It’s difficult to make broad statements on how much faster an application is overall, but it’s what you likely want to know. To satisfy that, MacTech has taken a series of test results, and used a center weighted average to give you an idea of how much faster these applications are. See Table 1.
Table 1: Outlook 2016 vs. Outlook 2011
Explanation of “Faster”: “Faster” means speed and is meant to give users an indication of perceived speed. 50% faster means that it finished the task in 2/3 the time. 100% faster means that it was twice as fast, or that it finished in half the time.
Note: For many determinations, MacTech uses geometric means rather than averages to give a more center weighted, and therefore conservative, evaluation of aggregate speeds.
Said another way, in almost 75% of the tests run, Outlook 2016 was faster. In over half the tests, Outlook 2016 was much faster. In fact, in more than 1/3 of the tests, Outlook 2016 was double the speed or more.
Clearly, when it comes to syncing, there’s a big difference between messages with attachments and not. Outlook 2016’s three-pass method is more and more impressive as you see more messages with attachments.
No doubt about it. Performing faster in a majority of the tests we ran, Outlook 2016 is noticeably and significantly faster in a number of key areas compared to Outlook 2011. Add to this a far more stable and capable SQLite engine under the hood, it’s an upgrade that any Office user should seriously consider.
About the author…
Neil is the Editor-in-Chief and Publisher of MacTech Magazine. Neil has been in the Mac industry since 1985, has developed software, written documentation and has been heading up the magazine since 1992. When Neil writes a review, he likes to put solutions into a real-life scenario and then write about that experience from the user point of view. That said, Neil has a reputation around the office for pushing software to its limits and crashing software/finding bugs. Drop him a line at email@example.com
- Page 1: Intro
- Page 2: Overview
- Page 3: Top-Level Results
- Page 4: Test Environment
- Page 5: Specific Testing
- Page 6: App Launch and Quit
- Page 7: Operations
- Page 8: Searching
- Page 9: CPU and Memory Footprint
- Page 10: Energy Footprint
- Page 11: User Interface Performance
- Page 12: Sending, Receiving, and Notification Performance
- Page 13: Sync Performance
- Page 14: Exchange vs. IMAP
- Page 15: Local Exchange Sync Performance
- Page 16: Local IMAP Sync Performance
- Page 17: Office 365 Sync Performance
- Page 18: Gmail Sync Performance
- Page 19: What about Mail.app?
- Page 20: From the Server Perspective
- Page 21: Conclusion