[MrNo]

A friend of mine got his 900 today and I run xbench on it right away. It had only 128MB RAM and it scored 62 while my 3 months old 800 with 384MB RAM scored only 54.
The new 900 is also much lighter then the 800, but that's probably because they used different type of plastic for the case.
I wonder if 900 got better score only because it's a 100MHz faster or did Apple maybe use a faster HD or an HD with a larger buffer.
However 800's look better then 900's

[Peter]

if the 900 uses the same plastic as the 700, wouldn't that make the 700 and 800 very closely matched?
I doubt its the plastic, perhaps the 100Mhz makes a larger difference?

[daSilVetZ]

If you get to a chance to rerun that xBench, could you post the detail of it (subsections like CPU, HD, ect..) please? Thx.

[MrNo]

I'll try to post the info as soon as I can, and I ment lighter in weight because of plastic not speed javascript:smilie('')

[iamnid]

I wouldn't mind seeing the results either as xlr8yourmac.com and barefeats.com seem to be dragging their heels on this one. I'd love to see benchmarks compared to the 12" powerbook as well.

[MrNo]

Here is the xbench info, however this time it scored a point less then before

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Results 60.18
System Info
Xbench Version 1.0
System Version 10.2.4
Physical RAM 128 MB
Model PowerBook4,3
Processor PowerPC G3 @ 900 MHz
Version 750FX v2.3
L1 Cache 32K (instruction), 32K (data)
L2 Cache 512K @ 900 MHz
Bus Frequency 100 MHz
Video Card ATY,RageM7
Drive Type FUJITSU MHS2040AT D
CPU Test 99.36
GCD Recursion 90.94 3.55 Mops/sec
Floating Point Basic 83.16 280.34 Mflop/sec
Floating Point Library 139.39 6.26 Mops/sec
Thread Test 70.23
Computation 56.93 458.66 Kops/sec, 4 threads
Lock Contention 91.64 1.15 Mlocks/sec, 4 threads
Memory Test 35.08
System 30.08
Allocate 170.36 57.44 Kalloc/sec
Fill 24.49 140.43 MB/sec
Copy 18.86 94.28 MB/sec
Stream 42.06
Copy 44.03 192.56 MB/sec
Scale 44.07 192.26 MB/sec
Add 39.44 179.45 MB/sec
Triad 41.09 180.56 MB/sec
Quartz Graphics Test 90.77
Line 84.36 2.15 Klines/sec [50% alpha]
Rectangle 94.71 6.66 Krects/sec [50% alpha]
Circle 100.18 2.31 Kcircles/sec [50% alpha]
Bezier 94.58 1.03 Kbeziers/sec [50% alpha]
Text 82.50 1.34 Kchars/sec
OpenGL Graphics Test 62.92
Spinning Squares 62.92 44.03 frames/sec
User Interface Test 70.16
Elements 70.16 23.87 refresh/sec
Disk Test 44.77
Sequential 41.92
Uncached Write 35.27 15.39 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write 38.95 15.84 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read 58.53 9.22 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read 41.14 17.75 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Random 48.04
Uncached Write 49.74 0.75 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write 44.47 10.20 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read 50.47 0.33 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read 47.93 9.40 MB/sec [256K blocks]

[Peter]

Originally posted by MrNo:
...and I ment lighter in weight because of plastic not speed javascript:smilie('')

ah lol

[MrNo]

Check these pics out.
from left to right
iBook 800, iBook 900, Ti 1GHz

http://www.geocities.com/nightclassteam/3.JPG

http://www.geocities.com/nightclassteam/5.JPG

[Parrot]

Here's my xbench results for my iBook 800

(I'll be getting my new iBook 900/60G is a few days!!)

Results 50.49
System Info
Xbench Version 1.0
System Version 10.2.5
Physical RAM 640 MB
Model PowerBook4,3
Processor PowerPC G3 @ 800 MHz
Version 750FX v2.2
L1 Cache 32K (instruction), 32K (data)
L2 Cache 512K @ 800 MHz
Bus Frequency 100 MHz
Video Card ATY,RageM7
Drive Type IBM-IC25N030ATCS04-0
CPU Test 84.44
GCD Recursion 75.42 2.95 Mops/sec
Floating Point Basic 71.06 239.51 Mflop/sec
Floating Point Library 122.02 5.48 Mops/sec
Thread Test 60.69
Computation 49.52 398.92 Kops/sec, 4 threads
Lock Contention 78.38 983.99 Klocks/sec, 4 threads
Memory Test 29.27
System 25.26
Allocate 145.85 49.17 Kalloc/sec
Fill 24.91 142.84 MB/sec
Copy 13.94 69.70 MB/sec
Stream 34.79
Copy 34.92 152.69 MB/sec
Scale 34.96 152.55 MB/sec
Add 34.12 155.25 MB/sec
Triad 35.19 154.64 MB/sec
Quartz Graphics Test 73.78
Line 78.73 2.00 Klines/sec [50% alpha]
Rectangle 75.06 5.28 Krects/sec [50% alpha]
Circle 90.03 2.08 Kcircles/sec [50% alpha]
Bezier 75.97 825.52 beziers/sec [50% alpha]
Text 57.21 932.50 chars/sec
OpenGL Graphics Test 54.82
Spinning Squares 54.82 38.36 frames/sec
User Interface Test 59.92
Elements 59.92 20.39 refresh/sec
Disk Test 36.15
Sequential 37.54
Uncached Write 32.29 14.09 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write 32.19 13.10 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read 77.98 12.28 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read 31.55 13.61 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Random 34.85
Uncached Write 22.43 0.34 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write 35.98 8.25 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read 51.96 0.34 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read 43.19 8.47 MB/sec [256K blocks]

[Eug]

I wouldn't mind seeing the results either as xlr8yourmac.com and barefeats.com seem to be dragging their heels on this one. I'd love to see benchmarks compared to the 12" powerbook as well.

Not a 12", but for reference, the 15" TiBook SD is about 90.

[andretan]

Actually, what is the reason for such low benchmarks?

I have a iBook 700 combo (20gig, 16mb vram) that I bought in Nov 2002. I have a total of 256MB of ram and when I ran Xbench, it gave me a score of 51.40

I'd like to know what are the factors that affect the score.

Thanks.

[bleee]

I'm pretty sure 640mb of ram in that 900Mhz would help alot

[milhouse]

My iBook 800 only scored ~54 running Xbench.
Not much more than my previous 700 (~51).
I was surprised especially since it has 32MB VRAM vs the 700's 16MB. RAM was/is maxed at 640 on both machines (the iBook needs another RAM slot...)

I OC'd it this weekend but only got 850MHz...I wonder what difference it makes..gonna Xbench it tonight and see.

[MrNo]

I removed the extra RAM from my iBook and run xbench then to see how would it compare with the 900. It scored only 1 point less then with 256MB of RAM more...

[wataru]

Originally posted by MrNo:
I removed the extra RAM from my iBook and run xbench then to see how would it compare with the 900. It scored only 1 point less then with 256MB of RAM more...

Yeah, what XBench does doesn't really take up much RAM. It's when you're using many different apps over a long time that RAM really helps.

XBench tests a lot of good things, but it's not representative of a system under heavy load.

[dettociao]

Originally posted by wataru:
Yeah, what XBench does doesn't really take up much RAM. It's when you're using many different apps over a long time that RAM really helps.

XBench tests a lot of good things, but it's not representative of a system under heavy load.

My 12" PowerBook scored a ~71