Any idea how a quad would do against a 1.8 iMac G5?

Posted:
in Current Mac Hardware edited January 2014
I currently have a 1.8 GHz iMac G5. It has 1.5 GB ram.



I use Final Cut Pro HD, LiveType, and DVD Studio Pro quite a bit. I am trying to decide if I want to go ahead and get the Quad or just one of the dual core machines. This is all based on the performance increase.



Anyone know what kind of gains could be had in the above apps making the switch?



I am wanting to say no more render garbage and possibly cutting down on my DVDSP3 render times by half.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 13
    lundylundy Posts: 4,466member
    Run my factorial app that exercises the ALU for a rough estimate of processor horsepower.



    Does not really measure bandwidth, disk access, or graphics of course.



    So far we have



    My Dual 2.0 gHz G5 - 3 seconds

    Powerdoc's Quad - 1 second

    1.0 gHz G4 tower - 30 seconds

    G4 Cube - 169 seconds

    PowerBook 1.5 gHz - 20 seconds

    DualCore G5 2.3 gHz - 3 seconds



    This is for computing the factorial of 16, 50 million times.



    It is on my iDisk johnnylundy
  • Reply 2 of 13
    aplnubaplnub Posts: 2,586member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by lundy

    Run my factorial app that exercises the ALU for a rough estimate of processor horsepower.



    Does not really measure bandwidth, disk access, or graphics of course.



    So far we have



    My Dual 2.0 gHz G5 - 3 seconds

    Powerdoc's Quad - 1 second

    1.0 gHz G4 tower - 30 seconds

    G4 Cube - 169 seconds

    PowerBook 1.5 gHz - 20 seconds

    DualCore G5 2.3 gHz - 3 seconds



    This is for computing the factorial of 16, 50 million times.



    It is on my iDisk johnnylundy




    Thanks! I got the program and as soon as my iMac writes the latest short to file, I will run the program again (right now it got 25 seconds) and see what my computer gets without writing video. It looks like a quad is the way to go for my type of apps.



    R u a bulldog fan?
  • Reply 3 of 13
    lundylundy Posts: 4,466member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by aplnub



    R u a bulldog fan?




    Georgia Tech, I must say, interests me more. 8)
  • Reply 4 of 13
    aplnubaplnub Posts: 2,586member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by lundy

    Run my factorial app that exercises the ALU for a rough estimate of processor horsepower.



    Does not really measure bandwidth, disk access, or graphics of course.



    So far we have



    My Dual 2.0 gHz G5 - 3 seconds

    Powerdoc's Quad - 1 second

    1.0 gHz G4 tower - 30 seconds

    G4 Cube - 169 seconds

    PowerBook 1.5 gHz - 20 seconds

    DualCore G5 2.3 gHz - 3 seconds



    This is for computing the factorial of 16, 50 million times.



    It is on my iDisk johnnylundy




    20" iMac G5 1.8 GHz (1st gen.) - 7 Seconds



    I root for the orange blooded neighbors to the north...
  • Reply 5 of 13
    powerdocpowerdoc Posts: 8,123member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by aplnub

    20" iMac G5 1.8 GHz (1st gen.) - 7 Seconds



    I root for the orange blooded neighbors to the north...




    I have also the same Imac G5. On photoshop 7 I did not see a huge difference after having tried differents filters. The file open more quickly, that was the biggest improvement. I'd say that on photoshop the quad is 30 % faster in most tasks.



    Final cut pro HD is MP aware, unfortunately final cut express HS is not : screw Apple
  • Reply 6 of 13
    powerdocpowerdoc Posts: 8,123member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by lundy

    Run my factorial app that exercises the ALU for a rough estimate of processor horsepower.



    Does not really measure bandwidth, disk access, or graphics of course.



    So far we have



    My Dual 2.0 gHz G5 - 3 seconds

    Powerdoc's Quad - 1 second

    1.0 gHz G4 tower - 30 seconds

    G4 Cube - 169 seconds

    PowerBook 1.5 gHz - 20 seconds

    DualCore G5 2.3 gHz - 3 seconds



    This is for computing the factorial of 16, 50 million times.



    It is on my iDisk johnnylundy




    Oh boy : my quad is 30 times faster in your test than my powerbook G4 1 ghz
  • Reply 7 of 13
    i just got the program and it says 12 seconds. does that make sence on a 1.2GHz iBook G4 w/ 512MB RAM?
  • Reply 8 of 13
    aplnubaplnub Posts: 2,586member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by theapplegenius

    i just got the program and it says 12 seconds. does that make sence on a 1.2GHz iBook G4 w/ 512MB RAM?



    I'll check my iBook tonight and post back. Sounds close if not better than I would have thought.
  • Reply 9 of 13
    lundylundy Posts: 4,466member
    We need some more data points to evaluate the Quads' improved performance. The last time I posted this it gave pretty consistent results.
  • Reply 10 of 13
    aplnubaplnub Posts: 2,586member
    G4 iBook 12" 1.2 GHz - 12 Seconds
  • Reply 11 of 13
    londorlondor Posts: 257member
    Dual 1.8 G5 (Rev. A) - 3 seconds
  • Reply 12 of 13
    a_greera_greer Posts: 4,594member
    17 sec on a 1.2 Mac Mini w/512 MB ram and 10 MB free...I am a muti-tasker.
  • Reply 13 of 13
    lundylundy Posts: 4,466member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by theapplegenius

    i just got the program and it says 12 seconds. does that make sence on a 1.2GHz iBook G4 w/ 512MB RAM?



    Yep. aplnub got the same result.
Sign In or Register to comment.