 |
 |
Testing apps for Processor upgrades?
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Salt Lake City, UT USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
I just ordered a new procesor for my G4 Sawtooth, It should be here in the next few days. I'm looking for some apps to test speed differences. Recommendations?
Please list where to get them, if you could.
Thanks
|
|
2008 iMac 3.06 Ghz, 2GB Memory, GeForce 8800, 500GB HD, SuperDrive
8gb iPhone on Tmobile
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Here
Status:
Offline
|
|
I like Xbench. Xbench: Comprehensive Macintosh Benchmarking It breaks down performance item by item, so you can compare just exactly how much better your CPU performance is. Also, it has a function to submit your results to their webstie, so that you can compare your results to other Macs.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Administrator  Join Date: May 2000
Location: California
Status:
Online
|
|
Any distributed computing client will max out the CPU(s). It is rumored that crunching for Team MacNN produces a higher-quality test, but we have not proven that yet.
Folding@home
SETI@home
Predictor@home
Einstein@home
There are many others available. Inquire in the Team Forum for help and further details.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status:
Offline
|
|
Xbench is poo.
Try the torture test in the OSX port of Prime95.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Here
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by mduell
Xbench is poo.
Try the torture test in the OSX port of Prime95.
I didn't know that there was an OSX port of Prime95. I used to use my p4 as a room heater using that test. (not kidding at all).
Xench, however, is not poo.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Tuoder
Xench, however, is not poo.
The consistency of Xbench is very low. Also sometimes the results are nonsense, like half of the Xbench results on this page.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Here
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by mduell
The consistency of Xbench is very low. Also sometimes the results are nonsense, like half of the Xbench results on this page.
The problem was with Quartz, not with Xbench.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderator  Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Arizona
Status:
Offline
|
|
Xbench is poo.
Anything that can have its results affected by as much as 30% with something as simple as a reboot is poo. And it's not just the Quartz tests that are crap, it's everything else from hard drive to CPU.
|
|
I like chicken
I like liver
Meow Mix, Meow Mix
Please de-liv-er
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: If I tellz ya, then I gotsta killz ya !
Status:
Offline
|
|
I thought the problem w/ xBench was OpenGL-rendering-related, but yea, it is POO, IMO. A reboot shouldnt give 30% variances, nor should two 100% identical machines give different results.......
|
|
Signatures are ugly. Bitchy women are ugly......YOU do the math :)
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Tuoder
The problem was with Quartz, not with Xbench.
And that causes the nonsense disk benchmark results how?
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Here
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by mduell
And that causes the nonsense disk benchmark results how?
I was speaking of your specific example of why you think Xbench sucks. It was faulty.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Tuoder
The problem was with Quartz, not with Xbench.
Originally Posted by Tuoder
I was speaking of your specific example of why you think Xbench sucks. It was faulty.
Look at the disk test.
I don't see anything immediately wrong with the Quartz benchmark on the same page, but shouldn't a benchmark designed for an operating system work correctly in that operating system?
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: California
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by mduell
Look at the disk test.
I don't see anything immediately wrong with the Quartz benchmark on the same page, but shouldn't a benchmark designed for an operating system work correctly in that operating system?
X-Bench is up to 1.3. Perhaps the issue (if there is one) has been fixed?
|
|
20" iMac C2D/2.4GHz 3GB RAM 10.6.8 (10H549)
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Here
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top
