[UnixMac]

I just clipped this off from "another site".. it's a fresh benchmark done on a G5 2.5 w/6800DDL card... and if I read it correctly, there is a significant leap in performance over the last top of the line machine (more than what one would expect with a mere .5 more mhz)... could it be the graphics card? look at these numbers..(makes me wonder how much benefit a guy with the dual 2.0 could get from the new 6800?)

CINEBENCH 2003 v1
**************************************************
Processor : PowerMac G5
MHz : 2500
Number of CPUs : 2
Operating System : OS X 10.3.4
Graphics Card : GF 6800 Ultra DDL
Resolution : 2560x1600
Color Depth : millions
**************************************************
Rendering (Single CPU): 356 CB-CPU (Dual 2.0 = 219)
Rendering (Multiple CPU): 633 CB-CPU (Dual 2.0 = 401)

Multiprocessor Speedup: 1.78 (Dual 2.0 = 1.83)

Shading (CINEMA 4D): 335 CB-GFX (Dual 2.0 = 266)
Shading (OpenGL Software Lighting) : 995 CB-GFX (Dual 2.0 = 661)
Shading (OpenGL Hardware Lighting) : 1794 CB-GFX (Dual 2.0 = 1168)

OpenGL Speedup: 5.36 (Dual 2.0 = 4.40)

[OzarkMtn]

The Dual 2.0 GHz test were done with an older version of CineBench, so It most likely is not completely accurate.

[Eug Wanker]

Originally posted by OzarkMtn:
The Dual 2.0 GHz test were done with an older version of CineBench, so It most likely is not completely accurate.

Below is the 2.0 with the newer beta version of CineBench (which is the same one that was used to test the 2.5). The CPU render speeds have nothing to do with the graphics card. But you'll note that its numbers make much more sense for 2.0 vs. 2.5. In other words, the comparison from that other site is misleading.


Processor : G5
MHz : 2 GHz
Number of CPUs : 2
Operating System : Panther 7b85

Graphics Card : RADEON 9600 PRO
Resolution : 1024X768
Color Depth : 16.7 MILLION!!!!!!!!!

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

Rendering (Single CPU): 286 CB-CPU
Rendering (Multiple CPU): 516 CB-CPU

Multiprocessor Speedup: 1.80

Shading (CINEMA 4D) : 277 CB-GFX
Shading (OpenGL Software Lighting) : 758 CB-GFX
Shading (OpenGL Hardware Lighting) : 1387 CB-GFX

OpenGL Speedup: 5.01

[UnixMac]

Is cinabench hardware accelerated? or is it all CPU rendered?

Anyway, those numbers are more in line with a "25%" faster processor..

[reader50]

The clipped benchmarks come from a macrumors story. Please supply a link to the material's source when reposting. If you check the bottom of their page, that story is copyrighted.

I believe it falls within fair use to repost a relevant excerpt, but the source should certainly be credited.

IANAL

[UnixMac]

Originally posted by reader50:
The clipped benchmarks come from a macrumors story. Please supply a link to the material's source when reposting. If you check the bottom of their page, that story is copyrighted.

I believe it falls within fair use to repost a relevant excerpt, but the source should certainly be credited.

IANAL

I'll keep that in mind.. didnt't realize that it was copyrighted. I am a member of many sites (as I am sure many here are) and didn't intend to steel that info. So if I were to state next time that "on Macrumors, I read.... etc..." and provide the link would that work?

[reader50]

Sorry if it sounded like I'd said you stole anything, we all repost snippets here and there, and it is perfectly legal fair use. I'm not even certain that a source link is required.

It just felt like a breach of 'net etiquette. Nothing so elaborate is needed, just stick a little link at the bottom or something.

link

[Big Mac]

I suspected something was amiss with that comparison, so thank you for confirming the disparity, Eug Wanker.

[eddiecatflap]

this is EXACTLY the mac I want to get

or is it worth waiting for PCI-express ??

[Spliffdaddy]

PCI Express might offer a potential future upgrade path for the video subsystem.

I used to drool over a pair of 3DFX Voodoo2's in SLI. Had a little cable that connected the 2 (PCI-interface) cards together. Somehow or another, this allowed each GPU to only have to render every other line of resolution - effectively cutting their workload in half (in some instances). Anyhow, that was state of the art before the AGP interface came into the picture.

Cross your fingers and hope Apple incorporates nVidia's SLI scheme. Mostly, it's done in hardware that's already on the card itself. From what I understand, software can provide improved load-balancing and whatnot - but the software doesn't seem to be a big part of the SLI equation. This bodes well for Apple, who won't need to provide much (if any) additional work in order to add SLI functionality.

In other words, if one of the "SLI-enabled" PCI-Express nVidia cards is offered by Apple (the 6800 might work, look for the SLI header - see pic below), chances are good that adding another similar card (along with the plug-in SLI bridge) will yield SLI functionality - even if Apple doesn't support it or even care. As long as the SLI's heart is in hardware, it should be a no-brainer.

Multi-GPU for your multiprocessor G5.

Sounds like a plan.

images from this article> http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/article/1728/







^ that's bad-ass

[eddiecatflap]

over at macforums they all agreed that a 2.5 w/ a 6800 card will be more than enough for the next 2-3 years

even IF agp goes awol and pc-e takes over

if only to keep up with the os

i don't use any heavy duty programs anyway

the 2.5 seems to be the best vfm mac in a LONG time

[johnnydr87]

i wonder what the scores would be if they *both* had the 6800....in other words, is the 2.5 ghz processor even doing anything..lol

[FlammableYurt]

As Eug Wanker said, rendering doesn't utilize the graphics card at all, so you could have a 5 year old card in there and the results should still be the same. 3D rendering is entirely driven by CPU.

[UnixMac]

Originally posted by eddiecatflap:
this is EXACTLY the mac I want to get

or is it worth waiting for PCI-express ??

I am betting (to the tune of $7000+) that this is going to be the best Mac for a good long while.. the 90n process is reaching the limits of computer engineering technology for the time being, and the 6800 is also a major step forward inj GPUs, not just a small step... This is like the leap we took when the Dual processor Macs first hit the scene 5 years back, it was just small increments from there forward, and I would argue that today, the increments are going to be even smaller.

If you want to top speed, it's not going to get much faster anytime in the next 12 months. I also believe that with the PCI-X slots already in this model, the option for doing a PCI SLI setup is always available later IF YOU REALLY NEED it. I doubt whether I (an avid 3D Gamer) will need much more than the 6800 for a few years.

IMHO

[Graymalkin]

For a real comparison you'll need to test a GF 6800 in one of the 2GHz G5s. Obviously the GF 6800 is going to be faster than the stock Radeon 9600 but by how much is the real question. The OpenGL Hardware Lighting test in Cinebench 2003 is pretty much entirely video card dependent. The original 1.6GHz and 1.8GHz G5s had identical OGLHT results despite a 13% difference in processor speed because they came with identical stock video cards. The GF6800 will give a nice speed boost to existing G5s when it comes to GPU bound operations, especially when compared to the GF5200 Ultra and Radeon 9600.

Hopefully with Apple's move back to DVI interfaces for their monitors prices will come down on video cards for PowerMacs. It's ridiculous that a Radeon 9800 for a PowerMac costs almost twice what a PC card does. The GF6800 is even more poorly priced compared to the PC version than the Radeons.

[Dennis the Phantom Menace]

Actually the Geforce 6800 ultra cards for PCs start off on pricewatch.com at $540. Apple is selling their's for $599. That's not that bad of a mark up.