PowerMac G5 2.5GHz Benchmarks

MacRumors · Jul 2, 2004, 07:41 PM

One user provides some of the first benchmarks from Apple's newest top end PowerMac - the dual 2.5GHz model. Apple introduced the dual 2.5GHz PowerMac G5 in early June but the top end model is not due to ship until late July.

The following Cinebench benchmarks were run on a Dual 2.5GHz PowerMac with the new GeForce 6800 Ultra video card (connected to two 30" Apple LCDs).

For reference, Dual 2.0GHz PowerMac/Radeon 9600 Pro benchmarks from Xlr8yourmac's overview are provided in parenthesis.

Quote:

CINEBENCH 2003 v1
****************************************************
Processor : PowerMac G5
MHz : 2500
Number of CPUs : 2
Operating System : OS X 10.3.4
Graphics Card : GF 6800 Ultra DDL
Resolution : 2560x1600
Color Depth : millions
****************************************************
Rendering (Single CPU): 356 CB-CPU (Dual 2.0 = 219)
Rendering (Multiple CPU): 633 CB-CPU (Dual 2.0 = 401)

Multiprocessor Speedup: 1.78 (Dual 2.0 = 1.83)

Shading (CINEMA 4D): 335 CB-GFX (Dual 2.0 = 266)
Shading (OpenGL Software Lighting) : 995 CB-GFX (Dual 2.0 = 661)
Shading (OpenGL Hardware Lighting) : 1794 CB-GFX (Dual 2.0 = 1168)

OpenGL Speedup: 5.36 (Dual 2.0 = 4.40)

Aside from a 25% increase in processor speed, the new machine also houses a faster front-side bus (1.25GHz vs 1.0GHz) and improved video card.

SFNE Freak · Jul 2, 2004, 07:43 PM

Looks like it performs noticably better!

Grimace · Jul 2, 2004, 07:43 PM

yowsers - I want one now - and a 30" monitor!

Don't panic · Jul 2, 2004, 07:46 PM

not bad: 50% increase in performance!

arn · Jul 2, 2004, 07:47 PM

Usual caveats.... benchmarks measure very specific things, etc...

however... the rendering benchmarks are proportionally higher than expected from just the processor jump (25% processor speed bump vs 60% improvement in the single cpu rendering)

swingerofbirch · Jul 2, 2004, 07:50 PM

wouldn't running the two 30" monitors slow down the computer, if only marginally?

legion · Jul 2, 2004, 07:54 PM

I'd attributed most of the overall performance increases to the graphics card as cinebench offloads a lot of these tasks to the GPU and the GeForce6800 DDL is quite a bit faster than the previous.

As Arn's disclaimer before, cinebench isn't a great test to see processor performance as much as GPU+SystemBus+CPU.

toughboy · Jul 2, 2004, 07:54 PM

did anyone realise that the systems have different graphic cards??

for that reason the benchmarks may not show a real difference..

clr900 · Jul 2, 2004, 07:54 PM

How did someone already get a dual 2.5 with a 6800 ultra, I thought they are not shipping until August? I plan on getting one too but didn't think that they are shipping right now.

legion · Jul 2, 2004, 07:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by swingerofbirch

wouldn't running the two 30" monitors slow down the computer, if only marginally?

No, all the work is done by the graphics card (plus, dual link cards can easily go higher than the resolution of the 30" monitors, so it still isn't at a taxable level)

benoda · Jul 2, 2004, 07:55 PM

I wish the benchmark comparisons where more relevant. It's hard to discern what advantage the new video card gives over what the faster processor/bus provides.

I suppose all will be answered once they ship

legion · Jul 2, 2004, 07:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by clr900

How did someone already get a dual 2.5 with a 6800 ultra, I thought they are not shipping until August? I plan on getting one too but didn't think that they are shipping right now.

WWDC setup (note the monitors too!)

arn · Jul 2, 2004, 07:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by clr900

How did someone already get a dual 2.5 with a 6800 ultra, I thought they are not shipping until August? I plan on getting one too but didn't think that they are shipping right now.

WWDC

arn

themadchemist · Jul 2, 2004, 08:01 PM

Despite the obvious fact that there are multiple variables here, it's nice to see how the high end package available now does against its predecessor. Of course, cinebench only tests a few things, but it seems that there is significant improvement, largely because that sucktastic graphics card is gone.

clr900 · Jul 2, 2004, 08:02 PM

Oh alright, it is nice to have some insider info!

Sir_Giggles · Jul 2, 2004, 08:11 PM

Now that Mac OSX will use Core Image and Core Video to offload some processing to the GPU, this throws a wrench into some of the benchmarks for rendering. As image-manipulation apps and 3d programs are sure to benefit greatly from GPU rendering, are we to see Cinebench being updated to allow for these new benchmarks?

Santaduck · Jul 2, 2004, 08:12 PM

if the powers that be that leaked the 2.5 dp cinebench results are reading this, could you try an Unreal Tournament 2004 benchmark? Both botmatch Asebestos, and flyby Asbestos on "max" detail settings (so we can compare to the xlr8yourmac database. Botmatch tends to be CPU-limited, and the flyby gfx-limited.

Benchmarker for UT2k4 is available here.

realityisterror · Jul 2, 2004, 08:17 PM

no fair!!!
i want one of those baby's.
how come it only recognizes one monitor?

reality

msconvert · Jul 2, 2004, 08:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sir_Giggles

Now that Mac OSX will use Core Image and Core Video to offload some processing to the GPU, this throws a wrench into some of the benchmarks for rendering. As image-manipulation apps and 3d programs are sure to benefit greatly from GPU rendering, are we to see Cinebench being updated to allow for these new benchmarks?

Does anyone else remember last years WWDC? One of the graphics programs was specifically reprogramed to offload the GPU onto the G5 because it was actually faster. (The 3d world generator). Now the card is faster for floating point calculations? What gives? Is the card that much better - Stevo did say in the current WWDC keynote that GPUs are out pacing moores law so maybe I answered my own question. Or they are prepairing for the future if it isn't already here....

Thoughts?

Sabbath · Jul 2, 2004, 08:47 PM

Looks like a nice little boost, hopefully we will keep seeing decent boosts in the G5 scores as the FSB will keep going up with the chip and memory and GPUs keep getting faster all the time.

I know the nvidia is a serious step up from the 9600 maybe it would be better compare against the 9800, but it still is a decent improvement.

kirk26 · Jul 2, 2004, 08:52 PM

Sweet, now you babies can stop asking if this is enough to have 2 internet pages open while working Photoshop!

slughead · Jul 2, 2004, 08:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SFNE Freak

Looks like it performs noticably better!

Looks like the 6800 is a 6800. Both computers need need the same video card to compare the processors in most of these tests.

Quote:

For reference, Dual 2.0GHz PowerMac/Radeon 9600 Pro benchmarks from Xlr8yourmac's overview are provided in parenthesis.

I'm waiting for a real comparison, as all half of the comparisons mean nothing.

Move along, nothing to see here.

PlaceofDis · Jul 2, 2004, 08:57 PM

wow now only if i could afford a setup like that

jadedchameleon · Jul 2, 2004, 09:06 PM

Well, the rendering tests are really CPU tests. The shading tests are more graphics card tests. Rendering scores among the same setup with different video cards tend to be the same. I would say the speedup seems quite good from 2.0 to 2.5.

CholEoptera36 · Jul 2, 2004, 09:06 PM

Very nice increase in performance from upgrading. I like the numbers.

Anybody got any other figures or markings to add to these?

Jul 2, 2004, 07:46 PM	#4
Don't panic macrumors 68000 Join Date: Jan 2004	not bad: 50% increase in performance! __________________ Bush Tours America To Survey Damage Caused By His Disastrous Presidency

Jul 2, 2004, 07:50 PM	#6
swingerofbirch macrumors 68000 Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: The Amalgamated States of Central North America	slow down from monitors wouldn't running the two 30" monitors slow down the computer, if only marginally?

Jul 2, 2004, 07:54 PM	#8
toughboy macrumors 6502a Join Date: May 2003 Location: Izmir, Turkey	did anyone realise that the systems have different graphic cards?? for that reason the benchmarks may not show a real difference.. __________________ 12" PB G4 Rev A ~ "Ice" (what an irony!) 15.2" PB G4 ~ "DevIce" 17" MBP 2.5GHz/4GB/ Hi-Res LED Screen FTW! ~ "BigMac"

Jul 2, 2004, 08:01 PM	#14
themadchemist macrumors 68030 Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Chi Town	Despite the obvious fact that there are multiple variables here, it's nice to see how the high end package available now does against its predecessor. Of course, cinebench only tests a few things, but it seems that there is significant improvement, largely because that sucktastic graphics card is gone. __________________ Sometimes, things get worse before they get better. Sometimes, they get better before they get worse. Almost never do they stay the same.

Jul 2, 2004, 08:12 PM	#17
Santaduck macrumors 6502a Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Honolulu	if the powers that be that leaked the 2.5 dp cinebench results are reading this, could you try an Unreal Tournament 2004 benchmark? Both botmatch Asebestos, and flyby Asbestos on "max" detail settings (so we can compare to the xlr8yourmac database. Botmatch tends to be CPU-limited, and the flyby gfx-limited. Benchmarker for UT2k4 is available here. __________________ The Santaduck G5: The World's First Two-Bit Duck www.macologist.org - Mac Gaming Expert Solutions & Mod Download: BF1942 UT2004 etc. www.santaduck.com- Mac Gaming Resources and Newsblog www.foosballheaven.com - Foosball

Jul 2, 2004, 07:43 PM	#2
SFNE Freak macrumors member Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: CT	Looks like it performs noticably better!

Jul 2, 2004, 07:43 PM	#3
Grimace Contributor Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: with Hamburglar.	yowsers - I want one now - and a 30" monitor!

Jul 2, 2004, 07:47 PM	#5
arn macrumors god Join Date: Apr 2001	Usual caveats.... benchmarks measure very specific things, etc... however... the rendering benchmarks are proportionally higher than expected from just the processor jump (25% processor speed bump vs 60% improvement in the single cpu rendering)

Jul 2, 2004, 07:54 PM	#7
legion macrumors 6502a Join Date: Jul 2003	I'd attributed most of the overall performance increases to the graphics card as cinebench offloads a lot of these tasks to the GPU and the GeForce6800 DDL is quite a bit faster than the previous. As Arn's disclaimer before, cinebench isn't a great test to see processor performance as much as GPU+SystemBus+CPU.

Jul 2, 2004, 07:54 PM	#9
clr900 macrumors regular Join Date: Jan 2004	How did someone already get a dual 2.5 with a 6800 ultra, I thought they are not shipping until August? I plan on getting one too but didn't think that they are shipping right now.

Jul 2, 2004, 07:55 PM	#11
benoda macrumors member Join Date: Apr 2003	I wish the benchmark comparisons where more relevant. It's hard to discern what advantage the new video card gives over what the faster processor/bus provides. I suppose all will be answered once they ship

Jul 2, 2004, 08:02 PM	#15
clr900 macrumors regular Join Date: Jan 2004	Oh alright, it is nice to have some insider info!

Jul 2, 2004, 08:11 PM	#16
Sir_Giggles Banned Join Date: Dec 2003	Now that Mac OSX will use Core Image and Core Video to offload some processing to the GPU, this throws a wrench into some of the benchmarks for rendering. As image-manipulation apps and 3d programs are sure to benefit greatly from GPU rendering, are we to see Cinebench being updated to allow for these new benchmarks?

Jul 2, 2004, 08:17 PM	#18
realityisterror macrumors 65816 Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Snellville, GA	no fair!!! i want one of those baby's. how come it only recognizes one monitor? reality __________________ </end>

Jul 2, 2004, 08:47 PM	#20
Sabbath macrumors 6502a Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: London	Looks like a nice little boost, hopefully we will keep seeing decent boosts in the G5 scores as the FSB will keep going up with the chip and memory and GPUs keep getting faster all the time. I know the nvidia is a serious step up from the 9600 maybe it would be better compare against the 9800, but it still is a decent improvement. __________________ All That Glitters Distro

Jul 2, 2004, 08:52 PM	#21
kirk26 macrumors 6502 Join Date: Jun 2003	Sweet, now you babies can stop asking if this is enough to have 2 internet pages open while working Photoshop! __________________ 400Mhz Blue iMac running 10.4 server

Jul 2, 2004, 08:57 PM	#23
PlaceofDis macrumors Demi-God Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Chicago.	wow now only if i could afford a setup like that __________________ dim my eyes on the waves of confessions... SpringWarmCold

Jul 2, 2004, 09:06 PM	#24
jadedchameleon macrumors newbie Join Date: Aug 2003	Well, the rendering tests are really CPU tests. The shading tests are more graphics card tests. Rendering scores among the same setup with different video cards tend to be the same. I would say the speedup seems quite good from 2.0 to 2.5.

Jul 2, 2004, 09:06 PM	#25
CholEoptera36 macrumors regular Join Date: Jun 2004	Very nice increase in performance from upgrading. I like the numbers. Anybody got any other figures or markings to add to these?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode