7 replies to this topic

[VaiOSX]

http://db.xbench.com...tml?doc1=150870

http://db.xbench.com...tml?doc1=150688

http://db.xbench.com...tml?doc1=150801

[pion]

man, these result are pretty crap lol. my Intel 650 beats it (score 76).

edit; ops enter wrong number. 650 3.4ghz

[stryder]

pion, on Jan 15 2006, 08:17 AM, said:

man, these result are pretty crap lol. my Intel 640 beats it (score 76).

Yes, but for the price it's a nice machine. Your Intel 640 is a 3.2 GHz processor, with 800 MHz FSB, right?  Just wait until Apple ships the Intel PowerMac's (I presume they will be called Mac Pro).  That will be the power user's machine!

[VaiOSX]

what is the Xbench result for an ADP machine ?

Anybody here can post it ?

Also, it would be good if we can get Xbench results (with a 8f1111a version) from new PCs with a Core Duo CPU to compare.

[cyrana]

I don't think xbench does SMP so well, either, does it?  And that machine doesn't have the fastest hard drive in it.  Still seems slightly low though.

[mykell9999]

man that doesnt look good at all, my crappy p4 503 ( 2.66 ghz, single core, no HT ) machine has a score in the mid 60's, 66.xx more or less.

i thought they were supposed to be 3 -4x faster.............

[bjr1028]

xbench isn't a very useful benchmark.  Its results tend is differ depending on the time of day.

[berehon]

Just look in UI tests of new imacs. It cant be correct. I cant believe that GMA900 two-three times faster then x1600.
It seems xbench doesn't love ati cards.
BTW on xbench.com there is a note about this.

Edited by berehon, 16 January 2006 - 02:52 PM.