7.6 GigaFLOPS - How about you?

jeromba · February 1, 2002 3:38AM

On a Dual 800 with 10.1.2 i've got 5443.3 MegaFlops in 2.4 sec.

Not bad ?

mithras · February 1, 2002 6:14AM

I'm very curious to see someone's results with a TiBook G4.

I'm still running on my old "top of the line" Powerbook G3/300 (176 MFLOPS). The wifey is using an iBook 600 (370 MFLOPS). This is all under 10.1.

I'm soon going to grad school, where I'll be running lots of computationally intensive scientific apps (Stata, Mathematica, etc.) I'll get a new computer when I go. I've always liked having a notebook; but if the desktops kick so much butt on DP-enabled, AltiVec-enabled code, I might have to reconsider.

So can someone kindly try this on a TiBook, to compare a reasonably-speedy TiBook G4 to the seriously-speedy DP towers?

[ 02-01-2002: Message edited by: Mithras ]</p>

krassy · February 1, 2002 9:47AM

G4/400Mhz AGP 448MB Ram 1275 MFLOPS

bunghole · February 1, 2002 10:38AM

I got 8123 megaflops on my dual 1 gig, the first scores were in the 7800 range, thats damn good, my dual 450 showed 3026 megaflops. 8123 rocks the house.

crusader · February 1, 2002 8:10PM

125.4 Megaflops in 113.6 seconds

iMac 233 (Rev a) OS 9.

pepsi · February 1, 2002 9:25PM

My Dual 450 got 3376.5 Mflops in 6.8 seconds...

nostradamus · February 2, 2002 8:56AM

tt?

nostradamus · February 2, 2002 10:21AM

Any PowerBooks out there?

nostradamus · February 2, 2002 12:07PM

As more of you get your new iMacs, feel free to post results in this thread.

I'm very interested to see how a 800MHz G4 with no L3 cache and on a 100MHz bus does at this benchmark.

thunderpoit · February 2, 2002 12:20PM

867 w/ 384MB and os 10.1.2

altivec on: 3209.9MFLOPS

altivec off: 455.2 MFLOPS

:eek:

so altivec /can/ make a difference

serrano · February 3, 2002 2:00AM

277.7 MF

tt = touble tost?

wyntir · February 3, 2002 2:53AM

Big bad 157.9 Mflops on my 266 Beige G3

mike · February 3, 2002 3:03AM

[quote]Originally posted by janitor:

<strong>tt = touble tost?

</strong><hr></blockquote>

No, I had traveled back in time to post some messages and it stands for time trouble

capt. obvious · February 3, 2002 11:01AM

266mHz PBG3, 10.1.2, 384mb RAM

158mflops in 90.2 sec. after I quit all apps;

146mflops in 97.7 sec. after turned off Altivec code;

145mflops in 98.0 sec. before twiddling anything

thegelding · February 3, 2002 11:08AM

new iMac---4.8 sec with 2777.6 megaflops....so almost exactly half of a dual 800....

[quote]jeromba

On a Dual 800 with 10.1.2 i've got 5443.3 MegaFlops in 2.4 sec <hr></blockquote>

junkyard dawg · February 3, 2002 1:59PM

Cool thread...

System:

Powermac G4 400 MHz "Sawtooth" motherboard w/ AGP.

576 MB RAM

OS X, 10.1.2

MFlops:

Altivec ON: 1367

Altivec OFF: 309

Isn't that Altivec sweet? Wintel users, go put those results in your pipe, and smoke 'em!

jeromba · February 4, 2002 12:26AM

Ok dual 800 on 9.2.2 for a change...

With One Processor: 4,7 sec / 2845.8 MF

With Two: 2.3 sec / 5671.7 MF

Altivec Off (Mono): 33.9 sec / 419.9 MF

Altivec Off (Dual): 16.9 sec / 844.0 MF

cosmo · February 4, 2002 7:30AM

anyone using a "Yikes!" G4? specifically a 350. I'm curious as to whether or not all of the g4s that apple has ever produce can surpass one gigaflop.

also i'm curious if using the older mobo really would make a differance seeing how as it still had 100mhz bus and pc 100 ram.

for those who are confused the yikes! machines used the same motherboard as the b&w g3s. (if you have a g4 with no agp slot you own a yikes! machine)

mike · February 4, 2002 7:48AM

System: PowerMac G4 Dual 1GHZ, 512mb of ram, OS X 10.1.2

Results: 6991.1 Megaflops at default settings

I can tweak it to go higher but the defaul settings seem to be the fair comparison.

pismeov · February 5, 2002 6:44AM

to those who doubt the power of the g4:

ibook 600 mhz w/ 256 megs of ram.

system 9.2.1

419 mflops

compare that to the earliest g4 tower

hehe

[ 02-05-2002: Message edited by: pismeov ]

[ 02-05-2002: Message edited by: pismeov ]</p>

7.6 GigaFLOPS - How about you?

Comments