any one with Core 2 Duo 3.06 Ghz and ATI Radeon HD 4670 256MB post the geekbench score and summary?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
My Quad Core 27-inch i5 has arrived! (includes pictures and Benchmark)
- Thread starter Carressa
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You should be able to refer to the previously posted E7600 score. Though if it's based on the 9400M G model the memory scores should be a little lower.
I get about 6100 in Geekbench here under Windows 7. I'll admit I'm running my RAM at really high latencies though.
Holy Crap! From the Geekbench site:
The iMac (Late 2009) Intel Core 2 Duo E7600 3.06 GHz (2 cores) = 4297
Yippee!!!!
I'm not too sure how seriously I can take geekbench scores.
On the same machine, Windows 7 64 bit running 32 bit geekbench scored 6603.
In OS X, 32 bit geekbench scores 7828. 64 bit scores 8812. This is in 10.5.8.
My hardware is a Q9550 @ 3.71 GHz, 4 GB of DDR2 RAM @ 1156 MHz.
Just strange to me.
Well that was a good question so here is what I tried to test this...
First I opened WoW and put it in windowed mode, next I opened Photoshop and then Itunes and started UP playing in HD. Next I opened up my windows VM session and then started Handbrake and had it start converting a movie...and then i'm like what else can I do so opened a few intense flash sites and started streaming some V on Hulu
Is that good enough for stress testing? . So I checked Istat and it shows me running at 47 to 50 degrees celsius on CPU. My GPU Diode and and GPU Heatsink hit 75 celsius but everything was running smooth as can be.Well I hate to be the bearer of bad news
Chipset Model: ATI Radeon HD 4850
Type: GPU
Bus: PCIe
PCIe Lane Width: x16
VRAM (Total): 512 MB
Vendor: ATI (0x1002)
Device ID: 0x944a
Revision ID: 0x0000
ROM Revision: 113-B9110C-394
EFI Driver Version: 01.00.367
Displays:
iMac:
Resolution: 2560 x 1440
Pixel Depth: 32-Bit Color (ARGB8888)
Main Display: Yes
Mirror: Off
Online: Yes
Built-In: Yes
Connection Type: DisplayPort
Display Connector:
Status: No Display Connected
It is the Core i5.
Well I hate to be the bearer of bad news
Chipset Model: ATI Radeon HD 4850
Type: GPU
Bus: PCIe
PCIe Lane Width: x16
VRAM (Total): 512 MB
Vendor: ATI (0x1002)
Device ID: 0x944a
Revision ID: 0x0000
ROM Revision: 113-B9110C-394
EFI Driver Version: 01.00.367
Displays:
iMac:
Resolution: 2560 x 1440
Pixel Depth: 32-Bit Color (ARGB8888)
Main Display: Yes
Mirror: Off
Online: Yes
Built-In: Yes
Connection Type: DisplayPort
Display Connector:
Status: No Display Connected
Booo bad news. That is not what I hoped for.
Oh well.i know it is Core i5 just want to know it is Stock Intel CPU 750 or some special custom CPU build for Apple
Remember the stock i5 750 is 95 Watts TDP.
that is only possible in Windows with CPU-Z program, i guess.
but thank you for all the effort.
Could you run:
iTunes
Quicktime
Flash under Safari
Paying attention to the temps and core % utilizations for each instance?
There's an entire thread on this. These instances (and a few others related to the underlying Quicktime X code) that have caused high temps for low core usage in the Mac Pros.
It's suspected SL is the culprit, and if it is, high temps will show up on the i5 and i7 based iMacs compared to other operations of ~ the same CPU % of utilization. It's not occuring on the non-Nahalem based MP systems. But we're trying to isolate it.
Any assistance in this matter would be truly appreciated. Thanks.
iTunes
Quicktime
Flash under Safari
Paying attention to the temps and core % utilizations for each instance?
There's an entire thread on this. These instances (and a few others related to the underlying Quicktime X code) that have caused high temps for low core usage in the Mac Pros.
It's suspected SL is the culprit, and if it is, high temps will show up on the i5 and i7 based iMacs compared to other operations of ~ the same CPU % of utilization. It's not occuring on the non-Nahalem based MP systems. But we're trying to isolate it.
Any assistance in this matter would be truly appreciated. Thanks.
I'm quite surprised that the i5 benchmarks posted here are so much lower than my base '09 Mac Pro. I thought the i5 and i7 architecture was basically the same, minus the hyperthreading?
Difference:
i5 iMac
Summary
Section Description Score Geekbench Score
Geekbench 2.1.4 for Mac OS X x86 (32-bit)
Integer Processor integer performance 4967
Floating Point Processor floating point performance 10436
Memory Memory performance 3630
Stream Memory bandwidth performance 3791
Geekbench Score: 6496
Base 2009 MP (techhie)
Summary
Section Description Score Geekbench Score
Geekbench 2.1.2 for Mac OS X x86 (64-bit)
Integer Processor integer performance 8327
Floating Point Processor floating point performance 14582
Memory Memory performance 4732
Stream Memory bandwidth performance 4593
Geekbench Score: 9423
Well that was a good question so here is what I tried to test this...
First I opened WoW and put it in windowed mode, next I opened Photoshop and then Itunes and started UP playing in HD. Next I opened up my windows VM session and then started Handbrake and had it start converting a movie...and then i'm like what else can I do so opened a few intense flash sites and started streaming some V on Hulu
Did you happen to notice what the fan speeds were?
The problem is specific to audio/visual based applications though. Everything else is fine. But 1% CPU utilization shouldn't result in 67C.
100% on all cores, Yes.
67C is the max temp stated by Intel at stock settings. They can actually get hotter than that and survive (100C or so), but it's dangerous to the processor/s. And it's showing up on Single Processor and Dual Processor based '09 MP systems. From the information available, it's software. But we've been waiting for the Nehalem based iMac owners to report in with systems to prove it. So far, Apple's not acknowledged the issue (formally), though it's been reported. We're hoping that if it does what we think (affects all the Nehalem systems), the added weight of the i5 & i7 iMac owners will force Apple to address it.
It's been there from 10.6.0, and 10.6.2 just released. No solution as of yet.
Here is the new 27" 3.06 GHz iMac for additional comparison:
Summary (techhie's 27" iMac C2D)
Section Description
Geekbench 2.1.2 for Mac OS X x86 (64-bit)
Integer Processor integer performance 4364
Floating Point Processor floating point performance 6670
Memory Memory performance 3041
Stream Memory bandwidth performance 2118
Geekbench Score: 4681
Summary (techhie's 27" iMac C2D)
Section Description
Geekbench 2.1.2 for Mac OS X x86 (64-bit)
Integer Processor integer performance 4364
Floating Point Processor floating point performance 6670
Memory Memory performance 3041
Stream Memory bandwidth performance 2118
Geekbench Score: 4681
Just for laughs I Geekbenched my PowerBook G4 and got...wait for it...
786!!!! I think my i7 with 8GB should do rather better don't you
Simple... 4 vs. 8 cores. I7 has 8 virtual cores. Look at other stats at geekbench - 16 cores class of its own, 8 cores too etc. Adjust for clock speed. I am guessing i7 (I have on order
will be about the same as 2.66 quad 09 MP.