472) | more than 8 years ago | (#14787813)

I wonder if standing between the bank and auction house in Orgrimmar would be a good proxy for Molten Core combat, as this test can be done much easier, and within seconds of installing WoW on a MacBook (such as one that happens to be on display in a store). And I agree with waiting for the revised models to come out, Apple computers seems to have funny things happen when they are the first edition.

Re:Proxy for MC (2)

mothoc (307671) | more than 8 years ago | (#14787903)

I think standing between the bank and auction house in Ironforge would be a bit more of a trying test. Alliance tends to be more... frivolous with their time there. Mages seem to almost always have multiple blizzard spells going, paladins doing their consecrate thing. Dozens of Night Elfs showing of their mounts (or just dancing to annoy people).

Either way, though, once you get the game installed on the store machine (which will take a half-hour or so anyway), you have to download the monstrous 1.0-1.9 patch (approximately 325MB), and then each of the incremental 1.9.x patches. All told, you''ll have to find a way to distract the sales persons for around 2 hours.

You should go and do this on a Saturday around noon. They'll never notice.

Re:Proxy for MC (1)

spectral (158121) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788016)

or just bring in your own ipod with WoW installed to it and slap it in the dock they already provide for you

Re:Proxy for MC (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14788121)

Put the line
set M2Faster "1"
in the config.wtf file, see what that does. Might improve it.

The only problem with WoW lag is if you don't have enough memory for the texture/model cache; then you get swapping, and that's bad.

The Macbook Pro shouldn't have a problem with WoW, at all, CmdrTaco. I hear it works well.

And yeah, use Ironforge, in the biggest realm you can. It'll probably be busier.

Re:Proxy for MC - Missing Bits (1)

Nom du Keyboard (633989) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788199)

I agree with waiting for the revised models to come out, Apple computers seems to have funny things happen when they are the first edition.

You mean like missing half their bits?

Yonah is a 32-bit Intel processor. No 64-bit extensions.

Re:Proxy for MC - Missing Bits (2, Informative)

DA-MAN (17442) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788311)

You mean like missing half their bits?

No, the G4 is a 32-bit processor as well. Remember Apple never released a G5 laptop, and we are talking about laptops here. Had this been about the G5 iMac vs. the Intel iMac, you probably would have had a point though . . .

Hosted on a G4? (4, Funny)

Critter92 (522977) | more than 8 years ago | (#14787822)

Apparently Geekpatrol is hosted on a G4 Powerbook. Were it hosted on a Intellitosh it would have survived a bit longer.

Re:Hosted on a G4? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14787839)

Slashdot Effect at its' best.

Re:Hosted on a G4? (1)

Profane MuthaFucka (574406) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788164)

Congratulations, you just invented a new way to misuse the apostrophe.

Re:Hosted on a G4? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14788206)

Congratulations, you just invented a new way to misuse the apostrophe.

Thanks'

Re:Hosted on a G4? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14788244)

How about this? "You're still an ass"

I was going to buy a Mac (0, Troll)

bobcat7677 (561727) | more than 8 years ago | (#14787837)

This article might have pushed me over the edge. But since the server was slashdotted before it even it that main page I never got the chance. Guess I'll have to stick with WinTel hardware now.

Re:I was going to buy a Mac (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14787910)

Wow, another "Slashdotted server, the hardware must be crap" joke! I mean it was old the three billionth time I heard it, yeah, but you've breathed new life into an old classic!

And the captcha word is "reject." How appropriate.

Re:I was going to buy a Mac (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14788467)

forget buying a Mac, just install OSX on your Dell and save few hundred bucks.
1) buy a dell
2) install OSx86
3) profit!

Who cares? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14787849)

Nice to see Apple has finally bought into the "MHz Myth."

Re:Who cares? (2, Insightful)

chrismcdirty (677039) | more than 8 years ago | (#14787901)

1.83GHz, at a time when Pentium4 processors run somewhere close to 3.80GHz. I think the MHz myth is close to buried. The new myth has to do with power consumption!

Re:Who cares? (1)

damsa (840364) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788427)

Isn't it dual core so its like running two 1.83GHz processors at once? I know you can't add processor amounts to get 3.7.

