Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

'Real World' Photoshop Benchmark - Speed Test

Just as reference for what good more RAM and a cleanup can do to your system:

Mac Pro: 2.66, 160Gb HD, 1Gb RAM

CS2: over 6 1/2 minutes
(this was a few months ago and I was really confused by the slow time)

CS3beta: over 5 1/2 minutes
(again, i was scratching my head, I knew the page-outs would slow it down, but didnt think it would be THAT bad, when I had seen macpros hitting 30secs etc)


I just upgraded my RAM today, so new spec:

Mac Pro: 2.66, 160Gb HD, 3Gb RAM (risers juggled properly)

CS3beta: 43 seconds

after a clean-install of my machine

CS3beta: 31 seconds


so a bit more RAM and a spring clean knocked 5 minutes of my time!
 
iZac said:
Just as reference for what good more RAM and a cleanup can do to your system:

Mac Pro: 2.66, 160Gb HD, 1Gb RAM

CS2: over 6 1/2 minutes
(this was a few months ago and I was really confused by the slow time)

CS3beta: over 5 1/2 minutes
(again, i was scratching my head, I knew the page-outs would slow it down, but didnt think it would be THAT bad, when I had seen macpros hitting 30secs etc)


I just upgraded my RAM today, so new spec:

Mac Pro: 2.66, 160Gb HD, 3Gb RAM (risers juggled properly)

CS3beta: 43 seconds

after a clean-install of my machine

CS3beta: 31 seconds


so a bit more RAM and a spring clean knocked 5 minutes of my time!
Click to expand...

This proves that MacPro is very slow with 1 gig RAM - it needs at least 2 )prefferably 3) to run at the speed the machine is capable of.
 
Hey there mac users. Just wanted to see how I measured up. My wife is a designer who uses a mac so I am interested in seeing how I can speed up her 20"Imac for her.

1min50 - On my Athlon 64 2x 4400 oc 2.8Ghz w 1.5gig Ram and half full 250gig scratch disk.
In this test it used 50-90% of processor and 1.35gig of ram.

5min - On the same machine without changing history and cache settings and without the scratch disk.
In this test it used 5-40% of the processor and 1.7gig of memory (200 VM)

I think it pays to have enough ram to host the entire process!

What does the cache setting do?

Edit - More tests

Sorry about the double post..couldn't see an edit option. I have done some more tests to see what change really made the difference.

2 things made a significant difference.

1. Opening a couple programs in the background (outlook and firefox = 150meg ram) added 30 seconds. Time = 2.34

2. Changing history back to 20. Time = 16.43! (Programs still open in background.) CPU was hardly used.

Summary = This photoshop test needs 1.5gig of ram minimum. Real life photoshop needs 10-20 history therefor to bench it properly you need 2gig of ram. (Mine peaked at 1.9 but it is a pc.) Scratch disk, and cache influence was marginal in this test and the CPU was only used when memory wasn't overloaded. ie 5-10% average usage for the long test.
 
31s (using CS3 beta)

That must be pretty good for a dual core system:

Core 2 Duo 3GHz (4MB L2, 1333MHz FSB)
4GB DDR2-833MHz
Samsung T166 320GB (7200RPM, 16MB cache)
GeForce 7900GS 256MB
Windows Vista 64-bit

Followed the instructions in the test's ReadMe (1 history state, 4 cache levels, 100% mem usage). No scratch disk was used.
 
MacPro 8-core, CS3
Max ram (3gb I think), 1 history (which is garbage), 4 cache

29seconds

20 History levels, 6 cache (more realistic)

1:27
 
I know this is supposed to be for Macs but I'm still waiting to get my MBP (when Santa Rosa comes out) but I did the test on my Windows laptop anyway...

2.0 GHz P-M, 1 GB RAM, Windows XP Pro, Photoshop CS2

8 minutes 56 seconds
 
My first desktop Mac

2.66 - 4GB RAM (3GB approx for CS3) - 150GB WD 10K Raptor as CS3 scratch

35 seconds on my first and only try. This thing is fast!

I do a test with my computers when I make a change or get a new one -- to get a glance of what they are capable (processor intensive). I got the test from this forum long time ago -- the one with a pic of a horse. I tested my new Mac Pro against my MBP 2.16 w/ 2GB RAM with this horse:

Mac Pro = 7 seconds
MBP = 27 seconds
PowerBook G4 1.67 = 1min 47 sec.

With real life CS3 tasks (I use tif files of approx 150MB) The MacBook Pro is good but the MP 2.66 just makes you feel you're working with small jpegs; I love this Machine.
 
Just for comparison

Intel Core2 E6400 @3.2Ghz
Asus P5B Deluxe @ 400Mhz FSB
4GB DDR2-800 @ 4-4-4-12
200GB WD SE16 HDD
Photoshop CS3

29seconds

This is running Vista x64 which is a bit slower than x86 or XP would have been. I suppose when a 64bit photoshop comes out it will run a bit faster.
 
Time to upgrade

Just for a laugh I ran this test :)
Powermac G4 AGP Graphics
450 Mhz
2 Gig of ram
SG barracuda 7200 RPM ATA empty scratch disk
Photoshop CS2

Drum roll please....
16 Min 5 seconds :eek:

I will update this machine as soon as I see a machine that will be viable for a while. I almost bought when the quads came out. This one was and is worth every penny spent on it. It still runs most apps. Slow as can be but works.
My photography business has really taken off lately and I have to run and use a friends at times to beat my deadlines.
_______________________________
Unique Visuals Photography, Designs
UniqueVisuals.com
 
Unique Visuals said:
Just for a laugh I ran this test :)
Powermac G4 AGP Graphics
450 Mhz
2 Gig of ram
SG barracuda 7200 RPM ATA empty scratch disk
Photoshop CS2

Drum roll please....
16 Min 5 seconds :eek:

I will update this machine as soon as I see a machine that will be viable for a while. I almost bought when the quads came out. This one was and is worth every penny spent on it. It still runs most apps. Slow as can be but works.
My photography business has really taken off lately and I have to run and use a friends at times to beat my deadlines.
_______________________________
Unique Visuals Photography, Designs
UniqueVisuals.com
Click to expand...

Well your machine was a beast back in '99/'00 --three times the power of a Pentium III at the same clock speed -- The first Mac I saw in my life was a Performa 550 owned by an architect friend of mine and Apple fan around 1994. He left his CAD drawings rendering all night long ( I guess those files couldn't be much larger than a couple MBs
 
Unique Visuals said:
Just for a laugh I ran this test :)
Powermac G4 AGP Graphics
450 Mhz
2 Gig of ram
SG barracuda 7200 RPM ATA empty scratch disk
Photoshop CS2

Drum roll please....
16 Min 5 seconds :eek:

I will update this machine as soon as I see a machine that will be viable for a while. I almost bought when the quads came out. This one was and is worth every penny spent on it. It still runs most apps. Slow as can be but works.
My photography business has really taken off lately and I have to run and use a friends at times to beat my deadlines.
_______________________________
Unique Visuals Photography, Designs
UniqueVisuals.com
Click to expand...

Actually, the time you got ist that bad for a single 450 MHz G4! I thought it would be over 20 minutes on that kind of machine! :)
 
14.6 :eek:

Windows Vista 32
Intel e6600 @3.6Ghz
4GB OCZ PC8500
2 X Raptor 74 Raid 0
Asus striker extreme
Water cooled.
CS3 Full.

Not trying to start a PC / Mac thing, but I thought it would be nice for a comparison. YEs I followed all teh instructions to the letter.

PS I reckon I coudl get this under 10 Seconds with a bit of work.
 
results

38 seconds

Photoshop CS3 retail
Power Mac Quad Xeon 2.66
3GB DDR2 667 RAM
X1900XT Video Card w/512MB
500 GB WD boot drive / app drive
500 GB Seagate scratch drive [7200rpm; 16MB cache]
 
Windows Notebook, Core Duo, CS3

I'm considering a move to a Mac Pro so that I can do most of my Windows work in a VM (Visual Studio development)... trying to wait until after wwdc '07 to see if the Mac Pro or Cinema Displays get updated... don't know if I can hold out :cool: Maybe we'll see an update regarding Blu-Ray, HDCP compatible cards/displays, octo-core $2499 base model !?! hey, one can dream...

For now though, this is my current system and the results follow:

HP Compaq nw8440 Notebook

Intel Core Duo 2.16GHz (first gen, not core 2 duo)
2GB RAM
100GB 7200rpm Seagate Momentus 7200.1
Windows XP sp2
ATI FireGL v5200 (aka X1600)

History 1, Cache 4, Memory 100% (per test specifications)

1:48 (average of three runs at 1:49, 1:47, 1:47)

Pretty much nothing else running... not even Anti-Virus !!! How dare I not run AV on a Windows box?! :)

Cliff
 
Somebody chart the results!

Maybe Bakedbeans who started this thread should go through all of these replies and start charting all of this data, yes?

Lets see a comprehensive conclusive graph!
 
jimedit1 said:
Maybe Bakedbeans who started this thread should go through all of these replies and start charting all of this data, yes?

Lets see a comprehensive conclusive graph!
Click to expand...

I think it would be a bit frustrating to do that.

There are people with PC's or Macs

People that change the history setting, cache setting and re-test a miliion times.

We need to stick with one setting, this benchmark is starting to get really sloppy.
 
Mac Pro Dual Quad Core 3.0 Ghz
x1900xt
9GB ram
2 - 500 GB Apple stock hard drives
OS - Bootcamp running XP64

Photoshop CS3
1 History State
Cache Level 4
100% Memory - PS can't use all of it and 70% was same time :(

Time 23 seconds

I ran the test 4 times - no change. Tried with other apps running in the background - didn't seem to matter. With 20 History levels, 6 cache 1:15
 
Mac Pro Quad Core 3.0 Ghz Xeon
2GB RAM (as 4 x 512MB)
ATI X1900XT
500 GB 7200RPM Samsung Scratch Drive
10.4.9 with Finder and Dashboard running

Photoshop CS3 Extended
1 History state
Cache level 4
100% memory

33 seconds, ran it twice, both after restarting and with other apps, yielding the same time exactly.

Think I need more RAM?
 
fairnymph said:
Mac Pro Quad Core 3.0 Ghz Xeon
2GB RAM (as 4 x 512MB)
ATI X1900XT
500 GB 7200RPM Samsung Scratch Drive

33 seconds, ran it twice, both after restarting and with other apps, yielding the same time exactly.

Think I need more RAM?
Click to expand...

It would probably help. You have the same system as I do (with less ram) and I doubt that my running WinXP for the test makes that much difference...
 
fairnymph said:
Yeah that's what I was thinking after seeing your benchmark. Maybe I should go up to 4GB.
Click to expand...

I run it with my 3GHz Quaqd 7Gig RAM x1900xt CS3

32 seconds.

My ex 2.66 6 GB Ram did it in 36 seconds.

Also, in the the Xbench test my 2.66 was faster than the new 3ghz with same X1900 but 3GHz I more gig of RAM.

So, my 3ghz is not slower (thanks god):eek: , but I don't believe you can tell the difference with the 2.66 in real time working. I don't think its worth the extra $$
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back