adowoMAC Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 Hello, I`ve installed 10.4.8 JaS on my Intel Celeron D Platform (1024MB) on a MSI 649-V. The performance of the running System is very bad so that I have to wait very often. I installted the same software on a P4-Mobile (512MB) and the result was very much better. When I start an application, the animations of the DOCK and the Window animations are slow. The Memory is used up to 950/1024 with only Firefox and some other small apps. In idle the usage is 600/1024. When the PC is idle, the animations are perfect and smooth. No problem! My graphics card is a 7600GS (256MB) with Titan and QE/CI. It is connected on an AGP-AGR Port, what means that its connected via PCI-Bus! Could that be the reason? What could be the problem? Thanks in advance, Hendrik Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/48776-osx86-performance-so-poooooor/ Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superhero360 Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 Celerons are too slow (hence Apple never put them in their Macs, thankfully) and you need at least 1GB RAM for things to load smoothly. Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/48776-osx86-performance-so-poooooor/#findComment-349199 Share on other sites More sharing options...
lord_muad_dib Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 My graphics card is a 7600GS (256MB) with Titan and QE/CI. It is connected on an AGP-AGR Port, what means that its connected via PCI-Bus! Could that be the reason? could be, installed agpgart or whatever? Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/48776-osx86-performance-so-poooooor/#findComment-349201 Share on other sites More sharing options...
adowoMAC Posted April 18, 2007 Author Share Posted April 18, 2007 I didn`t install agpgart. The card is detected and handled as a pci device. Do you think that the performance of the celeron D is soooo damn ugly? I`m with you that it is slower than a P4 but my problems aren`t in a range of 40% or something like this, it is 4 times slower! Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/48776-osx86-performance-so-poooooor/#findComment-349204 Share on other sites More sharing options...
lord_muad_dib Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 pci or pci-e? Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/48776-osx86-performance-so-poooooor/#findComment-349205 Share on other sites More sharing options...
adowoMAC Posted April 18, 2007 Author Share Posted April 18, 2007 pci! The board has a pci-e slot but i don`t have a card for it PCI has a max. transfer of 260MB/s .. that is the half of the maximum from AGP1x .. i would buy a pci-e device when i`m sure! Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/48776-osx86-performance-so-poooooor/#findComment-349208 Share on other sites More sharing options...
lord_muad_dib Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 pci slots are slow, add on that macos probably doesn't have a proper driver for 'em.. all gets even slower Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/48776-osx86-performance-so-poooooor/#findComment-349212 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neonkoala Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 Celerons are too slow (hence Apple never put them in their Macs, thankfully) and you need at least 1GB RAM for things to load smoothly. You don't need that much RAM at all, 512mb is fine for most, I have 768mb and it runs smoothly - bear in mind 256mb is taken up by the GMA900 as graphics. Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/48776-osx86-performance-so-poooooor/#findComment-349215 Share on other sites More sharing options...
adowoMAC Posted April 18, 2007 Author Share Posted April 18, 2007 I`ve got 1024 so all shoul be fine from this view. I`ll try to borrow a PCI-E device. Thank you very much! Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/48776-osx86-performance-so-poooooor/#findComment-349220 Share on other sites More sharing options...
adowoMAC Posted April 18, 2007 Author Share Posted April 18, 2007 Update: I started XBench to proof my machine. I`ve got the following scores: Overall: 16,32 CPU: 56! Thread: 83 Memory: 53 Quartz: 20 OpenGL: 54 User Interface: 6 Disk: 7 (Seq 4,8, Rand 13,66) Why do I have that slow Disk rates??? I don`t think the Problem is the cpu or the graphic. Can someone gimme a hint or a patch for IDE? It is a 7200rpm Seagate.. Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/48776-osx86-performance-so-poooooor/#findComment-349349 Share on other sites More sharing options...
sigxcpu Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 Maybe you should start by telling us what chipset is your board, not to wait for others to do research for you Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/48776-osx86-performance-so-poooooor/#findComment-349445 Share on other sites More sharing options...
candykane Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 • SiS® 649 Chipset - Supports FSB 533/800MHz. - Supports PCI Express x16 interface. - Supports DDR333/400 memory interface. • SiS® 965L Chipset - Hi-Speed USB (USB2.0) controller, 480Mb/sec, 8 ports. - 2 Serial ATA ports with transfer rate up to 1.5Gb/s - 2 channel Ultra ATA 66/100/133 bus Master IDE controller. - PCI Master v2.3, I/O APIC. - Supports both ACPI and legacy APM power management. Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/48776-osx86-performance-so-poooooor/#findComment-349629 Share on other sites More sharing options...
mifki Posted April 19, 2007 Share Posted April 19, 2007 rofl, thats why its slow, sis sucks ass Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/48776-osx86-performance-so-poooooor/#findComment-349705 Share on other sites More sharing options...
adowoMAC Posted April 19, 2007 Author Share Posted April 19, 2007 I thought the Board implicates the SIS 649. In my research I found out that this controller is not supported or patched for OS X. I`ve organized a board with an i865 to try again. Thanks. Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/48776-osx86-performance-so-poooooor/#findComment-349802 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts