What is your XBench result?

[novicew]

I have just done the XBench (http://xbench.com/) test and got 72.89. Interested to know what you've got?

System Specs.: iMac G5 with iSight / 1GB RAM / 250 GB HDD

[mikemodena]

I got a 103.63 on a Dual 2GHz PowerMac G5 with 2 gigs of RAM and a Radeon 9800 pro

[powerbook911]

I got 113.27, on my 17-inch iMac Core Duo, with 1.5 GB of memory.

My Powerbook gets something like 40.

[iHeartTheApple]

45.08 for my Rev.E PB... :( I think that it runs just fine, but damn! You guys have much higher scores! :eek: :D

[ipacmm]

I got 132.40 on my Quad.

[someguy]

43.41 on my Rev. D 15" Powerbook - 1.5Ghz, 1.5GB RAM (w/ Adium running and connected, iTunes running but paused, and Firefox, Address Book, Dashboard, Preview and a couple other small apps open.

I'm going to try with nothing running but Xbench and see how much difference there is, then I'll post here.

EDIT: 44.46 with nothing but Finder and Dashboard running. btw, I am running OS 10.4.5 if it matters. :)

[BlizzardBomb]

69.99 on my Rev.B iMac.

[ryannel2003]

43.15 on my eMac :)

[munkees]

Can't truxt xBench, it gives false CPU scores

[Eidorian]

69.99 on my Rev.B iMac.Yeah, I get about the same on my Rev. B iMac G5 as well. I got it up to 70.41 once though. :cool:

[evilgEEk]

95.56 on the G5 in my sig.

[ero87]

man, 57.51 for my iMac G5... doesn't that seem low? is there a way to pick this up?

[MIDI_EVIL]

My PowerBook got 45.61

Just wish i knew what it all meant.

I compared it to about 100 other PowerBook scores, and mine was third fastest.

Sometimes 15 points higher than the same machine with 2GB of RAM.

Cool.
Good to know this G4 is as good as some G5's.

Rich.

[risc]

Power Mac Dual G5 1.8 GHz
2 GB RAM
256 MB nVidia 6800 Ultra DDL
74 GB WD740GD Raptor
320 GB WD3200JD
20" ACD

93.40

-- Xbench the worlds worst benchmarking software: my OpenGL score went down when I replaced my 9800 XT with the nVidia :rolleyes: --

[risc]

man, 57.51 for my iMac G5... doesn't that seem low? is there a way to pick this up?

If you haven't done it already you can change the processor performance under System Preferences / Energy Saver / Options to Highest. Personally I don't worry about anything Xbench says it is a complete joke, every point release update to Tiger my score has gone down. Also see my comment above about changing video cards. :rolleyes:

[evilgEEk]

-- Xbench the worlds worst benchmarking software: my OpenGL score went down when I replaced my 9800 XT with the nVidia :rolleyes: --
Ha ha ha! That's just not right.

[risc]

Ha ha ha! That's just not right.

Yeah it was fun watching the jump in frame rates in games, and noticing how smooth things like expose worked but then Xbench told me the card sucked. :D

[evilgEEk]

If you haven't done it already you can change the processor performance under System Preferences / Energy Saver / Options to Highest.
I always leave mine on Automatic, I just set it on Highest and got a 98.34.

But, I agree, Xbench is worthless. There's no consistency whatsoever.

I wonder what my iBook would get. ;)

[ero87]

hmm does setting it to "highest" affect performance in any way? my score went up from 57.51 to 58.38 (whoopee) but will my computer be faster now?

[BlizzardBomb]

Yeah, I get about the same on my Rev. B iMac G5 as well. I got it up to 70.41 once though. :cool:

I just tried it once. I closed all widgets and apps too :cool:

[haiggy]

24.84 on my iBook with Adium and Safari open. Hmmm... terrible.

[risc]

...does setting it to "highest" affect performance in any way? ... will my computer be faster now?

Yes. If you can actually tell though is another story.

[johnnybluejeans]

I got 113.27, on my 17-inch iMac Core Duo, with 1.5 GB of memory.

My Powerbook gets something like 40.

Impossible. You must be leaving out some tests. The new iMacs get killed on things like the UI test.

I have a 2.0Ghz iMac Core Duo. On a full test I score around a 64.

If I run it without the UI test I score a 101.

[powerbook911]

Impossible. You must be leaving out some tests. The new iMacs get killed on things like the UI test.

I have a 2.0Ghz iMac Core Duo. On a full test I score around a 64.

If I run it without the UI test I score a 101.

I'm sorry, but I'm not lying. :) 113. Yes, another time it read 111, but I did get a 113+. I never leave out tests because that is cheating.

Now my Powerbook does get a measly score. 30s or 40s I think.

I think this link will show my results:
http://db.xbench.com/merge.xhtml?doc1=159840&doc2=1&setCookie=true

Mind posting a link to your test results, so I can see?

Mines the iMac.

[johnnybluejeans]

I'm sorry, but I'm not lying. :) 113. Yes, another time it read 111, but I did get a 113+. I never leave out tests because that is cheating.

Now my Powerbook does get a measly score. 30s or 40s I think.

I think this link will show my results:
http://db.xbench.com/merge.xhtml?doc1=159840&doc2=1&setCookie=true

Mind posting a link to your test results, so I can see?

Mines the iMac.

Did you turn off Quartz BeamSync? I heard that makes all the difference in the UI test -- turning the Core Duo scores from a 30 like mine, to the 200-300 range like yours..

I'll post my results when I get back to my iMac..

[johnnybluejeans]

Did you turn off Quartz BeamSync? I heard that makes all the difference in the UI test -- turning the Core Duo scores from a 30 like mine, to the 200-300 range like yours..

I'll post my results when I get back to my iMac..

After disabling Quartz BeamSync, I scored a 113 total (I had some apps running and two users logged in).

[powerbook911]

After disabling Quartz BeamSync, I scored a 113 total (I had some apps running and two users logged in).

Cool. Yes, I guess you do to disable the Quartz BeamSync too. I thought only the 17-inchers had to do that. Something the way xbench works with the OS, it doesn't know what to do with automatic, so turning off the beamsync makes it the near-ideal comparison between platforms.

I think it's pretty impressive what the intel macs are scoring on xbench. I know xbench isn't some commit to it benchmarking program, but it seems to give pretty decent comparisons, and I score consistently within the same 4 or so points. Surely the 2.0GHZ iMac like you have is probably one of the 4 fastest Macs ever, if you go only by xbench.

[kretzy]

I got 49.18 on my PB. This seems pretty normal and reasonable to me.

[Shamus]

my ibook got 34.3 :)

[iGary]

124.89

[Miguey]

EEEKK! i got scared when it did the graphics test.,...thought my ibooks screen was going skitzoid on me...

back to topic...i got a 28.59


WTF WTF WTF...14 inch ibook latest standard and i got a 28?!?!!?!?..i dont trust this...lol

[Laser47]

Latest 14" iBook with 1.5 gigs of RAM
42.35

[dr_lha]

Dr LHA’s Mac Mini 63.40 Mac Mini Intel Core Solo
Dr LHA’s Power Mac G5 77.28 PowerMac G5 (June 2004)
Dr LHA’s PowerBook G4 12"... 28.74 PowerBook G4 (Al)

Not that Xbench means all that much :)

[eXan]

70.34 under 10.4.4(my last result), but that's low, cuz my HD was almost full at that time (it is now full, too :D )

I'll probably re-benchmark under .4.6 im using now

[Lord Blackadder]

-- Xbench the worlds worst benchmarking software: my OpenGL score went down when I replaced my 9800 XT with the nVidia --

Ditto - I upgraded from a Radeon 9600 Pro (64MB) to a GeForce 6800GT (256MB) and dropped about 5 points. :confused: :mad: :rolleyes:

My PowerMac G4 tower (in sig) averages around 45.5 on a good day.

[0010101]

I've seen a lot of talk about xbench on the net.. seems the people with scores in the tolit are the ones who think xbench blows and the folks with sky high scores think it works just fine.

I think perhaps one of the reasons people with fast computers get crap scores is because they've got a bunch of stuff running while they do the test.

The way to get the most accurate bench seems to be to do a restart, and run xbench when the system is ''fresh' without any programs like messenger, Safari, etc running at the time.

I've run xbench on several Macs and found the bench scores to be very consistent.

[Mundy]

My Mac Pro 2.66 w/ 4 GB of RAM, X1900XT and RAID 0 scores 201.14.

[Shadow]

~91.1 but it varies. Xbench sucks.

[I'mAMac]

If you haven't done it already you can change the processor performance under System Preferences / Energy Saver / Options to Highest. Personally I don't worry about anything Xbench says it is a complete joke, every point release update to Tiger my score has gone down. Also see my comment above about changing video cards. :rolleyes:
How does that increase processor performance?

115.52 on comp in my sig. :)
Second time, got a 124.93 :D
Third time, 125.97 :p
At least theyre in the same ballpark...

[floam]

.

[someguy]

43.41 on my Rev. D 15" Powerbook - 1.5Ghz, 1.5GB RAM (w/ Adium running and connected, iTunes running but paused, and Firefox, Address Book, Dashboard, Preview and a couple other small apps open.

I'm going to try with nothing running but Xbench and see how much difference there is, then I'll post here.

EDIT: 44.46 with nothing but Finder and Dashboard running. btw, I am running OS 10.4.5 if it matters. :)
Same machine, same specs, running 10.4.8.

Scored a 45.13 with Finder, Dashboard (14 widgets), Mail, Adium, Shiira, iTunes, Quicktime Pro, Poisoned, and Skype running.

[simie]

Quad G5, 5GB Ram - all tests run, my score is 126.08

Second test, nothing running. 129.12

[risc]

iMac Core 2 Duo 20" standard + 2 GB RAM - 131.72

Mmm Xbench only you could say a Quad G5 is slower than an iMac... :rolleyes:

[suneohair]

Xbench = worthless

[FF_productions]

Xbench is really wierd.

My iMac G5 got a 69, and my Dual G4 that I have got a 68, so I'd say a fair trade..

[Unorthodox]

If Xbench sucks, what is an alternative?

[FF_productions]

If Xbench sucks, what is an alternative?


There is no other alternative...

Geekbench?

[jamesi]

i get 49 with my pb last time i tried it. lol w/e

[Monyx]

Why post a tiny subset of results here :confused:

There's heaps of results collated at the Xbench site

http://db.xbench.com/

[peas]

14.6

my mac pro screams!

[panoz7]

Same machine, same specs, running 10.4.8.

Scored a 45.13 with Finder, Dashboard (14 widgets), Mail, Adium, Shiira, iTunes, Quicktime Pro, Poisoned, and Skype running.

I got a 57.3 with the same machine running 10.4.8 also, but mine has half a gig less ram. Why the huge disparity? This xbench thing seems to be sort of random...

[Transeau]

My Mac Pro 2.66 w/ 4 GB of RAM, X1900XT and RAID 0 scores 201.14.

Hrmmm
Can you post your results?
My MP 3.0 with 6GB, X1900 and RAID 0 Raptors is only 187.89

[Transeau]

Fix it :)
Boy that stripe size makes a huge difference!
I dropped it down to 32kb and I'm now benching 217.78

[Mundy]

Fix it :)
Boy that stripe size makes a huge difference!
I dropped it down to 32kb and I'm now benching 217.78

Stripe size does indeed make a huge impact. 64k is ideal for the kind of work I do, and that's what it was set to when I ran the benchmark.

[scottlinux]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_PI

http://www.super-computing.org/

This is a better benchmark. And universal to any operating system (Linux, BSD, Win, OS X, anything)

Entering '21' as a value, I got 91.388 sec.

Total calculation(I/O) time= 91.388( 14.327) Sec.
------ Ended super_pi run : Sat Nov 4 22:07:50 PST 2006


Early 2005 Powermac G5 dual 2Ghz / 1.5GB Ram

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edit: Not sure if that one above is multithreaded. This one is:

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/archive/index.php/t-111462.html

Results:

stmiller:~/Desktop/multipi stmiller$ ./multipi.sh

**** MULTIPI 0.2: a multithreaded pi calculator ****

USE: /MultiPi <numberofiterations> <workunitsize>
<numberofiterations>: total number of iterations to find pi - DEFAULT: 100000000
<workunitsize>: divise iterations into blocks of this size to spread work over cores - DEFAULT: 5000000

WARNING: this is a beta version, do not distribute unless you're a betatester. Results may vary in future versions.

Starting Pi calculation
Available cores dedected: 2

[snip]

Pi calculated in: 01m 59.600s

[livingfortoday]

Intel Mac Mini Core Solo (1.5Ghz) - 77.27 (with Safari, Dashboard, Handbrake [open but paused])
15" Powerbook G4 (1.25Ghz) - 45.76 (with Safari, Dashboard, Handbrake [open but paused])
PowerMac G4 (500Mhz) - 22.75 (only Dashboard on)

[Neonguy]

200.3 On my Mac Pro 2.6Ghz Xeon, 2GB RAM, ATI X1900XT at slot 1 running maximum speed.

[Karpfish]

black book 2gb-88.19

[Pants Dragon]

Mac Pro/2.66/1GB RAM/Base videocard/Running MSN,AIM,YIM,Firefox,Acqlite,iTunes: 140.56

[iGary]

141.73

[aneks]

186.56

I have cheap 8x512 mb ram so and my raid is on disk 2 and 3 so I guess thats why its slower. Still not bad