or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Apple's Snow Leopard bests Windows 7 in speed tests
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple's Snow Leopard bests Windows 7 in speed tests - Page 2

post #41 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by mytdave View Post

I like Macs, and the tests showed Mac in a good way, but those "tests" were pointless and all over the map. Really, there is a large difference between SL and Win7. These types of tests need to be revamped, and conducted later when both OSes have a little time to mature.

Keeping in mind no test will ever be perfect, you have to make some decisions about what you want to test. Do you want to test SL & Win7 performance on Apple hardware, or do you want to test performance on *equivalent* hardware? Are you testing the hardware or the OS? Are you going to test the OS or test Apps running on the OS? Testing with Apps shows the performance of the App on a particular platform, not the performance of the OS. Choose what you want to test for.

If you want to test the OS, then boot/shutdown times are good. Disk access, network performance, I/O, graphics performance and other subsystems are what you look at.

Separately you can test App performance... but seriously, you need to find 3rd party Apps, but those where the developer has optimized for BOTH platforms, not just ported generic code from one to the other.

Based on Windows to Windows testing conducted elsewhere, Win7 is faster than Vista but slower than XP. MacOS X has been shown to be consistently faster in some functions than Windows, but behind in some others (like graphics performance ironically).

What do you need your computer to do? Games will likely always be faster on Windows cause developers optimize for DirectX. Other Apps such as video editing run exceptionally well on Mac. When serious developers optimize for multi-core processing that MacOS does very well, those apps run better on Mac. When developers start to take advantage of the full 64bit, GCD, OpenCL, etc. features of SL, then those particular apps will really spank similar/equivalent apps on Win7.

There is no blanket "faster" system. It's case by case, over time.

Couldn't agree more.

Which of us is the fisherman and which the trout?

Reply

Which of us is the fisherman and which the trout?

Reply
post #42 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenRoethig View Post

No, it thrives in spite of Apple Hardware. Also, there is no such thing as Apple hardware anymore, they died with the PowerPC. They design ways to cram other people's parts into pleasant looking forms.


Yea, I looked at a mac pro with the side panel open just the other day to see everything "crammed" in there.... Get real.
Apple, bigger than Google, ..... bigger than Microsoft,   The universe is unfolding as it should. Thanks, Apple.
Reply
Apple, bigger than Google, ..... bigger than Microsoft,   The universe is unfolding as it should. Thanks, Apple.
Reply
post #43 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

When both Mac OS X 10.6 and Windows 7 were tested on a MacBook Pro, Apple's new operating system clearly beat Microsoft in terms of speed, a new test has shown.

Both operating systems were tested on a 2008 MacBook Pro machine by CNet,

"In time-based tests, Snow Leopard consistently outdid Windows 7," the study found. "It took only 36.4 seconds to boot up, while Windows took 42.7 seconds. In a shutdown test, Snow Leopard took only 6.6 seconds, while Windows needed twice the amount of time: 12.6 secondsFinally, if money is not an issue--and it definitely is for most of us--you should get a Mac anyway. It's the only platform, for now, that can run both Windows and OS X."

See also:
Windows 7 vs. Mac OS X Snow Leopard
Exploring Windows 7 on the Mac
Inside Mac OS X Snow Leopard

In fairness and true journalism, the headline should have read, "Apple's Snow Leopard bests Windows 7 in speed tests running on a MacBook Pro."

Otherwise, this report was well written, not because one beat the other, but that the protocol was well designed and the author did not stray from the only results that could be stated because of it.

As for, "why didn't they run the comparison on of the two OS's on separate pc's and Macs?' well, this was done and reported, for example, as per the author's link to Mossberg's review:

"Speed: In my tests, on every machine, Windows 7 ran swiftly and with far fewer of the delays typical in running Vista. All the laptops I tested resumed from sleep quickly and properly, unlike in Vista. Start-up and restart times were also improved. I chose six Windows 7 laptops from different makers to compare with a new MacBook Pro laptop. The Mac still started and restarted faster than most of the Windows 7 PCs. But the speed gap has narrowed considerably, and one of the Lenovos beat the Mac in restart time." http://ptech.allthingsd.com/20091007...lp-you-forget/
post #44 of 169
What a waste of Bandwidth. I assume these tests were done in BootCamp for Windows, where there aren't even any official Windows7 drivers (and even the Vista ones are hugely out of date, last time I looked).

Snow Leopard may well be faster than Win7 (although I have my doubts outside of Apple specific applications... I mean, seriously, Quicktime encoding is well known to be slow at the best of times anyway,) but the CNET article doesn;t really prove that.

Check this out to see how Ubuntu outperforms OS X 10.6

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag..._leopard&num=2

OpenGL in SL (in fact in OS X generally) is terrible (mainly thanks to sucky drivers).

Again here

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag..._leopard&num=3

When using a NEUTRAL application (LAME), OS X brings upthe rear... again...

Actually OS X generally doesn't do well in benchmarks, so Apple fans are better off not banding them around, IMO.

Do not overrate what you have received, nor envy others.
15" Matte MacBook Pro: 2.66Ghz i7, 8GB RAM, GT330m 512MB, 512GB SSD

iPhone 5 Black 32GB

iPad 3rd Generation, 32GB

Mac Mini Core2Duo 2.26ghz,...

Reply

Do not overrate what you have received, nor envy others.
15" Matte MacBook Pro: 2.66Ghz i7, 8GB RAM, GT330m 512MB, 512GB SSD

iPhone 5 Black 32GB

iPad 3rd Generation, 32GB

Mac Mini Core2Duo 2.26ghz,...

Reply
post #45 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoolook View Post

What a waste of Bandwidth. I assume these tests were done in BootCamp for Windows, where there aren't even any official Windows7 drivers (and even the Vista ones are hugely out of date, last time I looked).

Snow Leopard may well be faster than Win7 (although I have my doubts outside of Apple specific applications... I mean, seriously, Quicktime encoding is well known to be slow at the best of times anyway,) but the CNET article doesn;t really prove that.

Check this out to see how Ubuntu outperforms OS X 10.6

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag..._leopard&num=2

OpenGL in SL (in fact in OS X generally) is terrible (mainly thanks to sucky drivers).

Again here

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag..._leopard&num=3

When using a NEUTRAL application (LAME), OS X brings upthe rear... again...

Actually OS X generally doesn't do well in benchmarks, so Apple fans are better off not banding them around, IMO.

Also looks like BS Binaries in phoronix suite are not optimazed for OS X. This test is as biased as CNET's.

Which of us is the fisherman and which the trout?

Reply

Which of us is the fisherman and which the trout?

Reply
post #46 of 169
But the real question is which seems snappier?
post #47 of 169
Not sure which is more lame...this so called test or the balloon boy story.
post #48 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hutcho View Post

You have a PC with exactly the same specs for as your Mac? Unlikely.

What would be more fair is getting a PC running Windows 7 for $2000, and a Mac running OSX 10.6 for $2000 and see which is faster. The Windows machine would win convincingly.

Has it ever been tried? Create a PC with high end, high price components that would cause that PC to be $2000.00? Can PC's plastic case handle the heat??

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply
post #49 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asherian View Post

This really doesn't make any sense at all.

Windows Update will update all MS software on a Windows computer, Software Update will update all Apple software on a Mac. Just claiming that the Mac's software update is significantly different than Windows goes to show how very little experience you have with the platform, and not in a position to judge.

As for "proven windows" applications running faster on Mac than PC -- which ones would those be? None of those on the list are really examples of Windows Native apps. Just more nonsense...

Windows Update updates windows only. Software Update on the Mac updates all Apple software. The problem really starts, however, when you realize that in order to do serious work in Windows you need a vast array of 3rd party little software to do things like virus, malware, defrag, memory defrag, clearing of cashes, mail, calendar, contacts, a descent web browser, etc, etc.
post #50 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rot'nApple View Post

Can PC's plastic case handle the heat??

PC's plastic cases?

I asure you that a $2.000 PC runs cooler an quieter than any $2.000 Mac
post #51 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by buceta View Post

Windows Update updates windows only. Software Update on the Mac updates all Apple software


False, Windows Update updates Microsoft software, including Office, Live and so on.

Memory cleaner? Disk defrag? Are you talking about Windows 98?
post #52 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chachi View Post

Not sure which is more lame...this so called test or the balloon boy story.

This should be the lead on the national news, too.
post #53 of 169
Retraction
post #54 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gwydion View Post

False, Windows Update updates Microsoft software, including Office, Live and so on.

Memory cleaner? Disk defrag? Are you talking about Windows 98?

Vista and 7 use NTFS and NTFS has to be defragmented, so in Vista and 7 there is a service which does the defragmenting once in a while. HFS+ does not require defragmenting because of it's nature.

Which of us is the fisherman and which the trout?

Reply

Which of us is the fisherman and which the trout?

Reply
post #55 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by pondosinatra View Post

But the real question is which seems snappier?

You're absolutely right, and that's subjective and will vary from person to person.

The key thing for me in an OS is stability when running multiple apps. To be honest, it doesn't matter if iTunes takes longer to encode a CD on a PC or a Mac to me, since as soon as something takes more than a few seconds, I'll open up something else to keep me amused whilst it's doing it's thing, then it really doesn't matter to me how long it takes.
post #56 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hutcho View Post

What speed processor and running what? Your blanket statement means nothing. Of course, in apps that don't take advantage of multicore processors, then a 3ghz Dual Core is going to be much faster than a 2.4ghz Quad Core. But when the program does, the Quad Core is going to kill the Dual Core (in CPU intensive tasks).

mac: macbook pro early 2009 (core 2 duo) - 2.0 ghz - 2 gb ram
pc: core 2 quad - 2.4 intel - 4 gb ram

applications?

mac: mail, open office, ie, ff, vnc viewer, virtual box
pc: thunderbird, open office, ie, ff, vnc viewer, virtual pc
post #57 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by buceta View Post

Windows Update updates windows only. Software Update on the Mac updates all Apple software. The problem really starts, however, when you realize that in order to do serious work in Windows you need a vast array of 3rd party little software to do things like virus, malware, defrag, memory defrag, clearing of cashes, mail, calendar, contacts, a descent web browser, etc, etc.

1) Windows Update updates Windows, Office, other Microsoft programs, AND hardware device drivers -- just like Software Update and respective Apple software. So what's your problem?

2) Disk Defrag is built into Windows. Memory defrag? WTF? Mail and Contacts are built-in with Windows. IE8 is a sucky browser for power users, but it works just fine for everyday users. My parents use it just fine (they're 59 and 60). Malware detection is present natively in Windows 7 with Windows Defender.

I'll spot you the antivirus, but Microsoft provides their AV software for free:

http://www.microsoft.com/security_Essentials/

Don't quit your day job
post #58 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hutcho View Post

You have a PC with exactly the same specs for as your Mac? Unlikely.

What would be more fair is getting a PC running Windows 7 for $2000, and a Mac running OSX 10.6 for $2000 and see which is faster. The Windows machine would win convincingly.

That would depend on how you configured the PC.

Regardless, the only speed test I care about is me. I can get my work done quicker on a Mac than on a PC - I couldn't care less about individual tests that make up none or only a small part of my work day.
post #59 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by suckerpunch86 View Post

what would the results be if Apple delivered Windows-7 optimized and compatible drivers?

And which drivers are you referring to that would affect these speed tests. Who cares if Apple has a flaky mic driver if none of the speed tests involve recording audio?
post #60 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazda 3s View Post

1)
I'll spot you the antivirus, but Microsoft provides their AV software for free:

Which eats CPU cycles.

Which of us is the fisherman and which the trout?

Reply

Which of us is the fisherman and which the trout?

Reply
post #61 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

I tried click2flash for 1 week and couldn't stand the way my web pages looked- like something out of George Orwell's "1984". It looked like I was banned from viewing 15% of the web. I un-installed it last night. I hate to impose censorship just because Apple and Adobe can't solve the problem. I'm not running any other Apps (usually) when I surf at nioght anyway. But I'm glad you can tolerate the look of censorship.

"The look of censorship" Ha ha! Give us a break! Flash wastes RAM and CPU and ClickToFlash is the best way to solve that problem.

Your opinion that it "looks like censorship" is irrelevant and it's simply your opinion. The rest of us are able to tell what real censorship looks like so ClickToFlash is not a problem.
post #62 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by bdkennedy1 View Post

Anyone with common sense can see this is biased. How about comparing Office versions?

Word and Excel is dog slow on the Mac. It runs a lot faster on a PC. But we will stick with the iTunes and Quicktime results because it looks better :-)
post #63 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gustav View Post

Regardless, the only speed test I care about is me.

Exactly, and in the same exact hardware there are applications I use that run faster in Mac OS X and others that run faster in Windows 7.
post #64 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Povilas View Post

Which eats CPU cycles.

Well I declare!!! You serious? Really?? An application that runs in the background uses CPU cycles? Well spank my ass and call me Charlie!!

You don't want to know how much crap I have running on my MacBook Pro right now
post #65 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gustav View Post

"The look of censorship" Ha ha! Give us a break! Flash wastes RAM and CPU and ClickToFlash is the best way to solve that problem.

Your opinion that it "looks like censorship" is irrelevant and it's simply your opinion. The rest of us are able to tell what real censorship looks like so ClickToFlash is not a problem.

ClickToFlash saves CPU cycles and my nerves Flash on Mac OS X realyy sucks. How 320x240 flash banner can eat 60% CPU?

Which of us is the fisherman and which the trout?

Reply

Which of us is the fisherman and which the trout?

Reply
post #66 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazda 3s View Post

You don't want to know how much crap I have running on my MacBook Pro right now

You are right, I don't.

Which of us is the fisherman and which the trout?

Reply

Which of us is the fisherman and which the trout?

Reply
post #67 of 169
Crappy article... Couldn't this have just as easily been titlted "Apple software runs slower under windows"? They really should have tested more non-apple software. Especially something modern and available in 64-bit on both, Lightroom comes to mind. for example.tOt would have been good to also see something like Photoshop which is 64-bit on Windows but 32-bit on Mac. I look forward to someone doing a proper and thourough review.
post #68 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by pondosinatra View Post

But the real question is which seems snappier?

ahh! thank god - the voice of reason!
post #69 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by jb510 View Post

Crappy article... Couldn't this have just as easily been titlted "Apple software runs slower under windows"? They really should have tested more non-apple software. Especially something modern and available in 64-bit on both, Lightroom comes to mind. for example.tOt would have been good to also see something like Photoshop which is 64-bit on Windows but 32-bit on Mac. I look forward to someone doing a proper and thourough review.

On the same hardware, Lightroom and DXO Optics Pro run faster on Windows 7 than in Leopard
post #70 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by iekozz View Post

A Apple OS is faster on a Apple machine.. WOW I did NOT expect that! /sarcasem I'd say that a Windows 7 is faster on a Windows laptop. But oh wait, os x can only run on Apple stuff.

I find this test a waste of time for something we already knew.

er... doesn't running windows on a macbook make it a windows laptop??
post #71 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gwydion View Post

On the same hardware, Lightroom and DXO Optics Pro run faster on Windows 7 than in Leopard

I'm not surprised. All Adobe products run faster on Windows, mainly because Mac version are still 32 bit and carbon based.

Which of us is the fisherman and which the trout?

Reply

Which of us is the fisherman and which the trout?

Reply
post #72 of 169
I do love Apple and all its products, but this article should never have been posted. the difference in response rates for the average user is really nothing and to be frank and its all about bragging rights, which is not much.
post #73 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Povilas View Post

I'm not surprised. All Adobe products run faster on Windows, mainly because Mac version are still 32 bit and carbon based.

DXO is not from Adobe, is a OS X Cocoa 32 bit application and Windows .NET 32 bit application.

And iTunes is still a 32 bit Carbon application, doesn't it?
post #74 of 169
Even if this was compared with a comparable HP system with a Macbook and Windows 7 edged OSX SL that still would be bad.

