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

Power Mac G5 Quad Benchmarks

nospleen said:
iGary, have you tried the photoshop test? I cannot believe the Quad did it in 19.2. That is just nuts!!!!
Click to expand...
Do you mean the Horse Photoshop Test?
If so, it wouldn't be that outrageously fast. My 2 GHz G5 iMac took 1:50. Divide 1:50 by 4 (assuming the Quad is 4x faster) and you get 27.5 seconds. If that computer had a better graphics card or more RAM, I would say it could easily do it in about 20 seconds.
 
To those who received their Quads: did you pull the trigger on your order the second the store was back up? :)

I'm going to go to the Apple store tomorrow to order one, myself. Anyone else seeing them arriving early?
 
Hi Pie, & all - you can compare Cinebench results for many systems here:

http://www.3dfluff.com/mash/cbtop.php

In summary, the rendering score is excellent, only beaten by the Quad Opterons, it beats the Quad Xeon which is nice :p

However the OpenGL score is disappointing to say the least - no problem if you're not involved in 3D apps (or games...) but if you are, the score quoted here is roughly the same as a G5 Dual with a GeForce 6800 Ultra - or a Pentium M Centrino (ie, a laptop :eek: ) running a Radeon 9000 M. Oh dear...

C

Pie said:
Sure...

CINEBENCH 2003 v1
****************************************************

Tester : Pie

Processor : Quad G5
MHz : 2.5 GHZ
Number of CPUs : 4
Operating System : 10.4.2

Graphics Card : GeForce 6600
Resolution : <fill this out>
Color Depth : <fill this out>

****************************************************

Rendering (Single CPU): 359 CB-CPU
Rendering (Multiple CPU): 1016 CB-CPU

Multiprocessor Speedup: 2.83

Shading (CINEMA 4D) : 353 CB-GFX
Shading (OpenGL Software Lighting) : 1051 CB-GFX
Shading (OpenGL Hardware Lighting) : 1871 CB-GFX

OpenGL Speedup: 5.29

****************************************************


Does this make any sense to anybody?
Click to expand...
 
plinden said:
Just to throw in a PC cinebench test, on a machine running lots of other stuff and not restarted:
CINEBENCH 2003 v1
****************************************************

Tester : plinden

Processor : Thinkpad T41p
MHz : 1600 (Banias Core)
Number of CPUs : 1
Operating System : Windows XP Professional SP1

Graphics Card : ATI Mobility Fire GL 9000
Resolution : 1280x1028
Color Depth : 32-bit

****************************************************

Rendering (Single CPU): 188 CB-CPU
Rendering (Multiple CPU): --- CB-CPU


Shading (CINEMA 4D) : 187 CB-GFX
Shading (OpenGL Software Lighting) : 810 CB-GFX
Shading (OpenGL Hardware Lighting) : 1429 CB-GFX

OpenGL Speedup: 7.63

****************************************************
Click to expand...

VS MY Beautiful (MAC OSX) Laptop

CINEBENCH 2003 v1
****************************************************

Tester : jazmac

Processor : 12" Powerbook
MHz : 1.5ghz
Number of CPUs : 1
Operating System : OS X

Graphics Card : GFX 5200 64mb
Resolution : 1024X768
Color Depth : 32bit

****************************************************

Rendering (Single CPU): 133 CB-CPU
Rendering (Multiple CPU): --- CB-CPU


Shading (CINEMA 4D) : 159 CB-GFX
Shading (OpenGL Software Lighting) : 424 CB-GFX
Shading (OpenGL Hardware Lighting) : 700 CB-GFX

OpenGL Speedup: 4.40

****************************************************



IT GOT KILLED!!!!!!!

But the day i use windows again....... hehe ..... likely

Try this benchmark
XP vs OSX
hmmmm......

The PowerBook stil wins in my opinion.

But people..... wait till the PowerBook's have the same chips as the ThinkPads. That will be a good day

I HAVE TO WAIT TILL THE 29/12 Until i can benchmark my QUAD.... Wonder hat the shading will look like with the Quadro in it. Interesting.... Or even the 7800
 
please help my brain

i figured this would be the best place to post this question.

the old g5 PM: each processor had it's own link to the system bus. so two processors, two buses, right? the ratio between cores:system links is 1:1.

new dual core g5 PM: 1 dual core proc has 1 link to the system bus. now instead of each core having a link, the ratio between cores:system links is 2:1.

is my logic right here? is this the right systems design? i am by no means an expert, but i do remember my fractions and if the system communication is how i remember it, isn't a dual core g5 at similar clocks as a single core not much to write home about (comparatively speaking)? not the best worded question, but i think i get my point across.
 
Chrissyboy said:
Hi Pie, & all - you can compare Cinebench results for many systems here:

http://www.3dfluff.com/mash/cbtop.php

In summary, the rendering score is excellent, only beaten by the Quad Opterons, it beats the Quad Xeon which is nice :p

However the OpenGL score is disappointing to say the least - no problem if you're not involved in 3D apps (or games...) but if you are, the score quoted here is roughly the same as a G5 Dual with a GeForce 6800 Ultra - or a Pentium M Centrino (ie, a laptop :eek: ) running a Radeon 9000 M. Oh dear...

C
Click to expand...

As you can see from the list, when comparing OpenGL performance between Windows an Mac OSX boxes with similar graphic cards, the Windows boxes are about 2x faster. It's a known problem that OpenGL is way better optimized on Windows. No hardware in the world will help you there.

regards
Andy
 
Any doubts I had on the quads are fading fast. I'm going to get one with the 7800 graphics card as soon as they're shipping - not really wanting to wait all that time - been there before and its a pain. And a week or two won't make that much difference to me, anyway.

D
 
Mr. Anderson said:
Any doubts I had on the quads are fading fast. I'm going to get one with the 7800 graphics card as soon as they're shipping - not really wanting to wait all that time - been there before and its a pain. And a week or two won't make that much difference to me, anyway.

D
Click to expand...

I agree, the 7800GT sounds like the best all-around option, but for the sake of time I'm sticking to the 6600 for now. Time is a factor for me, and as of tonight the Apple store is sticking to the following shipping schedules:

6600 = 2-3 weeks (or apparently, NOW in the UK)
7800 = 6-8 weeks
4500 = 3-4 weeks

I think the 7800GT will make a great upgrade further down the line.

Sorry if this is OT. Still wondering: has anyone else received their Quad or been given an updated shipping date?
 
ANIM8R said:
I think the 7800GT will make a great upgrade further down the line.
Click to expand...

For me, its going to be easier to get everything at once (extra memory as well, but not through apple) - and if the delay for the 7800 is still several weeks by the end of December, I might be ordering it anyway. We'll see.

D
 
Macrumors said:


One of our Wales UK-based members has reported receiving his Power Mac G5 Quad earlier in the week, and has run a preliminary set of Xbench benchmarks on it. While full details are in the forum thread, the overall score for the machine with 3 GB RAM running Mac OS X 10.4.2 weighs in at 151.86.
Click to expand...
Oh I just read this and omg, Apple, IBM, and AMD, took the same route - HyperTransport =D. Way to go guys. You know how technology works. As for Intel, you're pathetic.... I mean I'll buy an IiMac or an IiBook or IPM or IPB or IMM - (Intel = I
MM = Mac-Mini (don't forget the - )) - not for the purpose of Intel, but keep an Apple close to my heart.
For all of those who can see ? you know what I mean:
???||???||???||?||||||???
?||?||?||?||?||?||?||||||?|||||
???||???||???||?||||||???
?||?||?||||||?|||||||?||||||?||||
?||?||?||||||?|||||||???||???
 
b.k.jackson said:
For comparison, my PowerBook (15" Alu) 1.25 G4 got a 102.80

Brian
Click to expand...

note the xbench 1.2 has recalibrated the 100 benchmark from xbench 1.13

(from a g4x2 @800Mhz to a g5x2 @2Ghz)

so my 1.8x2 g5 went from 190 to 62
 
Brian Hickman said:
Not possible...here is what my 15' 1.25GHz PB scored...

Results 43.91
System Info
Xbench Version 1.2
System Version 10.4.3 (8F46)
Physical RAM 1024 MB
Model PowerBook5,2
Processor PowerPC G4 @ 1.25 GHz
L1 Cache 32K (instruction), 32K (data)
L2 Cache 512K @ 1.25 GHz
Bus Frequency 167 MHz
Video Card ATY,RV350M10
Drive Type Hitachi HTS548080M9AT00
CPU Test 51.89
GCD Loop 108.18 5.70 Mops/sec
Floating Point Basic 34.77 826.12 Mflop/sec
vecLib FFT 72.96 2.41 Gflop/sec
Floating Point Library 39.41 6.86 Mops/sec
Thread Test 54.73
Computation 53.50 1.08 Mops/sec, 4 threads
Lock Contention 56.02 2.41 Mlocks/sec, 4 threads
Memory Test 32.18
System 35.62
Allocate 118.06 433.57 Kalloc/sec
Fill 32.30 1570.46 MB/sec
Copy 22.33 461.20 MB/sec
Stream 29.34
Copy 28.76 594.01 MB/sec [altivec]
Scale 27.65 571.25 MB/sec [altivec]
Add 30.60 651.78 MB/sec [altivec]
Triad 30.56 653.73 MB/sec [altivec]
Quartz Graphics Test 58.45
Line 51.92 3.46 Klines/sec [50% alpha]
Rectangle 59.54 17.78 Krects/sec [50% alpha]
Circle 60.42 4.93 Kcircles/sec [50% alpha]
Bezier 67.90 1.71 Kbeziers/sec [50% alpha]
Text 54.89 3.43 Kchars/sec
OpenGL Graphics Test 68.24
Spinning Squares 68.24 86.56 frames/sec
User Interface Test 36.62
Elements 36.62 168.05 refresh/sec
Disk Test 31.54
Sequential 54.12
Uncached Write 51.69 31.74 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write 47.45 26.85 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read 72.42 21.19 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read 50.81 25.54 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Random 22.25
Uncached Write 7.92 0.84 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write 41.01 13.13 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read 63.60 0.45 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read 74.39 13.80 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Click to expand...

Here is the scores I got from XBench with my iMac G5:

Results 139.58
System Info
Xbench Version 1.1.3
System Version 10.4.3 (8F46)
Physical RAM 1536 MB
Model PowerMac8,2
Processor PowerPC G5 @ 2.00 GHz
L1 Cache 64K (instruction), 32K (data)
L2 Cache 512K @ 2.00 GHz
Bus Frequency 667 MHz
Video Card ATY,RV351
Drive Type Maxtor 7Y250M0
CPU Test 160.88
GCD Loop 95.18 3.72 Mops/sec
Floating Point Basic 287.55 1.04 Gflop/sec
AltiVec Basic 134.72 3.91 Gflop/sec
vecLib FFT 164.01 2.55 Gflop/sec
Floating Point Library 279.76 11.20 Mops/sec
Thread Test 84.17
Computation 57.40 774.94 Kops/sec, 4 threads
Lock Contention 157.70 1.98 Mlocks/sec, 4 threads
Memory Test 218.61
System 250.99
Allocate 482.59 314.79 Kalloc/sec
Fill 330.82 2633.37 MB/sec
Copy 145.82 729.12 MB/sec
Stream 193.63
Copy 168.33 1230.49 MB/sec [G5]
Scale 169.42 1250.34 MB/sec [G5]
Add 217.87 1394.37 MB/sec [G5]
Triad 236.69 1446.18 MB/sec [G5]
Quartz Graphics Test 153.05
Line 144.99 3.69 Klines/sec [50% alpha]
Rectangle 153.40 10.79 Krects/sec [50% alpha]
Circle 162.00 3.73 Kcircles/sec [50% alpha]
Bezier 140.99 1.53 Kbeziers/sec [50% alpha]
Text 167.03 2.72 Kchars/sec
OpenGL Graphics Test 138.73
Spinning Squares 138.73 97.08 frames/sec
User Interface Test 229.18
Elements 229.18 73.71 refresh/sec
Disk Test 106.69
Sequential 113.61
Uncached Write 148.56 61.93 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write 98.45 40.32 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read 116.86 18.50 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read 102.43 41.39 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Random 100.56
Uncached Write 119.74 1.80 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write 140.51 31.69 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read 77.29 0.51 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read 87.96 18.10 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Click to expand...

On the face of it, it seems that I did well in not "wasting" money for this "hot" new PM G5 Quad...
 
Chip NoVaMac said:
Here is the scores I got from XBench with my iMac G5:



On the face of it, it seems that I did well in not "wasting" money for this "hot" new PM G5 Quad...
Click to expand...


Run the Cinebench and see what you get....

D
 
Chip NoVaMac said:
Here is the scores I got from XBench with my iMac G5:



On the face of it, it seems that I did well in not "wasting" money for this "hot" new PM G5 Quad...
Click to expand...


Are you sure you ran the latest version of XBench?? If 100 is what a dual 2.0 should get, then you must not be running the latest version? My new imac scored a 72? (yours is a 2.0 with more ram, but that is pretty high) If you did run the newest Xbench, then you have a bad a$$ imac. :D
 
My Results

Results 63.88
System Info
Xbench Version 1.2
System Version 10.4.3 (8F46)
Physical RAM 1280 MB
Model PowerMac8,1
Processor PowerPC G5 @ 1.80 GHz
L1 Cache 64K (instruction), 32K (data)
L2 Cache 512K @ 1.80 GHz
Bus Frequency 600 MHz
Video Card GeForce FX 5200
Drive Type WDC WD1600JD-40GBB2
CPU Test 81.81
GCD Loop 64.91 3.42 Mops/sec
Floating Point Basic 89.51 2.13 Gflop/sec
vecLib FFT 92.40 3.05 Gflop/sec
Floating Point Library 87.01 15.15 Mops/sec
Thread Test 49.80
Computation 45.85 928.79 Kops/sec, 4 threads
Lock Contention 54.51 2.35 Mlocks/sec, 4 threads
Memory Test 63.53
System 62.00
Allocate 84.62 310.77 Kalloc/sec
Fill 66.55 3235.84 MB/sec
Copy 46.42 958.87 MB/sec
Stream 65.12
Copy 64.27 1327.42 MB/sec [G5]
Scale 64.56 1333.72 MB/sec [G5]
Add 66.13 1408.62 MB/sec [G5]
Triad 65.58 1402.88 MB/sec [G5]
Quartz Graphics Test 92.75
Line 82.76 5.51 Klines/sec [50% alpha]
Rectangle 82.44 24.61 Krects/sec [50% alpha]
Circle 82.15 6.70 Kcircles/sec [50% alpha]
Bezier 82.92 2.09 Kbeziers/sec [50% alpha]
Text 183.08 11.45 Kchars/sec
OpenGL Graphics Test 90.33
Spinning Squares 90.33 114.59 frames/sec
User Interface Test 62.26
Elements 62.26 285.75 refresh/sec
Disk Test 42.33
Sequential 57.56
Uncached Write 47.43 29.12 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write 40.91 23.15 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read 87.88 25.72 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read 79.48 39.95 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Random 33.47
Uncached Write 11.86 1.26 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write 72.17 23.11 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read 82.05 0.58 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read 109.27 20.28 MB/sec [256K blocks]
 
Mr. Anderson said:
Run the Cinebench and see what you get....

D
Click to expand...

There was a hint of sarcasm in my post since XBench is so poor overall. All about the version run and all. In fact when I ran this test I was running Safari, Calendar, iTunes, Address Book, Mail, Calculator, and Azureus!

nospleen said:
Are you sure you ran the latest version of XBench?? If 100 is what a dual 2.0 should get, then you must not be running the latest version? My new imac scored a 72? (yours is a 2.0 with more ram, but that is pretty high) If you did run the newest Xbench, then you have a bad a$$ imac. :D
Click to expand...

Note that the version of XBench is 1.1.3! It was what I had used to test the differences between my PB 1ghz and my newer iMac.

At least IMO a benchmark program should be such that one should not have to retest an older system with a newer version of the benchmark program.
 
nospleen said:
Are you sure you ran the latest version of XBench?? If 100 is what a dual 2.0 should get, then you must not be running the latest version? My new imac scored a 72? (yours is a 2.0 with more ram, but that is pretty high) If you did run the newest Xbench, then you have a bad a$$ imac. :D
Click to expand...

It's version 1.1.3..
 
yeah, Xbench 1.1.X is worthless right now. The Photoshop tests and Cinebench scores mean more.
However, this thread is so messed up right now. I mean, there's benchmarks of various sorts posted everywhere! No info on RAM or the type of video card provided by some. Who can compare systems well without this extra bit of info?

And why post about PB Xbench scores? We're trying to see who has the biggest peepee right now, nothing more. ;)

EricNau said:
Quite Simply: If I were to lose to them, I would never hear the end of it, but I need a way to prove to them that my computer is faster. I just switched 6 months ago and all of them are convinced that Apple's are slow ("Only 2.0 GHx?").
Click to expand...

Who cares.
 
nick007 said:
Using Photoshop CS or CS2 (or PS 7)
==================================================
1.) Download the test image from http://www.quicklance.com/test.jpg
2.) Save it to the computer and then open it up in Photoshop
3.) From there please apply a ‘radial blur’ with the settings at:
Amount = 100
Blur Method = Spin
Quality = Best
Using a stop watch / ps timer see how long it takes to apply this filter
I just want to see what these new cpu’s can really do.

Results:
iMac G5 1.8GHz, 1GB - 2:00
Athlon XP3200+, 1GB - 2:15
Athlon64 4000+, 1GB - 1:25
Dual 2.5 Running 10.4.2 with 2.5 GB RAM 40 seconds
PowerMac Dual 2.7 Dell 2405 FPW, 2.5 gigs of ram, Radeon 9650 42 seconds
Dual Core 2.0 GHz G5 with 2.5GB ram Photoshop CS2 47.4 seconds

Quad 2.5GHz G5 2.5GB RAM 10.4.3 22 seconds !!!!! It's an amazing huh??!!!
Click to expand...

My Powerbook G4 15" 1.67 took exactly 2:01 on the above instructions.
I am usung CS2 compared to the iMac G5 1.8GHz, 1GB - 2:00
and Athlon XP3200+, 1GB - 2:15 I feel pretty good about my Powerbook.

I am so glad I bought when I did.
But I will be ordering a Quad in December. BTW can someone explain to me the diff in ECC ram and Non-Ecc ram and why one is so much more expensive than the other?
 
nick007 said:
Using Photoshop CS or CS2 (or PS 7)
==================================================
1.) Download the test image from http://www.quicklance.com/test.jpg
2.) Save it to the computer and then open it up in Photoshop
3.) From there please apply a ‘radial blur’ with the settings at:
Amount = 100
Blur Method = Spin
Quality = Best
Using a stop watch / ps timer see how long it takes to apply this filter
I just want to see what these new cpu’s can really do.

Results:
iMac G5 1.8GHz, 1GB - 2:00
Athlon XP3200+, 1GB - 2:15
Athlon64 4000+, 1GB - 1:25
Dual 2.5 Running 10.4.2 with 2.5 GB RAM 40 seconds
PowerMac Dual 2.7 Dell 2405 FPW, 2.5 gigs of ram, Radeon 9650 42 seconds
Dual Core 2.0 GHz G5 with 2.5GB ram Photoshop CS2 47.4 seconds

Quad 2.5GHz G5 2.5GB RAM 10.4.3 22 seconds !!!!! It's an amazing huh??!!!
Click to expand...


Running Photoshop CS2 on my PC

Athlon X2 3800+ @ 2.1ghz took 39 sec , gimmie a few i will post at @2.5ghz


Update: 32.5 sec at @2.5ghz ...Imperial G5 Destroyer strikes again..hehe
 
EricNau said:
Has anybody on a PC tried this? If so, I am very curious to hear the results. I would love to compare my iMac with my friends PC's, but I don't want to risk them beating me. :eek: What are your thoughts? Should I risk it?
My iMac (see sig) scored 1:50 using this photoshop test
Click to expand...
Lie :)
 
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