new powerbooks. damn fast.. I WANT ONE. NOW!

hmm, i don't really get why the new Powerbook is so much faster than the TiBook.. It only has a "small" difference of some 100-200Mhz..

Which "hardware" makes the laptop faster?
 
to not bring any confusion:

i do believe it's much faster than the TiBook, but i'm wondering how Apple made it faster, because i don't get it how they did it..
 
Maybe the bigger L2 cache? The higher fsb? or just the better graphiccard? I don't know if there is finally a benefit of the faster memory. Before it was just a matter of compatibilty but not really performance
 
They never mentioned what was the GPU used with centrino chip. But looking at it, just the raw CPU power, centrino beats the shit out of apple.
And the current status of centrino is i believe 1.7Ghz. Its going to take eons for apple to touch that number if they stick with motto (like 300MHz per year, ... will take a year and a half to reach 1.7).

No doubt i like apple, but intel with their centrino is well ahead.
 
Originally posted by arun
They never mentioned what was the GPU used with centrino chip. But looking at it, just the raw CPU power, centrino beats the shit out of apple.
And the current status of centrino is i believe 1.7Ghz. Its going to take eons for apple to touch that number if they stick with motto (like 300MHz per year, ... will take a year and a half to reach 1.7).

No doubt i like apple, but intel with their centrino is well ahead.
Click to expand...

I am inclined to agree with you speed to most users is speed you can get a Toshiba or Compact in Cambodia for USD1650 standard is 2.0Ghz, Apple just does not seem to get it , incidentally I have used Mac's for almost 20 yrs and will most likely order new PB 15" !!
:( :(
 
Originally posted by arun
They never mentioned what was the GPU used with centrino chip. But looking at it, just the raw CPU power, centrino beats the shit out of apple.
And the current status of centrino is i believe 1.7Ghz. Its going to take eons for apple to touch that number if they stick with motto (like 300MHz per year, ... will take a year and a half to reach 1.7).

No doubt i like apple, but intel with their centrino is well ahead.
Click to expand...

And where exactly did you read about the RAW CPU POWER? Cause if you mean CineBench CPU test that is just another benchmark and not something that can show us how a CPU performs... As for CineBench ANYONE should know by now that is a Wintel/Amd customized app to the fullest and just converted to Macs :p

Plus I bet that with the Panther all those scores will improve for PowerBooks ::ha::
 
Well, for better or worse, I've pressed the order button, and a 1GHz 15" AlBook should be on its way within a week or two...
 
To senne's questions:

a) The PowerPC 7457 has a larger (512K) level 2 cache and is, overall, a more evolved chip than the previously used chips (7410, 7451, 7455).

b) The graphics card certainly has an impact. Mostly for the games, of course, but also for GUI tasks.

c) The bus is faster, which always plays a big role.

I'm glad that the new PBs are that much faster. Sure, they're not what I was hoping for, but they're what I've expected.

Sadly, this means that the gap between the desktop and mobile Macs is getting bigger and bigger. Steve Jobs himself is talking about how important notebooks are to Apple, so they should put all their money and energy into getting a PowerBook G5 ready for MWSF 2004 in January. And if that isn't possible, I hope that Motorola once can deliver what they promise and bring us a PowerPC 7457-RM at 1.833 GHz. The PowerBooks deserve this, and the iBooks could sure make use of the 1.25 GHz PowerPC 7457. Alas, we _do_ know a bit about Motorola, and maybe it's better if Apple goes G5 (90 nm) for the PowerBooks and uses the ever faster G3s from IBM for the iBooks.
 
Originally posted by Zammy-Sam
Why did I know hulkaros will comment aruns post? ;) :)
Click to expand...

...it's a dirty job but someone has to do it! Superman, SpiderMan, et al have bigger fish to fry :p

So, here I am with the trademark problem solution of mine:
:mad: HULK SMASH! :mad:




:D ;) ::angel::
 
"We are outpacing the market by a country mile," Greg Joswiak, Apple's vice president of hardware marketing, said in an interview. Joswiak noted that in the most recent market share statistics from research firm IDC, Apple had 7 percent of the U.S. notebook market, up sharply from a year earlier.
Click to expand...

yes guys. i have to agree with you. its all about processor power and CENTRINOS. yeyyy...
thats why the powerbooks are doin good. (And will do much better once they go G5)
 
I have read that the battery in the 15"
only lasts about 2 hours - that is very BAD!!!!!!
 
arden: Are you still trying to up your post count? Quite irrelevant, your post, isn't it?

grep: There are rumours that some batteries are faulty. If you get a 15" AluBook, make sure that you get the battery life you expect. However, you have to compare this not to the number Apple gives you, but to the number that seems reasonable. Sure: Apple says 4.5 hours, but that probably means that the display and keyboard light have to be off or at the lowest setting, DVD and harddrive shouldn't even spin and the processor runs at ~700 MHz.
 
Yes, Fryke, I'm only interested in upping my post count, which is why I post completely frivolous posts, as that's all that's important to me in this world, and I'm doing it just to piss you off. [/sarcasm]

Read the title of this thread, like the ALL CAPS PART.
 
I noticed in the benchmark test that the 15" 1.25ghz did a lot better then the 1ghz, does that 250mhz make that much of a difference or is it that the computer was tested with 512mb ram vs 256mb ram for the 1mhz and has a slower harddrive then the 1.25ghz?
What do you guys think??

Viktor
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top