My unscientific 1.6G5 benchmark vs. 867/1.25 G4

[ftaok]

I was at the Apple Store in KOP, Pa today and I did a comparison between the 1.6G5 with an 867 12PB and a single 1.25 G4. This test was conducted with the machines they had on display.

Resolution was set at 1024x768. I used iTunes visualizer to compare the speeds. I set the settings to use OpenGL and "Rougher but faster". Full-screen and Large.

867 G4 12"PB - 63 fps
1.25 G4 PowerMac - 66 fps
1.6 G5 PowerMac - 63 fps

oh, I also tested an iBook 900 - 48 fps

I know that this wasn't the most scientific test, but it does show me something. I'm wondering if iTunes limits the fps since the G4s and the G5 had almost identical scores.

Maybe some others can post their speeds.

NOTE - I forgot to check how much RAM was in each Mac, but I'm suspecting that it was whatever the standard configuration was.

[benixau]

well the nVidia cards got 63 and the Ati got 66 on a slower cpu.

think we know who makes better gfx cards now ....

[Marble]

I don't know if the iTunes visualizer even uses the graphics card. It's based on G-Force by Andy O'Maera, which doesn't use any hardware acceleration. It's kind of like copying and pasting images 63 times per second.

[benixau]

sounds like raw integer ops. It is already know that the G4 is better at raw 32bit integer ops.

[AngryAngel]

Originally posted by Marble
I don't know if the iTunes visualizer even uses the graphics card. It's based on G-Force by Andy O'Maera, which doesn't use any hardware acceleration. It's kind of like copying and pasting images 63 times per second.

If the visualiser is using OpenGL, then OS X will use the graphics card.

[Marble]

G-Force doesn't use OpenGL. Not sure about iTunes, though. Maybe someone should remove their graphics card and try it. :p

[Wes]

In the visual options there is an option to use open gl. Maybe it is set to max out at 60fps, or the refresh rate of the screen.

Weird observation, when I have iTunes as the active app, max fps is 63. While typing this. It's going to 90-120.

(Dual Ghz MDD)

[zimv20]

Originally posted by Marble
G-Force doesn't use OpenGL. Not sure about iTunes, though. Maybe someone should remove their graphics card and try it. :p

9oj, i hve remoobed mu grapphicS crd but i Ca'nt see whatt im' typinG.CAn't seem to clikc on itUnes either>
Now wheere's that "SUbmit rEply' button/

[MacsRgr8]

:D

... now has anybody tried playing a game, and comparing the FPS?
That's what I call a real un-scientific way, but very effective ;)

[nek]

Using a G4 400/640MB RAM/Radeon 8500/OSX 10.1.5:

In full screen using OpenGL my 4-year old G4 goes up to 75fps, so it seems to be dependent on the graphics card rather than the CPU.

Full screen w/ OpenGL: 35 - 75 fps
In a window w/ OpenGL: 20 - 42 fps
Full screen w/o OpenGL: 18 - 28 fps
In window w/o OpenGL: 9 - 12 fps

Its always much slower in a window. Maybe that's because of my older OS? As you can see using OpenGL is faster but also causes much more of a fluctuation in fps.

[MacsRgr8]

Originally posted by nek
Using a G4 400/640MB RAM/Radeon 8500/OSX 10.1.5:

In full screen using OpenGL my 4-year old G4 goes up to 75fps, so it seems to be dependent on the graphics card rather than the CPU.

Full screen w/ OpenGL: 35 - 75 fps
In a window w/ OpenGL: 20 - 42 fps
Full screen w/o OpenGL: 18 - 28 fps
In window w/o OpenGL: 9 - 12 fps

Its always much slower in a window. Maybe that's because of my older OS? As you can see using OpenGL is faster but also causes much more of a fluctuation in fps.

The reason why running iTunes in a window is slower, is that in full screen-mode, your screen is set to 640 x 480 res. If you would set your screensize to this resolution, then running in a window should about the same speed.
I set my resolution to 1600 x 1200. If I display iTunes in a window maximum size, well.... its pretty slow!