L2BWL (0, Flamebait)

MattHawk (215818) | more than 8 years ago | (#14787870)

Molten Core? L2BWL, Noob.

(No, while I play WoW, I'm not actually a raider, but if Blizzard is allowed to condescendingly put L2BWL in a video they distribute about it, I can condescendingly put it in a slashdot post ;) )

Re:L2BWL (2)

TheRealCoreyHaim (956515) | more than 8 years ago | (#14787916)

Actually, your statement does have some validity. FPS in the drake filled AoE room would be a much better benchmark than at any part of MC. :)

comparison against the G4? (0)

slackaddict (950042) | more than 8 years ago | (#14787891)

I thought the new cpu was a G5 replacement.

Re:comparison against the G4? (1)

Wyatt Earp (1029) | more than 8 years ago | (#14787945)

The G5 was never put in a laptop. Since this is a Laptop vs. Laptop shootout, they went with the G4.

Re:comparison against the G4? (1)

MBCook (132727) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788250)

Well, yes the CPU is a G5 replacement in that they used it instead of the G5, and will probably replace the G5 machines with Core Duo machines (as they did with the iMac).

However, there has never been a G5 Powerbook. They are comparing this to the fastest powerbook that was on the market (1.67 GHz or so) because that's what everyone wants to know. Is it faster than the machine it replaced or not.

From the benchmarks I've seen, the answer is an emphatic yes.

Re:comparison against the G4? (1)

mattkime (8466) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788391)

Its a replacement for the G5 in that its the G4's successor - at least in notebooks.

For PowerMac G5 users, no way. The intel is a 32-bit chip which would likely limit me to 2GB of ram. I have 3.5GB in my powermac and wouldn't mind a bit more.

You need the DuoCore to beat the G5. A single core wouldn't touch it.

Why just benched against another Mac? (3, Insightful)

Anubis333 (103791) | more than 8 years ago | (#14787897)

Given that many of the same apps run on both Mac and PC platforms, why don't more people bench Mac vs. PC? I mean we are even talking about virtually the same architecture, the mac is now just another OS running on x86 hardware like Linux et al. I know it's interesting to see how the latest Mac stacks up against last years model, but how bout someone bench the latest Mac against it's contemporaries? The reason this isn't often done is because they usually get thrashed pretty bad, and feathers get ruffled (see: Adobe "PC Preferred" ad campaign, or Apple's SPEC processor benchmarks that were rejected because they were not completely legit). Windows always gets put against Linux, but Mac never seems to get benched against other platforms, and it is much, much closer to PC, as both platforms run many of the same apps. Just my two pennies...

Re:Why just benched against another Mac? (2, Insightful)

idobi (820896) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788096)

Because if you benchmark commonly used apps now, it'd be pointless. Windows would win because native versions of Photoshop and a dozen other apps important to mac users are not yet available.

Re:Why just benched against another Mac? (3, Interesting)

aftk2 (556992) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788252)

I agree with you, and as a Mac user, this is kind of frustrating (the occasional disparity between Mac & Windows versions of the same program). However, you might be interested in this: Ableton Live 5.2 Benchmarks [macrumors.com] . It benchmarks multiple versions of the program, on Windows and OS X with different processors.

Re:Why just benched against another Mac? (1)

tktk (540564) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788256)

These early benchmarks are primarily for Apple fans who want an excuse to buy a new Powerbook. And also those who are interested in gauging the Rosetta performance hit.

I'm sure future benchmarks will pit WinXP + app vs. Mac OS X + app.

Re:Why just benched against another Mac? (1)

damsa (840364) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788404)

More likely it will be Vista vs OsX app. Ah who am I kidding. Insert meme here.

Re:Why just benched against another Mac? (1)

99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788283)

Given that many of the same apps run on both Mac and PC platforms, why don't more people bench Mac vs. PC? I mean we are even talking about virtually the same architecture, the mac is now just another OS running on x86 hardware like Linux et al.

Historically it is because there has not been "equivalent" hardware. There have been benchmarks and they have been a mixed bag, and no one knows what is because of hardware, what is because of software, and what is because of the OS.

Now that Intel macs are starting to come out, we can mostly eliminate one of those three variables, the hardware. More-so when people get Windows running on mac hardware or vice versus. Right now though, what are you going to benchmark? It is hard to find hardware close to an intel imac and the macbooks aren't shipping yet. And most of the software anyone is interested in is still running in emulation mode on OS X for intel. Just wait six months and we will be able to compare some native apps on different platforms and the same hardware. This will be very useful for general performance and for finding bottlenecks in OS's and in particular software.

Lame (4, Funny)

Eightyford (893696) | more than 8 years ago | (#14787906)

No altivec. Less space than a Dell. Lame.

Re:Lame (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14788035)

For those who weren't around in 2001: a piece of /. history [slashdot.org]

Re:Lame (0, Offtopic)

Eightyford (893696) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788227)

Troll? Too soon to bring back that cliche, huh. Maybe we need an "Unfunny" mod.

Re:Lame (1)

Trillan (597339) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788335)

Well, it brought a smile to my face at least.

FPS in WOW (5, Informative)

Shishak (12540) | more than 8 years ago | (#14787924)

I had a PowerBook G4 1Ghz, 1Gig RAM (all graphics set to lowest setting) and would get insane lag in Ironforge around the AH. I couldn't run my epic horse through that area without ending up in the ditch. I now have a MacBookPro, 2.0 Ghz, 2 Gigs RAM and can run around in IF with 0, none, NADA lag and 30-35 FPS. I have all options turned on and the highest resolution the laptop screen can handle. Crusing around WSG is fun as I don't get lagged to death

The MacBookPro is insanely fast. I'm not a big fan of the magnetic power cord, it seems to fall out too often with just a switch in body position. It is quite a bit hotter on my lap and I have had some random crashes while in WoW. Complete computer lock up, power down, restart to get it working again. (CTRL-ALT+Power)

I haven't gone into MC yet but will hopefully go tonight, we are killing domo so that should be some tasty lag.

All in all, I'm extremely happy with my MacBookPro

Re:FPS in WOW (1)

xenocide2 (231786) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788086)

Call it a guess, but now that the auction houses are linked, there's less reasons for everyone to hang out at iron forge all day. Of course, Iron Forge is also pretty heavy on the geometry, but the massive amount of player movement may have contributed to that old lag.

Re:FPS in WOW (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14788280)

Domo on a Thursday? Yuck. Thursdays are nasty enough without having to crowd control 8 adds.

Re:FPS in WOW (1)

thatguywhoiam (524290) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788334)

I had a PowerBook G4 1Ghz, 1Gig RAM (all graphics set to lowest setting) and would get insane lag in Ironforge around the AH. I couldn't run my epic horse through that area without ending up in the ditch. I now have a MacBookPro, 2.0 Ghz, 2 Gigs RAM and can run around in IF with 0, none, NADA lag and 30-35 FPS. I have all options turned on and the highest resolution the laptop screen can handle. Crusing around WSG is fun as I don't get lagged to death

I'm sure the new MacBook helps - lucky bastard - but for WoW, the issue is probably a network one. If I pop open CPU and bandwidth monitors on my dual G5 while playing WoW (windowed), the CPUs are only hitting 50-65%, and the packets are numerous but small. WoW is just not that intensive a game. I would guess that a combination of non-bus-chocked laptop (MacBook - the G4 laptop's biggest weakness was that weak ass bus), and improvements to both WoW's client and backend infrastructure (they've added dozens of new servers).

Molten Core? BWL is worse. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14787926)

I'd like to see FPS of a typical fight through the supression room in Blackwing Lair.

Apple innovation? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14787954)

Apple and innovation?

Apple is regarded by its supporters to be an innovative [macsimumnews.com] and forward looking company. They claim Apple invented most things from the GUI to Desktop publishing. Almost always the supporters make the innovation claims with restrictions like "in the field of personal computing", "over the entire product line", "affordable solution" or "as a standard feature". They also like to blur your vision when equaling "popularized" and "introducing" with "inventing". Apple supporters always maximizes the importance of Apples involvement in an innovation (even if it's very slim) and at the same time downplay any other companies involvement.

