Mac Pro 2009 w/ GTX 285 Xbench results

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by Chad H, Jul 11, 2009.

  1. Chad H macrumors 6502a

    Chad H

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2008
    Location:
    Auburn, AL
    #1
    Hey guys,
    I finally got my 2009 Mac Pro in.(Stats in signature) So, after getting everything up and running I decided to run Xbench and thought I would post the results. Now, this is after I installed 6GB of RAM from OWC and the Nvidia GTX285 graphics card from Apple. The GTX285 is using the latest driver off of Nvidia's website. I gotta ask one quick question can anybody look at the picture of my temps and see if those are okay? The temps screenshot was taken while playing watching a youtube video, typing this, and listening to music in iTunes. BTW, the room temperature is 74 degree's Fahrenheit not Celsius. :)
     

    Attached Files:

  2. Mustard Chops macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2007
    #2
    Not that far behind you...

    http://db.xbench.com/merge.xhtml?doc2=379302

    Results
    229.58
    System Info
    Xbench Version
    1.3
    System Version
    10.5.7 (9J3050)
    Physical RAM
    4096 MB
    Model
    MacBookPro5,2
    Drive Type
    APPLE SSD TS128A
     
  3. Chad H thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Chad H

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2008
    Location:
    Auburn, AL
    #3
    Are those numbers on par for the system/graphics card I have? I didn't run the test in every department.
     
  4. bearcatrp macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Location:
    Boon Docks USA
    #4
    I would like to see xbench score with same mac pro but with the latest ATI graphics card. I can't make up my mind between the nvidia or the ATI due to both having issues. If anyone has this mac but with the ATI card from apple, please post your results to help me decide. tnks
     
  5. MacVidCards Suspended

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2008
    Location:
    Hollywood, CA
    #5
    Xbench is NOT for testing GPUs.

    You may as well toss them in a lake and time how long they take to sink, you will have just as useful a number.
     
  6. bearcatrp macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Location:
    Boon Docks USA
    #6
    Suppose your right about that. Cinebench would be a better test for the graphics card. Chad H, would you mind running a cinebench 10 test and post your results?
     
  7. Peace macrumors P6

    Peace

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Location:
    Space--The ONLY Frontier
    #7
    That's not going to be very accurate.

    "The most current version is MAXON CINEBENCH R10 (August 1, 2007)"

    2007. A LOT has changed since then.
     
  8. bearcatrp macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Location:
    Boon Docks USA
    #8
    Unless there is a better test out there, were stuck with it.
     
  9. netkas macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2007
  10. bearcatrp macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Location:
    Boon Docks USA
    #10
    Anyone update there 285 with the new update? Am so close on pulling the trigger and if this update does increase performance, will snag it.
     
  11. Chad H thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Chad H

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2008
    Location:
    Auburn, AL
    #11
    I'm not home right now. I will do a xbench this afternoon and report back here.
     
  12. Chad H thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Chad H

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2008
    Location:
    Auburn, AL
    #12
    These are the same drivers. Nvidia posted them July 2nd. Does anybody know of a better test? Xbench varies way to much. I get anything from 250 to 265 running the same parameters.
     
  13. bearcatrp macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Location:
    Boon Docks USA
    #13
  14. Chad H thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Chad H

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2008
    Location:
    Auburn, AL
    #14
    Alright, I'm downloading now. Will post the results shortly. Im encoding some video, so it could be an hour or so.
     
  15. bearcatrp macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Location:
    Boon Docks USA
    #15
    Here is the cinebench score on my 1st gen mac pro w/7300GT:
    -------------2.0 quad 2.33 octo
    Render cpu 2184 2534
    multi cpu 7457 14834
    open gl 2867 2863

    2008 2.8 mac pro
    render cpu 3232
    multi cpu 18245
    open gl 6093
     
  16. Chad H thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Chad H

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2008
    Location:
    Auburn, AL
    #16
    Well here they are. Let me know if this is good or bad.

