1066MHz Front Side iMacs Benchmarked

[MacRumors]

Primatelabs.ca published Geekbench scores for the iMacs that were released just this week.





These overall scores can be compared to this comprehensive table of results from a wide variety of Mac configurations.

The new iMacs with a faster bus may have a slight edge over the previous generation iMac. When comparing the 2.80GHz (1066MHz front-side) iMac to the 2.80GHz (800MHz front-side) iMac, the overall scores are 3728 and 3674, respectively. with the bulk of the difference in the Memory scores (2877 vs 2530).

Unfortunately, however, as with most benchmarking software, there can be a wide variation in scores even on the same computer that can erase these differences.

Article Link

[Dorfdad]

Modest to say the least! I was expecting more but the New video card alone is worth the upgrade for gamers!

[nyquist11]

Intresting; I wonder how far away it is from the Mac Pro

[flopticalcube]

Originally Posted by nyquist11

Intresting; I wonder how far away it is from the Mac Pro

4-core Early 2008 Mac pro scores 5330.

[Brianstorm91]

I was expecting better to be honest.

[corywoolf]

Don't you mean this week?

[jons]

Originally Posted by nyquist11

Intresting; I wonder how far away it is from the Mac Pro

My 8-Core Mac Pro scores overall 7364 with a few apps running, before a restart.

[ricosuave]

Originally Posted by jons

My 8-Core Mac Pro scores overall 7364 with a few apps running, before a restart.

Those are some pretty impressive numbers.

Did you run the 64 or 32 bit version?

[Analog Kid]

What do you know-- about a 5-10% improvement generation to generation...

Originally Posted by Rocketman

OLED iMac in 2009?

You do this just to spin people up, don't you... Please don't get the kids all worked up just before bed.

Originally Posted by Bubba Satori

And with ATI 4000 series video cards due in a month or so, a two generation old video card.

We're reaching new levels of Mac-bashing here... It's lame because there's going to be a better video card coming out some time?

[jons]

Originally Posted by ricosuave

Those are some pretty impressive numbers.

Did you run the 64 or 32 bit version?

32-bit. 1TB Striped RAID, 6GB RAM, 8800GT.

[carfac]

So no need to bust down the doors and get one.... or sell the 800 mhz version on eBay for the latest and greatest...

Still a step forward.

[Rocketman]

Bottom line is this is a fill-in deployment in anticipation of a full chipset update next revision.

Nice computer, same price, incrementally faster than the last one. A good buy, but not suitable for an upgrade unless you are 3+ updates behind.

OLED iMac in 2009?

Rocketman

[Obi-Wan Kubrick]

Originally Posted by Rocketman

Bottom line is this is a fill-in deployment in anticipation of a full chipset update next revision.

Nice computer, same price, incrementally faster than the last one. A good buy, but not suitable for an upgrade unless you are 3+ updates behind.

OLED iMac in 2009?

Rocketman

Maybe late 2009 if we are lucky.

[JayLenochiniMac]

So hardly any difference between the new 2.8 and prev gen 2.8. Those who just purchased last week or so shouldn't get upset (especially if you're not that big of a gamer). It's not like the new one has any other cool features like Blu-Ray or the like.

[milo]

Originally Posted by JayLenochiniMac

So hardly any difference between the new 2.8 and prev gen 2.8. Those who just purchased last week or so shouldn't get upset (especially if you're not that big of a gamer).

But wasn't the old 2.8 the same price as the new 3.0? And isn't the video card better?

Of course there's not going to be much of a boost just from bus speed with the same clocked CPU, there never is a huge difference.

I think people had unrealistic expectations - the real upgrade is that the available CPU speeds have all been boosted at each price point.

Right now, speed improvements are limited by chip technology, and the imacs are plenty fast already. We won't see a major boost until they ship a quad core iMac (if that ever happens).

Personally, I think this is a perfect time to buy a refurb, since the difference in generations isn't that much. I'm not a fan of the iMac form factor, but at 25% off the normal price I'll at least consider it.

Originally Posted by terryzx

I’m surprised that there is no Blu_ray, especially since Toast just added their Blu-Ray plugin.

Shame since Blu-ray looks way better

I don't think the copy protection issues have been fully sorted out yet. Even on the PC side, it has taken a while for movie playback to work right.

Originally Posted by macrumorino

You could choose to simply inform him about what has to happen, the sequence, an expected arrival date... or why it's a harder problem than it seems... or why he's better off sticking to the current DVDs (which is what I do, since I don't like the high price of blu-ray disks one bit)... and you could that in a manner that doesn't make some of us a little nauseous to read.

That's exactly what he detailed in his post...do you really need to whine about the TONE of it? The fact is, the DRM of bluray causes lots of problems, including on the PC side. I've read plenty of reports of people with PCs with bluray drives who can't watch movies. I'd rather see apple wait and get it right.

Originally Posted by Bubba Satori

Don't want to watch movies. Want Blu-ray for authoring High def video. Also be using PS, Cinema 4D, Vue and some audio. I don't mind paying a premium for Apple's quality hardware and software, but to get some old components, limited upgrade options and some completely unavailable options is disappointing, to say the least. So, I'll get the Mac Pro instead when the Nehalem units are available.

If I could have at least got a decent matte screen and a video card that every other pc on the planet will have access to next month I would have gone for it. Oh well, gotta take the bad with the good.

You can get third party bluray for that. Apple's not going to include a bluray drive that is data only and doesn't allow watching movies, that's worse than not including the drive at all.

[nerdynerdynerdy]

Originally Posted by MacRumors

I've been looking for a comparison like this. I recently bought a just superseded 2.66 Quad Intel Mac Pro with 5GB ram, and wondered how it compared to the other machines I considered (top of the line iMac, mid range Macbook Pro).

Does anybody know if there's a similar comparison of the graphics cards in machines so I know where my machine sits in the heirarchy?

THanks.

nnn

[ChrisA]

What I want to see are these benchmarks

(1) The mac rumers post reading mark: How many forum posts can you read per hour with a 3Ghz imac vs. a 2.16Ghz imac and,

(2) The "DVD Mark" If it takes 2 hours to watch "Titanic" in a 2.16Ghz iMac can you watch it in less time using the 3.0Ghz iMac?

These two new benchmarks would measure the way people actually user their computers in the real world.

[dukebound85]

Originally Posted by ChrisA

What I want to see are these benchmarks

(1) The mac rumers post reading mark: How many forum posts can you read per hour with a 3Ghz imac vs. a 2.16Ghz imac and,

(2) The "DVD Mark" If it takes 2 hours to watch "Titanic" in a 2.16Ghz iMac can you watch it in less time using the 3.0Ghz iMac?

These two new benchmarks would measure the way people actually user their computers in the real world.

hmmm those would be very interesting

someone test that out lol

[JayLenochiniMac]

Originally Posted by ChrisA

(2) The "DVD Mark" If it takes 2 hours to watch "Titanic" in a 2.16Ghz iMac can you watch it in less time using the 3.0Ghz iMac?

Oh, yes, those with 3.0GHz iMac just sink back to MacRumors without finishing the movie

[daneoni]

Originally Posted by ChrisA

What I want to see are these benchmarks

(1) The mac rumers post reading mark: How many forum posts can you read per hour with a 3Ghz imac vs. a 2.16Ghz imac and,

(2) The "DVD Mark" If it takes 2 hours to watch "Titanic" in a 2.16Ghz iMac can you watch it in less time using the 3.0Ghz iMac?

These two new benchmarks would measure the way people actually user their computers in the real world.

Mr Funnyman

[Bubba Satori]

Lame. No matte screen, no Blu-ray, no quad core... And with ATI 4000 series video cards due in a month or so, a two generation old video card. No surprise there.

[QCassidy352]

Originally Posted by Bubba Satori

Lame. No matte screen, no Blu-ray, no quad core... And with ATI 4000 series video cards due in a month or so, a two generation old video card. No surprise there.

so, other than watch blu-ray discs, what do you want to do with your imac that you can't with this model, but you could with your quad core and ati 4000 card?

[Bubba Satori]

Originally Posted by QCassidy352

so, other than watch blu-ray discs, what do you want to do with your imac that you can't with this model, but you could with your quad core and ati 4000 card?

Don't want to watch movies. Want Blu-ray for authoring High def video. Also be using PS, Cinema 4D, Vue and some audio. I don't mind paying a premium for Apple's quality hardware and software, but to get some old components, limited upgrade options and some completely unavailable options is disappointing, to say the least. So, I'll get the Mac Pro instead when the Nehalem units are available.

If I could have at least got a decent matte screen and a video card that every other pc on the planet will have access to next month I would have gone for it. Oh well, gotta take the bad with the good.

[flopticalcube]

Originally Posted by Bubba Satori

Lame. No matte screen, no Blu-ray, no quad core... And with ATI 4000 series video cards due in a month or so, a two generation old video card. No surprise there.

The 8800m has only been out for a few months. This is no desktop card. There is no mobile quad core available until later this year.

[Eidorian]

Originally Posted by Bubba Satori

Lame. No matte screen, no Blu-ray, no quad core... And with ATI 4000 series video cards due in a month or so, a two generation old video card. No surprise there.

I know that the RV770 desktop variants are going to be out in July but no word on Mobility versions yet. Call me when Apple starts using hardware decoding features.

Originally Posted by Rocketman

Bottom line is this is a fill-in deployment in anticipation of a full chipset update next revision.

Nice computer, same price, incrementally faster than the last one. A good buy, but not suitable for an upgrade unless you are 3+ updates behind.

OLED iMac in 2009?

Rocketman

Aren't OLED screens still tiny and expensive? It doesn't sound very iMac to me.