Tack on anti-virus and anti-malware software and you'll lose anywhere between 5 to 20% of your system performance. Then over time your registry becomes bloated and slows down lookups that all apps do and so on. Whatever edge Windows 7 had at the beginning is soon gone after a month of use.
post #75 of 169
This is a stupid review.
Most of us employ the Internet not to seek the best information, but rather to select information that confirms our prejudices. - Nicholas D. Kristof
Reply
Most of us employ the Internet not to seek the best information, but rather to select information that confirms our prejudices. - Nicholas D. Kristof
Reply
post #76 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gwydion View Post

DXO is not from Adobe, is a OS X Cocoa 32 bit application and Windows .NET 32 bit application.

And iTunes is still a 32 bit Carbon application, doesn't it?

I was refering to Adobe part Yes, iTunes is still 32bit carbon.

Which of us is the fisherman and which the trout?

Reply

Which of us is the fisherman and which the trout?

Reply
post #77 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTel View Post

Even if this was compared with a comparable HP system with a Macbook and Windows 7 edged OSX SL that still would be bad.

Tack on anti-virus and anti-malware software and you'll lose anywhere between 5 to 20% of your system performance. Then over time your registry becomes bloated and slows down lookups that all apps do and so on. Whatever edge Windows 7 had at the beginning is soon gone after a month of use.

5% to 20%? No, 134%.

My God, I'm using now Windows 7 because I'm downloading Steam games. I'm using Windows Microsoft Essentials.

Task manager says I have 69 (I like his number :P) open processes, Steam is downloading 8 games at a time, I have 17 open tabs in Firefox (the program which uses most RAM, 125MB) and those are the stattistics:

CPU use: 2%-5%
Memory use: 17% of 8GB
post #78 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazda 3s View Post

1) Windows Update updates Windows, Office, other Microsoft programs, AND hardware device drivers -- just like Software Update and respective Apple software. So what's your problem?

2) Disk Defrag is built into Windows. Memory defrag? WTF? Mail and Contacts are built-in with Windows. IE8 is a sucky browser for power users, but it works just fine for everyday users. My parents use it just fine (they're 59 and 60). Malware detection is present natively in Windows 7 with Windows Defender.

I'll spot you the antivirus, but Microsoft provides their AV software for free:

http://www.microsoft.com/security_Essentials/

Don't quit your day job

Windows Update worked for %30 of my software and took forever. Because of the instability one had to update by parts, restart numerous times, and every week there was a freaking update. Factor into that the other 70% of software which had their own separate updates, each happening very often and you have a situation where you spend a considerable time every day updating and restarting.

With a Mac all of that is gone. Updating works for 80% of my software (because Apple has the best in class in what I need almost always), it happens completely in the background and only occasionally (a few times a year) asks you to restart, which takes 1 minute.

So one has a situation where you spend a couple of hours a week on one OS and a couple of hour a YEAR with the other OS.

That to me is a deal-breaker.
post #79 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by buceta View Post

Windows Update worked for %30 of my software and took forever. Because of the instability one had to update by parts, restart numerous times, and every week there was a freaking update. Factor into that the other 70% of software which had their own separate updates, each happening very often and you have a situation where you spend a considerable time every day updating and restarting.

Hi! I've been using the final version of Windows 7 for several weeks now together with Office 2007 and Visual Studio and Windows Update worked for me each and every time quite reliably. Are you sure that you used Windows recently? Even updates which require a restart will usually just wait until you shutdown the computer. This has actually been the case for a couple of years, even the XP updater got revamped with a service pack. For your information, with Security Essentials there's even now a daily update (signatures).

So what's your point? Playing the anecdotal evidence game?
post #80 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTel View Post

Tack on anti-virus and anti-malware software and you'll lose anywhere between 5 to 20% of your system performance. Then over time your registry becomes bloated and slows down lookups that all apps do and so on. Whatever edge Windows 7 had at the beginning is soon gone after a month of use.

Hi! Macs are overprized PCs with an insecure operating system for fashion divas with an inferiority complex who define themselves through the computer they own. Geez, I love making those blanket statements, too!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac OS X
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Apple's Snow Leopard bests Windows 7 in speed tests