Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Mac Pro vs G5 Quad benchmark

That test is hardly fair seeing as how the Mac Pro is running in rosetta. That said, if you need photoshop speed go Quad G5.
 
macenforcer said:
That test is hardly fair seeing as how the Mac Pro is running in rosetta. That said, if you need photoshop speed go Quad G5.
Click to expand...

I know, but he iMovie and Final Cut tests are native on both. The speed difference is quite large.
 
macenforcer said:
That test is hardly fair seeing as how the Mac Pro is running in rosetta. That said, if you need photoshop speed go Quad G5.
Click to expand...

Actually those tests say quite a bit about the performance of the Xeons. 6-10 seconds slower because it's running under translation is amazing. Just imagine how fast it will run photoshop when it becomes native.
 
Yep, the Woodcrest (and Core 2) products are obviously faster per clock than the G5. Anything else would have been pretty bad, since the G5 is old news now. What's nice is that the frequency ceiling seems quite high on the Woodcrest parts, which means that we won't have to wait all that long for higher clocked versions. 🙂

By the way, why is it that no one tests Photoshop performance on the Mac Pro running WinXP through Boot Camp? 😕 That way we'd see how the Mac Pro stacks up to the Quad G5 without having to wait for CS3. That said, considering the pretty impressive performance under Rosetta, it's pretty safe to say that the Mac Pro will outperform its older brother substantially.
 
That's cool - I was hoping to start seeing some of these "real world" benchmarks show up. I can't believe how well the Mac Pro performed even through rosetta - that says a lot for when CS3 comes out.

I agree with the XP suggestion, though. I'd be curious in those results.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back