G5 Speed Tests

Originally posted by jhawk28

The majority is the PC, and despite how Apple and AMD try to make out that mhz doesn't matter, it does.
Click to expand...

yes..yes...
tell that to centrinos :)
 
[offtopic]
Why do I always have the idea that some people wish Apple was immune to critique. Mindbends post expresses his concerns, mentioning 2 sources that confirm his concerns in his post. Perfectly valid. The reactions here to his post make want to not come back to this forum because of the occusing vibes.

Posts like some of those from Hulkaros, RacerX and tsizKEIK seem to me to be slightly immature. I agree with jhawk28 that these people just nullify their own argument, which is a shame because Hulkaros and RacerX do have good things to say.

I think we should embrace the critique and remain open to improvement. If Apple can't deliver then we shouldn't act as if it's not an issue...
[/offtopic]

Even though it's early and it really is hard to judge how the G5 will perform I think it definitely has potential to soar in speed but we'll just have to wait for real world benchmarks to know.

I say real world benchmarks because it's there that it will make a difference in productivity, the whole platform not just the processor. I think I agree with Mindbend that that's the sort of benchmarks we need, that's also the sort of BM's that will build a business case for managers and other decision makers to purchase the G5.
 
Hmm... Just trying to stay in my track here. I've been using Macs ever since I've been using computers (or almost). The Mac was always the computer of a smaller group, but I've been attracted to it in 1987 as much as I was in the nineties and in this new century. There was a time when the Mac _clearly_ was a slower performer than a PC. My main argument for the Mac back then (not too long ago...) was that I still get my work done faster. I'll stick to that. Bring me the fastest available Windows machine in a nice package (and that won't be cheap, either), and I'll still get my work done faster on any old G4. In fact, I'm still using my iBook as my main machine for design purposes. It does its job well, and although I know I could have a faster machine (1.25 GHz G4 15" PowerBook sounds just swell to me), the iBook/800 is still too young to be replaced - for several reasons.

Now, Apple has released the G5. The Dual 2 GHz G5 is a fast machine, no doubt about that. Does it score better or worse than an expensive Wintel PC? What do I care? I get my work done faster on a Mac, anyway, so even if this or that bench tells me a PC would be faster, it wouldn't really matter to me. The _IMPORTANT_ thing is: The G5 _can_ keep up with the fastest PCs out there in benchmarks, whether they are real world tests or just raw processing tests. This wasn't possible a few months ago.

The only computer that is a competition to the Dual 2 GHz G5 right now - for me - is the Single 1.8 GHz G5. And I guess we _can_ compare those and we _can_ name a winner.
 
Originally posted by elspif
[offtopic]
Why do I always have the idea that some people wish Apple was immune to critique. Mindbends post expresses his concerns, mentioning 2 sources that confirm his concerns in his post. Perfectly valid. The reactions here to his post make want to not come back to this forum because of the occusing vibes.

Posts like some of those from Hulkaros, RacerX and tsizKEIK seem to me to be slightly immature. I agree with jhawk28 that these people just nullify their own argument, which is a shame because Hulkaros and RacerX do have good things to say.

I think we should embrace the critique and remain open to improvement. If Apple can't deliver then we shouldn't act as if it's not an issue...
[/offtopic]

Even though it's early and it really is hard to judge how the G5 will perform I think it definitely has potential to soar in speed but we'll just have to wait for real world benchmarks to know.

I say real world benchmarks because it's there that it will make a difference in productivity, the whole platform not just the processor. I think I agree with Mindbend that that's the sort of benchmarks we need, that's also the sort of BM's that will build a business case for managers and other decision makers to purchase the G5.
Click to expand...

The problem is that there are NO valid benchmarks for G5... NOT YET! Of course we get some signs of what the performance MAY BE as of now but not in the not so distant future!

That's why I keep repeating:
"EVERYTHING that the G5 based Macs brought us is A LOT faster than the G4 based Macs but it will take us some months before we will understand the real benefits let alone experience them... "

The problem with the logic of people who are trying TOO HARD to be "open minded", "realistic", whatever regarding the G4, G5 and Apple in general, is that if we were listening to them we would switch to the Dark Side no questions asked... You know what? Some times you onle need to have faith! ;)

PS. Personally, I would not even dare to call RacerX's postings here immature or something... RacerX is one of the most knowledgeable people here in www.macosx.com not only for Apple stuff but computing in general... What I believe about him also is that he too sometimes see people here blasting off Apple without not even understanding what they are writing about :p

As for tsizKEIK, like me, he is from Greece too! And I think we all know that we, greeks, are passionate about the things we love LOADS MORE than the next guy and YES we ::love:: our favorite company which is :) of course!
 
Strange... the MacWorld journalist I met today (and then spent most of my time with when at the presss room) told me they didn't receive the 2.2GHz on time to publish tests...
 
Fryke,

I agree for the most part. That is the mantra I have been running with for years and still believe.

However (there's always a "but", isn't there?), when you render After Effects composites, Lightwave renders, Final Cut renders and Photoshop processing all day, every day, I'd be stupid to ignore the (previously true) simple fact that to some extent I'm pissing money away waiting for that stuff to finish. There's a reason why virtually all render farms are non-Mac. Looks like that's about to change thanks to Pixar, at least, but still, my point stands.

I have no interest in disspelling the G5 magic. I am only interested in facts. What I'm actually hoping for is that we can find conclusive proof that the G5 really does match or beat the competition across the board and not just in obscure tests.

Some early indications (Photoshop loaded with RAM, Final Cut optimized for G5), look quite impressive. Others are not quite so impressive (one second gain in iMovie render).

Can't wait for the data to start trickling in.
 
Originally posted by mindbend
There's a reason why virtually all render farms are non-Mac. Looks like that's about to change thanks to Pixar, at least, but still, my point stands.
Click to expand...

Just FYI...

Pixar is replacing their workstations (a combination of SGI and IBM workstations) with Macs and their render farm (originally Sun servers) with Xeon based servers running Linux.

This is not as much an affirmation of the superiority of any given platform as it is an affirmation of Pixar's confidence in their software on any given platform.

They may put out movies every so often, but they are still a software company.

I wouldn't be surprised to see them change again in a year or two so they can show their software running on something else. Like Apple with WebObjects and Shake, when you have cross-platform software, it helps to show it running on some other platform in mission critical situations.
 
Racer, thanks for the Pixar info.

Since I would like this thread to become a repository for G5 speed data, here is another link (G5 info at bottom):

http://www.barefeats.com/al15.html

I just wish they would post more detailed info as to exactly what is being tested as well as provide PC comparisons.

I have to say, the key areas in which I work just happen to work (Final Cut, Photoshop, After Effects) have gained the most speed in these early speed charts. Assuming they are somewhat accurate, I'm a happy camper.
 
Hulk, much thanks for the links.

Now THOSE are some links I can relate to. I'm officially convinced the G5 is king of Photoshop, which is a very good thing. Other sources indicate it may be the king of video processing as well. Another very good thing. The darned chip even plays demanding games at high frame rates. Bonus.

Audio processing was already shown as impressive at the G5 announcement show (MacWorld?). I can't max out CuBase as it is, so a G5 will only make it better.

Now for 3D. I still want to see what the G5 can do with Lightwave. I suspect it will be crippled by LW's garbage optimization for the Mac. Apple should buy out Maya (or LW) or similar.

Good info.
 
Originally posted by mindbend
Now for 3D. I still want to see what the G5 can do with Lightwave. I suspect it will be crippled by LW's garbage optimization for the Mac. Apple should buy out Maya (or LW) or similar.
Click to expand...

The very reason that you would have Apple buy Maya is the reason it is owned buy SGI (Alias is a subsidiary of Silicon Graphics Inc.), to make sure that Maya is optimized for their hardware.

I don't think SGI would be willing to give up the premier 3D graphics software as long as they are a hardware company whose sales revolve around selling hardware for 3D visualization.

As it stands, Apple is in a good position in this area (with the high end software that is) by owning Shake, by having a version of Maya that is feature equivalent with Maya for other platforms and now having RenderMan. The fact that they also have Final Cut Pro, and can run software like After Effects and Photoshop makes them that much more of a complete solution (the Mac is the only platform which can run all the software titles I listed). And on top of the performance of the G5s, Apple has thrown in the Pixlet codec (in 10.3).

As far as high end 3D and video production is concerned, Apple is in the best position of any company out there today (not that this area is going to make a difference in market share or anything like that).
 
You say that you cant max out Cubase SX,would you like to explane that?
What if you want to use say,16 midichannels of software instruments,64 voices each and as many fx on every channel for those instruments,can you do that?
I hope you can try this :)
 
Macfeel,

I should have clarified. I meant to say "I don't max out CuBase as it is" instead of "I can't...".

My CuBase needs are pretty modest. Mostly MIDI tracks with a few audio tracks and not loads of effects. G4 has no trouble at all with that.

I'm quite sure CB would bog down real quick if I tried your suggestion. :)
 
who cares which ones the king...
...over the years intels might be faster 1 year, the next AMDs or Powermacs might be faster.
what i consider more imporant is which one lasts more, and which one is generally easier to use.
 
Apple should buy 3D Studio Max. Why has this software giant still not come to the Mac?

I agree with Fryke in that it's not about benchmarks but about getting your work done that counts. Remember, Mindbend, you can always go online while your waiting for your Photoshop filters to complete, your Lightwave scenes to render, etc. all at the same time.
 
Hulk. You the man.

That was the best, most informative, comparison yet. That was preciesly what I was looking for as well as what I optimistically expected.

There is no longer any reason for a Mac owner to feel as though they are being leapfrogged (which is how I have felt for the last couple of years).

One thing that they didn't even overtly point out (even though you can figure it out by reading the specs) is the simple fact that the G5 is running at 2/3 the Xeon "speed". Any PC user who reads that and puts two and two together should realize that this is only the beginning. If the G5 is performing like that without 64-bit optimized code, without optimized applications, without an optimized OS and at 2/3 the CPU rate. Holy crap is that thing gonna fly over the coming months/years.

All my G5 concerns are officially over. I will purchase the next speed-bumped model as soon as it's available (January?).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top