Mac faster than PC?

R

robmcq

Registered
On other dicussion board we had an argue about Mac is faster than PC or PC is faster than Mac.

I think that Mac is faster than PC. But what's makes Mac faster than PC?

I mean the numbers of MHz may appears that Mac is slower than PC.
I think this is just other stupid myth.

So I would like to ask you, what makes Mac faster than PC?
 
Some Macs are faster than some PCs, some PCs are faster than some Macs.
The argument shouldn't be about speed, because a half second here and there aren't going to matter one way or another. The argument should be about wich is better, which is stronger, which is more flexible and which is more stable.
The speed argument is silly. Maybe it mattered at one time, but that time has passed.
 
...Yeah. I got it from PCtoMac.com

Here's a link I read:

http://www.pctomac.com/why/myths.php

If you don't want to read all of it or just want to know where I got it, I copy and pasted from there:

Myth: Macs are too slow.
Fact: Number-for-number Megahertz-wise, a Macintosh's processor may appear "slower," but in many cases this is simply not true. Megahertz is only one processor measure, and does not always accurately portray the overall "speed" of a processor. The PowerPC processors Apple users are generally more efficient than their Intel or AMD counterparts, allowing them to hold their own for most tasks. Also, it's important to note that many Windows programs install extra "background" and system-tray applications which are usually invisible to the user, but always running. This, and things like fragmentation and "registry" corruption tend to slow your PC down as time goes on, giving you the false illusion that your computer has become too outdated and requires an upgrade. Apple has made Mac OS X very efficient so unnecessary background applications are not very common, and so your machine doesn't slow down as time goes on and you install more applications.

Yes, it's silly, after this topic in other discussion board, I realized that it is silly.
 
I think speed has become more of a marketing term for computer these days rather than a benchmark of performance. It's the new "extra-strength".
Computers are used for so many different reasons and ways these days, it seems that "speed" is lobbed as the only way to tell one from the other. And stability isn't as sexy as speed.
The G5s are going to be great computers, but truth be told, I spent some time a few weekends ago on my old graphite iBook (366 mhz, 6-gig hard drive, extra ram, AirPort card) and it did most of the things I wanted to do just fine (and that included using Photoshop and QuarkXpress at the same time.
 
a new pentium 4 3.0 will run circles around the fastest g4 plain and simple...

this all changes once the g5 comes out though

point is, apple has been behind on hardware speeds/power for the last couple years IMHO
 
point is, apple has been behind on hardware speeds/power for the last couple years
Click to expand...
Yeah, but look at what Apple has been ahead of over those same few years: iLife? iTunes? ITunes Music Store? Final Cut? iPod? Jaguar? Panther? Safari?
Numbers are just a marketing ploy because you can cook any number to show whatever you want.
But what do most people want? I'd say E-mail, Internet access, music, gaming, photo and video, watching dvds, text, simplicity of use, reliability. Other than gaming, you could argue that Apple is the leader or near the top of every other category.
And don't forget things such as iSync and how big a jump Apple has made recently in increasing and simplifying connectivity with mobile devices such as pdas and smartphones.
You're always going to have some Macs faster than PCs, some PCs faster than Macs.
 
i didnt say anything about software, i was talking pure hardware here (this is where most mac users get offended and start up with the app excuse ;))

all im saying is that the hardware (currently) is behind, thats all. now software? alot of it is nicer/more intuitive and thus increases the users speed... but wouldnt it be even nicer with equal or better hardware than the competition? ;)

(buys g5.... NO!... but i want it, please?... NO JASON YOU CANNOT.. but i can, see i have money... NO, IF YOU DO YOU WILL NOT BE ABLE TO EAT OR GO TO SCHOOL... hmmm might be worth it though....;))
 
Ok, exactly which hardware on the Mac is inferior to the same on a PC?

Another point is value. PC's may cost less to begin with, but they have far fewer features than even the tomorrow-morning-dregs Mac. Macs simply have a higher initial value, and they keep their value as they age. I am typing this on a 233 Mhz G3 that I could probably sell for at least $300. My friend's 300 Mhz P3 would probably go for $100-150.
 
What do you mean by speed ?

If this is the time you need to write a complete and complex report on a PC or on a Mac... try and see !

If this is the fps in Quake, is this the reason why you bought a computer ? The look at a PS2 or Xbox, it's cheaper and better suited for most games.

Is it the time needed to process an image or a movie, try and see...
 
I have PlayStation 2 games and Mac games.

The reason I want Mac games instead of PC, because I hate Windows. To me, it is not "Plug-and-play", it is "Plug-and-get mad" or "Plug-and-Pray".

I am not really computer gaming fan. I am really video game fan.

But sometime only computer have games, PlayStation 2 does not. Like Maesty, or Diablo.

Yes, PS 2 can play PS 1 games and PS 1 have Diablo, but when I bought computer version and on that time, I never heard of PS version of Diablo.

I am not going to waste money.
 
How come everyone always twists things around when it comes to hardware. Ok for the past few years Apple computers have been slower than PCs due to lower overall processor power (dont talk to me about per Mhz). Lower memory bandwidth etc.

Power IS important and all of you who say its not will be changing your tune and claiming how important speed is when the G5 comes around. You say its not right now because the hardware is behind thats all. Nobody likes to admit it but its true.

I have a G3 B&W at home as well as two PCs. At work we have multiple dual G4s and many PCs as well. The PCs are faster overall by quite a good margin. I'm not talking about user productivity faster. I dont care if it takes the same time to type a word document on both and I'm not just talking about games being faster either.

Photoshop runs faster on the 2.4Ghz P4 (533 bus) than the Dual 1Ghz machine. Maybe the odd filter will be faster on the mac but overall, most filters run faster in photoshop 7 with the P4. Compressing huge files as in stuffit / winzip is faster on the PC. Internet surfing in general. Heavy flash pages run smoother on PC....

The point is that everyone gets all upset if someone says a PC is faster which is the truth right now but you'll quickly change your tune 180 degree in a month or so. I even recall pre-osx days when I would tell mac users how multitasking was such a great thing and they would tell me that its not that useful and that all you need is to run the app you're using one at a time and who wants to run more than one thing at a time anyway. Now that OSX is here you talk like you invented multitasking ;)

Anyway thats my rant for now.


PS. Believe it or not I'm in a good mood right now because I just got the UW SCSI controller working right on my B&W G3. Putting in a 9.1 gig 10K SCSI drive to make it move a bit :)
 
Why do you come along and burst our bubble? :(

You're right, in some respects PC's are faster than Macs. But Macs have the advantage of being much more stable and user friendly. At work, which computers do you prefer to use? Which do you have to troubleshoot more because of hardware or software failures?
 
Um... just by looking at this forum I see that Macs have just as many issues (dare I say problems?) as PCs. From hardware to software failures. In reality, they're all still machines and machines have problems every now and then.

OSX is more stable than OS9, just like how Windows 2000 and XP are more stable than Win 95/98. When Win2000 first came out it had poor hardware support and was a lousy OS for playing games on. Same deal with OSX - some hardware still don't have drivers, and I hear people saying they boot into OS9 to play game XYZ and it performs better.
 
Sorry. Didnt mean to burst any bubbles. I'm not sure if I can say that Macs are more stable. I'm up for debate on that too. User friendly... well maybe OS9 but I dont think OSX is user friendly at all. In fact I think Win2k / XP is more friendly.

Now for my work place... my workstation is an AMD XP2500 system with an older Geforce2 GTS video card. It does have the advantage of having an 18gig 10K SCSI drive as a startup drive so I'm sure it makes a difference for how it feels too but overall I enjoy using it and win2k more.

The rest of the office has lots of macs. The dual processor macs in the office run OSX and our older singles run OS 9.2. All the PCs run Win2k Pro except for 2 which are running XP. In order of things I have to fix or troubleshoot...it goes like this from most trouble to least trouble.

OS9.2 --> OSX -->WinXP -->Win2k.


I'm being honest too. The network is about 50% mac and 50% PC. The majority of OS9 problems seem to be print issues and general instability and bombs...type2 's etc. Frequent dumping of preferences and rebuilding desktops, zapping prams.

The majority of OSX problems just seem to be buggy programs and quiry things the OS seems to do. There are also some file permission issues that seem to get strange.

Majority of WinXP issues seem to be quirky network issues. Slow downs for no reason etc.

Majority of win2k issues seem to be ... well I cant tell you what it is. It behaves well. Users are the problem.

BTW I'm the network admin at my company. We do have a systems guy just for the macs and he's getting tired of fixing things. They hired me because we started getting more PCs in the office. We also needed to deploy some inhouse webservers and an Exchange and SQL box.

At home my main machine is a P4 2.4B with 1gig ram, 15,000RPM SCSI drive for boot and two 10K drives for storage. Second machine is an Athlon XP 2100 system. I also have the G3 which I play around with.



Anyway I'm glad to see the G5 get some heavy power so dont get me wrong. I'm not anti mac. Just stating what I felt was true. All I want is better support of some legacy SCSI controllers under OSX but I dont think thats going to happen. Many feel SCSI is dying but trust me its not. As fast as firewire is, its nowhere the speed of 10K and 15K SCSI for high end workstation tasks.
 
me work faster in mac than in win. me choose mac. end of argument? no.

Then a simpler truth: Buy a PC and it's old next week. Buy a Mac and it's 'old' in half a year. But, and this is really important: Macs have a longer lifespan.
 
Originally posted by contoursvt
Power IS important and all of you who say its not will be changing your tune and claiming how important speed is when the G5 comes around. You say its not right now because the hardware is behind thats all. Nobody likes to admit it but its true.

I have a G3 B&W at home as well as two PCs. At work we have multiple dual G4s and many PCs as well. The PCs are faster overall by quite a good margin. I'm not talking about user productivity faster. I dont care if it takes the same time to type a word document on both and I'm not just talking about games being faster either.

Photoshop runs faster on the 2.4Ghz P4 (533 bus) than the Dual 1Ghz machine. Maybe the odd filter will be faster on the mac but overall, most filters run faster in photoshop 7 with the P4. Compressing huge files as in stuffit / winzip is faster on the PC. Internet surfing in general. Heavy flash pages run smoother on PC....
Click to expand...

First I would like to take a disclaimer that I edit digital video on a 600mhz G3. Not the occasional iMovie, but school projects shot in DV with Final Cut Express. So I'm fully aware of how important speed is.

Contour, I do agree with most of what you said. Speed does matter. If it didn't, we wouldn't see the push for speed processor manufacturers were making. In truth, I don't think a mac will be as fast as a PC in the near future like you said. However, speed is not as important as the issue that Computer A is an Apple and Computer B is a Dell (or what have you). You sound as though you're comfortable on Win2k, winxp, os 9 and os X. Well that's great. Because there aren't that many of you. When a company is buying computers, there's a lot more to consider than pure speed. I sincerely doubt the G5 would sell more than, say, a couple hundred units because it was the fastest computer (if it was). I do think however, it will sell many more units because it's the fastest Apple.
 
Hey Fryke,

I disagree with your statement. Pentium 200 vs PowerPC 200Mhz. They both came out around the same time right? Yes they did. I just installed Windows XP on a Pentium 200 with 128mb RAM, 4 gig drive for a friend. Its not idea but runs and gets the job done. She can use her office 97 that she had purchased as well as her photoshop 5.0

Try the above with the 200Mhz PPC. First of all you wont be installing OSX on it because its not going to happen. I dont even think OSX will install unless it sees a G3 cpu. Second, if you even could install OSX, it would absolutely crawl at 128mb RAM on a 200Mhz machine. Thats the OS itself. Then if you had to use classic to startup your previously bought software like Photoshop 5 and office98, it would just die.

Looking at this, I'd say that the PPC 200Mhz is the one thats outdated and has the shorter lifespan. Wonder when 10.3 comes out if apple will drop all support for the Beige G3 systems. I think they will... Looks like thats going to get outdated faster than a Pentium II 266 as well

The only issue with being outdated in the PC world is if you want to keep up to your neighbor. If you dont and just want to use the computer, then what is shortening its life span?
 
Mike, I agree with your statment. I dont think Apples G5 sales will soar just because its the fastest computer (when it comes out) but yes it surely will because its the fastest MAC.

Its also one very sexy machine! I know some may not like the way it looks but I love it :)
 
In my opinion, Mac is a feeling... isn't just a computer...
PC are faster, yes, but windows suks!!!
I was PC user for years... then I bought a mac and my idea of what a computer is changed forever...
Forget OSX, that in my opinion is what whindows should be... let's talk about OS 9... just switching between photoshop and illustrator with no delay, and drag and drop between them is wonderfull...
Forget pc's... think different...
 
Don't you love how the menu bar stays at the top of the screen, no matter what you're doing, on a Mac, instead of being tied to each application? Or how programs don't hide your entire desktop if you have no windows open? Or Exposé?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top