Options

New Computer Time: Why Not Apple?

12467

Comments

  • Options
    wxwaxwxwax Registered Users Posts: 15,471 Major grins
    edited May 24, 2006
    DavidTO wrote:
    I don't know how you expect to get by with only 40GB, myself. I keep all of my photos off my internal drive, and I still have about 75Gb of my 100GB used...
    Point taken. I'm currently using 41GB.
    Sid.
    Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
    http://www.mcneel.com/users/jb/foghorn/ill_shut_up.au
  • Options
    wxwaxwxwax Registered Users Posts: 15,471 Major grins
    edited May 24, 2006
    Mongrel wrote:
    Patch, here's the link to the test...

    http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic2/145693


    Took me 120 seconds on CS.

    Pentium 4, 2.67 GHz
    1 GB
    Sid.
    Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
    http://www.mcneel.com/users/jb/foghorn/ill_shut_up.au
  • Options
    marlofmarlof Registered Users Posts: 1,833 Major grins
    edited May 24, 2006
    41s, AMD3700+, 2GB RAM, PSCS2, WinXPSP2

    it's good to know that I can blur any image in less than 3/4 of a minute. it may help with some of my lesser pictures.
    enjoy being here while getting there
  • Options
    wxwaxwxwax Registered Users Posts: 15,471 Major grins
    edited May 24, 2006
    marlof wrote:
    41s, AMD3700+, 2GB RAM, PSCS2, WinXPSP2

    it's good to know that I can blur any image in less than 3/4 of a minute. it may help with some of my lesser pictures.
    lol3.gif
    Sid.
    Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
    http://www.mcneel.com/users/jb/foghorn/ill_shut_up.au
  • Options
    gusgus Registered Users Posts: 16,209 Major grins
    edited May 24, 2006
    wxwax wrote:
    Took me 120 seconds on CS.

    Pentium 4, 2.67 GHz
    1 GB

    29 seconds exactly for me.

    intel 2.8 gig 800FSB dual core
    2 gig ram (533mhz Twinmos)
    128MB 6600GT PCI express video card
    CS2

    Ta-darrrrrrrrrrrrr !!!
  • Options
    ChrisJChrisJ Registered Users Posts: 2,164 Major grins
    edited May 24, 2006
    That was fun, but it makes me wanna upgrade...

    78.5 seconds

    Athlon XP 2700+ (2.16 GHz)
    1 Gig DDR RAM @333 MHz
    WinXPsp2, PSCS2

    I closed down all of my open apps and it shaved off a whole 2 seconds!
    Chris
  • Options
    wxwaxwxwax Registered Users Posts: 15,471 Major grins
    edited May 24, 2006
    ChrisJ wrote:
    That was fun, but it makes me wanna upgrade...
    rolleyes1.gif
    Sid.
    Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
    http://www.mcneel.com/users/jb/foghorn/ill_shut_up.au
  • Options
    wxwaxwxwax Registered Users Posts: 15,471 Major grins
    edited May 24, 2006
    gus wrote:
    29 seconds exactly for me.

    intel 2.8 gig 800FSB dual core
    2 gig ram (533mhz Twinmos)
    128MB 6600GT PCI express video card
    CS2

    Ta-darrrrrrrrrrrrr !!!
    Wow.
    Sid.
    Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
    http://www.mcneel.com/users/jb/foghorn/ill_shut_up.au
  • Options
    gusgus Registered Users Posts: 16,209 Major grins
    edited May 24, 2006
    wxwax wrote:
    Wow.

    Photoshop can use the dual core well...not a lot else about can atm...i think this is why its so fast as well as the ram being fast.

    Are you looking at a dual ?
  • Options
    gubbsgubbs Registered Users Posts: 3,166 Major grins
    edited May 24, 2006
    FWIW, there's another ps benchmark thread here
  • Options
    MongrelMongrel Registered Users Posts: 622 Major grins
    edited May 24, 2006
    ahhh.....
    gubbs wrote:
    FWIW, there's another ps benchmark thread here

    THAT'S the one I ran first! I had it saved as an action so I could run it after tuning my system.

    The one above is heavier than the one linked to in Andy's original post.

    So I'm at three minutes on that one and 80secs on the other one.

    thanks Gubbs!
    If every keystroke was a shutter press I'd be a pro by now...
  • Options
    DoctorItDoctorIt Administrators Posts: 11,951 moderator
    edited May 24, 2006
    holy crap I looked away and this grew to 10 pages! :uhoh

    We just got 2 new duo-core PC's in the lab, and one new MacBook - gonna give that test a whirl when I get in this morning.
    naughty.gif
    Erik
    moderator of: The Flea Market [ guidelines ]


  • Options
    MongrelMongrel Registered Users Posts: 622 Major grins
    edited May 24, 2006
    Looking forward...
    to that Doc thumb.gif

    I'd really love to see a benchmark on an 20" iMac core-duo with 2GB of ram. Price-wise that's about as much as I could envision spending on a system ($2000 +\- ?...) PC or Mac.
    If every keystroke was a shutter press I'd be a pro by now...
  • Options
    bwgbwg Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 2,119 SmugMug Employee
    edited May 24, 2006
    DoctorIt wrote:
    holy crap I looked away and this grew to 10 pages! :uhoh

    We just got 2 new duo-core PC's in the lab, and one new MacBook - gonna give that test a whirl when I get in this morning.
    naughty.gif
    core-duo, not duo-core

    i only say that because duo-core can be more easily confused with dual-core which is not exactly the same thing as core-duo.

    and because i'm annoyingly pedantic.
    Pedal faster
  • Options
    gubbsgubbs Registered Users Posts: 3,166 Major grins
    edited May 24, 2006
    Mongrel wrote:
    to that Doc thumb.gif

    I'd really love to see a benchmark on an 20" iMac core-duo with 2GB of ram. Price-wise that's about as much as I could envision spending on a system ($2000 +\- ?...) PC or Mac.
    79 secs for 2gb ram
    82secs for 1gb ram

    for the retouch pro test
  • Options
    patch29patch29 Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 2,928 Major grins
    edited May 24, 2006
    So far I have only run the test on my

    G5 dual proc 2.7ghtz 8 gb ram CS2

    Retouch Pro

    43 sec, 8 bit file
    53 sec, 16 bit file

    Fred Miranda

    21 secs
  • Options
    patch29patch29 Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 2,928 Major grins
    edited May 24, 2006
    Now the benchmarks on my Macbook

    core duo 2.0ghtz, 2 gb ram, CS 2 (tryout)

    booted in OSX

    RetouchPRO

    81 sec, 8 bit
    130 sec, 16 bit

    Fred Miranda

    36 sec

    booted in XP CS2 (tryout)

    RetouchPRO

    65 sec, 8 bit
    72 sec, 16 bit

    Fred Miranda

    26 sec
  • Options
    patch29patch29 Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 2,928 Major grins
    edited May 24, 2006
    Benchmarks for my G4 Ti Powerbook 1ghtz 1gb ram CS2

    RetouchPRO

    200 sec, 8 bit
    256 sec, 16 bit

    Fred Miranda

    98 sec
  • Options
    gubbsgubbs Registered Users Posts: 3,166 Major grins
    edited May 24, 2006
    patch29 wrote:
    Now the benchmarks on my Macbook

    core duo 2.0ghtz, 2 gb ram, CS 2 (tryout)

    booted in OSX

    RetouchPRO

    81 sec, 8 bit
    130 sec, 16 bit

    Fred Miranda

    36 sec

    booted in XP CS2 (tryout)

    RetouchPRO

    65 sec, 8 bit
    72 sec, 16 bit

    Fred Miranda

    26 sec
    Patch, do you reckon the xp booted times give an indication of the likely speed increases once the universal version of ps is released, or doesn't it work like that ??
  • Options
    patch29patch29 Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 2,928 Major grins
    edited May 24, 2006
    gubbs wrote:
    Patch, do you reckon the xp booted times give an indication of the likely speed increases once the universal version of ps is released, or doesn't it work like that ??

    I don't know but I do hope that it is at least that fast with CS3. :D
  • Options
    patch29patch29 Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 2,928 Major grins
    edited May 24, 2006
    OK, since this is starting to head a little off topic and these tests could be useful to other buyers, I started a benchmark test thread here. Please also post your results there. Thanks. thumb.gif
  • Options
    wxwaxwxwax Registered Users Posts: 15,471 Major grins
    edited May 24, 2006
    gus wrote:
    Photoshop can use the dual core well...not a lot else about can atm...i think this is why its so fast as well as the ram being fast.

    Are you looking at a dual ?
    Absolutely.
    Sid.
    Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
    http://www.mcneel.com/users/jb/foghorn/ill_shut_up.au
  • Options
    NHBubbaNHBubba Registered Users Posts: 342 Major grins
    edited May 24, 2006
    Mongrel wrote:
    I'd really love to see a benchmark on an 20" iMac core-duo with 2GB of ram.
    Did the RetouchPro radial blur test on a brand-spanking-new 20" iMac 'core-duo' in an apple store a few months ago. It only had 512 MB of RAM and did not have CS2, just CS. But it scored 1:24.

