PDA

View Full Version : Cinebench R10



kaye
08-13-2007, 07:10 PM
New CINEBENCH version:
http://www.maxon.net/pages/download/cinebench_e.html
Technical Details:
http://www.maxon.net/pages/download/cinebenchtech_e.html

CINEBENCH R10
************************************************** **

Tester : kyum

Processor : G5 2.7GHz DP
MHz : 2700MHz
Number of CPUs : 2
Operating System : OS X 32 BIT 10.4.10

Graphics Card : ATI Radeon X800 XT OpenGL Engine
Resolution : 1920x1200
Color Depth : Millions<millions>

************************************************** **

Rendering (Single CPU): 2011 CB-CPU
Rendering (Multiple CPU): 3665 CB-CPU

Multiprocessor Speedup: 1.82

Shading (OpenGL Standard) : 2848 CB-GFX


************************************************** **

CINEBENCH Default Preferences.

My 23" Apple Cinema HD Display of April, 2005 is the older model with Response Time 16ms. Current models are 14ms and would be slightly faster. Last I looked there were LCD displays below 5ms for gamers. A CRT by definition has a Response Time of 0ms and would be definitely faster.

Anyone else with a G5 Quad or a Mac Pro or earlier, G4, or anything else including a PC run the CINEBENCH R10 benchmark and post? k</millions>

Nicolas
08-14-2007, 03:23 PM
Operating System : OS X 32 BIT 10.4.10<millions></millions>

How could that be?
Thought OSX runs 64BIT on G5 not 32BIT???


Results Windows Vista Business:
CPU: E6600
GFX-Board: GeForce 8800GTX
1 CPU:3040
X CPU:5868
MP Speedup: 1.93x
OpenGL:4003

Regards

Nicolas

kaye
08-15-2007, 07:50 AM
Nicolas,

I was hoping someone would notice that. Yes it appears to me that OSX Tiger runs 64BIT but I looked everywhere including the R10 Prefs and could not find anywhere that R10 was running 64BIT. I did find some comments by PC guys that 64BIT does not run any faster on their machines at 64BIT than 32BIT and a few that said 32BIT ran faster.

Does the Technical Details page mean that a G4 also run at 64BIT? Kind of murky waters. Could be more specific.

Your results, 1.51, 1.65, 1.41 times faster than my G5. Impressive. k

TZ
08-15-2007, 08:08 AM
The application layer or space on G5 is not a full 64-bit.

Geek Patrol has some 32 and 64-bit test results and tools.

And benchmark running in GUI rather than command line tool, is going to be running 32-bit, no?

Thought I read that the Mac Pro was "more" 64-bit machine in some way.

Leopard wss to be the first 'true' 64-bit OS.

And yes, 64-bit does have penalty and overhead possibly, things like registers and 'word size."

But then, I think PCs have been more like G4 and 2GB 32-bit more so than Mac with 4 yrs for G5 to influence the OS and applications and Mac market and begin to make use of more memory space.

kaye
08-15-2007, 09:47 AM
Well that is very interesting TZ. I can get along with 32BIT. Can you run the R10 benchmark? k

TZ
08-15-2007, 10:01 AM
I've tried twice, and it never gets beyond the "Starting...." download part.

And it seems like a flaw between Intego NetBarrier and Firefox when doing ftp. But even after allowing ftp on port 21, it still seems like downloading either has too many users or something. Never had trouble in the past.

Vista feels more "fluid" and faster, so things like downloading and surfing using FireFox seems better... but not download CINEBENCH.

Mac Pro vs PowerMac G5 32 vs 64 bit performance:
http://www.geekpatrol.ca/2006/09/32-bit-vs-64-bit-performance/



Power Mac Summary

Overall performance is down 10% in 64-bit mode. Hardly any tests are appreciably faster in 64-bit mode, and several are noticeably slower (such as most of the integer tests, as well as the dot product test).
Conclusion

It turns out the assertion that software runs faster in 64-bit mode than 32-bit mode is both correct and incorrect; Geekbench runs faster in 64-bit mode on Intel-based Macs, but slower on PowerPC-based Macs. I find this incredibly surprising.

On Intel-based Macs, most of the benchmarks that are slower in 64-bit mode are benchmarks that perform bit operations on 32-bit integers, where the compiler has to emit extra instructions to preserve the semantics of 32-bit arithmetic while using 64-bit registers.

However, extra instructions donít explain the surprising performance hit PowerPC-based Macs experience in 64-bit mode. I havenít had a chance to investigate it, but compiler quality could be a factor; the 64-bit PowerPC is a somewhat exotic platform, and GCC might not be generating great code for it.

I donít think the performance hit in 64-bit mode on PowerPC-based Macs is really something to be concerned about; I think that when 64-bit applications become mainstream, most users will have switched to Intel-based Macs (where 64-bit performance isnít a concern).

Update

Thereís an interest comment (http://macslash.org/comments.pl?sid=6356&cid=113229) over on MacSlash (http://macslash.org/) suggesting why 64-bit performace (compared to 32-bit performace) is better on x86 than PPC:
As someone who used to work at AMD which designed the x86-64 architecture: - 16 integer pipe registers versus 8 in 32 bit mode (of which 6 get used) - Carefully designed CISC so that 64-bit mode takes only 10% more space than 32 bit mode. This is important because the main bottleneck in modern systems is memory speed (hence the constant increase in cache sizes) PowerPC: - no increase in registers - much larger code size increase, although I canít find exact figures.
Mac.Ars takes on 64-bit computing
http://arstechnica.com/articles/columns/mac/mac-02172004.ars

kaye
08-15-2007, 10:52 AM
TZ:

I've tried twice, and it never gets beyond the "Starting...." download part.

And it seems like a flaw between Intego NetBarrier and Firefox when doing ftp. But even after allowing ftp on port 21, it still seems like downloading either has too many users or something. Never had trouble in the past.

Vista feels more "fluid" and faster, so things like downloading and surfing using FireFox seems better... but not download CINEBENCH.OK, maybe later. Anyone else try it? k

Boots
08-15-2007, 05:55 PM
CINEBENCH R10
************************************************** **

Tester : boots

Processor : PowerPC G5 (1.1)
MHz : 2500MHz
Number of CPUs : 4
Operating System : OS X 32 BIT 10.4.10

Graphics Card : nVidia GeForce 7800GTX
Resolution : 2560x1600
Color Depth : Millions

************************************************** **

Rendering (Single CPU): 2019 CB-CPU
Rendering (Multiple CPU): 6829 CB-CPU

Multiprocessor Speedup: 3.38

Shading (OpenGL Standard) : 3327 CB-GFX


************************************************** **

CINEBENCH Default Preferences.

Apple Cinema Display HD 30" (refurbed 2x)

kaye
08-16-2007, 11:37 AM
Thanks Boots. Your results 1.01, 1.86, 1.17 times faster than my G5 and with Apple Cinema Display HD 30" (refurbed 2x). Your Rendering (Multiple CPU) 6829 CB-CPU is amazing. k

kaye
08-17-2007, 06:34 AM
Bare Feats has a review which has several tests of various late model Macs running Cinebench 10:
http://barefeats.com/imacal2.html
Scroll down the page. All stunningly fast from my perspective, particularly that Mac Pro 8c. k

despaxas
08-17-2007, 10:34 AM
I have cinebench10 on my only PC at work:

Processor: Intel Xeon CPU 2.66
MHz: 4x____ (it's actually just 2CPUs but because of Intel's "hyper threading" XP sees 4 CPUs)
GFX: Fire GL X1 Pentium 4
1CPU:1561 CB
xCPU:3333 CB
Multiprocessor Speedup: 2.14x - interesting
Open GL:817 CB (haha!)

Maybe I'll download it on a mac or two and see what comes up.

TZ
08-18-2007, 02:09 AM
I still get a 'time out' and unable to download.

Only site or file that won't. Am I alone in being unable?

kaye
08-18-2007, 07:03 AM
You might try here http://www.techpowerup.com/downloads/697/Cinebench_v10.html k

TZ
08-18-2007, 07:34 AM
CINEBENCH R10
***************
Tester : TZ
Processor : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU 5130 @ 2.00GHz
MHz : 2.00
Number of CPUs : 4
Graphics Card : NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GT OpenGL Engine
Resolution : <fill this="" out="">
Color Depth : <fill this="" out="">
***********

</fill></fill> Operating System : OS X 32 BIT 10.4.9
<fill this="" out=""><fill this="" out=""> Rendering (Single CPU): 2176 CB-CPU
Rendering (Multiple CPU): 7401 CB-CPU
Multiprocessor Speedup: 3.40
Shading (OpenGL Standard) : 2594 CB-GFX
************************************************** **

</fill></fill>Operating System : WINDOWS 64 BIT 6.0.6000<fill this="" out=""><fill this="" out="">
</fill></fill>************************************************** **
Rendering (Single CPU): 2173 CB-CPU
Rendering (Multiple CPU): 5480 CB-CPU
Multiprocessor Speedup: 2.52
Shading (OpenGL Standard) : 2229 CB-GFX ************************************

CINEBENCH R10
******************
Processor : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU 5130 @ 2.00GHz
MHz : 2.0 Number of CPUs : 4
Operating System : WINDOWS 64 BIT 6.0.6000

Graphics Card : GeForce 7300 GT/PCI/SSE2
*************************
Rendering (Single CPU): 2188 CB-CPU
Rendering (Multiple CPU): 5929 CB-CPU

Multiprocessor Speedup: 2.71

Shading (OpenGL Standard) : 2313 CB-GFX
************************
Graphics Card :
GeForce 7300 GT/PCI/SSE2<fill this="" out=""><fill this="" out="">
<fill this="" out=""><fill this="" out=""> NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GT:
Chipset Model: NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GT
Device ID: 0x0393
Revision ID: 0x00a1
ROM Revision: 3008
Resolution: 1920 x 1200
Depth: 32-bit Color
Core Image: Hardware Accelerated
Main Display: Yes
Mirror: Off
Online: Yes
Quartz Extreme: Supported
Rotation: Supported</fill></fill><fill this="" out=""><fill this="" out="">
<fill this="" out=""><fill this="" out=""></fill></fill></fill></fill></fill></fill>

rguising
08-18-2007, 08:48 AM
Little Dell Inspiron 6000 notebook...

CINEBENCH R10
************************************************** **

Tester : Rob

Processor : Intel(R) Pentium(R) M processor 2.00GHz
MHz : 2.0GHz
Number of CPUs : 1
Operating System : WINDOWS 32 BIT 5.1.2600

Graphics Card : MOBILITY RADEON X300 x86/SSE2

************************************************** **

Rendering (Single CPU): 1742 CB-CPU
Rendering (Multiple CPU): --- CB-CPU


Shading (OpenGL Standard) : 655 CB-GFX


************************************************** **

kaye
08-18-2007, 09:12 AM
We are getting some interesting results. Thanks Rob. TZ, unless I missed someone, your Rendering (Multiple CPU): 7401 CB-CPU is the highest so far. Did you let it run in automatic or run each separately, and in what order? In automatic it runs Shading (OpenGL Standard) first which yields the highest score for that test. Even for the stock NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GT, great scores. Glad you like that website. k

rguising
08-18-2007, 10:00 AM
CINEBENCH R10
************************************************** **

Tester : Rob

Processor : Mac Mini Core Solo
MHz : 1.5GHz
Number of CPUs : 1
Operating System : OS X 32 BIT 10.4.10

Graphics Card : Intel GMA 950 OpenGL Engine

************************************************** **

Rendering (Single CPU): 1464 CB-CPU
Rendering (Multiple CPU): --- CB-CPU


Shading (OpenGL Standard) : 589 CB-GFX


************************************************** **

kaye
08-20-2007, 01:20 PM
I get First Prize for slowest:
CINEBENCH R10
************************************************** **

Tester : kyum

Processor : iBook G4 1.42GHz SP
MHz : 1420MHz
Number of CPUs : 1
Operating System : OS X 32 BIT 10.4.10

Graphics Card : ATI Radeon 9600 XT OpenGL Engine
Resolution : 1024x768
Color Depth : Millions

************************************************** **

Rendering (Single CPU): 814 CB-CPU
Rendering (Multiple CPU): --- CB-CPU


Shading (OpenGL Standard) : 494 CB-GFX


************************************************** **
k

Nicolas
08-30-2007, 11:32 PM
Results of E6600 Windows Vista Business:

CPU: E6600
GFX-Board: GeForce 8800GTX

1 CPU:3040
X CPU:5868
MP Speedup: 1.93x

OpenGL:4003
________________


CINEBENCH R10
************************************************** **
Tester : Greg
Processor : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU 5130 @ 2.00GHz
MHz : 2.00
Number of CPUs : 4
************************************************** **

Operating System : OS X 32 BIT 10.4.9<fill this="" out=""><fill this="" out="">
************************************************** **
Rendering (Single CPU): 2176 CB-CPU
Rendering (Multiple CPU): 7401 CB-CPU
Multiprocessor Speedup: 3.40
Shading (OpenGL Standard) : 2594CB-GFX
************************************************** **
</fill></fill>
Operating System : WINDOWS 64 BIT 6.0.6000<fill this="" out=""><fill this="" out="">
</fill></fill>************************************************** **
Rendering (Single CPU): 2173 CB-CPU
Rendering (Multiple CPU): 5480 CB-CPU
Multiprocessor Speedup: 2.52
Shading (OpenGL Standard) : 2229 CB-GFX
************************************************** **<fill this="" out=""><fill this="" out=""><fill this="" out=""><fill this="" out=""><fill this="" out=""><fill this="" out=""></fill></fill></fill></fill>
Seems like the Bootcamp drivers are not supporting all 4 cpus of the Mac Pro in Windows.
Otherwise I have no clue for this performance hit in MP Rendering. But the MP Speedup implies that the system is using more than 2 cores?
</fill></fill>Compared to my results the MP Rendering in Windows is a mess for the Mac Pro in OSX its great. <fill this="" out=""><fill this="" out="">TZ, I guess it is Vista 64Bit right?

Regards

Nicolas
</fill></fill>

TZ
08-31-2007, 07:00 AM
I would attribute differences based more on the Intel cpu chipset, Nvidia 8800.

BootCamp? I never used BootCamp with Vista until lately (sound and time synch problems), but usesd Nvidia drivers for the lowly 7300.

Nicolas
08-31-2007, 12:13 PM
TZ, I ment the Rendering (Multiple CPU) only

OSX:
Rendering (Single CPU): 2176CB-CPU
Rendering (Multiple CPU): 7401 CB-CPU

Windows:
Rendering (Single CPU): 2173CB-CPU
Rendering (Multiple CPU): 5480 CB-CPU


CINEBENCH R10
******************
Processor : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU 5130 @ 2.00GHz
MHz : 2.0 Number of CPUs : 4
Operating System : WINDOWS 64 BIT 6.0.6000

Graphics Card : GeForce 7300 GT/PCI/SSE2
*************************
Rendering (Single CPU): 2188 CB-CPU
Rendering (Multiple CPU): 5929 CB-CPU

Multiprocessor Speedup: 2.71

Shading (OpenGL Standard) : 2313 CB-GFX
************************

The Single CPU results are the same but the MP results are far better on OSX?:confused:

So you are running Vista directly without bootcamp?
Or within Paralells, VMware or something?

Regards

Nicolas

TZ
08-31-2007, 03:31 PM
Native Windows Vista 64-bit on its own Raptor.
My Xeon is only 2GHz dual-core, too.

Nicolas
08-31-2007, 05:48 PM
THX for this info it is curious your Mac Pro performs that much better on OSX.

Regards

Nicolas

rwm
08-31-2007, 06:00 PM
You want to see my DA/533 results. :D Maybe after I install the Dual 1.6. :rolleyes: - I enjoy the reading. - Randy

Nicolas
10-13-2007, 03:52 PM
Results Windows XP Pro (final configuration):
CPU: E6600
GFX-Board: GeForce 8800GTX
1 CPU:3653
X CPU:7013
MP Speedup: 1.92x
OpenGL:6513

No Quadcore :( Dualcore :D

Regards

Nicolas

Nicolas
06-03-2008, 03:47 PM
Results Windows XP Pro (final configuration):
CPU: Q6600
GFX-Board: GeForce 8800GTX
1 CPU:3454
X CPU:12193
MP Speedup: 3.51x
OpenGL:6213


Regards

Nicolas