We finally benchmarked the Apple PC in Windows successfully, thanks to the latest video driver release. It seems to struggle a bit in games with the level of detail increased, but it’s certainly not terrible, it’s about as good as a mid range notebook system.
We also noticed artifacts in certain games at higher resolutions. It could be related to heat or a driver issue, at this point there’s no telling for sure.
You'll notice that Apple wisely chose an ATi Mobility Radeon part for this system, it seems to make sense that ATi's mobile parts perform almost as well as their desktop counterparts and use far less power thereby generating very little heat.
Check out this analysis of the implications Boot Camp may have on our industry.
System Configuration:
CPU Information Model: Intel Corporation: (2000.0MHz Dual Core)
FSB Speed: 166.0MHz Current Clock: 2000 MHz
Motherboard: Apple Computer, Inc. Mac-F42787C8
Memory Size: 2048 MB (DDR2-667 DDR2 SDRAM)
Video Adapter: ATI Mobility Radeon X1600 (256 MB)
GPU Clock: 398 MHz (original: 400 MHz)
Disk Drive: WDC WD2500JS-40NGB2 (232 GB, IDE)
Optical Drive: MATSHITA DVD-R UJ-846
System BIOS: Apple Computer, Inc. 0.01
Hard Drive: WDC WD2500JS-40NGB2
Voodoo Haiti Gaming Benchmarks:
3DMark06 Overall: 1700
3DMark06 SM 2.0: 604
3DMark06 HDR/SM3.0: 627
3DMark06 CPU: 1672
3DMark05 (default 1024x768) Score: 3660
3DMark03 (default 1024x768) Score: 6452
3DMark2001SE (default 1024x768) Score: 16304
Counter Strike Source 1024x768 Score: 82
Doom 3 1024x768 Score: 28
Call Of Duty 1280x1024 Score: 59
Far Cry 1280x1024 Timedemo: 49
Far Cry 1280x1024 HDR Timedemo: 48
Halo 1280x1024 Timedemo Score: 42
Quake3 1280x1024 Score: 325
SiSoft Sandra 2005 SR2A
Dhrystone ALU: 18066
Whetstone FPU: 5553
Whetstone iSSE2: 7180
Float x4 iSSE2: 42286
RAM Bandwidth Int Buff'd iSSE2: 3971
RAM Bandwidth Float Buff'd iSS: 3980
Drive Index: 47 MB/s
30 comments:
Are those benchmarks with AA/AF at all? If not, those are still pretty disappointing. My Dell from 3 years ago got a better score with Doom 3, and that's with AA and AF.
It'd be interesting to see the impact on the gaming market if mac's become compatible with games. It still won't push anyone to get a mac, but more mac owners may start gaming on their mac.
You people have to realize that these are notebook class chips. The CPU and the video card are all mobile chips. Wait until they release their new line of desktops with fully enabled dual core (not core duo) chips and nvidia 7900 chips, then you will see performance equal to modern desktop rigs. Sorry Voodoo, my next PC will be a Mac (running Windows and OSX, ha ha)
MP
But your 3 year old dell probably didn't have a mainstream graphics card.
But the real question is whether gamers will buy intle powermacs(?) rather than alienware or similar since you can put pretty high end graphics in them.
About what you'd expect from a Mobility Radeon X1600, really.
also bet u had an nvidia card installed .... .WELL know fact ... Doom 3 is optomzied for NV cards and sucks on ATi Cards ...... Bet your 3 Y.O. Dell couldn't get 48 fps with HDR on in Far Cry.
Interesting scores to say the least. Love to get my hands on a Core Duo and OC it, use some DDR2 1100 RAM ...... ahh the possabilities!!!!!
Could you test the machine in a deep freeze to see if heat is causing the artifact problem? (or some extra good cooling somehow) If the artifacts go away then it is not a software problem. There have been other reports of heat issues on Intel Macs.
already can run OS X and Winblows!!! :-D .... on AMD!
What's with Anonymous?....I think his brain needs a heatsink as it is overheating and thinks that dual core is core duo ....yes they will be faster but as in the past mac fanatics need to read instead of post.....core duo is very fast and he needs to wait and see whats up.
Seems nice !
Ideal for Office and stuff
makes a good match with a Stock Xbox360 next to it eather :P
Thanks for this Post Rahul !!
Still just more Apple junk. There is a very good reason why Steve Jobs killed off the Mac clone market when he came back to Apple: Apple doesn't make very good hardware. In comparison, all of the competitors were faster, less expensive, more expandable, etc. Apple couldn't compete in the hardware market.
Macs are still overpriced, and anyone planning to run XP on it should have their heads examined. The only justifiable reason for buying Mac hardware is if you're planning to run OSX. Macs will always be sub-par for gaming, as it has never been a segment that Apple is interested in.
"Apple doesn't make very good hardware."
Depends on your definition of good.
Mine is: elegant, quiet, reliable and efficient.
In fact, Apple makes _great_ hardware, they just don't make _fast_ hardware.
I agree that there's little justification for running XP on Apple hardware, but my opinion comes from a completely different position.
And frankly, I'd withold judgement until Apple releases its 'pro' desktop, though I agree that historically they've been terrible about their support for gaming and high-end 3D adapters. However, Blizzard seems to be getting their OpenGL problems addressed in OS patches pretty regularly, and by 10.5 who knows, Apple might include a DirectX 9 API in XCode (one can dream)...
"Apple doesn't make very good hardware."
Depends on your definition of good.
Mine is: elegant, quiet, reliable and efficient.
In fact, Apple makes _great_ hardware, they just don't make _fast_ or _chintzy_ hardware.
I agree that there's little justification for running XP on Apple hardware, but my opinion comes from a completely different position.
And frankly, I'd withold judgement until Apple releases its 'pro' desktop, though I agree that historically they've been terrible about their support for gaming and high-end 3D adapters. However, Blizzard seems to be getting their OpenGL problems addressed in OS patches pretty regularly, and by 10.5 who knows, Apple might include a DirectX 9 API in XCode (one can dream)...
Now that Apple Computer has quietly made it known that its new Intel-based Macs will be able to dual-boot into Windows, we finally will have a basis for benchmark comparisons which will be.... well.... Apples to Apples.
Depends on your definition of good.
Mine is: elegant, quiet, reliable and efficient.
If that's your definition of good, try an IBM Thinkpad!! You'll never go back to Apple hardware, OSX or not.
What's the deal with the FSB speed - I thought 667MHz was the bare minimum these machines ran at?!
What machine are you using specifically?
Why is the bunny man giving mr jobs easter condoms?
166*4
quad pumped bus, remember?
H.-
Interesting. I see your GPU speed is 398 Mhz. There's a big thread on OnMac.net's forums about Apple underclocking video cards below stock levels (stock is reportedly 470 Mhz on comparable notebooks like Acer) to deal with heat issues. Once overclocked to close to 470, scores seem to improve dramatically.
Anonymous said...
Why is the bunny man giving mr jobs easter condoms?
I think it's an Intel guy giving steve job's chips :P
Yes, me too, AMD64 running at 2.71 OS X, blazes. Why pay for overpriced hardware that runs subpar when a HD with OS X runs circles around a $2000 G5?
Time for Jobs to release the OS dude.
Then he can gain some serious $$$, I am tired of the Apple makes $$ from hardware- rubbish, they do, but not from MACS, they make it from iTUNES and iPODS, release or license the OS, and then users will buy into it.
The real dream will be when OSX can run .exe programs from within the same OS, basically not really needing windows but seeing and being able to run all WIN apps. Vista looks terrible. Like a skin. Loving the work flow of the MAC OSx, wasn't a huge fan of OS9, but X is the best!
Then he can gain some serious $$$, I am tired of the Apple makes $$ from hardware- rubbish, they do, but not from MACS, they make it from iTUNES and iPODS, release or license the OS, and then users will buy into it.
The iPod's ballooning popularity has certainly proved to be a huge boon, but Macs have constantly been the large and dependable source of Apple's revenue. Even in Q4 2005, they still accounted for 50% of Apple's hardware revenue.
The iPod's popularity has shifted things somewhat, but Macs still accounted for over 30% of hardware revenue in Q1 2006.
Apple is keeping the ability to open up OSX in mind, certainly, but Macs are still a HUGE source of revenue, their TOTAL software sales are still miniscule by comparison (excepting in how they entice others to pay more for Mac hardware, but that's not directly measurable), and the iPod being a balloon is more vulnerable to "popping" than the Macs are.
As Macs are still experiencing solid growth, it doesn't behoove them to shoot themselves in the foot in that manner yet. But I have no doubt they are watching their numbers, tracking future costs, and keeping the ability to open up OSX to all hardware firmly in mind. (Especially if they can capitalize on mistakes in Vista. I was thinking OSX might bust out earlier, but MS backed off from their more consumer backlash-inducing ideas.)
Boot Camp is a solution for people who want to run WinXP natively on an Intel Mac at full hardware speed. With Parallels' VM (or the upcoming VMWare solution), Intel Macs will run WinXP, Win2003, Linux, BSD, Solaris and indeed most other x86 operating systems, as guests on MacOS X. Intel Macs now have the ability to run the widest possible range of software for personal computers, at close to native hardware speed, and for those who need the fastest speeds (e.g. gamers) on the hardware, Macs can now officially multiboot. What's not to like? People who overlook the reliability reports in Consumer Reports (and PC Magazine) will blather that Apple makes chintzy hardware. Rubbish. From a gamer perspective, Apple doesn't make anywhere near the most powerful systems. None of this changes the fact that with an Intel Mac, you can run almost any piece of software that is x86 binary compatible. I use MacOS X and WinXP everyday, and I far prefer MacOS X. A wise man once said: MacOS X is proof that it's easier to make UNIX pretty than to make Windows secure.
What is with the picture? Seems to have nothing to do with your post.
All this Apples to Apples comparison is still out on a limb. Although one can get a clear picture of the iMac performance wise for a XP machine, then it is ok to take a look. I don't think that people out buying a complete system that not only is comparable to the mainstream portable systems out the, would consider on if they intent on having it at home. For the most part, these people are buying a pretty peace of design artwork to go with their home office. Some will buy into the it for the self-contained design and not haven the 101 cables needed to run another platform.
On a final note, the comparison of apples to apples will never be 100% without flaws, as it will depend on the SW (OS) and the ISV building the SW to run on the OS to make it more ore less efficient on a pice of hardware. Already the benchmark for the iMac is flawed for the simple reason, that most of the drivers, that is the heart of linking the SW to the HW is not fully optimized thus transferring the limited effort in generating them to be compared to a mindset utterly different than the hack that Apples has provided for dual boot.
I think that what could change the course of action here is, if Apple can appeal to the ISVs by providing them with a stable and secure platform on which to build the SW, them MS could be in for some real trouble. Vistas is no where to be seen, and potentially could be seriously hampered with the developing liabilities of their unprotected kernel been exposed the root kits that would forced the user to have to reinstall just to resolve a virus infection.
How long will it take before you go out and get your self an iMac after you run through one of these experiences and you have your nerdy yuppie neighbor telling your... see I told you man, you should have gotten your self a dell, strike that a iMac :^P
That FSB speed is listed at 166 MHZ - that is what the old G4 laptops used but not the Intel equiped Macs. This BS is being spread all over the web. The FSB is 667 MHZ of course.
Things are now very different in the neverending Mac/PC debate. Recently Apple switched to an x86 platform, leaving one major difference between them and PCs - OSX. (Lets not get into their stubborn obsession with single buttons) But now you can run Windows on a Mac...and it stands to reason that if you can do that, then you can run OSX on a PC. This means that although Apple may gain some sales to consumers who wish to run OSX and XP on their native Macintosh system, they will also lose sales to other customers who can purchase a cheaper, but similar Dell and run OSX on it.
So what does it all mean? Both systems will boast the same hardware and software. Now all that distinguishes Apple is their beautiful design. If other manufacturers catch up in this department, then Apple will merely become another player in the OEM PC market...
Things are now very different in the neverending Mac/PC debate. Recently Apple switched to an x86 platform, leaving one major difference between them and PCs - OSX. (Lets not get into their stubborn obsession with single buttons) But now you can run Windows on a Mac...and it stands to reason that if you can do that, then you can run OSX on a PC. This means that although Apple may gain some sales to consumers who wish to run OSX and XP on their native Macintosh system, they will also lose sales to other customers who can purchase a cheaper, but similar Dell and run OSX on it.
So what does it all mean? Both systems will boast the same hardware and software. Now all that distinguishes Apple is their beautiful design. If other manufacturers catch up in this department, then Apple will merely become another player in the OEM PC market...
3DMark06 CPU: 1672
very nice score for a laptop.
macbook seems to be avery good intel based plateform for windows xp.
Voodoo Haiti Gaming Benchmarks:
Where does the Haiti come from ? ;-)
Bought my envy a:228 and love it! added bluetooth and bought real cool bluetooth mouse called mogomouse, must have!
Post a Comment