The newer "Haswell processors have a number of performance and battery gains when compared to the "Sandy Bridge" CPU in the W520. It is important that you compare the right hardware (basically look at similar generations of hardware). The important hardware is the same, though the specific Lenovo that you mention is using an Intel processor that is a little old. But in no case is it cost effective and/or faster. It's either more expensive at roughly the same speed or slower, depending on your definition of comparable. To use it as a Windows machine, I know of none. If you want to use a Mac as a Mac, there is plenty of compelling arguments either way. Given all that, there is effectively no way to make Mac hardware sensible for Windows workloads. Mac hardware is a price premium for the name combined with an inclusive license for Mac OSX plus the penalty of needing a retail box license of Windows 7. In both cases, Windows 7 seems to be better on the non-Mac hardware. And "comparable" could mean in hardware (Lenovo will be cheaper) or in money (Lenovo will be drastically faster.) The Mac has no special hardware to make it faster. ![]() ![]() If there are any differences I'd be interested to see a comparison but there's nothing inherently different about a mac that should make any difference. Since the Macbook pro is literally just a normal laptop when running WIndows there's no reason why it would run any differently to an identically specced non-Apple laptop as far as I am aware.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |