20hz Posted May 4, 2007 Share Posted May 4, 2007 I just put together a system and I have 10.4.6 jas installed. the system is as follows intel d915gag mb p4 3.2 256 megs ram pc3200 gma 900 graphics 80 gig ata hd Everything works but my xbench score is very low, my cpu score is 9.89 total score is 11.78 is there anything i can check or do to get better results. I know i need more ram for one thing.. Thanks ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danyel Posted May 4, 2007 Share Posted May 4, 2007 Hi 20hz: That does seem rather low. I ran XBench on my Dell Inspiron 1300 (Celeron M 2.3gHz / 1GB RAM / GMA900 Graphics / 40GB IDE) and my CPU was 46.67 and the Total Average was 71.27 due to good scores on Graphics, Quartz and OpenGL. I would say 512MB is practical minimum but 1GB or more would be preferred. EDIT: My scores closely resemble Mac Mini ("Aaron's Core Solo") but I feel that the system "feels" much faster due to the extra 512MB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pitr- Posted May 4, 2007 Share Posted May 4, 2007 Running OS X with only 256Mb of ram is like running Windows XP with only 64-128Mb and it certainly wont make it easier for xbench to work out reliable results.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sarahbau Posted May 4, 2007 Share Posted May 4, 2007 I agree that 256MB will severely slow down OS X, but it's not going to make XBench score a 9, as a good CPU test shouldn't hit anything other than L1 and L2 cache. I say get GeekBench and see what that gives you. It's more detailed in the results, showing scores for individual tests instead of just "CPU" and "Memory." It doesn't test graphics or hard drive, but it should give you a better idea of exactly what is running slowly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danyel Posted May 4, 2007 Share Posted May 4, 2007 Hi Sarahbau: Nice setup you have there. That's an excellent idea (!) I'm going to take picture of my OSx86 setup at home. I love using Front Row on the widescreen monitor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
20hz Posted May 4, 2007 Author Share Posted May 4, 2007 Thanks for the info. Yea I do know that I need to get more ram. Just seems to be slow, I read so many other people geting much higher scores and mine is the lowest I have seen posted anywhere. I will adress the ram issue this weekend, but should that cause the cpu and all the other stuff to be so slow? I ran geekbench it took about 8 or so mins to finish and here is what I got. Geekbench Score 679 Version Geekbench 2.0.2 Platform Mac OS X x86 (32-bit) Operating System Mac OS X 10.4.6 (Build 8I1119) Processor Intel® Pentium® 4 CPU 3.20GHz Model Hackintosh Memory 256 MB 333 MHz DDR SDRAM System Information Platform Mac OS X x86 (32-bit) Compiler GCC 4.0.1 (Apple Computer, Inc. build 5363) Operating System Mac OS X 10.4.6 (Build 8I1119) Model Hackintosh Motherboard ADP2,1 Processor Intel® Pentium® 4 CPU 3.20GHz Processor ID GenuineIntel Family 15 Model 6 Stepping 5 Logical Processors 1 Physical Processors 0 Processor Frequency 3.20 GHz L1 Instruction Cache 12.0 KB L1 Data Cache 16.0 KB L2 Cache 2.00 MB L3 Cache 0.00 B Bus Frequency 800 MHz Memory 256 MB Memory Type 333 MHz DDR SDRAM SIMD 1 Integer Performance 528 Blowfish single-threaded scalar 2339 102.8 MB/sec Blowfish multi-threaded scalar 2033 83.3 MB/sec Text Compress single-threaded scalar 141 464.2 KB/sec Text Compress multi-threaded scalar 137 462.9 KB/sec Text Decompress single-threaded scalar 160 674.9 KB/sec Text Decompress multi-threaded scalar 158 646.7 KB/sec Image Compress single-threaded scalar 661 5.47 Mpixels/sec Image Compress multi-threaded scalar 572 4.81 Mpixels/sec Image Decompress single-threaded scalar 275 4.62 Mpixels/sec Image Decompress multi-threaded scalar 214 3.50 Mpixels/sec Crafty Chess single-threaded scalar 88 44.6 Knodes/sec Crafty Chess multi-threaded scalar 87 42.4 Knodes/sec Lua single-threaded scalar 252 97.3 Knodes/sec Lua multi-threaded scalar 281 108.2 Knodes/sec Floating Point Performance 992 Mandelbrot single-threaded scalar 1208 803.8 Mflops Mandelbrot multi-threaded scalar 980 641.4 Mflops Dot Product single-threaded scalar 620 299.8 Mflops Dot Product multi-threaded scalar 460 209.7 Mflops Dot Product single-threaded vector 166 199.2 Mflops Dot Product multi-threaded vector 220 229.6 Mflops LU Decomposition single-threaded scalar 114 102.2 Mflops LU Decomposition multi-threaded scalar 128 112.4 Mflops Primality Test single-threaded scalar 134 20.1 Mflops Primality Test multi-threaded scalar 108 20.2 Mflops Sharpen Image single-threaded scalar 2020 4.71 Mpixels/sec Sharpen Image multi-threaded scalar 1736 4.00 Mpixels/sec Blur Image single-threaded scalar 3411 2.70 Mpixels/sec Blur Image multi-threaded scalar 2595 2.04 Mpixels/sec Memory Performance 514 Read Sequential single-threaded scalar 555 695.9 MB/sec Write Sequential single-threaded scalar 829 580.8 MB/sec Stdlib Allocate single-threaded scalar 293 1.10 Mallocs/sec Stdlib Write single-threaded scalar 816 1.69 GB/sec Stdlib Copy single-threaded scalar 81 85.6 MB/sec Stream Performance 447 Stream Copy single-threaded scalar 266 373.8 MB/sec Stream Copy single-threaded vector 666 885.4 MB/sec Stream Scale single-threaded scalar 275 366.4 MB/sec Stream Scale single-threaded vector 612 846.0 MB/sec Stream Add single-threaded scalar 322 498.3 MB/sec Stream Add single-threaded vector 687 979.4 MB/sec Stream Triad single-threaded scalar 402 570.0 MB/sec Stream Triad single-threaded vector 352 676.4 MB/sec Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sarahbau Posted May 5, 2007 Share Posted May 5, 2007 hmm...it's possible that it actually might be memory related. I don't know for sure, but it's interesting that the only test in the Integer test that scored normally (Blowfish) only takes about 4KB of memory. I don't know how much memory "Crafty Chess" is set to take in the Geek Bench score, but it could be anywhere from 3-64MB, so if your computer has absolutely no memory available, that one might be hitting VM (and you got about 1/10th what my P4 scores on that one). I tried to take up all my memory by creating RAM disks so I could see how it would run, but ironically even RAM disks use VM, so no matter what, I have about a gig of real RAM available. lol. I also noticed that your GeekBench results show 0 physical processors and 1 logical processor. That doesn't make any sense. lol. Do you have hyperthreading disabled in BIOS or something? Your multi-thread results are all lower than your single thread results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
20hz Posted May 5, 2007 Author Share Posted May 5, 2007 Yes I do have Hypertheading disabled in the bios because my computer will not boot if its on. I think my cpu is not an HT cpu. I hope this is ram related I dont know what else to do... Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idividebyzero Posted May 6, 2007 Share Posted May 6, 2007 Getting more ram wont help, you could have picked something wrong during installation. You should be on 10.4.8 anyways, give that a try. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
20hz Posted May 6, 2007 Author Share Posted May 6, 2007 Yes my first install was 10.4.8 jas but alot of stuff would not work. I would choose the gma 900 support and when osx would load all i would see was blue squares. So i installed it again without the gma 900 support and it worked but without being able to choose video res. eathernet would not work as well so I went to 10.4.6 jas and everything works great execpt that its very slow like the benchmarks say. I am just installing whats on the jas dvd do I need to do other installs of diffrent kexts ?? Is there just a patch to go from 10.4.6 to 10.4.8 ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
20hz Posted May 6, 2007 Author Share Posted May 6, 2007 I did a test where I took another hard drive and installed win xp with Hypertheading on in the bios. Everything worked and xp installed just fine. Now when I try to install osx with Hypertheading on in the bios it starts up goes to the grey screen with the apple little logo for a few seconds then it just reboots. I have used several diffrent ver's of osx86 but the same thing happens with all of them. But if I dissable Hypertheading in the bios it works just fine and i am able to install. I looked up my cpu and it does support Hypertheading it is a Intel Pentium® 4 641 Processor Prescott 3.2GHz, 800MHz FSB, Socket 775, 2MB Cache. Could this be my whole problem with the low low xbench scores? because Hypertheading is dissabled ?? or am I over looking somthing in the bios ?? Please help.. Thanks !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sarahbau Posted May 6, 2007 Share Posted May 6, 2007 I just rebooted with HyperThreading disabled, and it didn't affect my score by much. I get about 2200 in GeekBench with HT enabled, and I this is what I got with it disabled: GeekBench Score: 1942 Integer Performance: 1423 Floating Point Performance: 2143 Memory Performance: 2626 Stream Performance: 1692 I have almost the same CPU as you do - a P4 630. GeekBench shows 1 physical processor and 1 logical processor, which is correct. I'm still confused as to why yours say 0 physical processors. That's obviously not possible. lol. Your motherboard shouldn't have any problems with osx86 as far as I can tell. Which osx86 image are you using (full name). Mine is JaS 10.4.8 Intel/AMD SSE2 SSE3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
20hz Posted May 6, 2007 Author Share Posted May 6, 2007 Hello sarahbau, This is the one I have i think. JaS OSx86 10.4.6 Install DVD that works on Intel and AMD systems, both SSE2 and SSE3 CPUs. I got that from the discription. I just also updated the bios and I still have the same problem it wont boot osx with HT on in the bios. But by what you are saying I guess that ht is not what is making it score so low. We have almost the same cpu and your scores are very good. Like you say geekbench shows 0 physical processors ?? I am going to run it again with the new bios update and see what happens.. Just ran the test same result. Logical processors 1 Physical processors 0 wow this is fustrating !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sarahbau Posted May 6, 2007 Share Posted May 6, 2007 Try updating your kernel to semthex 8.8.1. Other than your OS or kernel being the problem, I don't know what it could be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
20hz Posted May 6, 2007 Author Share Posted May 6, 2007 Thanks for all the info I will try that.. Where is a good place to get that Kernal update ? or can I take it off my 10.4.8 dvd ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
20hz Posted May 8, 2007 Author Share Posted May 8, 2007 I have installed 1gb of ddr 400 ram and I did notice a bit of an improvment but not much. my xbench cpu score is about a 10.0 now. When I run final cut pro i cant even play back normal video because it drops frames. Installing stuff takes so very long. I dont know what else to check could it be my motherboard?? or video ?? Please any help would be greatly welcome!!! Thhanks !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts