Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
wpwj40e said:
My WIN PC - P4 3.2 - 800mhz. 200 gig HD,400 GIG external. 2 gig ram, ati 800 256 graphics, 16x Pioneer DVD r/w external - dual, installed dvd r/w - unknown. Running under XP and firewalls and spyware and..and..., tweaked weekly - which helps.

<snip>

Anyways - games are faster with better frame rates on my PC than on the iMac - again once you start doing multiple tasks the PC bogs down and becomes comparable. In non-games - the kind of stuff I do - the iMac seems to handle multiple tasks MUCH better/faster and more handily.

Of course - I blame XP and the other garbage loaded on windows for causing my machine to act slow - hardware wise it is fine.

You have to remember that your iMac is dual processor while the P4 isn't, which would explain the slowness while running multiple tasks. It has hyperthreading but this is no where as fast as real dual processor.

Otherwise i agree with what you see, although i only have slow mac's they both seem to run faster than my main PC. The interface seems a lot faster but this could be because my PC is loaded down with GiG's of files whereas my apples don't have much. I know that for processor intensive applications the 4400+ wipes the floor with my mac's they still seem faster. Or maybe i'm just expecting less from them.
 
wpwj40e said:
Here ya go...
Mac OS X 10.4.4 (8G1165)
Kernel Version: Darwin 8.4.1


Therese

Thanks!!

Here's a quick benchmark :

I moved a 3 gig zipped file from a DVD to the desktop.Took about 4-5 minutes.
I then unzipped it.Took about 2-3 minutes ( approx ).These were 180 minutes worth of .WAV files.14 total files.

I opened iTunes and set the default import to AAC high quality 128kbps.
Then I dragged the files into iTunes.Took about 2 minutes.
Lastly I converted the .WAV to the AAC 128kbps.

180 minutes worth of audio.14 songs.
This took 10 minutes and averaged 20.3X.


And to the person that was talking about games :
First off I'm impressed that they even played.
If they did they were running under Rosetta because the Universal apps arn't out in final release yet that I know of.
 
jacobj said:
Your claims are so extraordinary that I am inclined to disbelieve.... but I want to believe...

I think it's a matter of expectations...

You know, before my Mini 1.42, 1gb Ram, my first Mac, I always used PC's and my previous was a p3 700mhz with 128mb ram, sharing 8mb, all on board...

Even Word, when printing, was sluggsh...

Now, I do a lot of things together and i'm really pleased with my mini performance...

You, in US, have acces to a lot of good things and put high expctations on everything... for me, I'm sure that I would be blown away with happiness with an iMac intel...
 
Peace said:
Thanks!!

Here's a quick benchmark :

I moved a 3 gig zipped file from a DVD to the desktop.Took about 4-5 minutes.
I then unzipped it.Took about 2-3 minutes ( approx ).These were 180 minutes worth of .WAV files.14 total files.

I opened iTunes and set the default import to AAC high quality 128kbps.
Then I dragged the files into iTunes.Took about 2 minutes.
Lastly I converted the .WAV to the AAC 128kbps.

180 minutes worth of audio.14 songs.
This took 10 minutes and averaged 20.3X.


And to the person that was talking about games :
First off I'm impressed that they even played.
If they did they were running under Rosetta because the Universal apps arn't out in final release yet that I know of.


Ok I just did the exact same thing only using my rev.b dual G5 2.3 w/4 gigs ram..

Transfer from DVD to desktop : 7m30s.
unzip : 4m45s
drag to iTunes : 3m
Convert : 6m42s 30X

You be the judge.
 
irock said:
GOD... I need another 1GB RAM for this Intel iMac. Granted, it's fast overall... but everything in Tiger is RAM-hungry.

- FireFox (PowerPC) is about 30% slower (subjective numbers)

- HandBrake is not as fast as I thought, but reckon it has something to do with unoptimized codes. To put this into perspective, my PowerBook 1.33Ghz can pull around 10-12fps in H.264 while my new iMac beats the laptop by 20fps. I'm expecting iMac to encode at 50fps.

- Boot up time doens't really concern me b/c I only reboot once a week.

Gosh I know! I had to remove all of my Dashboard Widgets because I needed the small amounts of RAM they were taking up. The Intel iMacs are really RAM hungry. I have the 20" iMac Core Duo.
 
Dual Screen

Dual screen works great.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_3871.jpg
    IMG_3871.jpg
    89.2 KB · Views: 298
jsfpa said:
Dual screen works great.
I agree, I have a 19" hooked up to my my iMac. It's beautiful.




Only, the iMac's display is so bright, my 19" looks a little dull in comparison. I've created so many color profiles for it.
 
One day with a new iMac

Well, I've gone a whole day now with my new Intel iMac, and I'm still loving it. Perhaps it's because I've used several other OSs in the past (MS-DOS, Wins 95, NT 2000, XP, Solaris, HPUX, various shades of Linux etc) but it took me no time to get used to OS X.

With the trouble I had with Windows on my Dell desktop, I had decided to try out Linux again, and I was playing around with it the day before this arrived, thinking that it was good enough to use. After a few hours with the iMac, I moved the old desktop to the basement. I might use it again in a few weeks, as a file server, but right now, I'll stick to the Mac.

So the impressions I have:
1. I have to consciously think about the menu items on the menu bar - the first time I opened iPhoto and wanted to import my photos, I searched around on the top of the window rather than look to the top of the screen. I'm learning quickly though.

2. The screen is bright and clear, no dead pixels as far as I can tell, but I'm little concerned about the colour. Watching an episode of Dora the Explorer with my 3 year old, the colours looked off slightly compared to TV. But I'm not dependent on a good colour screen, and it's better than my Dell 17" LCD, which has a definite yellowish tone in comparison.

3. This is so silent. I can just about hear a faint hum if I listen hard, but when I have my external HD or Dell laptop running, I can't hear anything from the iMac. I'm used to spending half my waking life listening to fans whirring.

4. Installing apps by dragging them to Applications and uninstalling them by dragging to Trash is so natural it's pure genius. I wonder why no one thought of it before ... oh, Apple engineers did, four or more years ago. A couple of nights ago I installed Firefox on the Linux machine, and to make it accessible outside of a terminal, I had to right click the menu and type in the label and location of the app executable and its icon.

5. Speaking of right clicking, some or many of you will be surprised to hear that I haven't yet configured the Mighty Mouse for two button use. I haven't had to. I haven't even had to use Ctrl-click much.

As someone who learned programming using a text editor on a Vax mainframe, I've always used keyboard shortcuts more than the mouse. I consider every second with my hand on the mouse is half a second wasted. So I'm learning the keyboard shortcuts and finding that one button use is a perfectly natural way to work. I know I'm not typical, but I like this.

6. I'm a little pissed though, that they don't use the standard Ctrl-A. Ctrl-C, Ctrl-X and Ctrl-V for select all, copy, cut and paste - well, just something else I have to bear in mind.

7. FrontRow is pretty good, but I never had any other multimedia type program to compare it too. My 3 year old loves Dora and the photo slideshow, and the cosmic screensaver, although she insists there's something wrong with the "computerer" when it switches to screensaver.

8. Java performance is tremendous - a 1.83 GHz CPU is 53% faster than a Pentium-M 2.26 GHz laptop at compiling the same code. That works out that the iMac is twice as efficient per clock cycle as the Windows laptop. With X11 and Tomcat installed, I can do all my Java development work on this.

9. Access privileges are implemented well. This is something I missed on my Windows PCs, trying to limit users' privileges usually ended up making the account unusable. I have two daughters who are not yet old enough to use a computer, but I set up a managed account just to see, and the parental controls seem pretty decent.

10.I think I found a bug last night while playing around with accounts and user switching. I've enabled root access, and an account "System Administrator" showed up in the account list on the top right. I logged into this using the root password, and it just displayed the background, no Finder running. I couldn't get a way out short of pulling the plug. That account is not present in the list now.

