Benchmarked: The Quad-Core i7 iMac is Super Fast

robby818

macrumors 6502a
May 2, 2007
582
3
Nice review. Thanks for posting a link to it. I use handbrake so seeing that the i7 will make a difference there is good news to me. I originally ordered an i5 through Amazon but changed to an i7 this past weekend. I am looking at delivery next week. :)
 
Comment

JimKirk

macrumors 6502
Oct 6, 2009
442
0
That review is full of errors

It talks about the I7 Bloomfield and not Lynnfield.

Honestly that guys knows nothing about these machines.
 
Comment

jgmacrum

macrumors member
Oct 27, 2009
77
0
Nice review. Thanks for posting a link to it. I use handbrake so seeing that the i7 will make a difference there is good news to me. I originally ordered an i5 through Amazon but changed to an i7 this past weekend. I am looking at delivery next week. :)
Do you already have a shipping date? When is the expected arrival date?
 
Comment

wodeh

macrumors regular
Nov 18, 2007
223
0
Norwich
I thought that one of the major benefits of multi-core systems for every day use was that you could run several single-threaded applications simultaneously without them fighting for CPU cycles. This article doesn't even touch upon that...

Surely you gain benefits with single-threaded applications as soon as you start running a large number of them? I would typically have several virtual machines, PHP/Apache/MySQL running alongside a plethora of development tools.

Furthermore, the i7 architecture should also better serve the RAM requirements of multiple simultaneous applications versus the Core2.

The i7 must surely smoke the Core2 when multi-tasking. But these tests assume the "real world" single threaded application user would only be using one single threaded application at any one time.
 
Comment

spacepower7

macrumors 68000
May 6, 2004
1,509
0
Could 47 minutes be improved with an external FW800 drive?
That 47 minutes includes ripping the DVD straight from the 8x Superdrive. If you used a 16x or higher external DVD drive, then I would imagine the speed would be closer to ~30 minutes.
 
Comment

fobfob

macrumors 6502
Oct 15, 2008
318
0
These results tally with my observations. I'm waiting for the threads to start on how to interpret CPU utilisation graphs on an i7. I posted about this the other day. PC people might be able to help us as they have a huge head start on the i7!
 
Comment

Uncle Pinny

macrumors regular
Jul 15, 2008
109
1
London
That 47 minutes includes ripping the DVD straight from the 8x Superdrive. If you used a 16x or higher external DVD drive, then I would imagine the speed would be closer to ~30 minutes.
As I've just mentioned on another thread, I 2 passed m4v h.264 handbrake encoded a pre ripped DVD last night in 15mins flat.

AWESOMENESS.
 
Comment

zedsdead

macrumors 68040
Jun 20, 2007
3,252
573
As I've just mentioned on another thread, I 2 passed m4v h.264 handbrake encoded a pre ripped DVD last night in 15mins flat.

AWESOMENESS.
What was the FPS? I am getting about 80+ FPS with the internal drive. I didn't expect there to be that big a jump..damn.
 
Comment

Uncle Pinny

macrumors regular
Jul 15, 2008
109
1
London
What was the FPS? I am getting about 80+ FPS with the internal drive. I didn't expect there to be that big a jump..damn.
Notice I said 'pre ripped'


....as in a dvd image I'd previously extracted using Fairmount. Superdrive still sucks even in 2009!
 
Comment

paulyras

macrumors 6502
Dec 3, 2006
486
3
Singapore
What was the FPS? I am getting about 80+ FPS with the internal drive. I didn't expect there to be that big a jump..damn.
These computers are certainly fast enough that the drive itself becomes a bottleneck, but keep in mind that there are A LOT of options in handbrake.

You rip differently for an iPod vs a Hugh quality rip to display on a nice tv or on your screen. Resolution, # of passes, etc... will have a huge effect on the framerate. It may not be an apples to apples comparison.
 
Comment
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.