Are Macs faster than PCs?
- Thread starter Mork
- Start date
Assuming you're comparing similar models (not 400 Mhz G3 Mac vs. 90 Mhz Pentium Win2k). 
At Photoshop? Yes.
At any other app? Depends.
After the G5's come out in January, it will be a moot argument anyway.
At Photoshop? Yes.
At any other app? Depends.
After the G5's come out in January, it will be a moot argument anyway.
Faster macs are faster then slower macs, and faster pcs are faster then slower pcs.
Does it matter?
Can you do your job well with a mac or a pc.
Thats all that matters.
Does it matter?
Can you do your job well with a mac or a pc.
Thats all that matters.
<< Are macs faster at... photoshop? >>
Um, what kind of dumb question is that?
Photshop is THE benchmark that apple uses to promoite the mac.
PC's are faster than Macs for the same price. That is to say if you had a certain amount of money, say $1500, you could get a PC that is better than a Mac for the same price. Mac people say the Gates is trying to take over the world or something. But Mac people forget that Apple is the one that is so proprietary.
but a 2100 mac laptop as compared to a pc laptop that offers the same feature set and ability will be less expensive then it's pc conterpart.
Well i'm not too familiar with the laptops. But the bottom line is you can't go and build your own Mac, and for me building the computer is as much fun if not more fun than using it
From technical standpoint, the PowerPC has better architecture than i386 does (don't ask me for details, I just write what I read). And in SOME real-life scenarios, Mac with a CPU with less MHz that a PC can be faster (photoshop for example). But then again, there are cases where PC's are faster. It all depends on the application.
And we shouldn't compare the MHz of PowerPC to MHz of i386-CPU's, because they are different architecture. For now, PowerPC's have less MHz that Athlon or P4 does, but that doesn't tell us anything. Even inside a processor-family, it's becoming more and more meaningless to compare MHz (like Athlon vs P4).
And we shouldn't compare the MHz of PowerPC to MHz of i386-CPU's, because they are different architecture. For now, PowerPC's have less MHz that Athlon or P4 does, but that doesn't tell us anything. Even inside a processor-family, it's becoming more and more meaningless to compare MHz (like Athlon vs P4).
IMHO, Apple has made and will always make kick-ass laptops.
But, it depends on what you use the comp for obviously. I *love* overclocking and case-modding, which is why my main computer is a PC. However, I would *really* like a nice new PowerMac next to my PC. The G5 should kick some bootie this January.
But, it depends on what you use the comp for obviously. I *love* overclocking and case-modding, which is why my main computer is a PC. However, I would *really* like a nice new PowerMac next to my PC. The G5 should kick some bootie this January.
For gaming, PC's smoke Macs. The only benchmark you can find in most any comparison is Photoshop, which is optimized for a Mac. Comparing Photoshop on Macs and PCs seems kind of like comparing an old game that was optimized for Glide on a 3DFX card to the same game on a card running D3D or Open Gl. Of course the Glide will beat the other because that's what the game (like Unreal 1) was optimized for.
I did a google search for macs vs. pcs and came up with several test, which naturally uses Photoshop as their main benchmark. The Mac sites really made a big deal out of Photoshop, and pretty much glossed over the fact that in games the Mac got beaten much worse than the PC did in Photoshop.
I also found one comparison that said while Macs could win synthetic cpu benchmarks, in real-world performance, PC's were faster.
They also whined about how the video cards and drivers for PC's were better, etc....but that's not the PC's fault. You have to use what's available, and the fact of the matter is that there is far, far more hardware and software available for PC's than there is for Mac.
Plus, the fastest PC now is more than likely faster than the fastest MAC, and you can buy or build that PC for much, much cheaper than the Mac, and your peripheral options are far greater.
I personally prefer PC's, but I don't say Macs suck.....I just don't see why anyone would want one over a PC except for the novelty.
I did a google search for macs vs. pcs and came up with several test, which naturally uses Photoshop as their main benchmark. The Mac sites really made a big deal out of Photoshop, and pretty much glossed over the fact that in games the Mac got beaten much worse than the PC did in Photoshop.
I also found one comparison that said while Macs could win synthetic cpu benchmarks, in real-world performance, PC's were faster.
They also whined about how the video cards and drivers for PC's were better, etc....but that's not the PC's fault. You have to use what's available, and the fact of the matter is that there is far, far more hardware and software available for PC's than there is for Mac.
Plus, the fastest PC now is more than likely faster than the fastest MAC, and you can buy or build that PC for much, much cheaper than the Mac, and your peripheral options are far greater.
I personally prefer PC's, but I don't say Macs suck.....I just don't see why anyone would want one over a PC except for the novelty.
I always thought that building and tweaking pc's was a novelty.
I use a mac for DV, graphic arts, and audio.
My desktop athlon can barely keep up to the alti vec enhanced programs. But when it comes to games, it's pc all the way.
I use a mac for DV, graphic arts, and audio.
My desktop athlon can barely keep up to the alti vec enhanced programs. But when it comes to games, it's pc all the way.
<< HELP! in an argument
I'm defending PCS,
Are macs faster at apps and photoshop? >>
Macs are difinitely better at bi-lingual support. If you insert a disk with Eastern language into a PC, it won't let you handle the file, because it will give you file system error and won't even show up. On Macs, the characters will be scrambled without a plug in for that language, but you can handle the file.
Actually, it's not that MACs run Photoshop faster than PCs, it's that they have superior management, i.e. the on screen image looks the same when it is printed out.
-= SsZERO =-
-= SsZERO =-
What I´v read is that in 90% of applications are faster on a PC. Applications like Photoshop which mac users love so much is in practice just slightly faster than a PC. It is in some photoshop filters that the Mac totaly smokes the pc but in the rest its just a mix, sometimes the PC is faster and sometimes the Mac is faster.
But its not realy just performance that makes one type better than the other, it is about what tool you need and what suits your needs best. Most of the time the PC comes out on top even though a Mac is alot better in some areas just overall the PC is way better than the Mac.
But its not realy just performance that makes one type better than the other, it is about what tool you need and what suits your needs best. Most of the time the PC comes out on top even though a Mac is alot better in some areas just overall the PC is way better than the Mac.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter