Computer Benchmark Tests with Photoshop

wxwax · November 10, 2006

Andy wrote:

?

The 3mghz Mac Pro costs $800 more than the 2.66.

So the 2 second edge over Charlie cost $800, or $400 per second.

Hey, are you eyeing the octopus?

Andy · November 10, 2006

wxwax wrote:

The 3mghz Mac Pro costs $800 more than the 2.66.

So the 2 second edge over Charlie cost $800, or $400 per second.

Hey, are you eyeing the octopus?

I'd like to see a 2.66 box vs. mine, running:

* CS2
* Bridge
* Firefox 2
* Thunderbird
* Apple Mail
* Safari
* Excel
* Parallels, with IE6 or IE7 going, and i2e

Octopus ?

gus · November 10, 2006

Andy wrote:

Octopus ?

Hmmmmm........very nice.

Andy · November 10, 2006

gus wrote:

Hmmmmm........very nice.

:eat

wxwax · November 10, 2006

Andy wrote:

Octopus ?

The quad dual, coming out in January or so.

Andy · November 10, 2006

wxwax wrote:

The quad dual, coming out in January or so.

Oh. Well, probably not, since I only just got this one

:uhoh

wxwax · November 10, 2006

Andy wrote:

Oh. Well, probably not, since I only just got this one

:uhoh

Hey, that's two looong months away.

thebigsky · November 10, 2006

I just tried the 16 bit Retouch Pro test.

Whilst also running:-

Lightroom (sharpened an image)
Eye TV live digital recording
Thunderbird (receive mail)
Firefox (just displaying smugmug)
Safari (did a google search)
Emptied the trash (10 raw files)

38 Seconds

Did it again with none of the above:-

37 Seconds (whoops. sorry, hadn't quit live TV recording)

Did it again without TV recording 34 Seconds

Wow, these MacPro's are some beasts, the fans didn't even speed up.

Charlie

cbmazur · November 12, 2006

My results using my "field computer"

ACER - Acpire 3620 w/
XP SP2
Intel Celeron M 1.6GHz
40G HD w/60G external
512MB ram
Now im not sure if it makes that much time differance but I have my CS2 loaded on my external hd and have it running through the usb 2.0 port. But anyways the time I got on the RetouchPro 8 bit was............

3 Minutes 52.4 Seconds......

I guess its not too bad for a $400 laptop thats been to combat.....lol

marlinspike · November 13, 2006

DavidTO wrote:

I asked a friend with a new Core 2 Duo MacBook Pro, 2.16ghz, 2GB RAM to run these tests, this is what he got:

Fred Miranda: 22 seconds

RetouchPro (8bit file): 68 seconds

My Core 2 Duo Thinkpad (T60 2007-7JU, 2.16ghz Core 2 Duo, 1gb ram, I swapped out the 5400rpm HDD with a 7200rpm one) with same CPU and 1/2 that amount of ram did the retouchpro in 57 seconds. Windows XP Pro > OS X

DavidTO · November 13, 2006

marlinspike wrote:

My Core 2 Duo Thinkpad (T60 2007-7JU, 2.16ghz Core 2 Duo, 1gb ram, I swapped out the 5400rpm HDD with a 7200rpm one) with same CPU and 1/2 that amount of ram did the retouchpro in 57 seconds. Windows XP Pro > OS X

Yeah, CS2 on an Intel processor is taking a performance hit until Adobe comes out with the new version, since CS2 was not written for an Intel processor and runs under emulation.

marlinspike · November 13, 2006

DavidTO wrote:

Yeah, CS2 on an Intel processor is taking a performance hit until Adobe comes out with the new version, since CS2 was not written for an Intel processor and runs under emulation.

Is the same true for Windows CS2 or just Mac CS2? It would seem silly if the same were true for Windows CS2. (also, mine cost several hundred less than the macbook pro...for me anyways - which may be unfair but a custom built unit to the same specs still costs less than the macbook pro - and gets 6 hours of battery life, about 5.5 hours if using wireless, and about 4hr if using wireless with the screen brightness all the way up while doing RAW photo processing).

Andy · November 13, 2006

marlinspike wrote:

Is the same true for Windows CS2 or just Mac CS2? It would seem silly if the same were true for Windows CS2.

Only Mac.

DavidTO · November 13, 2006

marlinspike wrote:

Is the same true for Windows CS2 or just Mac CS2? It would seem silly if the same were true for Windows CS2.

Sorry, I wasn't clear. Just Mac. Adobe hasn't caught up yet with the migration to Intel.

Poseidon · November 13, 2006

Just ran the retouch pro on my Sharp notebook.... 5:31 seconds!

AMD 64 2700+
512MB DDR
60GB Hard drive.

I am off to the MacPro and see what happens there.

MacPro 2.66GHz box stock.... 28 seconds!

Ran both tests in 8 bit mode.

davemj98 · November 14, 2006

Sony
While running 109 processes on my VGC RC210G with 3GB ram and an ATI x1600 video card w/512 v/ram at 3GHz, retouch pro on CS2 in 88 seconds.

rutt · November 22, 2006

After a two year wait, I finally bought a 17" MacBook Pro with 3GB of memory. It's 2.33GHz and has a Core 2 Duo. Cool!

Now should I keep it?

Executive summary: Much faster (about 2x) than fastest PowerBook G4 ever made. Roughly equal to 2 X 2.5GHz G5. Consider an upgrade from your PowerBook. Wait for CS3 if you have a 2xG5.

Datails: At this point I have 3 macs at hand so I thought I'd do some comparisons:

MBP = MacBook Pro / Core 2 Duo @ 2.33GHz / 3GB
G5 = G5 / 2 X GHz G5 @ 2.5GHz / 4GB
PB = Poerbook G4 / 1.67 G4 @ 1.67 / 2GB

I the three benchmarks that have become standard here, and a few more of my own which are more representative of the things I actually do which are preformance issues. There are:

SB8/SB16 = Surface blur with radius 7, threshold 13. This is one of the steps of the workflow I use for ballet theater shots, and in 16 bit mode it's dog slow. So this matters to me. It's also a part of the very best noise reduction workflows and a big deal for portraits which sharpen hair and eyes while softening skin imperfections. So it should matter to you, too.
CJPG = Capture 44 jpegs, about 90MB, from Compact Flash card via USB2. I used Unix commands in the terminal which are and very accurate to time.
CRAW = Capture 44 raws, about 548MB, from Compact Flash card via USB2. Similar to 2, but much larger files obviously. The two capture steps are really important to me during ballet shoots because I want to get as much info about how I'm doing during intermissions and other breaks.
Bridge = Open a folder with the results of 2 & 3 in Adobe Bridge. Wait until the pinwheel in the bottom left stops spinning.
PMech = Like Bridge, but with Photo Mechanic.

Results:

Comments: SB8, too fast to measure on mbp, so I took it as a lesson. Consider doing this in 8 bits since it probably doesn't really matter to final quality for what I'm doing. PMech was just too jast to measure on MBP. Cool!

What's going on with CRAW? I suppose this is really limited by the speed of the CF card and reader. Why slow on the G5? It's going through a USB hub, which might be an issue. Why isn't the MBP faster than the PB or at least as fast? Perhaps there is some tuning issue? In any case, it's not really a big deal.

System tuning? Charles Richmond used to have a performance tuning hack which were supposed to make the system use big memory more effectively. I wonder if this could possibly still be relevant. I wonder if Charles is still out there. Other tuning hints?

rutt · November 24, 2006

What's actually pretty amazing is how close Rosetta based CS2 is to native (on XP). For example I ran RTP8 in 48 and RTP16 in 78 seconds on a system very comparable to this:

marlinspike wrote:

My Core 2 Duo Thinkpad (T60 2007-7JU, 2.16ghz Core 2 Duo, 1gb ram, I swapped out the 5400rpm HDD with a 7200rpm one) with same CPU and 1/2 that amount of ram did the retouchpro in 57 seconds. Windows XP Pro > OS X

I'm not sure whether it's a little faster than his system or a little slower, but in any case it's impressive for emulation.

marlinspike · November 24, 2006

rutt wrote:

What's actually pretty amazing is how close Rosetta based CS2 is to native (on XP). For example I ran RTP8 in 48 and RTP16 in 78 seconds on a system very comparable to this:

Originally Posted by marlinspike
My Core 2 Duo Thinkpad (T60 2007-7JU, 2.16ghz Core 2 Duo, 1gb ram, I swapped out the 5400rpm HDD with a 7200rpm one) with same CPU and 1/2 that amount of ram did the retouchpro in 57 seconds. Windows XP Pro > OS X

I'm not sure whether it's a little faster than his system or a little slower, but in any case it's impressive for emulation.

Yeah, but you were on the 2.33ghz Rutt. Both I and the system I was referring to when I said Windowx XP > OS X run the 2.16ghz (and that other system had twice the ram mine has...though there is another 1gb on the way to me), and that other system (which mine is worse than spec wise) took 11 seconds longer than mine...so, just imagine what a 2.33ghz PC would do.

rutt · November 24, 2006

marlinspike wrote:

Yeah, but you were on the 2.33ghz Rutt. Both I and the system I was referring to when I said Windowx XP > OS X run the 2.16ghz (and that other system had twice the ram mine has...though there is another 1gb on the way to me), and that other system (which mine is worse than spec wise) took 11 seconds longer than mine...so, just imagine what a 2.33ghz PC would do.

Actually, I hope you are right and that your test was memory bound or something. I'd like to think that CS3 will offer more than 20% or so speedup.

Are there any apples to apples comparisons. I looked a little and didn't find. What about OS X vs bootcamp with XP on the very same machine?

I'm also interested in Core Duo vs Core 2 Duo. Probably it's back there somewhere, but I didn't find. It would be cool to construct one table for all these numbers.

marlinspike · December 11, 2006

rutt wrote:

Actually, I hope you are right and that your test was memory bound or something. I'd like to think that CS3 will offer more than 20% or so speedup.

Well, looks like the answer is that it's not memory bound, it's all in the cpu. I added a 2nd gb of ram and got the exact same 57 second result for 8 bit retouch pro

patch29 · December 15, 2006

patch29 wrote:

Now the benchmarks on my Macbook

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

booted in OSX

RetouchPRO

130 sec, 16 bit

retested today on my Macbook with PS CS3 Beta

67 sec, 16 bit.

Andy · December 15, 2006

CS3 Much Faster
Mac Pro 3Ghz - CS2

Retouch Pro Test
8-bit: 18 seconds
16-bit: 30 seconds

Fred Miranda Test
8-bit: 8 seconds
16-bit: 13 seconds

MY CS3 Results - Mac Pro 3Ghz:

Retouch Pro Test
8-bit: 14 seconds
16-bit: 19 seconds

Fred Miranda Test
8-bit: 6 seconds
16-bit: 8 seconds

That's a pretty substantial performance boost

Macbook Pro Results (8 bit test only)

Macbook Pro, 17" 2.16ghz processor, 2gb RAM. Photoshop CS2 under Rosetta:

Fred Miranda Test: 34 seconds
Retouch Pro Test: 73 seconds (8bit file)

CS3:
Fred Miranda Test: 19 seconds
Retouch Pro Test: 45 seconds

Also a significant performance boost

Andy · December 15, 2006

patch29 wrote:

retested today on my Macbook with PS CS3 Beta

67 sec, 16 bit.

Macbook pro, 17" w/ 2.16ghz processor. 16-bit retouch pro test w/ CS3: 60seconds

2Gb Ram.

marlinspike · December 16, 2006

Andy wrote:

Macbook Pro Results (8 bit test only)

CS3:
Fred Miranda Test: 19 seconds
Retouch Pro Test: 45 seconds

Also a significant performance boost

8-bit retouch pro test on CS3 beta for windows on a 2.16ghz core 2 duo with 2gb ram (so same specs as yours only Windows): 32 seconds. Windows pwn Mac!!!!

patch29 · December 16, 2006

patch29 wrote:

G5 dual proc 2.7ghtz 8 gb ram CS2

Retouch Pro

53 sec, 16 bit file

retest with CS3

63 sec, 16 bit file

Andy · December 23, 2006

http://hansv.com/cs3/

Apple Wins.

marlinspike · December 23, 2006

I wish I still had CS3 so I could test it for myself. It seems odd that the retouch pro test would find similar improvements on both Windows and Mac (about 11 seconds) but that this test would find a huge improvement in Mac on the first run, and then the retest would take almost twice as long.

clove · January 14, 2007

Fred Miranda: 19 sec
8 bit: 35 sec

AMD 4600 X2 Dual Core 2.4
2 GB RAM
Photoshop CS3
Windows Vista Ultimate (32 bit)

TristanP · February 21, 2007

FM: 27
RP 8 bit: 65

WinXP Pro, SP2
PS CS2 fresh after a reboot
Intel C2D 1.86 GHz (not overclocked)
2 GB RAM
Gigabyte DS3 mobo
XFX 7600 GT video
80/250 GB SATA Seagate HDs

Only cost me $950 w/o my monitor.

Will try again down the road when I overclock it.