Mac vs. PC: The Ultimate Lab Test for New Desktops & Laptops

Popular Mechanics ^ | May 2008 | By Glenn Derene

[Swordmaker]

This computer rivalry has been elevated to a cultural divide on par with Pepsi versus Coke. Taking it beyond personal taste, PM crunches the numbers—with some surprising results (and detailed benchmark scores).

We all know the stereotypes. Apple’s popular commercials have painted the picture in stark terms: There are two types of people, Mac people and PC people. And if the marketing is to be believed, the former is a hip, sport-coat-and-sneakers- wearing type of guy who uses his computer for video chatting, music mash-ups and other cool, creative pursuits that starchy, business-suited PC users could never really appreciate unless they tried them on the slick Apple interface. Then again, Windows PC enthusiasts probably think that Mac guy is a smug slacker with an overpriced toy that can’t do any serious computing anyway. Funny thing is, both stereotypes are wrong. With a 7.5 percent market share, Macs are no longer just the computer choice of artists and unemployed writers. (Apple is, in fact, the fourth largest computer manufacturer in the world.) And now, more than ever, the guts of both platforms are remarkably similar. Both types of machines use Intel proc­essors (although some PCs can be configured with processors from AMD). Both buy memory, hard drives and graphics cards from the same small pool of suppliers. The underlying operating systems have distinctly different flavors, but in terms of functionality, Microsoft Windows Vista and Mac OS X Leopard have surprisingly similar built-in multimedia, Internet and productivity applications.

Yet what makes the platforms feel so dissimilar is their approaches to these applications. Internet Explorer versus Safari, Windows Media Center versus Front Row, Photo Gallery versus iPhoto, Backup and Restore Center versus Time Machine—these system components from Microsoft and Apple are designed to accomplish essentially the same goals. To users, however, the position and movement of the virtual knobs and levers make all the difference.

These things are largely matters of preference and style, but you can still make a reasonable attempt to quantify them, and we did. We tested two all-in-one desktops and two laptops—one Mac and one PC per category—and assembled a panel of testers with a range of experience and preference that ran the gamut from expert users to my wife’s stepfather, who, by his own account, had never actually turned on a computer. Our testers were asked to set up the computers right out of the box and explore the machines through everyday tasks such as Web surfing, document creation, uploading photos, downloading Adobe Acrobat files and playing music and movies through Media Center and Front Row (the entertainment software suites integrated into Vista and Leopard, respectively). Our testers were instructed to divorce themselves as much as possible from their previous technological preferences and rate their experiences with each computer’s software and hardware.

Usability surveys are like taste tests—a useful look at the subjective appeal of a device. (Is it fun? Is it easy? Would I be happy to live with this thing?) But beneath their packaging, computers are data-crunching machines that can be run like racehorses. So the second component of our test regimen was about pure performance.

Our computers were closely matched, but in the interest of full disclosure, we’ll spit out the caveats: The Gateway One PC had a processor that runs 400 MHz slower than its iMac competitor (not a heck of a difference in this age of dual-core chips), but it also had two extra gigabytes of DDR2 memory. In the laptop category, our Asus M51 had a 2.2 GHz processor, compared to 2.4 GHz for our MacBook. But the Asus had a larger screen, a more sophisticated graphics card and an extra gig of RAM.

All that extra RAM may seem to give an advantage to the PCs. Vista, however, is a noted memory hog, so throwing more RAM into PC computers is probably less of a perform ance booster for manufacturers than it is a new baseline hardware specification.

Before we pulled out our stopwatches, we turned to two industry-standard, cross-platform benchmarking tools—Geekbench from Primate Labs and Cinebench from Maxon—to get third-party results. We ran both benchmarking programs on our Mac and PC desktop and laptop computers before our testers got their dirty little hands on the equipment to ensure that no confounding software could poison the results.

These benchmarks are reliable indicators of performance, but the numbers feel somewhat meaningless to ordinary users. Which is why we created our own suite of tests to meas ure the speed of everyday tasks. We logged boot-up and shutdown times, and launch times for the Internet browser and media player built into each operating system, as well as for common applications such as Microsoft Word and Adobe Photoshop. We tested how long it took for each computer to rip a CD and install a few big software suites. The laptops were forced to play the longest movie we could find (Saving Private Ryan—2 hours, 49 minutes) until they wheezed, sputtered and shut down. Finally, we put all four computers through a stress test. We ran three video sources (a YouTube clip, a DVD and an .avi file), DivX encoding, instant messaging, Word, Adobe Acrobat and a spyware scan simultaneously—then retimed our launch of Photoshop.

The results gave us a clear winner in the performance categories, but the big surprise was how little difference we found in user preferences. Turns out, both platforms are capable and easy to use, but only one was the victor.

---

iMac | $1499

SPECS
Hardware	20-in. screen, 2.4 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo processor, 1 GB DDR2 RAM, 320 GB hard drive, built-in Bluetooth and Wi-Fi, 8x CD/DVD burner, remote control, ATI Radeon HD 2600 graphics card.
Software	OS X Leopard, iLife '08 (iTunes, iPhoto, GarageBand, etc.), Front Row, iWork (30-day trial).
USER RATING
Design
Ergonomics
Internet surfing
Digital photo management
iWork
Front Row (movies, music, etc.)
Overall

SPEED TEST | Click here for detailed benchmark scores
Boot	Average startup	28.7 sec.
	Average shutdown	4.0 sec.
Install	Microsoft Office	4 min. 17 sec.
	Adobe Creative Suite 3	31 min. 44 sec.
Program Launch	Safari (Internet browser)	3.3 sec.
	Microsoft Word	4.2 sec.
	Adobe Photoshop	4.0 sec.
	Stress-launch Photoshop (w/ 8 apps running)	21.36 sec.
	CD rip	3 min. 35 sec.

Gateway One | $1800

SPECS
Hardware	19-in. screen, 2.0 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo processor, 3 GB DDR2 RAM, 500 GB hard drive, built-in Wi-Fi, 8x CD/DVD burner, remote control, ATI Radeon HD 2600 graphics card.
Software	Windows Vista Home Premium, Microsoft Works 8.5, Media Center, Microsoft Office (60-day trial).
USER RATING
Design
Ergonomics
Internet surfing
Digital photo management
Works
Media Center (movies, music, etc.)
Overall

SPEED TEST | Click here for detailed benchmark scores
Boot	Average startup	1 min. 13 sec.
	Average shutdown	44.3 sec.
Install	Microsoft Office	6 min. 25 sec.
	Adobe Creative Suite 3	25 min. 45 sec.
Program Launch	Internet Explorer	6.3 sec.
	Microsoft Word	5.2 sec.
	Adobe Photoshop	5.5 sec.
	Stress-launch Photoshop (w/ 8 apps running)	40.0 sec.
	CD rip	3 min. 35 sec.

---

MacBook* | $1299

* As tested on an Apple MacBook containing an Intel Penryn processor. Because the new Penryn version of the MacBook was not available at press time for the May 2008 print edition of PM, the test results appearing in the magazine reflect the previous version of the MacBook. to see the non-Penryn MacBook results that appeared in the magazine.

SPECS
Hardware	13.3-in. screen, 2.4 GHz Core 2 Duo (Penryn); 3GB DDR2 RAM, 160 GB hard drive, 8x CD/DVD burner, built-in Bluetooth and Wi-Fi.
Software	OS X Leopard, iLife '08 (iTunes, iPhoto, GarageBand, etc.), Front Row, iWork (30-day trial).
Weight	5 pounds
BATTERY TEST
With the DVD drive spinning and screen at full brightness, the MacBook made it through our movie, but fell short of Apple's stated 6-hour battery life: 3 hr. 34 min.
USER RATING
Design
Ergonomics
Internet surfing
Digital photo management
iWork
Media Center (movies, music, etc.)
Overall

SPEED TEST | Click here for detailed benchmark scores
Boot	Average startup	41.6 sec.
	Average shutdown	3.9 sec.
Install	Microsoft Office	2 min. 57 sec.
	Adobe Creative Suite 3	34 min. 54 sec.
Program Launch	Microsoft Word	5.3 sec.
	Adobe Photoshop	4.1 sec.
	Stress-launch Photoshop (w/ 8 apps running)	16.2 sec.
	CD rip	5 min. 49 sec.

Asus M51SR | $1299

SPECS
Hardware	15.4-in. screen, 2.2 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo processor, 2 GB DDR2 RAM, 250 GB hard drive, ATI Radeon HD 2400 graphics card, 8x CD/DVD burner, built-in Bluetooth and Wi-Fi.
Software	Microsoft Vista Home Premium, Works, Media Center, Office (30-day trial).
Weight	6.5 pounds
BATTERY TEST
Many users liked the Asus’s 15.4-in. screen, but that large display is a drain on the battery. The Asus couldn’t make it through our 2-hour, 49-minute movie: 1 hr. 30 min.
USER RATING
Design
Ergonomics
Internet surfing
Digital photo management
Works
Media Center (movies, music, etc.)
Overall

SPEED TEST | Click here for detailed benchmark scores
Boot	Average startup	1 min. 51 sec.
	Average shutdown	25.4 sec.
Install	Microsoft Office	4 min. 46 sec.
	Adobe Creative Suite 3	21 min.
Program Launch	Microsoft Word	6.2 sec.
	Adobe Photoshop	5.2 sec.
	Stress-launch Photoshop (w/ 8 apps running)	25.5 sec.
	CD rip	3 min. 9 sec.

---

The Verdict: Apple

Mac: In both the laptop and desktop showdowns, Apple’s computers were the winners. Oddly, the big difference didn’t come in our user ratings, where we expected the famously friendly Mac interface to shine. Our respondents liked the look and feel of both operating systems but had a slight preference toward OS X. In our speed trials, however, Leopard OS trounced Vista in all-important tasks such as boot-up, shutdown and program-launch times. We even tested Vista on the Macs using Apple’s platform-switching Boot Camp software—and found that both Apple computers ran Vista faster than our PCs did.

PC: Simply put, Vista proved to be a more sluggish operating system than Leopard. Our PCs installed some software faster, but in general they were slower in our time trials. Plus, both PCs showed weaker performance on third-party benchmarks than the Macs. Our biggest surprise, however, was that PCs were not the relative bargains we expected them to be. The Asus M51sr costs the same as a MacBook, while the Gateway One actually costs $300 more than an iMac. That means for the price of the Gateway you could buy an iMac, boost its hard drive to match the Gateway’s, purchase a copy of Vista to boot—and still save $100.

Detailed Benchmark Scores: Desktops

Benchmark Test	iMac 20-in screen; 2.2 GHz Core 2 Duo; 1GB DDR2	Gateway One 2.0GHz Core 2 Duo; 3GB DDR2
Geekbench
Overall	3180 (2651)	1903
Integer	2766 (3398)	2324
Floating Point	4460 (2675)	1713
Memory	2299 (1720)	1597
Stream	1916 (1819)	1707
Cinebench
1 CPU	2619 (2429)	1979
2 CPUs	4840 (4641)	3739
Graphics	4819 (3834)	2913

*Scores in parentheses are for Macs running Vista in Boot Camp.

Detailed Benchmark Scores: Laptops

Benchmark Test	MacBook 2.2 GHz Core 2 Duo; 1GB DDR2 (Out of production)	MacBook 2.4 GHz Core 2 Duo (Penryn); 3GB DDR2	Asus M51 2.2 GHz Core 2 Duo; 2GB DDR2
Geekbench
Overall	2885 (2465)	3156 (2657)	2445
Integer	2536 (3099)	2734 (3421)	3102
Floating Point	3959 (2429)	4395 (2660)	2444
Memory	2156 (1730)	2378 (1785)	1636
Stream	1809 (1850)	1853 (1717)	1772
Cinebench
1 CPU	2409	2741 (2561)	2214
2 CPUs	4468	5216 (4838)	4198
Graphics	2027	2040 (835)	2495

*Scores in parentheses are for Macs running Vista in Boot Camp.

[rmlew]

Run the test on actually comparable machines with the same RAM and processors. It is not difficult if you have the money.

[discostu]

There are benefits of suckling at the MS teet, lots of legally free software too. Of course you can still fix it, and the screen did tell you basically how to. So it’s not like a person is flying completely blind. XP was the last OS before the big security push, and subsequently the last version of Windows where by default you could double click and icon and the app would run without first asking for a note from your mother.

[Swordmaker]

. . . I noticed a whole string of Mac postings with your name on all of them recently so I clicked on your tag and saw nothing but Mac VS. PC war nonsense. . . However, your postings seem to be directed towards getting people arguing Mac VS. PC."

I would not characterize them that way... I post informative threads that Mac users and people considering switching to Macs find useful.

Strange thing is that most negative comments on this thread are from Windows users bashing their own computers. Then there are a few Windows users who always appear to make snarky comments about Mac users and their level of computer knowledge. . . or sexual orientation. It is not started by Mac users.

Also, if you think this is a Mac Vs. PC war thread, then you haven't seen one.

[Swordmaker]

Well, it’s not my site, if the mods don’t mind the Mac v. PC fights, then I have no place to complain.

By the way, the thanks I've gotten from fellow Freepers far outnumber the complaints. I think your semi-complaint is about the fourth I seen in over three years of managing the Mac Ping List, compared to at least a hundred thanks.

[Spktyr]

Actually... the screen on the OEM versions of XP SP 2 don’t tell you that running as admin is a bad thing. They don’t tell you *anything* about it.

The *very* last retail pressings of XP did, but they’re rare.

[RightOnTheLeftCoast]

"Sounds like your costly AV and firewall weren’t worth the money and your kids were hanging out in the dark corners of the internet and were running as admin."

Those dark corners are called game sites.

As to my wife, she has a weakness for "free" animated cursors and such. Sigh...

As to the AV and firewall stuff, you are correct. And regarding running Windows as admin, doesn't everybody? [grin]

[discostu]

It wouldn’t surprise me there’s nothing on the OEM, in theory if everything goes well only the guys at the OEM company will see the install screens on those machine, and they should just be following the script provided by their bosses. They probably only read enough of the screen to know where they are in the script. Might as well just put screen numbers on.

Of course if people would just stop double clicking on every damn thing most of the rest of the security measures would be unnecessary. Most of the stuff that runs rampant through PCs does its infection at the request of the user. People need to learn when in doubt scan, or better yet just delete it, most mystery files that come your way are no good.

[tacticalogic]

Strange thing is that most negative comments on this thread are from Windows users bashing their own computers. Then there are a few Windows users who always appear to make snarky comments about Mac users and their level of computer knowledge. . . or sexual orientation.

I'm just not crazy about the idea of having to buy their hardware to run what's essentially x86 *nix.

[dangus]

That was my implication.

[discostu]

Were they game sites or were they “game” sites. There are a lot of game sites out here that can’t be trusted, they’re warez site or crack sites or otherwise engaged in bad stuff sites. The first rule of the internet, regardless of computer type or OS: if you know the place you’re getting this from is engaged in illegal activity don’t blindly trust it. I freely admit to not always being the most law abiding computer user in the world, and when I hang out in the dark corners step 1 is make sure my AV is up to date and step 2 is scan what I just downloaded. Trust nothing, keep your laser handy.

Yup, know about the evil animated cursors, the blight of every IT department in the world. The malware Trojan specifically designed to get women, I’ve never heard of a guy getting hit by these emoticons seem to be a female thing. But it’s OK guys get nailed by fake codec packs, for viewing porn of course, there’s a nerd comedy routine in that I’m sure.

Yes we almost all do run as admin, heck even I do most of the time, I know the rules but I’m just as lazy as the next guy. I’m real strong on following the REST of the rules (especially the having good AV and firewall) to make up for it, I trade CPU cycles for personal effort.

[tacticalogic]

Run the test on actually comparable machines with the same RAM and processors. It is not difficult if you have the money.

I imagine you could get noticeably better performance out of Vista if you knew exactly what hardware it would be running on, and could tune it specifically for that hardware during development, too.

[Spktyr]

That’s may as may be. Then what excuse does the retail version have? You know, the one in a box from MS?

[discostu]

Because it’s the last OS before the big security push, and they want it to go away and make room for Vista the pig.

[Spktyr]

But they made the big security push by SP1 - and they were telling us all to stop running as admin by then. Then they had SP2, long before Vista was out, and they told us not to run as admin. BUT THEY ALL STILL DEFAULT TO NEW USERS AS ADMIN.

[discostu]

Only that first wave, new users made once the install is done default to power users. It’s MS, they blow it sometimes, they blow it a lot. Probably somebody just forgot about that screen in the install. I’m in QA that kind of thing happens, we make some change in how one section is going to work, but of course like any complex app (we have server, thick client, web client plus a couple dozen connector to 3rd party apps) many of our “one section” things can be accessed in a bunch of different place, we think we changed them all, we ship, 2 weeks later some tech support guy comes over and says “how come the UI for blah blah blah is so different in the web client than the thick”, and I’m stuck with “oh s#!+ the web client” for my only answer.

In the end we’re still only human.

[Spktyr]

Um, no. It doesn't. I just fired up my near-virgin copy of XP Pro SP2 (as a VM on my Mac, I should add) that I keep around as a backup file. I immediately updated it with everything Windows Update says it should have. It's so virgin that all it has is Windows, antivirus/malware products, and a proprietary database on it. That's it. At the point at which this image was created, I hadn't even set a password on my own account.

Guess what it *doesn't* do when you create a new user? Here's ALL the steps that a retail copy of XP Pro SP 2 does when you create a new user via the control panel.

The initial control panel:

Click on "create a new account," and you get this, asking you to name the new user.

You hit the "next" button, and you get this. Not seeing any "Power User" selection. Not seeing ANY explanation of why running as admin might be a problem. AM seeing it default to "admin."

Hit "Create Account" and it dumps you back to the User Accounts control panel. At NO time does it even ask you to set a password! Nor does it explain why you should set one anyway!

You keep making excuses and backing off points. HERE IS SOLID PROOF THAT WHAT MOST PEOPLE ARE SEEING FROM MICROSOFT IS NOT WHAT YOU ARE DESCRIBING. I have an MSDN image (read: the customized version they send to developers that cons them into thinking, "Windows isn't so bad, why is everyone complaining?") sitting around too - I'd put that up as comparison too, but I'd actually have to care first. I think I've proved my point. You have failed, please go crawl back into your little hole at Redmond now.

[Spktyr]

Oh, and before you dismiss that as "well, that's just Home Edition, not Pro, you must be mistaken," look at this.

[discostu]

That’s not how it is on my machine, like I said before on mine it defaults to Power User.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3127/2420457513_4707530795.jpg?v=

And you really need to cvalm down and stick that “discostu is a liar” stuff right up your ass.

[Centurion2000]

There’s the problem. They should have done a comparison between Mac and XP. Vista SUCKS.

[Spktyr]

Aha, I see what you’re doing. You’re using the lusrmgr.msc snap-in to create a new user. You’re NOT using the User Accounts control panel.

Most people have *no* idea that lusrmgr exists. It is also NOT the way that Microsoft tells people to do it outside of a domain.

You fail.