Is Rosetta really this good?

timidpimpin

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Nov 10, 2018
461
346
Cascadia
So I have a late 2009 Mac mini running Snow Leopard. Today I was going through some old files, and found an old copy of Geekbench 2.2.7. And this is a copy that's had all but the G4 code removed via Monolingual.

Here's the amazing part... this mini scores about 2500-2600 on a universal or intel only version of Geekbench, but in Rosetta with the G4 code only version it scores a 3500!

How the hell is this possible?
 

bjar

macrumors regular
Feb 20, 2013
220
83
Sugar land, tx
So I have a late 2009 Mac mini running Snow Leopard. Today I was going through some old files, and found an old copy of Geekbench 2.2.7. And this is a copy that's had all but the G4 code removed via Monolingual.

Here's the amazing part... this mini scores about 2500-2600 on a universal or intel only version of Geekbench, but in Rosetta with the G4 code only version it scores a 3500!

How the hell is this possible?
Is the universal 2.2.7? Different versions get different scores.
 

timidpimpin

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Nov 10, 2018
461
346
Cascadia
Is the universal 2.2.7? Different versions get different scores.
The Intel version I'm running is 2.4.3, so only slightly newer and still version 2. I ran it again and got 2900 this time on Intel, and the G4 code only version still gets 3500.
 

bjar

macrumors regular
Feb 20, 2013
220
83
Sugar land, tx
The Intel version I'm running is 2.4.3, so only slightly newer and still version 2. I ran it again and got 2900 this time on Intel, and the G4 code only version still gets 3500.
Maybe Rosetta is that awesome? I can test it on my 2010 Mac mini next weekend.
 

AL1630

macrumors 6502
Apr 24, 2016
314
235
Idaho, USA
If it really is that good, it might open up some cool possibilities. I've always heard that using it had a significant performance toll.
 

timidpimpin

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Nov 10, 2018
461
346
Cascadia
If it really is that good, it might open up some cool possibilities. I've always heard that using it had a significant performance toll.
That was the case with the Rosetta in Tiger and maybe Leopard also, but it got a lot better with Snow Leopard. And I'm finding it better than I ever remember.
 

Amethyst1

macrumors 6502a
Oct 28, 2015
519
731
Here's my limited experience: Photoshop CS2 was very sluggish on a 1.4 GHz Core 2 Duo with 2 GB RAM and an SSD running 10.6.8. Office X's and 2004's applications were fine.
 

retta283

macrumors 65816
Jun 8, 2018
1,156
784
Kingman, AZ
I run Rainbow Six 3 on Leopard and Snow Leopard and besides some animations being quicker in SL there is no difference. Any other program I've used has not had any difference or problem.

I did have a lot of issues with Classic mode in OS X though
 

pl1984

Suspended
Oct 31, 2017
2,230
2,603
So I have a late 2009 Mac mini running Snow Leopard. Today I was going through some old files, and found an old copy of Geekbench 2.2.7. And this is a copy that's had all but the G4 code removed via Monolingual.

Here's the amazing part... this mini scores about 2500-2600 on a universal or intel only version of Geekbench, but in Rosetta with the G4 code only version it scores a 3500!

How the hell is this possible?
It's possible because it shows how unreliable GB is as a tool for benchmarking dissimilar systems. IMO the only thing GB can be reliably used for is determining how fast a system can run GB.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Project Alice

timidpimpin

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Nov 10, 2018
461
346
Cascadia
I mainly use Snow Leopard as a gaming OS, and it allows be to run many PowerPC games very well in Rosetta. All at max graphic settings also.

Those games are Battlefield 1942, Oni, Return to Castle Wolfenstain, Quake 3 and others I can't think of ATM.
 

jerwin

macrumors 68020
Jun 13, 2015
2,475
4,455
I mainly use Snow Leopard as a gaming OS, and it allows be to run many PowerPC games very well in Rosetta. All at max graphic settings also.

Those games are Battlefield 1942, Oni, Return to Castle Wolfenstain, Quake 3 and others I can't think of ATM.
part of that is the gpu...
 

Project Alice

macrumors 6502a
Jul 13, 2008
779
434
Post Falls, ID
Here's my limited experience: Photoshop CS2 was very sluggish on a 1.4 GHz Core 2 Duo with 2 GB RAM and an SSD running 10.6.8. Office X's and 2004's applications were fine.
I'm pretty sure rosetta doesn't support altivec, so that's probably the main reason there. I think it was mainly implemented for office-type environments. I just use PPC macs for PPC apps.