Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 93

Thread: Apple iMac "Core 2 Duo" 3.06 24-Inch (Early09)

  1. #41
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    NW Montana
    Posts
    8,197

    Default XBench tests

    Looks good Kaye. Also you kicked my butt as expected your Intel iMac vs. my Intel iMac

    But my darn email works.

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Concord, CA
    Posts
    7,056

    Default

    I am very glad you have your email working. I know you have been working on that for a long time. k

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    NW Montana
    Posts
    8,197

    Default

    Embarrassed it was so simple. I figured it would be.

    I just have not had the energy to do things these last few years. But I have really noticed starting this September up until now. That I feel better now than the past 2 years or the first bad pneumonia April/May 2007.

    I am over this last little bout.

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Concord, CA
    Posts
    7,056

    Default

    Great that your health has improved so much. Just knowing that is a comfort to us all.

    Email settings have never been easy for me. Except for my primary account, my other accounts would never have worked without my son's help. When he leaves town, I keep my fingers crossed. k

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Concord, CA
    Posts
    7,056

    Default

    All of the applications and utilities (latest versions) I use and the order I do it for creating and maintaining a backup of my primary boot drive work just fine with Snow Leopard 10.6.2.

    1. Disk Utility to repair permissions of the Mac HD.
    2. SuperDuper to back up the Mac HD to the FW drive.
    3. Disk Utility to repair permissions of the FW drive.
    4. DiskWarrior the FW drive.
    5. Drive Genius, the Defrag utility, the FW drive.
    6. DiskWarrior again the FW drive. k

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Concord, CA
    Posts
    7,056

    Default

    Going back to retest all of the apps done before now with Gurus 8GB RAM and first tried Geekbench 64-bit:

    The first try, 4710 score, I discovered I was running it from the download, duh. I then moved the Geekbench 64-bit app to the Utilities folder and ran it again which yielded the 4721 score. Wow, much faster at 64-bit.

    Power Fractal apparently runs 32-bit because it yielded the same 1.1 seconds - 20451.2 MegaFlops.

    The Xbench Test score of 185.50 is also much faster but must be the Gurus 8GB RAM. Cinebench R10 to go.

    64-bit survives a reboot as well as a shutdown and startup. Not running Fusion 3 yet, maybe faster then, will see later. k

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    on the landline, Mr. Smith
    Posts
    7,784

    Default

    Go get 'em Kaye.

    ......So, you a confirmed Intel switcher now?
    "Imagine if every Thursday your shoes exploded if you tied them the usual way. This happens to us all the time with computers, and nobody thinks of complaining." -- Jef Raskin

  8. #48
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Concord, CA
    Posts
    7,056

    Default

    You bet Unc, for sure. BTW, now even tho I went back to 32-bit this morning, 64-bit apps still launch and give me 64-bit results. k

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Concord, CA
    Posts
    7,056

    Default

    I checked ASP this morning under Software and this is the result:
    Geekbench 2, two apps, one 32-bit, one 64-bit
    Power Fractal, 32-bit
    Cinebench R10, 32-bit (Windows version has both 32-bit and 64-bit)
    Xbench, 32-bit

    Some of the apps I use:
    Disk Utility, 64-bit
    SuperDuper, 32-bit
    DiskWarrior, 32-bit
    Drive Genius, 32-bit
    ASP, 64-bit

    Some surprises for me:
    iDVD, 32-bit
    iMovie, 32-bit
    iPhoto, 32-bit
    iTunes, 32-bit
    iWeb, 32-bit k

  10. #50
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    NW Montana
    Posts
    8,197

    Default I just looked myself...........

    Some surprises for me:
    iDVD, 32-bit
    iMovie, 32-bit
    iPhoto, 32-bit
    iTunes, 32-bit
    iWeb, 32-bit k
    Not that I'll really notice but why....... Those are main apps and leaving them at 32 bit after these changes?

  11. #51
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    on the landline, Mr. Smith
    Posts
    7,784

    Default

    Probably cause iLife '09 was developed in '08, and likely may be from an older code base too. The good news is that the biggest part of being 64 bit has to do with addressing RAM, and most iLife stuff is not a massive RAM hog......so it won't matter much if at all for most folks. Probably won't matter at all until we have well beyond 4GB of RAM actually installed. That counts out most iLife users.

    Oh, and unless Apple snuck some new code in iTunes 9, it is very old code.

    As a reminder......helping a customer the other day with an XP work horse, and it will only Address 3GB of RAM total. Period. Not beating up on XP, as it is 10 years old.......but we are lucky to be able to run oldish Macs with 10.5 and even be able to run 4+ GB of RAM......32 bit or not.

    Will be interesting to see what next iWork will be......hopefully all 64 bit, and perhaps serious changes to try and counter things like Google docs. We have all expected iLife to slowly catch up to MS Office (mostly has now), only to see that though Office is not going away, it ain't all that like it used to be. I am curious if Apple will have target fixation on Office, or will try to match/best Google Docs, and other new minded approaches to traditional software models.

    Will be interesting to see if iLife morphs into something new too. iDVD just sits, with no big change for years, and iPhoto is catching some heat from paid software like LightRoom and such. Would love to see a iPhoto able to do home and SMB DAM duty too. Other things real folks are starting to really do, in the real world might be interesting additions (document management, for example). In a nut shell.....Apple has nearly perfected iPhoto, iMovie, iDVD, and iWeb as stand alone apps. Will they continue to improve and append these apps incrementally.....or will there be some fundamental changes to the apps, or new additions?

    OK, back to your regularly scheduled iMac thread.
    "Imagine if every Thursday your shoes exploded if you tied them the usual way. This happens to us all the time with computers, and nobody thinks of complaining." -- Jef Raskin

  12. #52
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Boise
    Posts
    987

    Default

    Kaye did the added RAM speed things up? I don't think I would be upping the ante right now, but enquiring minds want to know.

    My Seagate drive from Gurus has arrived, with the sled for the Burley Hot swap. Is being zeroed out right now. 2 hrs is what it says. I'm planning on this being my "main" backup. I was thinking that I would make a large partition and use it for Time Machine and a smaller one for using SuperDuper.

    When TM was announced, I was impress. I've never used it before, though. SuperDuper has worked nicely and I wouldn't want to find TM not working as well for me.

    I upgraded to Quickbooks 2010. Some numbers were off. Loaded it up the other day and it said I needed an update. That fixed the problem. The program now allows one to process credit cards via Intuit. I use my Mac(s) for business, and have since 1988. The new iPod Touch 64GB will sync for scheduling purposes. No more PB to carry on trips either. This all should be a real nice fit for me.

    One question I can't find an answer to is... Will the MacPro Speakers from the DA work with the iMac? That would be nice

  13. #53
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Concord, CA
    Posts
    7,056

    Default

    I definitely think the added RAM speeded things up. And a side benefit is that there is less use of virtual memory (the internal hard drive churning along) which I find important. But it depends on your software and needs too.

    The MacPro Speakers, can you provide a link? k

  14. #54
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Concord, CA
    Posts
    7,056

    Default

    Latest
    CINEBENCH R10
    ************************************************** **

    Tester : kyum

    Processor : 3.06GHz Intel Core2 Duo
    MHz : 3060MHz
    Number of CPUs : 2
    Operating System : OS X 32 BIT 10.6.2

    Graphics Card : NVIDIA GeForce GT 130 OpenGL Engine
    Resolution : <1920x1200>
    Color Depth : <Millions>

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

    Rendering (Single CPU): 3557 CB-CPU
    Rendering (Multiple CPU): 6707 CB-CPU

    Multiprocessor Speedup: 1.89

    Shading (OpenGL Standard) : 6607 CB-GFX


    ************************************************** **
    And
    Xbench at 185.68. That should do it for awhile. k

  15. #55
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Boise
    Posts
    987

    Default

    Opps, my bad. Apple Pro Speakers.

    http://www.welovemacs.com/speakers-pro.html

  16. #56
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    on the landline, Mr. Smith
    Posts
    7,784

    Default

    Regarding TM and SD.......why not use both? Two backups are better than one. TM is awesome for hourly data backups, auto grooming of old backups, and silly easy restores. SD is awesome for scheduled backups and bootable clones.
    "Imagine if every Thursday your shoes exploded if you tied them the usual way. This happens to us all the time with computers, and nobody thinks of complaining." -- Jef Raskin

  17. #57
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Boise
    Posts
    987

    Default

    Actually unclemac, I am using both. Wondered if it might be a bit redundant. Didn't know if TM was a bootable backup. I really need to spend some time learning all the new aspects of 10.6.2. Thanks for the feedback.

    Upgrading bookkeeping took a month, can't have that stuff all screwed up right at tax season.

    Was pleased to find Appleworks runs just fine on 10.6.2, I thought it would be history.

    Still don't like the little keyboard. When I retire the DA I'll switch to the full size one I bought a couple of years ago.

  18. #58
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    NW Montana
    Posts
    8,197

    Default

    Didn't know if TM was a bootable backup.
    My question too. Is it bootable? I've been using SD. But have plenty of backup drives and could do both.

  19. #59
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Grangeville, ID USA
    Posts
    9,116

    Default

    Time Machine must be recovered from. It is an incremental data base, not a usable set of files until after you recover the files in it.

    Rick
    molṑn labe'
    "I am a mortal enemy to arbitrary government and unlimited power. I am naturally very jealous for the rights and liberties of my country, and the least encroachment of those invaluable privileges is apt to make my blood boil."
--Ben Franklin

  20. #60
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Boise
    Posts
    987

    Default

    Well then, that fixes it. Having Time Machine backup as well as a bootable backup with SuperDuper give me just what I wanted.

    Thanks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •