Tiger Performance

Discussion in 'macOS' started by devman, Apr 13, 2005.

  1. devman macrumors 65816


    Apr 19, 2004

    Attached Files:

  2. Logik macrumors 6502a

    Apr 24, 2004
    sounds good for my 1.33ghz G4 15"... weee.. glad i preordered.. only 15 days.. WOOOO
  3. stoid macrumors 601


    Feb 17, 2002
    So long, and thanks for all the fish!

    I'm certainly looking forward to a nearly 33% speed increase across the board on my 1.25 Ghz PowerBook!! WooHOOO!!
  4. Daveway macrumors 68040


    Jul 10, 2004
    New Orleans / Lafayette, La
    [singing praises] My iMac will be awesome with Tiger! [/singing praises]

    Memory and UI management is great. 24% increase! I'm guessing this is from putting the UI on the vid card. But why is memory usage soo much better?
  5. PlaceofDis macrumors Core

    Jan 6, 2004
    Tiger looks more and more promising everyday, now to just get the money together so i can get it......
  6. SAukland macrumors member

    Jan 11, 2005
    I always welcome performace tweaks. :eek:
  7. Mechcozmo macrumors 603


    Jul 17, 2004
  8. anjaki macrumors member

    Mar 23, 2003
    Berlin, Germany
  9. JFreak macrumors 68040


    Jul 11, 2003
    Tampere, Finland
    me too, but i cannot unilize it until digidesign approves tiger for protools systems... i'm hoping it won't take so many months ;)
  10. Sky Blue Guest

    Sky Blue

    Jan 8, 2005
  11. Platform macrumors 68030


    Dec 30, 2004
    Nice, and this is just twaks from an OS and with all the thigs that it can do :rolleyes: wow :D
  12. RandomDeadHead macrumors 6502

    Feb 8, 2003
    Great, the crippled HD performance of the G5 iMac gets another hit with 10.4, COOL!

    Now a 7200 rpm drive on sata in the iMac G5 is only 3 points faster than a 5400 rpm drive on ata in a Pbook. Bottleneck anyone? :mad:
  13. bpd115 macrumors 6502a


    Feb 4, 2003
    Why exactly are the HDs in the iMac slower? I xbenched my fathers 1.42 G4 iMac and the 1.8 G5 and the HD scores were better on the G4...
  14. Hemingray macrumors 68030


    Jan 9, 2002
    Ha ha haaa!
    Yeah, figures they'd have all the major models except the one I'm interested in... :rolleyes:

    Oh well, I'd imagine there'd be some kind of benefit on the iBooks too, judging from the other scores (that graph leaves much to be desired!)
  15. mkrishnan Moderator emeritus


    Jan 9, 2004
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    You guys realize I'm going to have to pre-order Tiger just so I don't have to miss out on all the fun when you're all playing with it at the end of April, right? I guess I can count it as half an entertainment expense, and half a day-early birthday present. :)

    Devman, thanks for the table -- it's really interesting. I wish it had two columns for at least one kind of iBook, though. Preferably *looks around innocently* a G4/12"/800MHz/640MB. :D
  16. invaLPsion macrumors 65816


    Jan 2, 2004
    The Northlands
    Sorry to play Devil's Advocate, but those results were done with xBench and may not be entirely reliable. Looks good though! :D
  17. wowoah macrumors regular

    Jul 16, 2003
    Berkeley, CA
    Sorry, but I'm colorblind and I can't really read the chart. I'm guessing we're all whooping and hollering because there's some pretty big speed increases? I have a TiBook 1GHz, can I expect an increase too? :)
  18. daveL macrumors 68020


    Jun 18, 2003
    I agree. Xbench is junk, from my experience. For the G5 1.8, the Quartz and memory test results between the PM and iMac make no sense at all. BTW, I'm not saying you won't see a good performance boost from Tiger.
  19. FoxyKaye macrumors 68000


    Jan 23, 2004
    Livermore, Terre d'Ange, Bas Lag, Gallifrey
    Well, the closest thing on the chart to my system is the iMacDV, which posted teeny speed increases across the board.

    I guess it makes sense - teeny increases for a teeny processor, but it is heartening to see that Tiger seems to have avoided the WinXP bloat factor.

    Maybe I'll buy it after all... :)
  20. Soulstorm macrumors 68000


    Feb 1, 2005
    Actually, I believe the results, despite the fact that xBench is not so reliable. I have heard that many people have observed the same performance tweaks as the chart says.
  21. sorryiwasdreami macrumors 6502a


    Apr 24, 2004
    way out in the sticks
    Not bad! My system's IHA user interface will be 56.4% higher! Btw, what does IHA mean?
  22. invaLPsion macrumors 65816


    Jan 2, 2004
    The Northlands
    Yep, I'm sure we will see speed increases, hopefully in OpenGL! :)
  23. mkrishnan Moderator emeritus


    Jan 9, 2004
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    Here are descriptions of the tests, from XBench...I think *IHM* is the French version of the acronym HMI in English (Human-Machine Interface). The list starts at two because one is just a system profile. :)

  24. Greencardman macrumors 6502


    Apr 24, 2003
    Madison, WI
    I don't think that is listed, but the Ti 800 might be close. The bars measure each system twice, once in 10.3 and once 10.4, so the first two bars (starting at the top) are the iMac Dv 400, then the next two are the Ti 800, then the 5th one is the ibook (its the only one not measured twice), and then the 6th and 7th are the Alu 15" 1.25 and on and on and I'm too lazy to list them all. Panther is always listed on top (ie. the first and third bars) and Tiger on the bottom (ie. the second and fourth bars).

    If you can figure out what i just said, you're a genius, cause trying to describe a colored chart without using colors is freaking hard!
  25. andrewfee macrumors 6502

    Aug 29, 2004
    While it is XBench, I think if you're comparing the same system on a different os, the results should still be comparable; it's when you compare one machine to another that things start getting inconsistent.

    For example: I've now got a maxed out 17" 1.67GHz Powerbook, and compared to my iMac, in everything other than hard drive speed, it feels faster, and more responsive. I don't know what a point on the Disk access actually represents, but the two aren't very far apart; that's just plain wrong. The iMac G5's hard drive is very fast from my experience, and while the Powerbook's drive isn't "slow" it's the only thing I notice as holding the system back in some tasks.

    As for video performance; the Radeon 9700 Mobility is somewhere between a desktop 9600 Pro and XT in terms of performance; and should be much faster than the crappy iMac's nVidia 5200 card.

    For example, in World of Warcraft, while it still doesn't run as well as I feel it should on this machine, my Powerbook is at least 3x the performance of the iMac G5. I couldn't play the game on my iMac; I was getting 10-20 fps outdoors with everything on its lowest setting, and averaging about 14. (with some options actually lowered in the configuration file below what the ingame options minimum settings are)

    On my Powerbook I can run it at the same resolution, but with high texture details and I've yet to see the game drop below 20, and it's averaging about 27fps. If I turn up all the options to max other than the shaders and anisotropic filtering, I get 16-25 fps with an average of about 22 fps. (I prefer to sacrifice looks for a better framerate)

    Memory performance doesn't surprise me one bit, although I've not actually seen it affect performance adversely on the Powerbook. (but then it's hard to know when memory is the bottleneck)

    Those are some fantastic performance improvements all round though. While I don't think you can trust the figures with it being XBench, the percentage values will probably apply. As I said, I've got a maxed out 17" 1.67GHz Powerbook, so I should hopefully see as much as a 50% cpu speed increase. :eek:

    I'm hoping gaming performance comes up a bit though. While WoW runs ok, I'm really wanting to play Doom 3 on the Powerbook. Yes, it may not really advance the shooter genre like Half-Life 2 did, but I just love the atmosphere it has, and id games are just plain fun.

Share This Page