I have plenty of more pics which I can email to someone who would like to post. I've been busy playing with the G5 so I've stayed away from some of the madness. I have no idea how I got these on Tuesday and no one else seems to have them.
The few pics I've seen do not show any cabling ot the HD's. Please send your picts with cabling installed if possible.
Yes I like to see some keyboard pictures if that?s possible. I realy hope it?s not that horrible looking keyboard I saw at an PCF introduction day here in Holland. I had a also a short change to play with the new 1.6. The first time I explored OSX. I was not impresed with how fast the windows, control ppanels and apps came up. In other wordss I didn?t had a lighting fast impression of it. Mabey I am to much influensed by the PR of Apple.
moox12, everyone, it's the same Apple Keyboard that ships with the eMac. This is not an assumption. I can't believe people are still in denial over a keyboard!
Those will be nice, but there is the need to also test non G5 with the same version. The changes are such that you can't directly compare the numbers from the old and new versions if you want a realistic comparision. However, a "baseline" with the new version for a dual 800 is provided for 1.1, so that is a good starting point.
Yes. Max is no.1, Lightwave no.2. However, Cinema 4D is no.3!
And still closing.
Impressive. Why? Because sometime ago, nobody had even heard of it. A couple of years ago it was ranked about no.18 in usage! To go from nowhere to 18 then to 3 says something about Maxxon's ability as a team.
It's always been fairly priced. Latterly? A bargain. You get a blazingly fast ray tracer. Easy to use interface. Along with Newtek's Lightwave, Cinema was the first 3D app' to hit Mac Os X! Maxxon have ultilised the 2nd processor. And it's an amazingly small app (last time I check was years ago, mind...) Maxxon also make the amazing 3d painter, Bodypaint 2 (which I will find hard to resist, it looks superb!) which is less than half the price of PC suck up software Righthemisphere's 'Deeppaint3d' (or something like that...)
Take yer hat off to Maxxon. They listen to feedback and really improve their app'. You know when Cinema's had an update!
I don't have it. I prefer the interface of the Legendary Lightwave But if you want to get into 3D cheaply on the Mac? By the Cinema 4D highend for less than £500? is it? Bargain (minus a few of the other modules.) Clever idea by Maxxon to make their package modular. Just buy what you need. It means you can a high end app for a stunning price. Be nice if Newtek followed suit. Anything to pile the pressure on the overpriced Studio Max.
Who needs Xsi, Max.
We got Maya, Lightwave and Cinema!
Yay! Twinkie Cakes.
lemon bon bon (sales rant over...)
PS. On topic? Er...X.bench 1.1 is indeed here. Looking for substantial improvements. It's been compiled with GC 3.3? Should make a huge difference if this is the Compiler used for Panther?
But hey, a 1.6 G5 is hanging with a '2 gig rating' Athlon at the mo'. Not bad for a machine that isn't even optimised! Macrumors have got some good links re: G5 1.6 performance.
Those will be nice, but there is the need to also test non G5 with the same version. The changes are such that you can't directly compare the numbers from the old and new versions if you want a realistic comparision. However, a "baseline" with the new version for a dual 800 is provided for 1.1, so that is a good starting point.
i tested my G4/400
Code:
Results 49.21
_System Info
Xbench Version 1.1
System Version 10.2.6
Physical RAM 448 MB
Model PowerMac3,1
Processor PowerPC G4 @ 400 MHz
Version 7400 (Max) v2.8
L1 Cache 32K (instruction), 32K (data)
L2 Cache 1024K @ 200 MHz
Bus Frequency 100 MHz
Video Card ATY,Rage128Pro (ATI Rage 128 Pro)
Drive Type IBM-DTLA-307030
_CPU Test 35.80
GCD Recursion 40.15
1.57 Mops/sec
Floating Point Basic 60.64
215.67 Mflop/sec
AltiVec Basic 50.04
726.86 Mflop/sec
vecLib FFT 15.33
236.21 Mflop/sec
Floating Point Library 76.60
3.07 Mops/sec
_Thread Test 30.62
Computation 26.12
210.39 Kops/sec, 4 threads
Lock Contention 37.01
464.60 Klocks/sec, 4 threads
+Memory Test 66.02
_System 55.65
Allocate 75.53
25.47 Kalloc/sec
Fill 53.53
426.12 MB/sec
Copy 45.48
227.42 MB/sec
_Stream 81.12
Copy 80.26
327.32 MB/sec [altivec]
Scale 79.28
329.35 MB/sec [altivec]
Add 81.93
345.75 MB/sec [altivec]
Triad 83.11
342.06 MB/sec [altivec]
Quartz Graphics Test 50.80
Line 42.51
1.08 Klines/sec [50% alpha]
Rectangle 61.17
4.30 Krects/sec [50% alpha]
Circle 59.42
1.37 Kcircles/sec [50% alpha]
Bezier 41.92
455.49 beziers/sec [50% alpha]
Text 55.97
912.29 chars/sec
OpenGL Graphics Test 75.54
Spinning Squares 75.54
52.86 frames/sec
User Interface Test 52.40
Elements 52.40
17.83 refresh/sec
+Disk Test 68.97
_Sequential 70.14
Uncached Write 65.08
25.91 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write 65.27
25.47 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read 77.75
12.31 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read 74.18
29.97 MB/sec [256K blocks]
_Random 67.83
Uncached Write 53.58
0.77 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write 72.46
16.34 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read 75.40
0.50 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read 75.50
15.54 MB/sec [256K blocks]
note: i think it's funny that i have such good altivec results - does XBench only use one cpu for those tests?