    Rendering 1 cpu 3048
    Rendering X cpu 13107
    OpenGL Standard 5197
     
  17. Chad H thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Chad H

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2008
    Location:
    Auburn, AL
    #17
    Okay, after researching and comparing numbers I began to fear my computer might be a weak "model". So after looking at every aspect I failed to notice I had a random program running that was constantly taxing the cpu at 20 to 25%. Looks like it was ffmpegx that kept trying to run. Anyway, after force quitting the app I ran Cinebench again. The numbers are below and a good bit better. Let me know what you think. :)

    Rendering CPU 3596
    Rendering xCPU 14709
    OpenGL Standard 6405
     
  18. bearcatrp macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Location:
    Boon Docks USA
    #18
    chad, am curious if when running the test if the 4 main cores are only running or 8 cores. Could you rerun this and open activity monitor to watch the cpu? I wish someone would make a new benchmarking app. Will run xbench and post results to see comparison anyway.
     
  19. Tesselator macrumors 601

    Tesselator

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2008
    Location:
    Japan
    #19
    Watching YouTube at that Ambient - everything looks just fine.

    When you post you should use Celsius though - as more people will know just by looking.

    Congratz on the new box!
     
  20. Chad H thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Chad H

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2008
    Location:
    Auburn, AL
    #20
    I ran the multi cpu test again and it looks like its using about 750% to 795% which would be all 8 cores. Also, xbench is going to vary to much I think. Mainly because I can inlcude every parameter except my hard drive and the score is around 310. Just run "quartz" and "open gl" and see. I will do the same.
     
  21. bearcatrp macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Location:
    Boon Docks USA
    #21
    2008 mac pro 2.8 w/18gb ram

    Results 181.84
    System Info
    Xbench Version 1.3
    System Version 10.5.7 (9J61)
    Physical RAM 18432 MB
    Model MacPro3,1
    Drive Type WDC WD3200AAJS-41VWA1
    CPU Test 189.30
    GCD Loop 328.15 17.30 Mops/sec
    Floating Point Basic 160.91 3.82 Gflop/sec
    vecLib FFT 130.93 4.32 Gflop/sec
    Floating Point Library 236.37 41.16 Mops/sec
    Thread Test 832.32
    Computation 1129.5822.88 Mops/sec, 4 threads
    Lock Contention 658.92 28.35 Mlocks/sec, 4 threads
    Memory Test 201.68
    System 283.29
    Allocate 326.43 1.20 Malloc/sec
    Fill 235.48 11449.71 MB/sec
    Copy 304.92 6297.93 MB/sec
    Stream 156.57
    Copy 157.37 3250.45 MB/sec
    Scale 159.03 3285.46 MB/sec
    Add 155.13 3304.61 MB/sec
    Triad 154.83 3312.16 MB/sec
    Quartz Graphics Test 275.78
    Line 218.96 14.58 Klines/sec [50% alpha]
    Rectangle 291.60 87.06 Krects/sec [50% alpha]
    Circle 237.44 19.35 Kcircles/sec [50% alpha]
    Bezier 231.99 5.85 Kbeziers/sec [50% alpha]
    Text 620.43 38.81 Kchars/sec
    OpenGL Graphics Test 214.29
    Spinning Squares 214.29 271.84 frames/sec
    Spinning Squares 214.29 271.84 frames/sec
    User Interface Test 439.82
    Elements 439.82 2.02 Krefresh/sec
    Disk Test 60.65
    Sequential 81.24
    Uncached Write 69.02 42.38 MB/sec [4K blocks]
    Uncached Write 74.88 42.37 MB/sec [256K blocks]
    Uncached Read 99.19 29.03 MB/sec [4K blocks]
    Uncached Read 88.42 44.44 MB/sec [256K blocks]
    Random 48.39
    Uncached Write 18.45 1.95 MB/sec [4K blocks]
    Uncached Write 104.73 33.53 MB/sec [256K blocks]
    Uncached Read 94.44 0.67 MB/sec [4K blocks]
    Uncached Read 120.27 22.32 MB/sec [256K blocks]
     
  22. Chad H thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Chad H

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2008
    Location:
    Auburn, AL
    #22
    Bearcat, I ran every department just like you. Below are my results.
     

    Attached Files:

  23. doox00 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 10, 2006
  24. Chad H thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Chad H

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2008
    Location:
    Auburn, AL
    #24
    I just ran it again and got a little higher. These tests bounce around way too much.
     

    Attached Files:

  25. bearcatrp macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Location:
    Boon Docks USA
    #25
    yeah, not the most reliable program. I think cinebench is a little better.
     

Share This Page