PowerMac G5: Pics and Benchmarks

Posted:
in Current Mac Hardware edited January 2014
So I got my new Dual 2Ghz PowerMac the other day and have been constantly "playing" with it since it arrived last week. I have 1GB of Ram (ordered another GB from newegg), 9800XT, airport, and bluetooth. I have to say I am rather impressed with the computers overall performance. I edited a short movie the other day and it was extremely fast, especially at encoding the DVD. iDVD also worked really fast, and I didn't notice any slow down except when the HD was being accessed.



Here are some pics of the PowerMac as well as my room mates new PowerBook. http://homepage.mac.com/pendaran/PhotoAlbum12.html



I ran xbench the other day here are the results in summary:

Overall 205.72

CPU 193.93

Memory test 342.47

OpenGL graphics test 177.31



I bought Unreal Tournament 2004 in order to play with the 9800. I have to say i am not super impressed with some of the scores. I am thinking it's probably cause the game isn't optimized that well for the Mac. I'd say that in most game types I get over 45fps on average. However, Onslaught maps online with 16+ people can drop them down the around 35fps average. Although it hardly ever drops below 25fps. This is with high/higher settings... projectors off though (can't tell a difference and it gives me a few more frames).



I ran santa bench for unreal: Botmatch, 1280x1024, max settings, bridgeoffate.



fps results:

min 15.6

avg 55.3

max 150.3

score 54



I have to say the overall responsiveness of the PowerMac is unbelievable when compared to my old 1Ghz G4.



Let me know if there are any questions etc. Also, if you guys want to compare your scores to mine that would be great or if you would like me to do more benching. I would be interested in the difference between mine and a 2.5Ghz G5. Enjoy!

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 16
    i understand people are proud when they get new machines, but it seems like everybody posts a "hey, i got this and here is my review since this product hasnt been out for 6 months." for products like the shuffle where only a couple people can get them or something, thats fine to post, but for something as common as a G5, a 2.0 nonetheless, just throw specs in your signature and let people look themselves. sorry, algol, i'm not trying to take anything away from your purchase, i've just been bothered by posts like this in the past.



    As for my results with the system in my sig:

    Overall: 248.42

    CPU: 242.65

    Memory: 370.91 (my 'allocate' score might be the highest at xbench at 917.57)

    OpenGL:217.06

    (link)



    I could have pulled higher numbers I think but the machine does what I need it to do so I dont really care if my number is higher or lower than another's.
  • Reply 2 of 16
    mattyjmattyj Posts: 898member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Algol

    I bought Unreal Tournament 2004 in order to play with the 9800. I have to say i am not super impressed with some of the scores. I am thinking it's probably cause the game isn't optimized that well for the Mac. I'd say that in most game types I get over 45fps on average. However, Onslaught maps online with 16+ people can drop them down the around 35fps average. Although it hardly ever drops below 25fps. This is with high/higher settings... projectors off though (can't tell a difference and it gives me a few more frames).



    I wouldn't be not impressed. One of my friends has a 3Ghz HT P4 with 1GB of RAM and a nVidia Quadro FX3000 (256MB card, worth well over a grand). He runs UT2004 at 1204x1024 highest settings with 20 bots, average fps is about 30-35.

    Your G5 has 1Ghz less clock, a less powerful graphics card yet it gives this spec a run for its money.
  • Reply 3 of 16
    algolalgol Posts: 833member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by ipodandimac

    i understand people are proud when they get new machines, but it seems like everybody posts a "hey, i got this and here is my review since this product hasnt been out for 6 months." for products like the shuffle where only a couple people can get them or something, thats fine to post, but for something as common as a G5, a 2.0 nonetheless, just throw specs in your signature and let people look themselves. sorry, algol, i'm not trying to take anything away from your purchase, i've just been bothered by posts like this in the past.



    As for my results with the system in my sig:

    Overall: 248.42

    CPU: 242.65

    Memory: 370.91 (my 'allocate' score might be the highest at xbench at 917.57)

    OpenGL:217.06

    (link)



    I could have pulled higher numbers I think but the machine does what I need it to do so I dont really care if my number is higher or lower than another's.




    The only reason I bothered to post this shit was for you guys. I thought some of you would be interested in some benches and maybe have questions etc. I know we all love pictures of new computers as well. Perhaps I am wasting my time. It took me a good while to load all those pics up to the idisk and write this post and run those benches. Sorry you don't appreciate it. If you are bothered by a post perhaps you should avoid it instead of reading it. I was pretty clear as to the topic in the thread name, you could have easily avoided the trouble.



    I mean it almost seems like you are saying: having to many people posting about their new computers bothers me on some psychological level therefore I am going to bitch at you for using the forum. See this really pisses me off cause now this whole thread is going to turn into a debate and the usefulness of it will be completely lost. lets Just get this straight, I don't give a fsck what bothers you... you can take what "BOTHERS" you and shove it up your ass.



  • Reply 4 of 16
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Algol

    The only reason I bothered to post this shit was for you guys. I thought some of you would be interested in some benches and maybe have questions etc. I know we all love pictures of new computers as well. Perhaps I am wasting my time. It took me a good while to load all those pics up to the idisk and write this post and run those benches. Sorry you don't appreciate it. If you are bothered by a post perhaps you should avoid it instead of reading it. I was pretty clear as to the topic in the thread name, you could have easily avoided the trouble.



    I mean it almost seems like you are saying: having to many people posting about their new computers bothers me on some psychological level therefore I am going to bitch at you for using the forum. See this really pisses me off cause now this whole thread is going to turn into a debate and the usefulness of it will be completely lost. lets Just get this straight, I don't give a fsck what bothers you... you can take what "BOTHERS" you and shove it up your ass.




    no i'm sorry i came across so harsh. there is a thread just for posting computer setup pics over in the 'General discussion' forum, which is the perfect place to give specs and pics of your new system. link I wrote some more after this but I decided to take it out. Basically, just copy your 1st post up above into the computer setup thread, and you'll find the kind of discussion you're looking for.
  • Reply 5 of 16
    a_greera_greer Posts: 4,594member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by mattyj

    I wouldn't be not impressed. One of my friends has a 3Ghz HT P4 with 1GB of RAM and a nVidia Quadro FX3000 (256MB card, worth well over a grand). He runs UT2004 at 1204x1024 highest settings with 20 bots, average fps is about 30-35.

    Your G5 has 1Ghz less clock, a less powerful graphics card yet it gives this spec a run for its money.




    P4 v PPC 970 G5 - RISC v CISC look it up.



    as to the Quadro, it is tuned for Open GL, not the run of the mill DirectX crap that is most of the video industry today. The Mac cards are all tuned for open GL. Nvidea. as does ati, rape PC users for open gl cards, IT SUX but it is the truth.



    Also, OSX v Win XP for power/media production users, no contest - BUT, if you want games, vuy an xbox.
  • Reply 6 of 16
    algolalgol Posts: 833member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by a_greer

    P4 v PPC 970 G5 - RISC v CISC look it up.



    as to the Quadro, it is tuned for Open GL, not the run of the mill DirectX crap that is most of the video industry today. The Mac cards are all tuned for open GL. Nvidea. as does ati, rape PC users for open gl cards, IT SUX but it is the truth.



    Also, OSX v Win XP for power/media production users, no contest - BUT, if you want games, vuy an xbox.




    So are you guys saying that macsoft optimized unreal better than I thought
  • Reply 7 of 16
    a_greera_greer Posts: 4,594member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Algol

    So are you guys saying that macsoft optimized unreal better than I thought



    What I am saying is that the game was not designed to play outside of the windows world, it was PORTED, the same way iTunes and QT6 were ported to windows, proformance of cocoa code on the windows platform stinks because the windows designers did not build it into the OS, as Mac did not build in DirectX. If the game designers would go ground up OGL, the preformance may be different.



    Now if apple would build their windows apps in sandard open standards from the ground up, they would be hellafast on windowsjust like if games were designed to work in OPEN standards, porting would be easier and the end user would have a great experiance on any platform, but both MS and, to a MUCH smaller extent, Apple want lock in.



    The day DX dies is the best day in computer game history, just you watch.
  • Reply 8 of 16
    algolalgol Posts: 833member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by a_greer

    What I am saying is that the game was not designed to play outside of the windows world, it was PORTED, the same way iTunes and QT6 were ported to windows, proformance of cocoa code on the windows platform stinks because the windows designers did not build it into the OS, as Mac did not build in DirectX. If the game designers would go ground up OGL, the preformance may be different.



    Now if apple would build their windows apps in sandard open standards from the ground up, they would be hellafast on windowsjust like if games were designed to work in OPEN standards, porting would be easier and the end user would have a great experiance on any platform, but both MS and, to a MUCH smaller extent, Apple want lock in.



    The day DX dies is the best day in computer game history, just you watch.




    Yea, that's why mac games are always slower. I know most of us don't play that many games on our computers, but I think for apple's market share to grow more games need to be ported and apple needs to figure out a way to have them run better. With this said, I am not so sure that Mac games are that much slower. I think some ports are probably crap and some are not. All the Blizzard games run great on Macs, and I have found other games to run well too.



    I installed Unreal 2004 demo on my friends 3.4Ghz HT P4, 9700, and 1GB RAM Dell XPS--Cost him a fortune haha. Anyway on normal settings, as that is all the demo allows for, I experienced frame rates that were between 4-8fps better than my Mac (granted I have my settings on high). Now considering that his CPU is 1400mhz faster and the game was designed to run on windows initially, I would have to say Macsoft is doing an okay job. This also leads me to believe that if these games were designed for OpenGL from the beginning macs would actually get better fps than PCs.



    I'm not sure as to where all this leads but it's an interesting observation

    IMHO.



    edit: I played Unreal 2004 a little more on my friends XPS this is what i noticed. The frame rates stay higher overall but in big battles they drop to under 20fps often. My G5 hardly ever ever drops below 20fps. I mean even in the craziest battles. Kinda of weird... I think the faster bus could be what is keeping the frames up. ???
  • Reply 9 of 16
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Algol

    Sorry you don't appreciate it. [/B]



    Well, I do. I swear to god, I just can't get tired of watching pictures of people opening their new Apple gear. O.K. that's a lie - I got a little tired of them when everyone got the first G4 imac - but this pro shit, I just can't get enough of.
  • Reply 10 of 16
    Quote:

    Originally posted by a_greer

    What I am saying is that the game was not designed to play outside of the windows world, it was PORTED, the same way iTunes and QT6 were ported to windows, proformance of cocoa code on the windows platform stinks because the windows designers did not build it into the OS, as Mac did not build in DirectX. If the game designers would go ground up OGL, the preformance may be different.



    Now if apple would build their windows apps in sandard open standards from the ground up, they would be hellafast on windowsjust like if games were designed to work in OPEN standards, porting would be easier and the end user would have a great experiance on any platform, but both MS and, to a MUCH smaller extent, Apple want lock in.



    The day DX dies is the best day in computer game history, just you watch.




    No game company that I know of is going to target OGL first/more than DirectX right now. Further, when DirectX "dies", it will only be because Microsoft has come up with something to replace it, and when Longhorn ships, that replacement will be in-place. OGL will still be on the outside looking in as far as Windows goes.



    Concerning OGL game performance, it's widely recognized that ATI's OGL support sucks when compared to nVidia under Windows, and I have no reasonto suspect otherwise when discussing drivers for the Mac platfrom. Before someone stands up points a finger and wails, "FAN BOY!", be it known I'm a long-time (and current) ATI user.



    In summary, DirectX dying won't benefit OGL at all, and OGL support by ATI may be a good portion of the problem for Mac-based games.
  • Reply 11 of 16
    tednditedndi Posts: 1,921member
    cell baby!



    Apple + speed + graphics =



    (windows marketshare)/ Tiger*(Apple+Sony+Toshiba+IBM)



    or some such thing...



    \
  • Reply 12 of 16
    Quote:

    Originally posted by jsimmons

    No game company that I know of is going to target OGL first/more than DirectX right now.



    id. Doom 3.



    Quote:

    Originally posted by a_greer

    What I am saying is that the game was not designed to play outside of the windows world, it was PORTED, the same way iTunes and QT6 were ported to windows, proformance of cocoa code on the windows platform stinks because the windows designers did not build it into the OS, as Mac did not build in DirectX. If the game designers would go ground up OGL, the preformance may be different.

    [/B]



    OpenGL and Direct3D are similar enough that it doesn't make a difference which engine you design for.



    The difference is in the driver support for the two, but to be honest, I don't believe that that varies all that much, if at all. The Direct3D and OpenGL drivers are just wrappers around the libaries that actually do the grunt work, after all.
  • Reply 13 of 16
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by jsimmons

    Concerning OGL game performance, it's widely recognized that ATI's OGL support sucks when compared to nVidia under Windows, and I have no reasonto suspect otherwise when discussing drivers for the Mac platfrom. Before someone stands up points a finger and wails, "FAN BOY!", be it known I'm a long-time (and current) ATI user.



    The Mac driver situation is totally different: Apple provides their own OpenGL layer, and the drivers from the GPU vendors basically just hook that layer to the hardware. The variant, incomplete "OpenGL" implementations that ship with PC gamer cards are a non-issue on the Mac. In that respect, you can think of OpenGL as Apple's DirectX.



    ATI provides their own Mac driver. NVIDIA ships Apple their Windows driver, and Apple ports it.



    Quote:

    DirectX dying won't benefit OGL at all



    Not as long as their isn't a standard, robust OpenGL shipped with the Windows OS. I'm not holding my breath...
  • Reply 14 of 16
    algolalgol Posts: 833member
    I heard that it's possible tiger will virtualize the dual Processors allowing programs that are not multithreaded to take advantage of dual systems. You guys think this is possible? Going to happen? May happen? def won't happen? haha would be a good idea on apple's part though.
  • Reply 15 of 16
    algolalgol Posts: 833member
    So I re-ran the botmatch test I ran earlier except now with 2GBs instead of 1GB. Contrary to popular belief having more than a GB of RAM does make a difference for games as well... at least for Unreal 04.



    I ran the test twice because the first batch of numbers was way to high I thought. Anyway my first average was 63.7 and my second was 57.7 that's compared to 55.3 with 1GB. Thought perhaps you'd all find this interesting. Of course we already know that the extra ram will come in really handy for final cut woot
  • Reply 16 of 16
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Algol

    So I got my new Dual 2Ghz PowerMac the other day and have been constantly "playing" with it since it arrived last week. I have 1GB of Ram (ordered another GB from newegg), 9800XT, airport, and bluetooth.



    I ran xbench the other day here are the results in summary:

    Overall 205.72

    CPU 193.93

    Memory test 342.47

    OpenGL graphics test 177.31



    I have to say the overall responsiveness of the PowerMac is unbelievable when compared to my old 1Ghz G4.







    Congrats on your new machine ! It will surely be a good companion to you for a long time forward.



    I was thinking . . . as many posts on this forum is about the next G5-version and the need for absolute speed... Have you ever tried to use activity-monitor to see how much cpu usage you normally spend in a usual day ? When browsing the web or doing school-stuff. I have a suspicion that it won´t tip over 15 %.



    Please check it out. It could be fun to know.



    Zon
Sign In or Register to comment.