Apparantly it does use single CPU's only, except for the threading tests, where you also see that your PowerMac does significantly worse than in the regular CPU-test.
There is a separate thread dedicated to Xbench-tests in the Mac OS X forum, I advice to use that one for non-G5 macs, because this is off-topic IMO.
Apparantly it does use single CPU's only, except for the threading tests, where you also see that your PowerMac does significantly worse than in the regular CPU-test.
There is a separate thread dedicated to Xbench-tests in the Mac OS X forum, I advice to use that one for non-G5 macs, because this is off-topic IMO.
if it works that way it should probably be noted that the final number in 'Results' is not very useful to compare overall system speed. also you can't hope for much better numbers when it comes to disk performance - the HD-technology didn't make a huge step forward just because there is a PPC970
You need as much work on improving spelling as I do
Hey, I don't USE the program, you can't expect me to spell it right...
:P
Re: Lightwave. There's something interesting about that. When I first started using Lightwave...I carped about the fact there were 'NO ICONS!?' However, when you read manuals such as the brilliant 'Inside Lightwave 7', it's 'Written' icons greatly speed up your understanding of what you're finding and what it does. As opposed to that 'icon/blob' thing one has to find and understand. After a while, Newtek's approach made great sense to me. I suppose that and the fact that Lightwave is widely used for T.V and Film production speaks volumes for it's 'production orientated' interface.
Still, I do like icons.
It's interesting that Xsi is more like Lightwave in this respect.
And Maya is more like Cinema.
Just a superficial observation on icons vs text interfaces...
It's interesting that Xsi is more like Lightwave in this respect.
And Maya is more like Cinema.
Just a superficial observation on icons vs text interfaces...
Lemon Bon Bon
I notice the same thing too
Cinema's interface started looking like Maya since version 6. When I launch the app in front of people many of them do think it is Maya.
Even XSI and LW have similar interface I prefer XSI over LW. Again I just hate LW's workflow (separate modeling, animation environoment sucks) .......but the difference in price is huge......
You of course will be proved wrong over the next 2 weeks
A healthy skepticism (possibly descending into cynicism at times) has stood me in good stead for fifty three years, and seems justified in this case in light of the following:
One week of "shipping" seems to have landed low end G5s into the hands of four individuals/universities ( here , here , here , and here ) and they have already written off one whole country.
On Saturday I trekked over to the WILLOW BEND apple store where all of the employees were decked out with black T-shirts with a gradient G5 logo on the back. They were all were staring aimlessly at a rotating halogen lit turntable with a little card that read "G5 coming soon"---that pretty well sums up the situation in my mind.
Personnally, I am going to stand down my anticipation level back to "defcon 1" so that if my 2Ghz G5 backorder from July 6th actually ships in five days as scheduled, it will come as an unexpected surprise.
I've seen them and I don't see anything so terrible about them.
Is it just because it was first introduced with the eMac, so people's perception is that it's low end?
To be honest, I don't think the pro keyboard that came with my Quicksilver is all that great either, but it does the job.
Too me, there is just *no* quality at all in it compared to the black 'Pro' item.
The plastic the keys are made of feels cheap, cheap, cheap! The action of the keys is plain awful. The angle is also all wrong for me, as I like flat keyboards.
Also the USB ports on the back are not as useful for peripherals as they were when they were located on the side. I found I had to loop cables around and it caused all sorts of hassle that never happened with the 'pro' item...
Also, after a few months usage, the white finish looks like ass. I have seen them absolutely filthy in some stores after only a few weeks... This never happened on the black items.
Comments
Or am i mistaken. Plus lightwave seems to be more mac willing to optimize for it.
3d gurus chime in.
I'd get much confidence out of a benchmark between any of those two.
Originally posted by richcigar
I have plenty of more pics which I can email to someone who would like to post. I've been busy playing with the G5 so I've stayed away from some of the madness. I have no idea how I got these on Tuesday and no one else seems to have them.
The few pics I've seen do not show any cabling ot the HD's. Please send your picts with cabling installed if possible.
http://www.xbench.com/
Originally posted by Krassy
i don't know if someone posted this already but XBench 1.1 - optimized for G5 - is now available - could someone with a G5 please test it?
http://www.xbench.com/
Those will be nice, but there is the need to also test non G5 with the same version. The changes are such that you can't directly compare the numbers from the old and new versions if you want a realistic comparision. However, a "baseline" with the new version for a dual 800 is provided for 1.1, so that is a good starting point.
Cinema4D?
Yes. Max is no.1, Lightwave no.2. However, Cinema 4D is no.3!
And still closing.
Impressive. Why? Because sometime ago, nobody had even heard of it. A couple of years ago it was ranked about no.18 in usage! To go from nowhere to 18 then to 3 says something about Maxxon's ability as a team.
It's always been fairly priced. Latterly? A bargain. You get a blazingly fast ray tracer. Easy to use interface. Along with Newtek's Lightwave, Cinema was the first 3D app' to hit Mac Os X! Maxxon have ultilised the 2nd processor. And it's an amazingly small app (last time I check was years ago, mind...) Maxxon also make the amazing 3d painter, Bodypaint 2 (which I will find hard to resist, it looks superb!) which is less than half the price of PC suck up software Righthemisphere's 'Deeppaint3d' (or something like that...)
Take yer hat off to Maxxon. They listen to feedback and really improve their app'. You know when Cinema's had an update!
I don't have it. I prefer the interface of the Legendary Lightwave
Who needs Xsi, Max.
We got Maya, Lightwave and Cinema!
Yay! Twinkie Cakes.
lemon bon bon (sales rant over...)
PS. On topic? Er...X.bench 1.1 is indeed here. Looking for substantial improvements. It's been compiled with GC 3.3? Should make a huge difference if this is the Compiler used for Panther?
But hey, a 1.6 G5 is hanging with a '2 gig rating' Athlon at the mo'. Not bad for a machine that isn't even optimised! Macrumors have got some good links re: G5 1.6 performance.
Anybody seen a PS7.1 bench yet?
Originally posted by Shaktai
Those will be nice, but there is the need to also test non G5 with the same version. The changes are such that you can't directly compare the numbers from the old and new versions if you want a realistic comparision. However, a "baseline" with the new version for a dual 800 is provided for 1.1, so that is a good starting point.
i tested my G4/400
Results 49.21
_System Info
Xbench Version 1.1
System Version 10.2.6
Physical RAM 448 MB
Model PowerMac3,1
Processor PowerPC G4 @ 400 MHz
Version 7400 (Max) v2.8
L1 Cache 32K (instruction), 32K (data)
L2 Cache 1024K @ 200 MHz
Bus Frequency 100 MHz
Video Card ATY,Rage128Pro (ATI Rage 128 Pro)
Drive Type IBM-DTLA-307030
_CPU Test 35.80
GCD Recursion 40.15
1.57 Mops/sec
Floating Point Basic 60.64
215.67 Mflop/sec
AltiVec Basic 50.04
726.86 Mflop/sec
vecLib FFT 15.33
236.21 Mflop/sec
Floating Point Library 76.60
3.07 Mops/sec
_Thread Test 30.62
Computation 26.12
210.39 Kops/sec, 4 threads
Lock Contention 37.01
464.60 Klocks/sec, 4 threads
+Memory Test 66.02
_System 55.65
Allocate 75.53
25.47 Kalloc/sec
Fill 53.53
426.12 MB/sec
Copy 45.48
227.42 MB/sec
_Stream 81.12
Copy 80.26
327.32 MB/sec [altivec]
Scale 79.28
329.35 MB/sec [altivec]
Add 81.93
345.75 MB/sec [altivec]
Triad 83.11
342.06 MB/sec [altivec]
Quartz Graphics Test 50.80
Line 42.51
1.08 Klines/sec [50% alpha]
Rectangle 61.17
4.30 Krects/sec [50% alpha]
Circle 59.42
1.37 Kcircles/sec [50% alpha]
Bezier 41.92
455.49 beziers/sec [50% alpha]
Text 55.97
912.29 chars/sec
OpenGL Graphics Test 75.54
Spinning Squares 75.54
52.86 frames/sec
User Interface Test 52.40
Elements 52.40
17.83 refresh/sec
+Disk Test 68.97
_Sequential 70.14
Uncached Write 65.08
25.91 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write 65.27
25.47 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read 77.75
12.31 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read 74.18
29.97 MB/sec [256K blocks]
_Random 67.83
Uncached Write 53.58
0.77 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write 72.46
16.34 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read 75.40
0.50 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read 75.50
15.54 MB/sec [256K blocks]
note: i think it's funny that i have such good altivec results - does XBench only use one cpu for those tests?
There is a separate thread dedicated to Xbench-tests in the Mac OS X forum, I advice to use that one for non-G5 macs, because this is off-topic IMO.
Originally posted by Zapchud
Apparantly it does use single CPU's only, except for the threading tests, where you also see that your PowerMac does significantly worse than in the regular CPU-test.
There is a separate thread dedicated to Xbench-tests in the Mac OS X forum, I advice to use that one for non-G5 macs, because this is off-topic IMO.
if it works that way it should probably be noted that the final number in 'Results' is not very useful to compare overall system speed. also you can't hope for much better numbers when it comes to disk performance - the HD-technology didn't make a huge step forward just because there is a PPC970
It's spelled "MAXON" not "MAXXON"
You need as much work on improving spelling as I do
Jesus. You like Lightwave's workflow and interface? You are sick
You need as much work on improving spelling as I do
Hey, I don't USE the program, you can't expect me to spell it right...
:P
Re: Lightwave. There's something interesting about that. When I first started using Lightwave...I carped about the fact there were 'NO ICONS!?' However, when you read manuals such as the brilliant 'Inside Lightwave 7', it's 'Written' icons greatly speed up your understanding of what you're finding and what it does. As opposed to that 'icon/blob' thing one has to find and understand. After a while, Newtek's approach made great sense to me. I suppose that and the fact that Lightwave is widely used for T.V and Film production speaks volumes for it's 'production orientated' interface.
Still, I do like icons.
It's interesting that Xsi is more like Lightwave in this respect.
And Maya is more like Cinema.
Just a superficial observation on icons vs text interfaces...
Lemon Bon Bon
Originally posted by moox12
If that?s so, it will be shame from Apple to add a keyboard like that with an Pro machine.
Can someone explain to me what is so terrible about those keyboards?
Originally posted by Lemon Bon Bon
It's interesting that Xsi is more like Lightwave in this respect.
And Maya is more like Cinema.
Just a superficial observation on icons vs text interfaces...
Lemon Bon Bon
I notice the same thing too
Cinema's interface started looking like Maya since version 6. When I launch the app in front of people many of them do think it is Maya.
Even XSI and LW have similar interface I prefer XSI over LW. Again I just hate LW's workflow (separate modeling, animation environoment sucks)
Originally posted by ryukyu
Can someone explain to me what is so terrible about those keyboards?
It's more like a BMW with an Pinto dashboard.
Originally posted by keyboardf12
damn hawkman, that's one cynical statement
You of course will be proved wrong over the next 2 weeks
A healthy skepticism (possibly descending into cynicism at times) has stood me in good stead for fifty three years, and seems justified in this case in light of the following:
One week of "shipping" seems to have landed low end G5s into the hands of four individuals/universities ( here , here , here , and here ) and they have already written off one whole country.
On Saturday I trekked over to the WILLOW BEND apple store where all of the employees were decked out with black T-shirts with a gradient G5 logo on the back. They were all were staring aimlessly at a rotating halogen lit turntable with a little card that read "G5 coming soon"---that pretty well sums up the situation in my mind.
Personnally, I am going to stand down my anticipation level back to "defcon 1" so that if my 2Ghz G5 backorder from July 6th actually ships in five days as scheduled, it will come as an unexpected surprise.
Originally posted by moox12
It's more like a BMW with an Pinto dashboard.
Can you be a little more specific?
I've seen them and I don't see anything so terrible about them.
Is it just because it was first introduced with the eMac, so people's perception is that it's low end?
To be honest, I don't think the pro keyboard that came with my Quicksilver is all that great either, but it does the job.
Originally posted by ryukyu
Can you be a little more specific?
I've seen them and I don't see anything so terrible about them.
Is it just because it was first introduced with the eMac, so people's perception is that it's low end?
To be honest, I don't think the pro keyboard that came with my Quicksilver is all that great either, but it does the job.
Too me, there is just *no* quality at all in it compared to the black 'Pro' item.
The plastic the keys are made of feels cheap, cheap, cheap! The action of the keys is plain awful. The angle is also all wrong for me, as I like flat keyboards.
Also the USB ports on the back are not as useful for peripherals as they were when they were located on the side. I found I had to loop cables around and it caused all sorts of hassle that never happened with the 'pro' item...
Also, after a few months usage, the white finish looks like ass. I have seen them absolutely filthy in some stores after only a few weeks... This never happened on the black items.
All in all, they are bloody awful.