On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 8:49 PM, Kris Tilford <[email protected]> wrote:
> I don't agree with this article. My experience is that the hit on > performance is closer to the 15-20% range for any PPC Mac running > Leopard as compared to the faster Tiger. I have only tried 10.5 on a single PowerPC Mac - my 20" iMac G5 - but the machine felt significantly slower under 10.5 than with 10.4. Not massively but I agree, 10% orso sounds plausible to me. Unfortunately, on my 10.4-only iBook G4, I am starting to find apps that only support 10.5+ now - such as Growl. I may be forced to upgrade just to be able keep my apps current. :¬( I'd go with 10.4 for any PPC box, unless the latest versions of the apps you want don't run under it. Obviously, if you need Classic, it has to be 10.4. > EXACTLY! And this is the problem with the article you cited above. The > comparison was done on the same Mac, BUT, the problem is that only one > HD was used, and it was a triple booting (three partitions) of one > single HD. The difference between partitions on one HD can be in the > 10-15% or greater range, so if the Leopard OS was on a fast partition > and the Tiger on a slow partition, the results would be skewed. In > order to do a valid comparison you'd need to install a clean OS onto > one HD or partition and run the test; then erase that HD or partition > and install the other OS onto the SAME HD or partition and rerun the > test. I believe if you run the tests on IDENTICAL setups you'll see > that Leopard is 15-20% slower than Tiger. I agree, in principle, but I have to say, from my own benchmarking days - back when I did performance evaluation for a living, 13-14y ago - position of stuff on disk made no measurable difference in tests. Yes, it's a theoretical factor, but in practice, the difference was too small to measure. That means, on my old tests, <0.1% difference. I think perhaps it may be like Windows 7 versus Vista. Win7 has been heavily tuned for responsiveness and everyone who uses it tends to say that it *feels* faster than before, but actually, in benchmark tests, actually Vista tends to win. Benchmarks do not measure how responsive a system "feels", they measure the raw execution speed of apps or processes, so they tend to penalise multi-core machines and so on. -- Liam Proven • Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/liamproven Email: [email protected] • GMail/GoogleTalk/Orkut: [email protected] Tel: +44 20-8685-0498 • Cell: +44 7939-087884 • Fax: + 44 870-9151419 AOL/AIM/iChat/Yahoo/Skype: liamproven • LiveJournal/Twitter: lproven MSN: [email protected] • ICQ: 73187508 -- You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list
