New To Mac-Forums?

Welcome to our community! Join the discussion today by registering your FREE account. If you have any problems with the registration process, please contact us!

Get your questions answered by community gurus Advice and insight from world-class Apple enthusiasts Exclusive access to members-only contests, giveaways and deals

Join today!

 
Start a Discussion
 

Mac-Forums Brief

Subscribe to Mac-Forums Brief to receive special offers from Mac-Forums partners and sponsors

Join the conversation RSS
Apple Desktops Discussion of Apple's desktop machines including Mac Pro, iMac, Power Mac, and mini

iMac - 3.06 GHz iMac Performance Tests vs. Power Mac, Mac Pro


Post Reply New Thread Subscribe

 
Thread Tools
mac57

 
mac57's Avatar
 
Member Since: Apr 29, 2006
Location: St. Somewhere
Posts: 4,560
mac57 has a brilliant futuremac57 has a brilliant futuremac57 has a brilliant futuremac57 has a brilliant futuremac57 has a brilliant futuremac57 has a brilliant futuremac57 has a brilliant futuremac57 has a brilliant futuremac57 has a brilliant futuremac57 has a brilliant futuremac57 has a brilliant future
Mac Specs: iMac 27" 3.4 GHz, 256 GB SSD, 2 TB HDD, 8 GB RAM

mac57 is offline
Folks, I have assembled a small table of XBench summary results for the new 3.06 GHz iMac vs. the 2.3 GHz PowerMac G5, the 2.08 GHz Mac Pro and the 3.2 GHz Mac Pro. These results follow below:

http://www.campbell-tx.net/Misc/imac.png

As you can see, the new iMac handily outperforms the older G5. It slightly outperforms the 2.8 GHz Mac Pro, and puts in a decent performance against the 3.2 GHz Mac Pro, surprisingly posting a few results that are faster than this fastest Mac on the market today. All in all, I would say that the new 3.06 GHz iMac is darn fast machine!

My Macs: iMac 27" 3.4 GHz, Mac Pro 3.2 GHz, PowerMac G5 Quad 2.5 GHz, G4 Cube with 1.2 GHz Upgrade
My iStuff: 64GB iPhone 5, 64GB iPad4, 30GB iPod Video, 16GB iPod Touch
My OS': Mac OS X Lion, Mac OS X Snow Leopard, Mac OS X Tiger, Mac OS 9.2.2, openSUSE 10.3
I was on the Mac-Forums honor roll for September 2007
QUOTE Thanks
sanity1082

 
sanity1082's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jun 17, 2007
Posts: 882
sanity1082 has a spectacular aura about
Mac Specs: macbook/iphone/ipod nano/ipod shuffle

sanity1082 is offline
interesting comparison. i know i am looking at a mac pro vs a top of the line imac. it sounds like you are leaning towards the imac
QUOTE Thanks
bryphotoguy

 
bryphotoguy's Avatar
 
Member Since: Feb 02, 2007
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 3,978
bryphotoguy is just really nicebryphotoguy is just really nicebryphotoguy is just really nicebryphotoguy is just really nicebryphotoguy is just really nice
Mac Specs: Quad 2.8GHz Mac Pro, Edge iPhone

bryphotoguy is offline
I'll add some info for 8800 GT later so the graphics option is a fairer fight


January 2008 Member of the Month
QUOTE Thanks
D3v1L80Y

 
D3v1L80Y's Avatar
 
Member Since: Feb 02, 2004
Location: PA
Posts: 12,456
D3v1L80Y has a reputation beyond reputeD3v1L80Y has a reputation beyond reputeD3v1L80Y has a reputation beyond reputeD3v1L80Y has a reputation beyond reputeD3v1L80Y has a reputation beyond reputeD3v1L80Y has a reputation beyond reputeD3v1L80Y has a reputation beyond reputeD3v1L80Y has a reputation beyond reputeD3v1L80Y has a reputation beyond reputeD3v1L80Y has a reputation beyond reputeD3v1L80Y has a reputation beyond repute
Mac Specs: MacBook

D3v1L80Y is offline
While I don't deny that a newer computer would be faster, XBench is pretty much completely unreliable as a measurement of real world performance, or even as a comparative measurement.

That goes for almost any 'benchmarking' app out there. Nothing compares to a real world, hands-on test.
Yet, if I had to choose a 'benchmarking' app, I would suggest Geekbench

__________________________________________________
Posting and YOU|Forum Community Guidelines|The Apple Product Cycle|Forum Courtesy

mac: a waterproof raincoat made of rubberized fabric
MAC: a data communication protocol sub-layer, also known as the Media Access Control
Mac: a brand name which covers several lines of personal computers designed, developed, and marketed by Apple Inc.

QUOTE Thanks
mac57

 
mac57's Avatar
 
Member Since: Apr 29, 2006
Location: St. Somewhere
Posts: 4,560
mac57 has a brilliant futuremac57 has a brilliant futuremac57 has a brilliant futuremac57 has a brilliant futuremac57 has a brilliant futuremac57 has a brilliant futuremac57 has a brilliant futuremac57 has a brilliant futuremac57 has a brilliant futuremac57 has a brilliant futuremac57 has a brilliant future
Mac Specs: iMac 27" 3.4 GHz, 256 GB SSD, 2 TB HDD, 8 GB RAM

mac57 is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanity1082 View Post
interesting comparison. i know i am looking at a mac pro vs a top of the line imac. it sounds like you are leaning towards the imac
Yup, I am leaning towards the iMac. I have pretty much decided. Now I just need to get to my local Apple Store and see if they have the config I want, or whether I need to order it from the Apple site.

My Macs: iMac 27" 3.4 GHz, Mac Pro 3.2 GHz, PowerMac G5 Quad 2.5 GHz, G4 Cube with 1.2 GHz Upgrade
My iStuff: 64GB iPhone 5, 64GB iPad4, 30GB iPod Video, 16GB iPod Touch
My OS': Mac OS X Lion, Mac OS X Snow Leopard, Mac OS X Tiger, Mac OS 9.2.2, openSUSE 10.3
I was on the Mac-Forums honor roll for September 2007
QUOTE Thanks
slinki

 
slinki's Avatar
 
Member Since: Oct 14, 2007
Location: Northern Ireland
Posts: 144
slinki is an unknown at this point
Mac Specs: 24" iMac, 2.8GHz Core 2 Extreme, 500+500GB HD, 4GB RAM, OSX 10.5.1

slinki is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by bryphotoguy View Post
I'll add some info for 8800 GT later so the graphics option is a fairer fight
Look forward to this
QUOTE Thanks
Blizare

 
Member Since: Mar 27, 2008
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 234
Blizare can only hope to improve
Mac Specs: Mac Pro 14gb ram 24" LED Cd & 23" Cd

Blizare is offline
If you choose an imac over a mac pro......it's cause you can't afford a mac pro.
QUOTE Thanks
mac57

 
mac57's Avatar
 
Member Since: Apr 29, 2006
Location: St. Somewhere
Posts: 4,560
mac57 has a brilliant futuremac57 has a brilliant futuremac57 has a brilliant futuremac57 has a brilliant futuremac57 has a brilliant futuremac57 has a brilliant futuremac57 has a brilliant futuremac57 has a brilliant futuremac57 has a brilliant futuremac57 has a brilliant futuremac57 has a brilliant future
Mac Specs: iMac 27" 3.4 GHz, 256 GB SSD, 2 TB HDD, 8 GB RAM

mac57 is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blizare View Post
If you choose an imac over a mac pro......it's cause you can't afford a mac pro.
Not true. I could afford either one. As I have posted elsewhere, I eventually went for the Mac Pro, but that was almost a personal decision not a technical one.

In general, the two products are very close together at this point if you recognize that most programs are not yet able to take advantage of very many cores due to the fact that they are not threaded for it yet.

Mac Pro:

3.2 GHz Penryn
Up to 1 TB hard drive per slot
>4 GB RAM
nVidia 8800 graphics

iMac

3.06 GHz Penryn
up to 1 TB hard drive
Up to 4 GB RAM
nVidia 8800 graphics

For most people, 1 TB of disk and 4 GB of RAM is all they will ever need. Hence the iMac will meet most people's needs. The rest of the major specs are close enough that you have to question the enormous pricing differential. The iMac has real advantages in its compact form factor, good looks and wonderful display. The Mac Pro has advantages in its expandability, (slightly) higher speed and ability to support one or more non Apple displays.

I really had to think about it. In the end, I had personally decided that I wanted at least 4 cores in my next machine. If Apple had put a quad core in the iMac vs. the current dual core, there is no question in my mind that I would be driving a new iMac now, not the Mac Pro.

That having been said, I am very pleased with my purchase of the Mac Pro. I am sure that when it arrives it will be an amazing system.

My Macs: iMac 27" 3.4 GHz, Mac Pro 3.2 GHz, PowerMac G5 Quad 2.5 GHz, G4 Cube with 1.2 GHz Upgrade
My iStuff: 64GB iPhone 5, 64GB iPad4, 30GB iPod Video, 16GB iPod Touch
My OS': Mac OS X Lion, Mac OS X Snow Leopard, Mac OS X Tiger, Mac OS 9.2.2, openSUSE 10.3
I was on the Mac-Forums honor roll for September 2007
QUOTE Thanks
Blizare

 
Member Since: Mar 27, 2008
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 234
Blizare can only hope to improve
Mac Specs: Mac Pro 14gb ram 24" LED Cd & 23" Cd

Blizare is offline
My Mac pro is way sexier to look at than my 24" imac.

upgradeable and dual displays and the fact that SOOOOON graphics intensive programs will take advantage of 4 and 8 core processors. Those are the deal breakers really if you going to use the power.

Your going to love it
QUOTE Thanks
mac57

 
mac57's Avatar
 
Member Since: Apr 29, 2006
Location: St. Somewhere
Posts: 4,560
mac57 has a brilliant futuremac57 has a brilliant futuremac57 has a brilliant futuremac57 has a brilliant futuremac57 has a brilliant futuremac57 has a brilliant futuremac57 has a brilliant futuremac57 has a brilliant futuremac57 has a brilliant futuremac57 has a brilliant futuremac57 has a brilliant future
Mac Specs: iMac 27" 3.4 GHz, 256 GB SSD, 2 TB HDD, 8 GB RAM

mac57 is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blizare View Post
My Mac pro is way sexier to look at than my 24" imac.
I think they both look fabulous, each in their own way. Personally, I find the looks of the iMac to be a major draw for the product. It is an incredible design - so eye catching, so beautiful.

The Mac Pro is a good looking box as well: not as "eye popping" as the iMac, but still very "eye catching". Its design and structure telegraphs what it is supposed to be: durable, powerful, professional.

Apple has done a nice job with the mechanical design of both of them.

My Macs: iMac 27" 3.4 GHz, Mac Pro 3.2 GHz, PowerMac G5 Quad 2.5 GHz, G4 Cube with 1.2 GHz Upgrade
My iStuff: 64GB iPhone 5, 64GB iPad4, 30GB iPod Video, 16GB iPod Touch
My OS': Mac OS X Lion, Mac OS X Snow Leopard, Mac OS X Tiger, Mac OS 9.2.2, openSUSE 10.3
I was on the Mac-Forums honor roll for September 2007
QUOTE Thanks
bryphotoguy

 
bryphotoguy's Avatar
 
Member Since: Feb 02, 2007
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 3,978
bryphotoguy is just really nicebryphotoguy is just really nicebryphotoguy is just really nicebryphotoguy is just really nicebryphotoguy is just really nice
Mac Specs: Quad 2.8GHz Mac Pro, Edge iPhone

bryphotoguy is offline
My Score was 183.40. I was at 240 before the Disk Test started. I really need to do something to boost the speed.

CPU- 189.50
Thread- 464.96
Memory- 180.47
Quartz Graphics- 258.56
User I/F- 438.97
Disk- 72.06


January 2008 Member of the Month
QUOTE Thanks
dtravis7

 
dtravis7's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jan 04, 2005
Location: Modesto, Ca.
Posts: 27,914
dtravis7 has a reputation beyond reputedtravis7 has a reputation beyond reputedtravis7 has a reputation beyond reputedtravis7 has a reputation beyond reputedtravis7 has a reputation beyond reputedtravis7 has a reputation beyond reputedtravis7 has a reputation beyond reputedtravis7 has a reputation beyond reputedtravis7 has a reputation beyond reputedtravis7 has a reputation beyond reputedtravis7 has a reputation beyond repute
Mac Specs: iMac 2.4 C2D 10.10.1, iMac 2.16 C2d 10.6.8, Macbook2007 10.8.4, Mac Mini 10.8.4, iPhone 3GS Note 8!!

dtravis7 is offline
What DB said is totally correct. I really do not trust any synthetic benchmark completely. Use real applications or Games.

I have had issues with XBench for years. I have upgraded my systems and they were slower after the upgrade, MUCH slower but in every application, File transfer test, Timed test doing video compression, Conversion, the Upgraded system was WAY faster.

Do not trust Xbench.

I took screen shots once for a doubting friend. He no longer doubts.
QUOTE Thanks
bryphotoguy

 
bryphotoguy's Avatar
 
Member Since: Feb 02, 2007
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 3,978
bryphotoguy is just really nicebryphotoguy is just really nicebryphotoguy is just really nicebryphotoguy is just really nicebryphotoguy is just really nice
Mac Specs: Quad 2.8GHz Mac Pro, Edge iPhone

bryphotoguy is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by dtravis7 View Post
Do not trust Xbench.
Neither do I.


January 2008 Member of the Month
QUOTE Thanks

Post Reply New Thread Subscribe


« Memory | iMac G5 won't come out of display sleep »
Thread Tools

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
iMac v Macbook Pro v Mac Pro Holiday Apple Desktops 2 04-28-2008 09:31 PM
HD Video editing Mac book or Mac Pro? MACHD Movies and Video 8 05-17-2007 06:45 PM
Mac Pro or iMac John Picton Switcher Hangout 10 02-10-2007 02:29 PM
Is it worth to switch from iMac G4 to iMac G5?? Mainyehc Apple Desktops 12 03-13-2006 07:21 PM

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:57 AM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
X

Welcome to Mac-Forums.com

Create your username to jump into the discussion!

New members like you have made this community the ultimate source for your Mac since 2003!


(4 digit year)

Already a member?