Case in point "USB":
When the supporters speak about how innovative Apple is they talk about how iMac was the first computer utilizing USB. This is arguable, but if you tell them they counterattack with something like "over the entire product line". And now they are correct. In reality Apple had absolutely nothing to do with the technical creation of USB. Intel invented USB as an answer to Apples pay-per-port licensing of firewire. Apple was one of the first companies to use USB but strictly (or not so strictly) speaking that isn't innovation. They just used an of the shelf product that where developed on the PC market.

The same can be said for a lot of products Apple supporters claim Apple invented, of course with "additional restrictions" (see above). Some of these innovations are: Audio, SCSI, Ethernet, long file names and Floppy drives. In reality Apple invented none of those products.

A nice place for looking at these "innovations" is an older wikipedia page [wikipedia.org] describing the Macintosh on which of course Mac users gone totally mad in describing the Macintosh as a very innovative platform. Almost all of claimed innovations are in fact just off the shelf parts licensed from other companies or already old products used in a slightly different manner by Apple. The wikipedia page has since been revised and is now more in line with what Macintosh actually brought to the table of computing.

It is however true that Apple are fast at picking up new technologies invented outside Apple and as a result the Macintosh is a faster evolving platform than the PC. This is a design decision made by Apple to keep the Macintosh computer interesting and "fresh". This however has some lowdowns. Every five year or so the Macintosh developers and users have to adapt to a completely new platform or a new operation system (68k->PPC, legacy Mac OS->OS X, PPC->x86, soon x86->x86-64). In the PC world this would be suicide, too much money are tied up in legacy technologies. Macintosh are mostly used by home users and small companies who don't need a homogenous environment, or have so few computers and programs they can invest in new technology every so often. The PC platform is used by everybody, small and large. It would be almost impossible to "twist and turn" the Apple way. Intel tried to introduce Itanuium for 64bit computing but in the end had to back down to a backward compatible x86 solution.

Conclusion:
All things considered, when the dust has settled. After decades of innovation and jumping between CPU families and platforms the Macintosh has transformed into nothing less than an ordinary PC, at least in hardware and mostly in software. Linux x86 booted within a month of the x86 Macintosh release using the standard EFI bootloader and Gentoo Linux distribution. Windows vista will probably boot out of the box on the Macintosh without Microsoft putting any effort in testing on the platform. On all important fronts the innovation by Apple has been nothing short of a straight copy of the PC platform. On the software side half of Apples operating system is also of the shelf available parts from different open source projects. Modern Macintosh is basically a proprietary GUI over standard open source components, running on PC hardware. The difference between Macintosh and the PC has been shrinking over the years and now they are VERY close. It's entirely possible Apple will abandon what's left of the Macintosh and go total PC, hardware and software. This isn't innovation and never has been.

Think different? No it looks like you are thinking exactly the same. Only later than everybody else.

/ttfn
iPod is UNIX

Damn (3, Funny)

wackymacs (865437) | more than 8 years ago | (#14787970)

Damn! I thought the MacBook Pro was going to be slower than the PowerBook G4...

That's all fine and good, BUT... (1)

Rude Turnip (49495) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788014)

Can anyone confirm if it will also run Windows XP? If I can use this to run Windows at work and OS X at home, I'll be all over one of these machines like hot grits on Natalie Portman.

Re:That's all fine and good, BUT... (1)

johndesmarais (707777) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788124)

Simple answer: No. Complex answer: Possibly, but not worth the effort involved in making it work. Mac's use EFI (Extensible Firmware Interface) rather than a BIOS. Windows XP requires a BIOS. Windows Vista (XP's successor), in theory at least, may run on an Intel Mac; and Apple says it won't do anything to prevent folks from doing so.

No but it runs Linux (1)

Foofoobar (318279) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788213)

A couple people already installed a version of Linux and got it working with a command line (No X Windows). Thought this was posted here a couple days ago. Don't you read Slashdot every 2 minutes like the rest of us?

Re:That's all fine and good, BUT... (1)

Paradise Pete (33184) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788271)

Can anyone confirm if it will also run Windows XP?

Apparently not, at least not yet. But since it would make them extraordinarily more marketable to people currently running Windows that I can't imagine it not happening eventually.

Re:That's all fine and good, BUT... (1)

Stormwatch (703920) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788272)

You don't have to use Windows to use Windows apps. You just need a compatibility layer - look into Wine. [wikipedia.org]

Impressive (1)

wlvdc (842653) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788033)

Those benchmarks are impressive, but I agree, an MC or ZF raid would be a better test.
Now we only need better Blizz performance, at least in Europe. 182ms and rising...

I'm waiting for rev2 also... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14788053)

I'd buy a macbook now (would be a nice upgrade for my 1.25 ghZ mac with 512mb ram) but it seems all too likely that the next rev will include legacy bios support, opening the door for windows and linux. Ommitting it from rev1 was a big miss IMO.

Re:I'm waiting for rev2 also... (0, Flamebait)

ickoonite (639305) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788160)

...it seems all too likely that the next rev will include legacy bios support...

Really? Where'd you hear that? Because that would make a lot of sense, building a totally new legacy-free laptop just like Macs have been for years (ADB excepted :P) and then going back for Rev B and putting the legacy crap in. Yeah, that really makes sense.

Idiot.

iqu :|

Re:I'm waiting for rev2 also... (2, Insightful)

rthille (8526) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788221)

I can almost guarantee you that new intel macs will not support legacy bios. EFI is the new 'bios', and macs will never bother to support the old cruft.

Re:I'm waiting for rev2 also... (1)

Trillan (597339) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788353)

"All too likely"? How about "not likely at all"?

I'd like to see WoW on there. (1)

xutopia (469129) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788056)

Just to see how well it would run... Cause honestly it's the only thing worth benchmarking for me.

battery life (2, Interesting)

Tibor the Hun (143056) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788232)

anyone have any numbers on battery life?
3 hours? 5? DVD playing? airport on/off?
because, that's, you know kinda important when it comes to laptops...

Taco! Enough with the Molten Core references! (4, Funny)

thatguywhoiam (524290) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788285)

Seems like (nearly) every time a Mac/Intel story pops up, CmdrTaco chimes in with some comment on WoW/Molten Core.

Dear Apple: Slashdot needs to review 5 of these indefinitely. Thank you XOXO ;) Seriously, i'm waiting for someone to give good benchmarks on these- especially testing for Warcraft. Now that it has a new Universal Binary I can't wait to see how it holds up against a modern windows machine.

'Not only did the new iMac wipe the floor with the old model in their tests, but using MacWorld's own test methodology would allow MacSpeedZone to conclude that the new Intel iMac is almost as fast as a PowerMac Quad G5.' I see only one way to solve this: Give me one. I'll run WoW on it, and decide.

I'm still waiting for the most important benchmark: frames per second in molten core combat.

We get it. You use your Mac for WoW.

WoW... (0, Offtopic)

netkid91 (915818) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788349)

And here come the WoW nerds, which account for most of the /. readers(not me, I play EQ) saying WoW is the TRUE benchmark. Seriously, EQ for OS X and WoW for OS X seem like the best benchmarks to me, go for it, but I don't care.

FireWire 800 Was Stupid (3, Interesting)

ImaNihilist (889325) | more than 8 years ago | (#14788394)

There is something that some of you forget about FW800. FireWire 800 was a mistake to begin with. There is no FireWire chipset that I know of that sits on the PCIe bus. That means, that if FW800 is on the PCI bus, it almost completely saturates the entire bus ITSELF. It was pointless. Until someone comes out with a FW controller that sits on the PCIe bus, FW800 is best left to something like ExressCard 54.

In theory, a FW 800 Express Card should be superior to FW800 built onto the PCI bus.

When the next generation of FW controllers come out that sit on the PCIe bus, then it will make sense. FW800 is just a little to early. Soon.

Desperate Need For Validation (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14788431)

It is really sad to watch the Mac community desperately keep coming up with these 'see! we were'nt given the boot by IBM. we WANTED to change to x86' benchmark stories.

I don't know what the hell you guys are going to be like when Apple dumps the x86 hardware and goes software only. Don't act surprised, you know it's coming...

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>