Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Leopard Boot Speed Test: SR 2.0GHz MacBook vs. PPC 1.5GHz PB G4 12"

TheScavenger

TheScavenger

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Jul 14, 2007
259
11
Kansas City, MO
I conducted a test today to see which one of my laptops boots up faster. I thought the results were pretty interesting so I thought I would tell everyone about it. Both computers are running Leopard and are on A/C power. I measured the time from the start up "ding" to when the clock appeared in the system tray. Here are the specs:

MacBook (basically a factory base model MacBook)

- 2.0GHz (Santa Rosa)
- 2x512MB RAM
- 80GB 5400RPM HDD

The MacBook took 35.5 seconds to boot up.

PowerBook G4 12"

- 1.5GHz PowerPC
- 2x256MB RAM
- 120GB 5400RPM Hitachi HDD

The PowerBook took 62.7 seconds to boot up.


For some reason I was disappointed with the G4. I think I still like the PowerBook more however :)

*I am going to up the RAM on the PB to 1.25GB soon. I'll perform another speed test then and update the results.
 
I'm thinking the PowerBook would do better if it had more RAM in it. I have 1.25MB in my PowerBook (1.25GHz) and it boots quite nicely... I'd have to stopwatch it tonight to give you a comparison....

How does Leopard run on your PowerBook anyway? Would you say it is on par with or faster than Tiger? Thanks!
 
hmmm...

I've never understood the fascination with start up times. Isn't sleep mode one of the fantastic advantages of having an Apple laptop? I don't recall the last time I actually turned mine off, but I do restart every once in a while for updates.
 
appleretailguy said:
I never understood the fascination with start up times. Isn't sleep mode one of the fantastic advantages of having an Apple laptop? I don't recall the last time I actually turned mine off, but I do restart every once in a while for updates.
Click to expand...

I agree - I love using sleep mode on my PowerBook. The only reboots are when an update requires one.... But when you do have to reboot, it's nice to be fast since we are not accustomed to booting - it seems like an eternity.
 
Hmmm...-

Squonk said:
I'm thinking the PowerBook would do better if it had more RAM in it. I have 1.25MB in my PowerBook (1.25GHz) and it boots quite nicely... I'd have to stopwatch it tonight to give you a comparison....

How does Leopard run on your PowerBook anyway? Would you say it is on par with or faster than Tiger? Thanks!
Click to expand...

I have a 1.5 GHZ, 12" Pbook with 1.25 gigs of ram...leopard runs okay. Stacks is delayed but not unusable.

I wouldn't go back to Tiger (Mail is much nicer, as is spotlight), but it's obvious that it's time for me to look toward a new laptop, if only because I like keeping as up to date as my wallet will allow.
 
I am very curious to see how the PB runs when I more than double the RAM. I am going to put some more RAM in it right before I sell it in a couple of weeks. Anyone interested in a 12" PowerBook in good shape (specs are in my sig)?

Leopard runs great with the current specs though. Expose runs fine. I haven't had a chance to mess with spaces yet though. All I really do is mess around in Safari and iTunes with this computer.

I'll update the time when I get the new RAM in there.
 
But doesn't sleep mode eat up battery? I always shut mine off if I wont be back in more than 3 hours, and besides, that glowing light is kind of distracting in the dark...
 
Nope

Swift Sketcher said:
But doesn't sleep mode eat up battery? I always shut mine off if I wont be back in more than 3 hours, and besides, that glowing light is kind of distracting in the dark...
Click to expand...

Very, very little. I've left mine unplugged overnight and woke to less than 5 percent battery usage during sleep.

Every three hours? Wow, that's a lot of restarting.

I was always taught it takes more energy to start up than it does to sleep, unless you don't plan on using the laptop for 48+ hours.
 
Your start up time depends on what you are starting up. Check your startup folder to be sure you have the same programs starting up on both books. Something might be on the g4 that is a larger or harder program to start affecting your startup time, or you might find the opposite is true and the macbook is being hindered and it even destroys the g4 more once they are on equal ground.
 
one1 said:
Your start up time depends on what you are starting up. Check your startup folder to be sure you have the same programs starting up on both books. Something might be on the g4 that is a larger or harder program to start affecting your startup time, or you might find the opposite is true and the macbook is being hindered and it even destroys the g4 more once they are on equal ground.
Click to expand...
hmmm... Is this possible? I would have assumed that anyone who would post numbers like this would have done it on freshly formatted installs with only a fully updated OS. Otherwise it's pretty worthless.
 
one1 said:
Your start up time depends on what you are starting up. Check your startup folder to be sure you have the same programs starting up on both books. Something might be on the g4 that is a larger or harder program to start affecting your startup time, or you might find the opposite is true and the macbook is being hindered and it even destroys the g4 more once they are on equal ground.
Click to expand...

I think both of the laptops are setup to just open iTunes helper (or whatever its called) on start up. I could be wrong so I'll double check.

Josh
 
I had to try and fix a guy's iTunes on a brand new laptop running Home Premium and the thing took about three or four minutes to turn on - all without any sort of indicator as to what was going on. There'd be nothing, then a little circle, then nothing, then a circle for ages.
 
for what it's worth...

Hardware:
PowerBook 15" 1.25GHz
1.25MB of RAM
Seagate 5400.3 160GB (5400rpm perpendicular) drive
10.4.11

Boot time (pressing power button) to when the log in screen appears = 56.5 seconds
 
If you up the ram on the macbook, you can bring that down considerably. My last boot up, it was 10-13 seconds from pressing button to log in screen. My fastest was 6 seconds after ram install.
 
ayeying said:
If you up the ram on the macbook, you can bring that down considerably. My last boot up, it was 10-13 seconds from pressing button to log in screen. My fastest was 6 seconds after ram install.
Click to expand...

10-13 seconds to the login screen? Oh I am going to LOVE my new MBP even more!!!!! :D
 
Hmmm...

ayeying said:
If you up the ram on the macbook, you can bring that down considerably. My last boot up, it was 10-13 seconds from pressing button to log in screen. My fastest was 6 seconds after ram install.
Click to expand...

Or you could up the ram and stop shutting off your laptop all the time. Then you'll never have to worry about startup times.
 
ayeying said:
If you up the ram on the macbook, you can bring that down considerably. My last boot up, it was 10-13 seconds from pressing button to log in screen. My fastest was 6 seconds after ram install.
Click to expand...

I used to have a Dual Core Mac Mini that booted up completely in ~23 seconds. It had 2GBs of RAM and a Seagate 160GB 7200.2 HDD.

Josh
 
appleretailguy said:
Very, very little. I've left mine unplugged overnight and woke to less than 5 percent battery usage during sleep.
Click to expand...

My 12" PowerBook will go about a week on battery before it dies quietly in its sleep. And this is with a battery that's already severely reduced in capacity (when new, it would power the PB for 5 hours... today I'm lucky to get 45 minutes).
 
appleretailguy said:
Or you could up the ram and stop shutting off your laptop all the time. Then you'll never have to worry about startup times.
Click to expand...

Well, not everyone likes leaving their system on 24/7. I just put my system to sleep, almost never turn it off unless I have to clean the system or install some hardware.
 
I would like to see benchmarks between a MBP SR 2.0, same ram, 7200 HD vs. MBP 2.16 non SR. How much would the SR motherboard compensate compared to a little faster clock speed. My guess is that the non SR would win but I could be wrong.
 
lavrishevo said:
I would like to see benchmarks between a MBP SR 2.0, same ram, 7200 HD vs. MBP 2.16 non SR. How much would the SR motherboard compensate compared to a little faster clock speed. My guess is that the non SR would win but I could be wrong.
Click to expand...

The SR's have only come in 2.2 or 2.4 in the MBPs. I'd think that the SR would be faster. You can have a faster CPU, but if you are limited by how fast you can feed it, then the slower CPU with faster system board (within reason) would be faster.

A 2.16 is 8% faster than a 2.0GHz CPU
A 800MHz is 50% faster than a 533MHz motherboard
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back