Apple Hardware and PC Hardware

[Zyrg]

Hello,


I am looking at purchasing a laptop, but I would like to go with a Macintosh. A couple of things I never figured out though. The system specs for Macs are ALWAYS weaker than a PC for a comparable price. Ie. You get a 64 Meg video card by ATI with a 1.5Ghz processor, but the competitor Dell has a 128 Meg card from ATI with a 2.8Ghz processor.

No problem so far I suppose. I do wonder whether or not there is a difference though. Everyone knows Macs are better graphically, but how can this be with a slower chip, less memory, and a worse video card?

To make issues more complicated, the system requirements for Hybrid software (Say Warcraft 3, I don't know!) are always less. If a game needs 500Mhz to run on a PC, it need 366Mhz to run on a Mac.

Give me some basics if possible please - I am VERY proficient with PCs, but know nothing about Macs, so elaborate on the Mac parts, hehe!

THANK YOU SO MUCH!
Steven

 

[DaveSimmons]

Think Athlon vs. P4, the Mac processor chips get more done / have a higher PR rating than the raw CPU speed would tell you.

That doesn't apply to the graphics card though, a Radeon 7000 is a Radeon 7000 whether it's on a PC or Mac.

Macs are known for good graphic design software, like PhotoShop, not for better 3D graphics perfromance.

 

[sisooktom]

OS X has a more sophisticated graphics subsystem than Windows does, I think the entire GUI is OpenGL. But that doesn't mean that games and so forth will perform equally well as they would under Windows with a better card.

 

[Zyrg]

Dang, I was kind of hoping for a gaming system, heh. I don't know why Apple doesn't use the 128 Mb cards in their laptops - they look sooooo pretty.

Appreciate it fellows.

 

[ViRGE]

Zyrg, as a Mac user, I'll flat out tell you that if you're looking for a gaming machine, don't get a Mac. Macs are good workhorses, but they're simply not built for major gaming. The only exception I would put to this, is that if you're only going to be playing WC3(and similar, somewhat older games), then you would be fine with a Mac.

 

[Eug]

Apple laptops make poor gaming machines. I think they're great for most stuff, but definitely not gaming.

 

[nortexoid]

if u've no reason to buy a mac, no matter how fast it runs, then don't. if u're looking to game on a laptop, then go PC, period. if u're using it for general tasks (browsing, multimedia, word processing, etc.) then both will have plenty of power, especially top-end models for both mac and pc.

i recently bought a laptop and considered buying a mac just because the OS and thing itself look so cool. i then realized all the software i own is for the pc, and i'd have to reinvest hundreds on software for the mac. it wasn't worth it. besides, windows isn't that bad, is it?

 

[Wahsapa]

i think apple is like via minus the x86. they have a closed architecture and collaborate with cpu suppliers like motorola and ibm. powerpc isnt them alone, ibm makes a high end server chip for linux and anybody could make a ppc chip if they had the $$. the preformance of the mac is based almost directly on apple, the g4s are not fast, but the g5(dual) is where its at.

all the northbridge/south bridge/IO control/etc is up to them and their standards(which are pretty high). when ati releases something like the 9800pro for the mac a lot more testing went into the drivers and stuff so as to insure stability.

because apple knows everything about the hardware they can make the os(mac os 10.3 is the most recent) highly specialized and specific(if they would choose to atleast) so that the usability of the machine is improved. the switch to unix has been great for them and hopefully the development soon follows.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Wahsapa
i think apple is like via minus the x86. they have a closed architecture and collaborate with cpu suppliers like motorola and ibm. powerpc isnt them alone, ibm makes a high end server chip for linux and anybody could make a ppc chip if they had the $$. the preformance of the mac is based almost directly on apple, the g4s are not fast, but the g5(dual) is where its at.

all the northbridge/south bridge/IO control/etc is up to them and their standards(which are pretty high). when ati releases something like the 9800pro for the mac a lot more testing went into the drivers and stuff so as to insure stability.

because apple knows everything about the hardware they can make the os(mac os 10.3 is the most recent) highly specialized and specific(if they would choose to atleast) so that the usability of the machine is improved. the switch to unix has been great for them and hopefully the development soon follows.

VIA is much more open than apple. And most things on Apple are fairly open. IIRC, the PPC was designed by 3 companies: apple, IBM, and Motorola.

The g4 is similar to the p3-> p4 switch. The g3 is faster clock for clock, but the g4 added some important things. Namely the Altivec stuff. The transition had to happen though. The G5 is a HUGE step up though.

And there are aparently some AMD chips (not CPU) making it into Apple hardware these days.