Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Mac Pro Performance Tests | 2.8 | 8800GT | 74 gig Raptor

Wild-Bill

Wild-Bill

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Jan 10, 2007
2,539
617
bleep
Ok,

So I was curious to see what the difference would be between
  • 10.5.1 to 10.5.2
  • 2 gigs of RAM to 6 gigs of RAM

So, when I first got the Mac Pro I ran both Geekbench and Xbench. I haven't tallied the Geekbench results, but the overall scores go like this:

  • 10.5.1 |2 gigs RAM = 7324 | Memory Score = 2486
  • 10.5.2 |6 gigs RAM = 7793 | Memory Score = 2693

I forgot to run Geekbench with 10.5.2 and 2 gigs of RAM. Sorry. :eek:

Attached are the numbers for Xbench. I also graphed them in Numbers. For all those who enjoy this stuff, here you go.

.. If someone notices something that seems jacked up with these numbers for this system in its various states of configuration, PLEASE let me know!! I'm not savvy with these benchmarking programs. I just thought some folks out there would like to see the info. :D ** The chart can't fit in all the chart titles, so you'll have to look at the raw data to interpret what belongs to what.

Feedback always appreciated. I'm off to finish loading some Windows programs and my games, and then move that partition to the 400 gig drive, and then tell VMware where to go git 'er done!
 

Attachments

  • Picture 6.png
    Picture 6.png
    58.5 KB · Views: 178
  • Picture 7.png
    Picture 7.png
    45.2 KB · Views: 173
M

Mr.PS

macrumors 6502a
Jan 8, 2008
528
9
Take it easy dude, I care :) The others though do not care, mainly because they're too busy clicking refresh on their order status page. ;) Great post - was going to comment on the graphs. Really nice work! As for the results, they look good. No real performance gains or losses, the graphics update seemed to have done alot for OpenGL performance which is good. Let's hope they fix the sleep issue in the next update, which will probably come sooner then later since their are still some bugs that need to be worked out.

I'm really happy with my new Mac Pro so far, let's hope it doesn't have the nasty sleep issues.
 
4God

4God

macrumors 68020
Apr 5, 2005
2,132
267
My Mac
Thanks for posting those. Any chance you could run the 10.5.2 tests without the extra ram?
 
M

Mr.PS

macrumors 6502a
Jan 8, 2008
528
9
I'm going to post some results from Xbench when I throw in 6gb of ram and my Samsungs in raid0!
 
Sharky II

Sharky II

macrumors 6502a
Jan 6, 2004
957
345
United Kingdom
xbench doesn't make any sense to me...

my g5 dualcore pci-e 2ghz, 4.5gb ram, ati x1900gt etc etc comes up with 121... and a 2.8ghz mac pro with 8 processors and 10gb of ram is 'only' 191?!?

i know the new mac pros are leaps and bounds faster.... not just around 60% faster...

similarly my mbp is faster than my g5... but it gets a much lower score because of the HD...
 
netdog

netdog

macrumors 603
Feb 6, 2006
5,760
38
London
How much of a gain is the raptor? Especially subjectively. Thinking about putting one in as my boot/application drive so I am wondering if the read times make a huge difference in feel. Also, how is the noise of the raptor?
 
Wild-Bill

Wild-Bill

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Jan 10, 2007
2,539
617
bleep
4God said:
Thanks for posting those. Any chance you could run the 10.5.2 tests without the extra ram?
Click to expand...

Under Xbench? I did. The '181' score was 10.5.2 + graphics update with 2 gigs of RAM. Or were you talking about Geekbench?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom