or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › G5 1.6 & 1.8 unimpressive performance
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

G5 1.6 & 1.8 unimpressive performance

post #1 of 36
Thread Starter 
I just wandered into CompUSA here in San Rafael, CA to check out the new G5. They had a 1.6 & a 1.8 set up for people to play with. I just did one simple test: On both machines I fired up the CPU Monitor, opened a finder window & grabbed the resize tab in the lower right corner, doing a continuous resize for 10 seconds or so. In each case, that simple action pegged the meter at 100%. Lame. On the 1.8 machine I fired up the Apple System Profiler. Spinning beachball and the app took more than 30 seconds to produce its window. Uh huh. So this is the killer G5. Glad I decided to wait. So now the excuse is we are waiting for Panther? Apple seems to live from one excuse to the next. Obviously, they were stretching the hype to the max. These machines should have been duals across the line, for the price they are asking. I would be willing to bet the MWSF lineup will be all duals, and those who jumped at these overpriced new G5s will be feelling pretty silly. I'll buy a dual 2 GHz G5 next spring, when it is the bottom of the line for $1799
post #2 of 36
ASP polls for all hardware busses, with timeouts. It also scans the entire hard drive for applications, frameworks, etc. It takes a few seconds that have nothing to do with the CPU. Sorry you thought this was a good test.

Did you try actually doing anything *useful* on them, or did you just perform useless motions that you're never going to replicate in real life?
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
post #3 of 36
ALL machines use 100% of the CPU to resize windows. Especially if there are no background tasks, why not use 100%? It makes it smoother.

I can sometimes launch Apple System Profiler really quickly, and sometimes it takes forever. I think it depends on whether it's been launched recently or something.

Neither one of your tests has anything to do with real-world performance. I'd also like to know what your standard of comparison was - if, say, it took 100% CPU to do a particular task on the 1.6 or 1.8 that only took 40% of the CPU on the dual 2.0, then you'd have a point.
post #4 of 36
Apple System Profiler responds instantly for me, for both main tab and devices and volumes. 1.8 stock + 1 gig extra ram.
post #5 of 36
my DP 1GHz uses %50 of each processor when resizing windows, why wouldn't it use all it could...
I heard that geeks are a dime a dozen, I just want to find out who's been passin' out the dimes
----- Fred Blassie 1964
Reply
I heard that geeks are a dime a dozen, I just want to find out who's been passin' out the dimes
----- Fred Blassie 1964
Reply
post #6 of 36
So I guess the lesson here is that if your primary use of a computer is endlessly resizing finder windows and running System Profiler, you can save your money and buy something else.

Didn't you try any "real" applications, like, say, changing your desktop picture or reconfiguring the display from thousands to millions of colors, or modifying the system beep? You know, stuff that power users spend most of their time doing?

You can never justify the cost of building a bridge by counting the number of people swimming across the river.
Reply
You can never justify the cost of building a bridge by counting the number of people swimming across the river.
Reply
post #7 of 36
Thread Starter 
Glad to know these aren't real tests of the G5's performance. Also, could be the systems at CompUSA are already screwed up from people banging on them.
post #8 of 36
The latter I'd totally believe. :P

Ah, the good old days of walking into a lab of //e's, quickly typing in '10 POKE (RND(32000), RND(255)) 20 GOTO 10 RUN' and walking away while the thing had fits...
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
post #9 of 36
just for your information - the G5 1.6 was tested in a logic audio performance comparison to the older G4. the results are really impressive. the G5 has 2-3 times the performance of a dual 1GHz.

http://www.mac-pro-audio.de/email-bi...erG5-test.html

as the report is in german, is anyone of you able to translate it? (i'm too lazy )
go AAPL, go to $70 !!! © 2004
Reply
go AAPL, go to $70 !!! © 2004
Reply
post #10 of 36
The G5 shines only if the app is tuned for it....
Mac Pro 2.66, 5GB RAM, 250+120 HD, 23" Cinema Display
MacBook 1.83GHz, 2GB RAM
Reply
Mac Pro 2.66, 5GB RAM, 250+120 HD, 23" Cinema Display
MacBook 1.83GHz, 2GB RAM
Reply
post #11 of 36
Quote:
Originally posted by Leonis
The G5 shines only if the app is tuned for it....

so - where's the problem?
go AAPL, go to $70 !!! © 2004
Reply
go AAPL, go to $70 !!! © 2004
Reply
post #12 of 36
The reason Apple System Profiler takes time to launch is because it gathers info about the whole system first - hence the prominetnly displayed "Gathering" message when you open it ..... once gatehred, the next time you launch it the display is instantaneous.
post #13 of 36
Quote:
Originally posted by qazII
Apple System Profiler responds instantly for me, for both main tab and devices and volumes. 1.8 stock + 1 gig extra ram.

That's because you keep opening it to remind yourself that you're on A NEW G5!!!!

-- Mark
Mark R. Wilkins
Author of MEL Scripting for Maya Animators
Reply
Mark R. Wilkins
Author of MEL Scripting for Maya Animators
Reply
post #14 of 36
This guy I know who is a PC user... he walks into CompUSA and notices the new G5. (Its a stock 1.6 GHz with 256 MB memory). He launches 4 applications at once. Apparently they took a while to load - sustained icon bounces. His conclusion - the new G5's are slow. Genius. Everyone seems to expect the G5 machines to be 1000x faster than their PC. Right.
post #15 of 36
Quote:
Originally posted by Krassy
just for your information - the G5 1.6 was tested in a logic audio performance comparison to the older G4. the results are really impressive. the G5 has 2-3 times the performance of a dual 1GHz.

http://www.mac-pro-audio.de/email-bi...erG5-test.html

as the report is in german, is anyone of you able to translate it? (i'm too lazy )

Yeah, these logic tests that are coming out look really great. 52 PV's is really amazing, and that's on the low-end 1.6. It's going to be really interesting to see the number on a 2 Ghz (or 3Gz next summer!)
post #16 of 36
Quote:
Originally posted by heaven or las vegas
This guy I know who is a PC user... he walks into CompUSA and notices the new G5. (Its a stock 1.6 GHz with 256 MB memory).

Apple isn't helping the perception by stocking the machines with 256MB RAM. All that CPU power and all that system bandwidth aren't worth much if you're swapping.
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
Reply
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
Reply
post #17 of 36
Quote:
Originally posted by giant
Yeah, these logic tests that are coming out look really great. 52 PV's is really amazing, and that's on the low-end 1.6. It's going to be really interesting to see the number on a 2 Ghz (or 3Gz next summer!)

People are going to get sick of pasting Platinum Verbs into channels long before they hit the limit with the Dual 2.0 machines.

I'm not gonna say "Who needs 80 reverbs?" because someone out there will want to do it, but good lord!

CV

Do what you will, but harm none.

Reply

Do what you will, but harm none.

Reply
post #18 of 36
Amorph: Amen to that! Can't believe the relatively small amount of RAM that Apple puts into its machines. Especially on the units for which RAM is very cheap, why not put a quick 1 Gig in? The machines would run a lot fatster and might help to dispel the "megahertz myth" that PC useds seem to care so much about. But I digress....
post #19 of 36
I'm sure that a lot of the problem is that the G5s at CompUSA are only there with 256 MB RAM. If Apple wants people to walk up and be like "Wow, this really is the world's fastest personal computer" they should at last ship it with enough RAM for any computer to do stuff at a decent speed.
post #20 of 36
My university has a 1.8Ghz G5 in the Book Store, they sell macs there, and I played around with it. The guy even took the side panel off for me to look inside. Beautiful beyond belief.

These are the tests I did:

Word opened in one bounce

System profiler open and profiled the system in about 2 senconds

iTunes Window resizing was smooth unlike on my G4 1Ghz.
"People don't want handouts! People want hand jobs!" ~ Connecticut governor William O'Neil at a political rally, followed by riotous applause
Reply
"People don't want handouts! People want hand jobs!" ~ Connecticut governor William O'Neil at a political rally, followed by riotous applause
Reply
post #21 of 36
I don't see it on the page anymore, but I swear Apple's G5 page said that those speed tests were done on machines with 2GBs of RAM. The impression I get from reading a lot of these sites is that the G5 works better with tons of RAM.
post #22 of 36
Quote:
Originally posted by MrSparkle
I don't see it on the page anymore, but I swear Apple's G5 page said that those speed tests were done on machines with 2GBs of RAM. The impression I get from reading a lot of these sites is that the G5 works better with tons of RAM.

There were some Photoshop benchmark tests from macaddict.com that showed that the dual 2ghz with with 2gigs of ram MAKES A HUGE DIFFERENCE. They ran tests with and without the extra ram and the differences was huge.
I think in one test its was 20 times faster than dual 1ghz with 256 megs of ram. Too bad they didn't put 2 gigs of ram in all the other machines they tested.

Apple should be shipping these machines with 1 gig of ram at least. Not a meg less.
You Can Say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one

------- John Lennon
Reply
You Can Say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one

------- John Lennon
Reply
post #23 of 36
I response to the CPU usage with moving windows I have tested this on a 3 PCs.

AMD 1800 768M Ram Win2k
AMD 2500+ Barton 1G Ram Win2k
P4 3.0 1G RAm Win XP Pro

ALL USE 100% CPU when moving windows. Also All of them take a VERY long time to open MS System Info (comparable to ASP).
post #24 of 36
No they should have 512 on the bottom. I mean come on, let's go to DealRam. $79 for a stick of 512. No excuse to not include. Apple of course would charge you hundreds of dollars. This RAM thing is getting old fast. I know they like to squeeze money but this isn't the right place to do it! It really affects speed when you page out!
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
post #25 of 36
Does iTunes resize smoothly on a G5 while doing average stuff (AIM open, iTunes playing, Safari loading something, and the other odd app going?
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
post #26 of 36
Quote:
Originally posted by heaven or las vegas
This guy I know who is a PC user... he walks into CompUSA and notices the new G5. (Its a stock 1.6 GHz with 256 MB memory). He launches 4 applications at once. Apparently they took a while to load - sustained icon bounces. His conclusion - the new G5's are slow. Genius. Everyone seems to expect the G5 machines to be 1000x faster than their PC. Right.

This guy should try launching Mozilla, Visual studio, and Visual sourcesafe on the PC sometime.

Question: how many apps were in memory at the time he decided to launch four more? It isn't as if people tidy up after they play with a machine.

Either way, comp USA should be shot for having a demo machine with only 256 MB of RAM.
King Felix
Reply
King Felix
Reply
post #27 of 36
Quote:
Originally posted by Aquatic
No they should have 512 on the bottom. I mean come on, let's go to DealRam. $79 for a stick of 512.

While Apple's RAM is unconscionably expensive, there are many quality levels of RAM and that which sells for $79 for 512 absolutely is not coming anywhere near my computer.

-- Mark
Mark R. Wilkins
Author of MEL Scripting for Maya Animators
Reply
Mark R. Wilkins
Author of MEL Scripting for Maya Animators
Reply
post #28 of 36
Quote:
Originally posted by mark_wilkins
That's because you keep opening it to remind yourself that you're on A NEW G5!!!!

-- Mark

Nope. First launch, right after initial startup.
post #29 of 36
I was kidding.

-- Mark
Mark R. Wilkins
Author of MEL Scripting for Maya Animators
Reply
Mark R. Wilkins
Author of MEL Scripting for Maya Animators
Reply
post #30 of 36
Quote:
Originally posted by Yevgeny
Either way, comp USA should be shot for having a demo machine with only 256 MB of RAM.

but if they have a machine there with 2 gig o ram, then your not using the machine that you would take home for the price marked on the card next to it..
post #31 of 36
Interesting. On my little ol' 900 Mhz G3, I ran a few rezizing tests. One with an 11 item window, one with a 60+ item window, and one with a 9 item HD window. In all cases the CPU monitor went up high, but performance was fair to good. And that's on a machine with 256MB RAM and not even a 1Ghz processor.
Trainiable is to cat as ability to live without food is to human.
Reply
Trainiable is to cat as ability to live without food is to human.
Reply
post #32 of 36
Quote:
Originally posted by heaven or las vegas
This guy I know who is a PC user... he walks into CompUSA and notices the new G5. (Its a stock 1.6 GHz with 256 MB memory). He launches 4 applications at once. Apparently they took a while to load - sustained icon bounces. His conclusion - the new G5's are slow. Genius. Everyone seems to expect the G5 machines to be 1000x faster than their PC. Right.

Launches 4 apps at once. Does Windows even let you do that? I don't think so. And Apple doesn't help by stocking 'em with 256MB RAM. They should have at LEAST 512MB (768MB or 640MB on 1.8Ghz)
Trainiable is to cat as ability to live without food is to human.
Reply
Trainiable is to cat as ability to live without food is to human.
Reply
post #33 of 36
Quote:
Originally posted by mark_wilkins
While Apple's RAM is unconscionably expensive, there are many quality levels of RAM and that which sells for $79 for 512 absolutely is not coming anywhere near my computer.

-- Mark

It's coming near mine.
Trainiable is to cat as ability to live without food is to human.
Reply
Trainiable is to cat as ability to live without food is to human.
Reply
post #34 of 36
Quote:
Originally posted by ryaxnb
Launches 4 apps at once. Does Windows even let you do that?

Sure. I do it every morning when I log on.
post #35 of 36
iTunes has a ton of stuff going on inside of it. I imagine that the G5 doesn't have much of a problem resizing. I think the G4 has trouble with iTunes cause of the slow bus.

I noticed that many common functions in the OS were no faster on the G5. Apps opened a little faster, but over all I think OS 10.2.6 will not run much faster than what maybe a 1Ghz G4 will run it at. 10.3 will probably be faster. But anything over 1ghz G4 is about as fast as you need to get full performance out of OS X. I am betting panther will allow all computers to run the OS X better especially the G5.
"People don't want handouts! People want hand jobs!" ~ Connecticut governor William O'Neil at a political rally, followed by riotous applause
Reply
"People don't want handouts! People want hand jobs!" ~ Connecticut governor William O'Neil at a political rally, followed by riotous applause
Reply
post #36 of 36
Quote:
Originally posted by Algol
Apps opened a little faster, but over all I think OS 10.2.6 will not run much faster than what maybe a 1Ghz G4 will run it at. 10.3 will probably be faster.

that would be 10.2.7 on the G5 I think. From what people have said panther is faster than jag on every machine, and I think it will kick ass on the G5.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › G5 1.6 & 1.8 unimpressive performance