Real world performance?

addisonaddison
Posted:
in macOS edited January 2014
I would like to know what the difference in real world performance is with Jaguar. We all know that the GUI is faster, but what about other tasks?



For instance take the same DV movie say a 5 minute clip and render it to quicktime in 10.1.3 and then in Jaguar what would be their relative rendering times?



[ 06-01-2002: Message edited by: Addison ]</p>

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 10
    sc_marktsc_markt Posts: 1,402member
    I'd like to know if anybody used Virtual PC in 10.2 and what kind of estimated performance gains they saw.
  • Reply 2 of 10
    kcmackcmac Posts: 1,051member
    Supposedly, Connectix is working on another update for VPC that will come out with Jaguar or slightly after to enhance speed, etc. I did not download the latest update because some feel it actually slowed down.
  • Reply 3 of 10
    ghost_user_nameghost_user_name Posts: 22,667member
    [quote]Originally posted by sc_markt:

    <strong>I'd like to know if anybody used Virtual PC in 10.2 and what kind of estimated performance gains they saw.</strong><hr></blockquote>Zero performance gains.



    Remember, apps typically won't take advantage of new technologies (sch as the speedier gcc 3.1) until they have been recompiled and updated for 10.2.
  • Reply 4 of 10
    sc_marktsc_markt Posts: 1,402member
    [quote]Originally posted by starfleetX:

    <strong>Zero performance gains.



    Remember, apps typically won't take advantage of new technologies (sch as the speedier gcc 3.1) until they have been recompiled and updated for 10.2.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Interesting. I would have thought that VPC would have naturally run faster on 10.2 since the grapics cpu was doing more work which would free up the microprocessor.



    Thx kcmac & starfleetX...
  • Reply 5 of 10
    addisonaddison Posts: 1,185member
    [quote]Originally posted by starfleetX:

    <strong>Zero performance gains.



    Remember, apps typically won't take advantage of new technologies (sch as the speedier gcc 3.1) until they have been recompiled and updated for 10.2.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    That's terrible. I 10.1 was a real boost over 10.0.3, but on this occasion you don't think we will see any gains other than the GUI :eek:



    I would have thought that 10.2 was another optomisation of the code that would immediatly benifit all of us.
  • Reply 6 of 10
    fluffyfluffy Posts: 361member
    Cocoa apps should see some speedup, as the messaging system has been optimized and the NS classes recompiled with gcc 3.1.
  • Reply 7 of 10
    ghost_user_nameghost_user_name Posts: 22,667member
    [quote]Originally posted by Addison:

    <strong>That's terrible.</strong><hr></blockquote>

    No, you misunderstand. I was specifically answering sc_markt's question regarding Virtual PC.



    Of course there are some "overall" speed improvements, most notably with gcc as I mentioned before, but it's difficult to find specific examples when you discount the GUI itself and its performance increase.
  • Reply 8 of 10
    airslufairsluf Posts: 1,861member
  • Reply 9 of 10
    gullivergulliver Posts: 122member
    [quote]Originally posted by starfleetX:

    <strong>Zero performance gains.



    Remember, apps typically won't take advantage of new technologies (sch as the speedier gcc 3.1) until they have been recompiled and updated for 10.2.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    I don´t agree!

    Run SETI@home and watch. When you set the screen to blank it runs appr. 10-15% faster. Obviously the 2D-graphics use quite some processor perfomance. If Quartz Extreme really transfers all 2D-calculation to the graphiccard, then Jaguar should be faster (at least with programs like SETI@home).
  • Reply 10 of 10
    ghost_user_nameghost_user_name Posts: 22,667member
    [quote]Originally posted by Gulliver:

    <strong>I don´t agree!</strong><hr></blockquote> <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />



    I swear... people here are getting dumber every day. Go back and re-read this thread.
Sign In or Register to comment.