11. Setting up printers is a pain. I have a Netgear print server for network printing, but the iMac doesn't seem to work with it. However, the Dell laptop doesn't work with it either (although a desktop and IBM Thinkpad did at the same time as the Dell didn't). So I now have the printer attached directly to the iMac.

But the printer preference page is odd - I don't know if it's a bug, but when go to System Preferences/Print and Fax, it doesn't always show the printer that's attached ... well it does now ... I'll watch out for similar behavior.



Overall, I'm highly impressed. I only wish I'd done this much earlier in my life.
 
plinden said:
2. The screen is bright and clear, no dead pixels as far as I can tell, but I'm little concerned about the colour. Watching an episode of Dora the Explorer with my 3 year old, the colours looked off slightly compared to TV. But I'm not dependent on a good colour screen, and it's better than my Dell 17" LCD, which has a definite yellowish tone in comparison.

Have you calibrated? You should definitely, definitely do it. You may have to do it more than once too, to be satisfied. I did it once on my iMac G5, and right now I still feel that my iBook's color is better, and that I need to do it again. In case you're not familiar, calibration is done in system preferences -> display -> color. Turn on expert mode, and just follow the prompts. :) It'll basically ask you to adjust a bunch of pictures with sliders, and tell you how to do it. I've printed photos out for framing and I've been very, very pleased that my iBook's colors are honest to print. My iMac doesn't seem perfect at the moment, but I think if I take another pass, I should be able to get it. :)

The brightness is lovely, on the other hand. :)
 
plinden said:
2. The screen is bright and clear, no dead pixels as far as I can tell, but I'm little concerned about the colour. Watching an episode of Dora the Explorer with my 3 year old, the colours looked off slightly compared to TV. But I'm not dependent on a good colour screen, and it's better than my Dell 17" LCD, which has a definite yellowish tone in comparison.

Go to systempreferences>displays>colour>adobe rgb 1998

that will make your colours nicer.


[quote[6. I'm a little pissed though, that they don't use the standard Ctrl-A. Ctrl-C, Ctrl-X and Ctrl-V for select all, copy, cut and paste - well, just something else I have to bear in mind.[/quote]

erm... it does just use the  key instead of the CTRL key (its easier)
 
BakedBeans said:
Go to systempreferences>displays>colour>adobe rgb 1998

that will make your colours nicer.
I'm at work at the moment, but I think I tried that, and it made everything look too washed out and blue. I seem to remember the default setting was my favourite. I may be wrong though, I played around with all the preferences yesterday so can't really remember. I'm at work now, so will have to wait till I get home.

erm... it does just use the  key instead of the CTRL key (its easier)
It uses the apple key, yes. But I keep going for Ctrl. I'm only a little pissed, I'll get used to it. If that's the only thing that annoys me, I'll be very happy.
 
plinden said:
It uses the apple key, yes. But I keep going for Ctrl. I'm only a little pissed, I'll get used to it. If that's the only thing that annoys me, I'll be very happy.

When I first made the switch to a Mac it annoyed me too, now I'm used to it. Of course, now I'm annoyed when I go to one of my PCs because I keep accidently hitting Alt. ; )
 
nph said:
I just tried Photoshop under Rosetta at the Applestore in Willow Bend.
It was slow as molass trying to run some filters on a large JPEG.
Everything else more or less flew but for heavy applications like PS under Rosetta you have to have some patience. It was slower than my current imac 800MHz G4...

How much RAM is in the thing? I'm going to keep railing on people about this until we get Photoshop benchmarks on systems with 2GB of RAM. Rosetta does not function like your everyday average application it is going to eat a crap load of RAM and if it’s the default 512MB I expect it to be a heck of a lot slower then 1GB or 2GB.
 