    Of note is that a dual processor G5 based PowerMac adjacent to it also w/ 512MB of RAM and running CS only scored 1 second faster at 1:23. As I said, that leads me to think that either the 'rosetta' emulation required to run p-shop doesn't result in as much of a performance impact as one might think... or the Intel chips are just that much faster than the old PPC G5's..
    bigwebguy wrote:
    core-duo, not duo-core

    i only say that because duo-core can be more easily confused with dual-core which is not exactly the same thing as core-duo.
    Is this true?! I thought the 'duo-core' trade name was Apple's cutsey way of saying dual-core.. I always attributed the very good p-shop performance the new 'core-duo' products demonstrated was due to the fact that they had dual cores..
  • Options
    wxwaxwxwax Registered Users Posts: 15,471 Major grins
    edited May 24, 2006
    I'm curious about the impact Patch's 8GB of RAM had on the test.

    I really hadn't considered going above 2GB on whatever machine I buy.
    Sid.
    Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
    http://www.mcneel.com/users/jb/foghorn/ill_shut_up.au
  • Options
    bwgbwg Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 2,119 SmugMug Employee
    edited May 24, 2006
    NHBubba wrote:
    Is this true?! I thought the 'duo-core' trade name was Apple's cutsey way of saying dual-core.. I always attributed the very good p-shop performance the new 'core-duo' products demonstrated was due to the fact that they had dual cores..

    core-duo is intel's name for their new architecture of dual core chips. they had dual core processors previously but they were a different (older) architecture.
    Pedal faster
  • Options
    mercphotomercphoto Registered Users Posts: 4,550 Major grins
    edited May 24, 2006
    NHBubba wrote:
    Did the RetouchPro radial blur test on a brand-spanking-new 20" iMac 'core-duo' in an apple store a few months ago. It only had 512 MB of RAM and did not have CS2, just CS. But it scored 1:24.

    Of note is that a dual processor G5 based PowerMac adjacent to it also w/ 512MB of RAM and running CS only scored 1 second faster at 1:23. As I said, that leads me to think that either the 'rosetta' emulation required to run p-shop doesn't result in as much of a performance impact as one might think... or the Intel chips are just that much faster than the old PPC G5's..
    Rosetta definitely slows things down. So once we get a Universal Binary of Photoshop that Core Duo will get quite a bit faster than the G5 iMac. Two things to remember is the impact of Rosetta, and also the impact of two cores versus one core. Not all applications can make any real use of two cores, but Photoshop absolutely can.
    Bill Jurasz - Mercury Photography - Cedar Park, TX
    A former sports shooter
    Follow me at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/bjurasz/
    My Etsy store: https://www.etsy.com/shop/mercphoto?ref=hdr_shop_menu
  • Options
    bwgbwg Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 2,119 SmugMug Employee
    edited May 24, 2006
    mercphoto wrote:
    Rosetta definitely slows things down. So once we get a Universal Binary of Photoshop that Core Duo will get quite a bit faster than the G5 iMac. Two things to remember is the impact of Rosetta, and also the impact of two cores versus one core. Not all applications can make any real use of two cores, but Photoshop absolutely can.
    ok, so now for the million dollar question. does running photoshop through rosetta utilize both cores?
    Pedal faster
  • Options
    patch29patch29 Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 2,928 Major grins
    edited May 24, 2006
    wxwax wrote:
    I'm curious about the impact Patch's 8GB of RAM had on the test.

    I really hadn't considered going above 2GB on whatever machine I buy.


    I think it allows me to run a lot of programs and keep going without making the machine usless.

    So, I did another quick test on the G5

    this time I had a lot more going on.

    checking mail
    surfing in safari
    burning a dvd
    bridge processing raw files to jpgs
    quickbooks running
    itunes playing music
    excel running
    journaling software running
    photoshop running the benchmark

    so it did slow me down for the 8 bit retouchpro test

    88 sec vs 43 sec with nothing but safari running.

    I bet it would not have as big a hit if I was not processing files via bridge or burning the DVD, but what kind of test would that be. I am also not running a separate disk for cache so that could slow me down too.
  • Options
    DoctorItDoctorIt Administrators Posts: 11,951 moderator
    edited May 24, 2006
    bigwebguy wrote:
    core-duo, not duo-core

    i only say that because duo-core can be more easily confused with dual-core which is not exactly the same thing as core-duo.

    and because i'm annoyingly pedantic.
    so whats the difference between dual core and core duo? you can't just tell me I'm wrong and not inform me!!!
    :D
    Erik
    moderator of: The Flea Market [ guidelines ]


  • Options
    bwgbwg Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 2,119 SmugMug Employee
    edited May 24, 2006
    DoctorIt wrote:
    so whats the difference between dual core and core duo? you can't just tell me I'm wrong and not inform me!!!
    :D
    you're not wrong...just not entirely accurate.

    Core Duo is intels newest dual core architecture, it's significantly better than their first gen dual core chips that were more or less rushed to market so they could compete w/AMD. "L@@K! we have dual-core too" kinda thing. If you're in the market for an Intel dual core, make sure it's a Core Duo. And since that's not confusing enough, the next revision of this architecture will be renamed to Core2 Duo.

    yeeeah.
    Pedal faster
Sign In or Register to comment.