Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Performance results on iMac 24" (new and old)
- Thread starter jesteraver
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I wish I had an extra gig of memory in my iMac G5 see the difference between this and my soon too be new computer.
Wirelessly posted (LGE-VX9900/1.0 UP.Browser/6.2.3.2 (GUI) MMP/2.0)
wow, the 2.8 is pretty fast. My 20 inch imac (2.33) got 3069... But whatever
wow, the 2.8 is pretty fast. My 20 inch imac (2.33) got 3069... But whatever
I found the mecca of geekbench scores
Performances (June 2007)
iMac G5 1.8 GHz @ 1044 *
Power Mac G5 Dual-Dual 2.5 GHz @ 3284 *
iMac C2E 2.8 GHz @ 3791
Mac Pro Dual Dual-Xeon 2.0 GHz @ 3894 *
Mac Pro Dual Quad-Xeon 3.0 GHz @ 8618 *
I can't wait too feel the power.
iMac 2.8 from a geekbench test seems pretty good.
* not sure how much memory they were using for these tests.
Performances (June 2007)
iMac G5 1.8 GHz @ 1044 *
Power Mac G5 Dual-Dual 2.5 GHz @ 3284 *
iMac C2E 2.8 GHz @ 3791
Mac Pro Dual Dual-Xeon 2.0 GHz @ 3894 *
Mac Pro Dual Quad-Xeon 3.0 GHz @ 8618 *
I can't wait too feel the power.
iMac 2.8 from a geekbench test seems pretty good.
* not sure how much memory they were using for these tests.
flopticalcube
macrumors G4
That's a lot faster than the difference in clock speed implies. Is something else going on inside the C2E?
Really the clock speed is about 16% (2.8/2.4) and so is the overall score (3791/3243). The floating point is even better than that though so maybe it is unusual...
flopticalcube
macrumors G4
Moreover, I would not have expected the full benefit of the clock to come through, given the 800MHZ fsb and 667MHz memory bus. In one way it confirms a suspicion I had that the desktop architectures could not get much better results even with faster FSBs and memory speeds.
One thing that amazes me. That the Quad-Xeon 2.0 GHz is slightly faster then the C2E 2.8 GHz. The Quad-Xeon has a slightly faster FSB. Plus the cache must have something too do with it also.
One thing. I am happy that I am getting a new mac. 260% increase in speed, now that is something.
I just wish Apple would use slightly better memory DDR2-800 instead of 667. Just imagine how much faster these babies would be.
One thing for sure by 2010, I'll get another mac. Hopefully it be a Mac Pro or wtv it will be called by then 😀
One thing. I am happy that I am getting a new mac. 260% increase in speed, now that is something.
I just wish Apple would use slightly better memory DDR2-800 instead of 667. Just imagine how much faster these babies would be.
One thing for sure by 2010, I'll get another mac. Hopefully it be a Mac Pro or wtv it will be called by then 😀