Mac Benchmarks....

[Backtothemac]

Well, this has developed out of another discussion, but here goes. Does anyone have any good way to benchmark a Mac. Are there programs that you can download that will do it? Is it just a matter of getting photoshop and a file and running times tests? How do you do it. How do you get the most accurate results?

[Ensign Paris]

I think Norton Utilities might have have a bench marking program with it, I am not sure if it is OSX complient though (I use TechTools)

Ensign

[Mr. Anderson]

Here's a little something I dug up at macdownloads.com

http://downloads-zdnet.com.com/3120-20-0.html?qt=benchmark+OSX&tg=dl-2003

[Ensign Paris]

That program looks pretty cool, I am going to register it!

it look really useful, nice bit of Real programming!

Ensign

[Hemingray]

Nice, although I won't know what to compare my benchmarks to (other than the pre-loaded iMac 350).

Here's mine:
24941 - Math
27462 - Memory
29541 - Graphics (ouch)
5691 - Disk

I'm running a G4 400 PCI. I can't wait to see how much some of the newer G4's blow this old thing out of the water... :p

[Ensign Paris]

This is from a PowerMac 867 with 1.5gb RAM:

Math 20890
Memory 20890
Graphics 20644
Disk 819

I am not sure if this is good or not :)

Ensign

[chibianh]

Here's one from my Tibook 800 with 512mb RAM

Math: 19584
Memory: 18227
Graphics: 17418
Disk: 658


Don't know what those mean either, but I think smaller numbers are better, or at least the readme said so.

[Backtothemac]

Well, here are mine, and yes, they are legit.

10.1.4 Clean install yesterday. Nothing running but finder.
Math 17067
Mem 18044
Graph 41247 (YIKES Nothing like Rage 128 right)
Disk 1468

Now, watch this. X.2

Math 17654
Mem 18322
Graph 28171 (MASSIVE, ABSOLUTLY MASSIVE IMPROVEMENT IN X2)
Disk 1406

I ran the best of three average test. Now, is the G3 dead? This thing is performing with the Ti800 mentioned before. Shorter is better according to the readme file.

iBook 600 with 384 of Ram.

[chibianh]

Wow.. the G3 is kickin some serious a$$ with this test... I wonder what the scores would be if the program was altivec optimized (or is it already?)?

[Zenith]

Here's my benchmarks:

Math 19376
Memory 20016
Graph 29743
Disk 1622

Running a Quicksilver 733 without L3 cache. I'll try 10.2 asap to see if the graphics score improves.

Err... I don't think this software is optimized for altivec... Backtothemac's iBook scores are much better than mine and chibianh's TiBook 800 scores. Maybe the G3 has a better integer unit than the G4.

[edesignuk]

Well, here it is. Running on a Dual 1Ghz with 1Gb RAM and GeForce 4 MX (OS 10.1.4)

Math > 15027
Memory > 14554
Graphics > 15514
Disc > 1110

:D

[ftaok]

I just ran it on mine.

Math - 20890
Memory - 21299
Graphics - 58491
Disc - 9947

My Mac - 500mhz G3 iBook/Combo/10GB HD/640MB RAM (3-2-2 on the 512 chip)

Note, I didn't restart or anything prior to running the test. In fact, I don't think I've restarted in over a month.

[eyelikeart]

that's wacky!!!

I cannot wait to get to my TiBook this evening and run this little app to see how I measure up...;)

[Mr. Anderson]

Here's my TiPB 667, 1 gig of RAM running OS9.2.2

Check out the graphics!!!!!

math> 22912
memory > 22835
graphics > 4623 (and no its 4,623, I didn't forget a nubmer)
disk > 17445

I'll boot to OSX and see what happens. Its amazing how much a hit the graphics takes. When Jaguar becomes available that will definitely help.

D

[Rower_CPU]

Here's my results:
G3 450, 256MB RAM, X 10.1.4

Math = 26214
Memory = 24576
Graphics= 28180
Disc = 3043

Smaller numbers are better, so the G4s are kicking @ss...as they should.

[Zenith]

no, they aren't... they should kick more ass than to be outperformed by a 600 mhz iBook.

[Backtothemac]

Originally posted by Zenith
no, they aren't... they should kick more ass than to be outperformed by a 600 mhz iBook.

This is no ordinary iBook. It can leap over 10,000 page word documents in a single bound. Run faster than a Jaguar, and its bullet proof!!!!

Don't ask me how it is, but I will take it. ;)

[Zenith]

hehe.. yeah, i've got an iBook 600 myself, and it's a nice little machine.

i just think the software isn't optimized to take use of altivec.

[mac15]

here it mine
I'm impressed, imac g4 700mhz 512ram

[mc68k]

Thanks to everyone for contributing to this benchmarking thread with their systems. It really is hard to guage what results mean unless someone else backs you up.

I was impressed w/my results on my rig, sometimes I liken it to the Millenium Falcon because it is so pieced together (but that's what I wanted from the start of last summer :)).

S900—G4 450 OC'd to 510MHz—512MB RAM (FPM, interleaved)—Acard 133 Controller w/7200 RPM WD Caviar—Radeon Mac Edition w/32 MB DDR—and the list goes on…

Makes me feel good about my investment in all these parts comparing it to some of your other "supported" systems (and I beat some of them too!). Thanks for making a man feel good. :)

[Backtothemac]

Here are mine from my iMac 600 SE with 1 Gig

[Backtothemac]

And here are the iBooks. Do I have the fastest G3's in the world or what? I wonder how long it will take someone to contact the guy who created this to find out why the G3 will run with and beat the G4.

[Rower_CPU]

Here's what I got on my PBG4 400. The left image is with shadows on, the right, shadows off:

[mc68k]

Originally posted by Backtothemac
And here are the iBooks. Do I have the fastest G3's in the world or what? I wonder how long it will take someone to contact the guy who created this to find out why the G3 will run with and beat the G4.

Not the fastest chip in the world, but maybe fastest X. :)

They're just benchmarks. As we all know the G3 and G4 are basically the same, save for the Altivec.

You're playing on a different playing field than most of us, just wait 'till we all get Jaguar… :)

I thought these were HW tests, funny how the OS effects the scores on HW.

[Funkatation]

on unoptimized code. Remember, a G4 is not a G3 with altivec anymore. Ever since the new G4's came out they are on a 7 stage pipeline. The G3's are still on a 4 stage pipeline. So for unoptimized code, it would make sense that a G3 is faster.

[agent302]

Ok, my scores are as follows:

Math: 27034
Memory: 23142
Graphics: 31416
Disc: 2253

Which leads me to be very confused. Why? Because my system (a Powerbook 667 DVI) is faster than the included set of an iMac 350 for Math, Memory, and Disc scores. But it's slower on graphics, which makes absolutely no sense (Mobility Radeon 7500 slower than Rage128?).

Also, mc68k, a neat benchmark from Apple (that you can get if you install these debug tools (http://developer.apple.com/tools/debuggers.html)) called Skidmarks (it's in the bashpack.dmg file installed in /Developer/Applications) that measures processor performance in Integer, Floating Point, and Vector calculations. Now, if a G3 and G4 are equal in non-vector calculations, then my Powerbook should have scored 67% better than my iMac 400. Instead, on integer calculations, the G4 was 115% faster, which leads me to think that, even though this is probably a finally tuned application, the G4 is faster than the G3 at the same clockspeed.

[Catfish_Man]

Originally posted by Funkatation
on unoptimized code. Remember, a G4 is not a G3 with altivec anymore. Ever since the new G4's came out they are on a 7 stage pipeline. The G3's are still on a 4 stage pipeline. So for unoptimized code, it would make sense that a G3 is faster.

A G3 might outperform a G4+ on well optimized scalar integer code that isn't limited by memory speed. At everything else (FP, especially double precision FP, memory, and vector[Altivec]) the G4 will win. I'm still kinda surprised that the iBook is doing so well, this seems to be a pretty shoddy benchmark (perhaps if we figured out how to run it in single user mode it would be more accurate).

I would suggest that we try it with disk basher, cache basher, graphics basher, and skidmarks GT. These are from apple and can be downloaded from their website. It may require a free developer registration, I'm not sure. If someone gets them, post a link to it (or if you can, mirror it). I'll post my computer's stats with heartbeat as soon as I test it. I want to see how much of a difference having omniweb in the background makes.

[Catfish_Man]

I've attached my G3 233's scores in heartbeat. Pretty abysmal aren't they? Also, I see someone posted a link to the bashpack while I was typing my previous post, I'll run those tests soon.

[mc68k]

I think we should create another benchmarking thread with some "real" tools from Apple, so we can get a better sense of how good/crappy our machines really are. :)

[Backtothemac]

Well, this is for the iMac X.1.4

[Backtothemac]

Here are the iBook's. iBook 600 with 384 of ram.

X.2 WWDC Build

[Zenith]

Here's my X.2 results in Heart Beat X.

With iTunes running and playing a MP3:

Math: 16819
Memory: 22733
Graph: 24801
Disk: 0 (a bug)

Without iTunes:

Math: 17894
Memory: 19840
Graph: 20106
Disk: 0 (the bug again)

Yesterday I got lower scores than I do today, and then I ran the benchmarks without IE running. It seems that I can get better scores with a few apps running. Strange about the iTunes-scores. I don't trust this program... :p

[resm]

here my iMac 800 :

Test Math : 20250
Test Memory : 19098
Test Graphics : 30085
Test Disc : 1580

[chibianh]

here's my skidmarks gt test..

[mmmdreg]

I did the best of three while Mozilla and foldingcontrol were open but hidden..Scores as follows:
15014 Maths
25280 Memory
46374 Graphics
7618 Disc...
thats on an iMac 600 (G3) with 640mb RAM.

[Backtothemac]

Well, that makes it official. This program is not trustworthy. Lets see the first clue was that the G3's were smoking the G4's, and now a G3 with less memory smoking a G3 with a clean install of X.1.4

Oh, well. Back to the original question.... anyway to benchmark besides counting bounces.