Apple’s Mac OS X Snow Leopard consistently beats Windows 7 in performance tests

“As someone who uses both platforms for work and personal entertainment, I’ve been wanting to do a performance comparison between Windows 7 and Mac OS X… The right time seems to be now, as Snow Leopard has been out for a while and has even been updated to 10.6.1, and Windows 7 has been at the OEM (original equipment manufacturer) vendors for almost three months and has also had a few updates. Furthermore, Boot Camp 3.0 seemed to make Windows run better than ever on a Mac,” Dong Ngo reports for CNET Reviews.

“There’s no rocket science involved here; all you need is a good stopwatch, a MacBook Pro, and a lot of time,” Ngo reports. “I chose Windows 7 64-bit as Apple claims Snow Leopard is now a pure 64-bit OS with most of its built-in applications being constructed with 64-bit code.”

Ngo reports, “In time-based tests, Snow Leopard consistently outdid Windows 7… Windows 7 on the MacBook Pro still has a significantly shorter battery life than Snow Leopard… Windows 7’s battery life is just about two-thirds of Snow Leopard’s on the MacBook Pro.”

Ngo reports, “Cinebench R10 showed that Windows 7 was better than Snow Leopard in 3D image rendering–with a score of 5,777 vs. 5,437 for the OS X (higher is better). In gaming, Windows 7 also offered higher frame rates. In our Call of Duty 4 test, Windows 7 scored 26.3 frames per second while Snow Leopard got 21.2fps.”

Ngo writes, “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.”

Full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: Spending money wisely is the actual issue, not what the sticker price reads. Look at spec for spec comparisons and consider Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) and the Mac is always less expensive than a comparable Windows PC over the life of the machine.

[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Jersey_Trader” for the heads up.]


  1. Cinebench R10 by what I read on Maxon’s web page is not 64 bits. Cinema 4D R11.5 is (64 bits) and more than 100% faster than Cinema 4D R10. So we would probably see a better score for the Mac with Cinebench R11 when it comes out.

  2. C’mon MDN! This “test” is neither fair nor unbiased…

    What about processor and memory usage, while doing taxing file system operations or network operations?

    Or comparing performance of native Windows 7 apps against GCD-enabled, OpenCL-enabled, native Snow Leopard apps?

  3. Hi LiM,

    All Apple has to do to change the “who has the most games at the best prices” issue is to let the Mac run the app games that were created and run on the Mac.

    These are the kind of things that drive me crazy. Why is there not a Mac version of every app? Only Apple knows.

  4. In the end, is it not about what Steve Ballmer chanted. DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS. And now they are developing on the Mac!

    Tsunami coming!

  5. Jersey,

    It really isn’t an issue with Apple. The problem is there are a much smaller number of Apple users. It costs a lot of money to port the games over, and it isn’t worth it too them many times.

    The funny thing is that since most PCs are cheapo boxes in an office running e-mail, there really aren’t as many game buyers as the numbers may show.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.