Operating Systems > macOS
The G5
psyjax:
quote:Originally posted by Viper:
Oh yeah. It is fair for Apple to test a G5 with all of it's optimizations but test the P4 without SSE2.
Riiiiggghhtt. :rolleyes:
--- End quote ---
The testing wasn't done in-house first off, and at the time of testing I don't thing the extreme existed, but I hardly doubt if that would make much of a dent considering the overal remarkable performance of the G5. Not to mention that it's due for a 3ghz speedboost by the end of the year.
Don't forget, IBM is backing apple here, that's like a freight traing pushing a baby carrige or something equally powerfull :D
Zombie9920:
This is interesting.
Here's a complete normalized PS7Bench results list.
quote:2x 2000 G5 OSX 10.2.7 555 (energy settings highest perf)
2x 2000 G5 OSX 10.2.7 497 (energy settings auto bus slewing)
2x 3060 Xeon (no L3) HT enabled 490
2x 3060 Xeon (OC'd 2400) 488
2x 2930 Xeon (OC'd 2400) 471
3200 P4 (800MHz) 427
3000 P4 (800MHz) 405
3495 P4 (OC'd 3.06) 386
3060 P4 XP Pro (533 FSB) 358 HT
2x 2200 Xeon PC 800 RDRAM CPQ Evo 357 HT
2x 3000+Athlon (2166) 355 (provisional Utwig)
2x 1500 G4 (OC'd 1420) 348
2x 1333 G4 DDR OS9.2 (oc'd 1.25) 346
1800 G5 OSX 10.2.7w/G5plugin 344 (energy settings highest perf)
2x 1420 G4 OSX 10.2.4 338
2x 2400+Athlon MP 338
2x 1250 G4 OS 9.2.2j 337
3200+Athlon XP 332
1800 Opteron(dual-chnlDDR 333) 332
2x 1333 G4 DDR OSX10.2.2(oc 1.25) 326
1800 OPteron(singl-chnlDDR333) 320
3000+Athlon XP 318
2x 1250 G4 OSX 10.2.5 318
2x 1250 G4 DDR OSX 10.2.1 316
2x 1800 Athlon MP 312
2800+Athlon XP Barton 298
2x 2000 P4 Xeon 286
2x 1200 G4Powerlogix(867MHzG4/QS) 285 upgraded
2x 1533 Athlon MP 285
2x 1533 Athlon MP 283
2530 P4 mobile (OC'd 1400) 282
2700 P4B (OC 2400, 600 MHz FSB)280
2x 1466 Athlon XP 279
1600 G5 OSX 10.2.7w/G5 Plugin 276 *MacNNscores (energy settings on auto)
2666 P4 (DDR 333) 269
2x 1000 G4 DDR 10.2 267
2400+Athlon XP 262
2x 1000 G4 OS9 260
2x 1000 G4 OSX 10.1.5 254
2400+Athlon 252
2400 P4B (800MHz) 251
2400b (sis 648 DDR400) 251
1600 Centrino IBM T40 250
2400 P4 (533MHz bus) 249
2400 P4 B 241
2340 P4 (overclock) 239
1600 Centrino Dell D800 236
2400 P4 234
1800+Athlon XP (1533 MHz) 226
1577 oc'd Athlon XP (Lestat) 221
2x 1000 G4 OSX 10.2.2 (upgraded) 218 ?!(dual 533 logic board)
1548 Athlon XP 214
1670 Athlon XP (2000+) 213
1667 Athlon XP 211
1400 Athlon XP 1600+ xp pro 200
1x 1533 Athlon MP 197
1300 Centrino Sony VAIO Z1A 196
1000 G4 17" Powrbk OSX 10.2.6 196
2000 P4 Xeon 194
1400 Athlon XP 1600+'98SE 191
1000 G4 OSX TiPbk 10.2.2 185
2x 533 G4 OSX 10.1.5 175
2x 533 G4 OS 9.2.2 174
1800 P4 173
1200 AthlonMP 168
1508 Celeron (overclock) 167
1400 PIII Tualatin 160 **?
2x 550 G4 OSX 10.2.3 (OC Cube) 160 **?
2x 500 G4 OSX 152
2x 450 G4 OS9 151
1333 Athlon TBird 147
2x 450 G4 OSX 10.1.5 143
800 G4 Pbook OSX 1MB L3 135
733 G4 (miro7) 134
667 G4 PBk OS9 noL3 127
667 G4 PBk OSX 10.2.3 no L3 125
466 G4 OS9 123
667 G4 OSX TiPBk 10.1.5 noL3 121
866 PIII 114
466 G4 OSX 133 MHz bus 112
550 G4 Powrbk OS9* 104
500 G4 Pbook (OC'd 400) 103
1x 450 G4 OSX 100 MHz bus 101
1000 Athlon TBird (PS6.01) 100
550 G4 Powrbk OSX* 95
933 Transmeta Crusoe Sony 78
700 G3 iBook 74
600 G3 iBook OS 9.2.2j 70
233 PII 30
--- End quote ---
Now, to get an idea of overall performance let's compare some more benchmark results between the platforms.
First let's start with the benchmarks C't magazine ran in a recent issue (all the systems are using a Radeon 9600). They used the G5 optimized version of Cinebench which isn
hm_murdock:
I was under the impression that in GL got accelerated through DirectX in version 9.
I officially retract my claim. I was mistaken as to their 3D architecture! :eek:
As for what I said about Linux... no, for what I do (audio recording/editing with realtime effects) Linux can't do it. It's not because of the OS, but because of the rather poor, inconsistant implementation of sound drivers.
And lack of apps for high end recording and editing.
I'm sorry. I don't come and flame you out when you say something negative about Mac OS. Linux isn't cut out for media production (although I was just informed that video editing is quite good). It can't do it all... audio isn't that easy.
I'm sorry... it just isn't. does that make you sad? :(
[ September 28, 2003: Message edited by: Jimmy the Shyster ]
Zombie9920:
I'm going to throw this in the mix as well.
Here are some Lightwave 7.5 scores from AnandTech and PCMagazine that show some Single Processor PCs versus a Dual G5:
quote:Rad. Ref. Scene
P4 EE 3.2GHz 42.5 sec
P4 3.2C 46.0 sec
P4 3.0C 48.4 sec
Athlon 64 FX 51 2.2GHz 49.3 sec
Athlon 64 2.2GHz 50.6 sec
Dual G5 2GHz 51.1 sec
Athlon 64 3200+ 54.5 sec
Raytrace Scene
Athlon 64 FX 51 2.2GHz 87.9 sec
Athlon 64 2.2GHz 88.3 sec
P4 EE 3.2GHz 89.3 sec
P4 3.2C 93.1 sec
Athlon 64 2.2GHz 96.4 sec
P4 3.0C 99.1 sec
Dual G5 2GHz 112.0 sec
--- End quote ---
psyjax:
If you think running a couple of video games, and an unspecified rendertest is the gamut of rigorus testing, you sir are an idiot. Notice, that it's a 1.8G5 against a 3Ghz P!V in the latter tests and in teh first tests were they use 2 Ghz dual G5's you, naturaly, get better performance. The 1.8 is out by a hair.
Of course this is irelivant, because here you are dealing with software optimization issues, run some apps well optomized for both platforms and you get a diffrent story, likewise run the stander floating point, integer tests, and you get a diffrent story.
Apple has done their part in making the computers faster, now the ball is in the developers court to start optomizing their shit.
WOW! Sorry Viper, That was a major mistake! I hit the edit button instead of the reply button. Please correct your post above. heh... perils of having Admin privaleges
[ September 28, 2003: Message edited by: psyjax: plain 'ol psyjax ]
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version