fps in full screen mode with itunes

boi

boi

official breaker of macs.
post your fps in full screen mode with the itunes visualization plugin. post your computer type and itunes version too. i'm just trying to see how bad mine is compared to others.

? 13fps, iMac DV 600, 128 ATI RAGE, OS X.1, 768 mb ram, itunes 2.
 
14-17fps iTunes 1
iMac DV SE 1999 128MB RAM Rage 128 8MB

7fps iTunes 2
Beige G3 MT 266 Rev A Rage II+ 2MB

The iMac is my moms. I am adding a Radeon Mac 32MB @christmas. I would get the 8500 (when it comes down in price), but it won't come out in PCI from what I understand.
 
With "faster but rougher" option checked: 13-19 fps mostly hovering around 17

Without "faster but rougher" (slow and smooth?): 10-12 fps

Both full screen while playing music. iTunes 1. iBook 500Mhz 512mb ram.
 
hit 'f'.
hit 'h' to see what stuff does. there's also other stuff you can do. push 'q' 'a' and 'z' to see what they do! ^_^
 
with the 'high' quality settings

lo: 18
hi: 22
avg: 19-20


OSX 10.1 5L14
iTunes 2.0f13
DP 533 G4
640MB RAM
RADEON 32 DDR
Mitsubishsi 19" Diamond Pro 900u
 
Full Screen, default settings (could not find high/low quality setting!)

No music
27-30 fps

Music
15-28 (avg 22)

Medium window, Explorer open in background

No music
27-30

Music
14-16

No music while moving window around
9-10

Music playing while moving window around
6-7

These numbers are exactly why I'm still unimpressed with OS X's speed. iTune's basically a screen saver for crying out loud and it's nowhere near as smooth as, say, Unreal Tournament, which has a lot more going on.

Also, so much for multitasking, notice the fps drops when moving the window and with apps open in the background.

iTunes performance=lame. Even on the DP machines, the fps sucks. Sheesh.

Now watch, I'll get blasted for daring to criticize the mighty OS X. IMHO, none of us should settle for this kind of performance in today's machines. If I had dropped $2500 for a DP machine and its own built-in screen saver/music player couldn't even hold steady at 30 fps no matter what on a multi-tasking, multi-threaded OS, I'd be pissed. I'll forgive my iMac, cuz I never expected great performance from it.

-------------

iMac DV 400
640 RAM
OS X 10.1
 
It's ridiculous. I'm running THE MOST POWERFUL MAC MONEY CAN BUY and I get around 18 fps in full screen itunes. That's just crappy. I get FAR FAR FAR higher fps in quake 3 (but those are still much too low).
 
Dual800G4 - 1GB RAM, GeForce3 - Tops out a 29 fps in Full screen mode (1280x1024) with iTunes 2. On my 2nd monitor which is run by a PCI Radeon, it tops out at 16fps. So it seems your Graphics card is as important as your CPU in iTunes frame rates....
 
my dad found a bug in itunes 2

When he plugs his rio 500 in it shows the first track as each track on the rio. Its wierd his first track is Beatles - Help, and it appears on all 16 tracks.

=[ hope apple fixes that by the release date
 
I don't know if anyone else knows about this, but I don't think so because there are people complaining here about having state of the art macs with only 29fps in itunes. While it's running, press T. Apparently there is a frame rate cap of 30 fps - pressing T toggles this on and off. I doubt this will help anyone that is getting 6 fps, but for those of you with the Dual 800 G4's, you might want to turn the caps off.
 
I get about 2 to 4 more fps when I play uncompressed audio (ie, my pink floyd, which is a wopping 2gigs or so of aiff files)

I'll post more info later, I'm on my linux box with an 8meg video card and Xf86 4.x. I'm lucky to actually see anything move ;-) ok, its not that bad, but visualization for xmms really bites on this configuration.
 
this is why you shouldnt buy a mac, i have an emachines(cheap walmart pc) with a sempron 3100+(1.8ghz) and a bfg(nvidia)8500gt-512mb running vista and i get 77fps on normal and 86(vsync)on faster but rougher display
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top