PB vs iMacG5 xBench results

[jjmaximum]

Recently got an iMac for the wife and ran xBench on it and it scored a 110. My PB scores a 107. I didn't expect the iMac to 'blow the doors' off the PB, but I did expect more than a 3 point increase. Is this normal, or does the extra RAM in the PB make that much difference?

Configurations
iMac G5, 1.8Ghz, 512Mb RAM (1 stick), 160Gb HD, BT, everything else standard. Running 10.2.7

PB G4, 1.5Ghz, 1.5Mb RAM (2 sticks), 80Gb HD (upgraded to 5400RPM), 128 vRAM, everything else standard. Running 10.2.7

Running 10.3.7...not Jaguar...

 

[clicknbet]

iMac G5 running 10.2.7? You sure about that?

 

[maya]

Recently got an iMac for the wife and ran xBench on it and it scored a 110. My PB scores a 107. I didn't expect the iMac to 'blow the doors' off the PB, but I did expect more than a 3 point increase. Is this normal, or does the extra RAM in the PB make that much difference?

Configurations
iMac G5, 1.8Ghz, 512Mb RAM (1 stick), 160Gb HD, BT, everything else standard. Running 10.2.7

PB G4, 1.5Ghz, 1.5Mb RAM (2 sticks), 80Gb HD (upgraded to 5400RPM), 128 vRAM, everything else standard. Running 10.2.7

I got a score of 104.69 on a 12" iBook with 256MB ram running OS X.3.7

will post later with 1280MB of ram sore will be even better.

 

[jjmaximum]

Meant 10.3.7...sorry

 

[jwdawso]

Adjust Energy Savings

If you have matched ram and you adjust the energy saver to "full power" (whatever it is) you can expect a score of ~160.

http://ladd.dyndns.org/xbench/merge.xhtml?doc1=86832

 

[Dont Hurt Me]

Remember that the GPU makes a big difference in the x-bench score and with FX5200s you arent going to turn any heads with that cheap chip. Thats why you have almost the same score. You have a nice new G5 mated to a old and bottom tier fx 5200. Sorry but this is apples way to get people to buy another imac in a couple of years when that sorry GPU cant handle the latest greatest stuff. You will hear more of this when Doom3 comes out and everyone wonders why they are using a fx5200.

 

[hjhhjh]

Remember that the GPU makes a big difference in the x-bench score and with FX5200s you arent going to turn any heads with that cheap chip. Thats why you have almost the same score. You have a nice new G5 mated to a old and bottom tier fx 5200. Sorry but this is apples way to get people to buy another imac in a couple of years when that sorry GPU cant handle the latest greatest stuff. You will hear more of this when Doom3 comes out and everyone wonders why they are using a fx5200.

XBENCH IS THE WORST BECNH TOOL EVER, ACCORDING TO IT MY POWERBOOK IS FASTER THAN UR G5 IMAC .. it makes no sence

 

[Fredstar]

Your imac G5 must be configured on lowest or automatic energy setting...
My imac G5 20" (1gb ram) gets a cpu test of 165-170
The overall benchmark averages at 140....due to the graphics card's poor performance.
whats your cpu test?
btw i have run a total of four benchmarks and none have been off a fresh reboot as of yet, although i think pretty much every programs was shut down.

 

[cluthz]

As said, set energy saver>cpu performance to highest!

My iMac gets ~170 (1.8GHz, 1.0GB RAM, 250GB disk),
My Powerbook gets ~125 (1.33GHz, 768MB RAM, 60GB disk)

You'll see that the CPU scores are much higher on your iMac than the Powerbook, but the Powerbook has a better GPU and therefore the difference isn't that much. Since you have stock HD and 512 MB RAM expect about 160 on the iMac and the powerbook will probably around 140 points (maybe more)

 

[RealDeal]

numbers...

in high power mode...G5 1.6/ 1GB (pair 512s)/160 HD; big hardware boost for graphics:
Numbers: CINEBENCH 2003-rendering 1 cpu- 170; graphics C4D shading 204; OpenGL SW-L 529; OpenGL HW-l 928; Speedup 4.59
XBENCH Results 146.68

a few OS updates since then- dunno if better or worse now...