SiliconAddict said:
How much RAM in the thing? I'm going to keep railing on people about this until we get Photoshop benchmarks on systems with 2GB of RAM. Rosetta does not function like your everyday average application it is going to eat a crap load of RAM and if it’s the default 512MB I expect it to be a heck of a lot slower then 1GB or 2GB.
I have 2GB RAM but no Photoshop. I could download the free 30 day trial (all 310MB of it) but I wouldn't know where to start testing ... any hints? But then, I also don't have a G5 to compare to.
 
plinden said:
It uses the apple key, yes. But I keep going for Ctrl. I'm only a little pissed, I'll get used to it. If that's the only thing that annoys me, I'll be very happy.

As a terminal using programmer you will soon appreciate that command-C is copy and ctrl-C still works as an interrupt. It really makes sense when you think about it. Ctrl is for control characters and Command is for issuing commands :)
 
I'm using the Adobe RGB 1998 color profile for my iMac and it looks great. Just wanted to say that. :p Now that I''ve been using this when I go back to the iMac color profile (just to test) it looks terrible.

Adobe on the left, iMac default setting ont he right:
n2mudk.png


I'm super bored. Sorry.
 
robbieduncan said:
As a terminal using programmer you will soon appreciate that command-C is copy and ctrl-C still works as an interrupt. It really makes sense when you think about it. Ctrl is for control characters and Command is for issuing commands :)
Yeah, I see your point. I have more than once accidentally interrupted a process by having the wrong terminal in focus when trying to copy some text, though not often.
 
plinden said:
2. The screen is bright and clear, no dead pixels as far as I can tell, but I'm little concerned about the colour. Watching an episode of Dora the Explorer with my 3 year old, the colours looked off slightly compared to TV. But I'm not dependent on a good colour screen, and it's better than my Dell 17" LCD, which has a definite yellowish tone in comparison.
So I calibrated my screen and it looks much better now - but I didn't like the adobe rgb 1998 calibration. Do you all really think that's better than the default?

8. Java performance is tremendous - a 1.83 GHz CPU is 53% faster than a Pentium-M 2.26 GHz laptop at compiling the same code. That works out that the iMac is twice as efficient per clock cycle as the Windows laptop. With X11 and Tomcat installed, I can do all my Java development work on this.
I did one more benchmark. I compiled the same Java project while importing the same CD (Tom Waits, Small Change) into iTunes on PC and iMac.

On the Windows laptop, the compile time went from 20 seconds to 2m 40s.

On the iMac, the compile time also increased ....

















... from 13 seconds to 15 seconds.

Man, I love the dual cores.
 
samanthas said:
I'm using the Adobe RGB 1998 color profile for my iMac and it looks great. Just wanted to say that. :p Now that I''ve been using this when I go back to the iMac color profile (just to test) it looks terrible.

Yeah, iMac profile is horrible (looks too washed out). Although Adobe RGB (1998) is an improvement, you are better of calibrating one yourself. It will take just few minutes and kinda fun actually.
 
Some of the claims on this forum seem to be slightly exaggerated. After almost two weeks with the Intel iMac (20"/2Ghz Core Duo/2GB RAM), I can say in my experience that it is not as fast as my Power Mac G5 (2Ghz Dual Processor/2GB RAM). It feels around 20-30% slower than my G5 in most applications including the iLife 06 suite and QuickTime. However, I'm sure for those with G4 processors, the Intel iMac will be a huge upgrade. But for those of us with recent Power Macs, there is no reason to go upgrading just yet.

I also found that Safari, the Finder and iPhoto are extremely buggy. I've had to force restart at least three times over the past two weeks because of freezing.

Overall, it's a great consumer machine, and I'm sure with the next Mac OS X update and future UB software the future of the Intel iMac is bright.
 
I just wanted to share this ... my brother turned up at our door yesterday (without letting us know he was coming :rolleyes: ). When he saw my new iMac (just one week old now and working flawlessly) he said how cool it was - he liked the Apple style.

Then he looked behind it and on the floor and asked "where's the rest of it?"

This is someone who works as a senior engineering manager (one step below VP level) for a software company and who dabbles in amateur photography, and who had been hearing about Macs from me for at least 18 months. I guess there's still a lot of education needs to be done.

By the way, I think he's tempted to get his own ...
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.