Macintosh Performa - Macintosh-to-Performa Comparison

Macintosh-to-Performa Comparison

Reference:

Performa system Equivalent Macintosh system
(with RAM/HDA/VRAM configuration)		 Introduction date
Performa 200 Macintosh Classic II, 4/80 August 19, 1992
Performa 250 Macintosh Color Classic
Performa 275 Macintosh Color Classic II
Performa 400 Macintosh LC II, 4/80/512 August 15, 1992
Performa 405 Macintosh LC II, 4/80/256, modem, .39 RGB April 15, 1993
Performa 430 Macintosh LC II, 4/120/512, modem, .39 RGB April 15, 1993
Performa 450 Macintosh LC III, 4/120/512, modem, .29 RGB April 15, 1993
Performa 600 Macintosh IIvx w/out RAM cache, 4/160/512, FPU socket September 15, 1992
Performa 600CD Macintosh IIvx w/out RAM cache, 5/160/1, CD300i, FPU socket September 15, 1992
Performa 410 Macintosh LC II, 4/80/512, modem, .39 RGB October 21, 1993
Performa 460 Macintosh LC III, 33 MHz, 4/80/512, modem, .39 RGB October 21, 1993
Performa 466, 467 Macintosh LC III, 33 MHz, 4/160/512, modem, .29 RGB October 21, 1993
Performa 475 Macintosh LC 475, 4/160/512, modem, .29 RGB October 21, 1993
Performa 476 Macintosh LC 475, 4/230/512, modem, .29 RGB October 21, 1993
Performa 550, 560 Macintosh LC 520, 5/160/768, modem, CD, Trinitron October 21, 1993
Performa 575 Macintosh LC 575, 5/250/1 MB, modem, CD, Trinitron April 26, 1994
Performa 577 Macintosh LC 575, 5/320/1 MB, modem, CD, Trinitron April 26, 1994
Performa 578 Macintosh LC 575, 8/320/1 MB, modem, CD, Trinitron April 26, 1994
Performa 580CD Macintosh LC 580
Performa 630 Macintosh LC 630, Macintosh Quadra 630 July 1, 1994
Performa 640 DOS Compatible Macintosh LC 630 DOS Compatible
Performa 5200 Power Macintosh 5200 LC
Performa 5300 Power Macintosh 5300
Performa 6200/6300 Power Macintosh 6200, Power Macintosh 6300
Performa 6360 Power Macintosh 6300/160
Performa 6400 Power Macintosh 6400

Read more about this topic:  Macintosh Performa

Famous quotes containing the word comparison:

    “The comparison between Coleridge and Johnson is obvious in so far as each held sway chiefly by the power of his tongue. The difference between their methods is so marked that it is tempting, but also unnecessary, to judge one to be inferior to the other. Johnson was robust, combative, and concrete; Coleridge was the opposite. The contrast was perhaps in his mind when he said of Johnson: “his bow-wow manner must have had a good deal to do with the effect produced.””
    —Virginia Woolf (1882–1941)