Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
It's a Noctua NH-C12P. It's a huge heatsink so I guess it would probably go higher but I read that Ivy can be unstable over 4.5GHz unless you start increasing the voltage, which might give me a heat problem.

Any overclock can be unstable with to little or to many volts
 
Just tested my newly acquired 2.7 16GB 512SSD GT650 Macbook pro it was one second faster than my 2011 iMac with 32GB of RAM and a 512 Internal Vertex 4 SSD. 2GB 6970m

Returned time of 11 seconds optimised or 12 seconds with 32 history states and 70% processor use
 
7 Seconds on the dot (performed the test twice, once without restarting).

This would be for a Hackintosh with the following specs:

i7 3930k 6-core, overclocked to 4.5ghz
32 gigs of RAM
GTX 660Ti

----------

By comparison, just ran the test again on my MBP and got just a little shy of 20 seconds.

MBP specs:

i7 4-core running at 2ghz

16 gigs of RAM

SSD drive
 
Anyone Run this on CC yet? I would love to see comparisons from CS to CC.

The king is back:

iMac (model 12,2) 3.4ghz i7 quad(eight)
16gig RAM
512 Crucial SSD

Mountain Lion 10.8.3

Photoshop CC: 12 Seconds flat.


That's 2 seconds down from having a 7200rpm drive and CS6. Let's remember - this is the mid 2011 iMac.
 
Just upgraded/reconfigured my mac pro today and thought I would redo this test.


Mac Pro 2010, 3.33GHz
8 gb 1333 MHz DDR3
Radeon 5770

OSX 10.8.4
Photoshop CS6

11.6 seconds
 
Ran it twice; once with Firefox and a few other apps running, and once with a fresh reboot.

System:
2009 Mac Pro
EFI upgrade to 5,1
3.33GHz 6-core W3680
32GB RAM @1333MHz
Areca 1880ix-12 attached to 8-member RAID6 (set as scratch)
ATI 5870 running dual monitors, 22" Dell and 30" ACD
Ran test on CS5 (PS v12.0.4)

Test with other apps open: 13.0 seconds
Test with fresh reboot: 12.2 seconds

That seems respectable. :)

Whoops, forgot I had Geektool running, and there are a ton of shells running with that enabled... so I disabled that and ran again without a fresh reboot, and did even better!

11.7 seconds!
Just ran it again after going from 10.6.8 to 10.8.4, and running CS6. The rest is the same:

11.2 seconds. At that point, I think it's more about how quickly I press the stop button on my stopwatch, but maybe it's a smidgen faster, too. :)
 
Hackintosh
i5-2400 (turbo bumped to 3.6Ghz)
4x4GB Mushkin 1600Mhz
Gigabyte Z77 UD5H
Nvidia 640GT

11.4s using CS6

I was surprised it was that fast. The parts are dirt cheap, total rig is only worth $60 CPU + $120 Mobo + $80 Ram + $75 GPU + $60 PSU + $100 SSD + $50 Case = $545

My MacBook Pro 13" Ivy i5 gets ~24s
 
I upgraded my computer just a little more, adding 8 GB ram and the Sonnet Tempo card. Think I am done upgrading for a while.

Mac Pro 2010, 3.33GHz
16 GB 1333 MHz DDR3
Radeon 5770
Sonnet Tempo SSD

OSX 10.8.4
Photoshop CS6

10.25 seconds

NOTE: I originally said 10.0 seconds but that seems like a lucky shot; so am reposting as 10.25 seconds which I can do all day.


:apple:
 
Last edited:
Hello, all. Well I just realized that my single hex-core cpu is triple channel and that I have been running four x 4 gb sticks, leaving me in dual channel operation when I should be in triple channel. With nothing better to do I removed one stick and ran this test again! I was able to see an improvement of 3.61%, which is a little more than general predictions (I've read 2 to 3%).

New time: 9.88 seconds

Broke that bitchy 10 second barrier. Cheers :)

Mac Pro 5,1 2010
W3680 6 x 3.33 GHz
12 GB 1333 MHz ram
Radeon 5770
Intel 520 Series 180 GB, Sonnet Tempo SSD
1 TB HD

OSX 10.8.4
Photoshop CS6
 
Last edited:
After upgrading my GCU to a MacVidCards-flashed GTX 580, I thought it might be interesting to try this benchmark again. Indeed, it is a little faster, about 1 second. My previous best was 12.3 sec. Now I'm down to an average of about 11.2 sec (depending on my reflexes pushing the stopwatch buttons). When I get around to buying another couple of 8GB sticks and run in proper 1333 mHz triple channel, I try it again.

System:

Mac Pro 5.1, 2009, 3.33 Hex W3680
14GB RAM (1066 mHz, 4 sticks, so running dual channel)
NVidia GTX 580 3GB
500GB SSD (plus assorted 9TB other HDs)
 
8,6 seconds - 2x e5-2690, 64gb quad channel rdimm, gtx 570
couldnt be bothered to close down the other applications running (just sound, firefox with 8 tabs and 4 ****ing word windows) or to change any of the history settings aso

win 7 tho :(
 
Last edited:
Shouldnt my time be comparable to those with the same specs as me?
I've always though photoshop ran slow on my macbook pro but it appears that people with the same setup asme are getting much faster times.

I have-

2.4GHz Intel core 2 duo, 4 GB 667 MHz SDRAM, 160 GB @ 7200 rpm (100 GB free) with an attaced 3TB firewire 800 drive as a scratch drive

getting a time 1:50
 
MacBook Pro 15 inch Early 2011

CPU: 2.2 GHz Intel i7
RAM: 8 GB 1333 MHz DDR3
GPU: AMD Radeon HD 6750M 1024 MB
HDD: 750 GB SATA

TIME:

14.8 Seconds
 
Just added more RAM to get up to 24 GB of 1333 mHz. Re-ran the benchmark, and used a video camera to measure exactly the time between clicking the start button and seeing the popup window appearing. This takes away the variability of my reflexes on a stopwatch.

Anyway, with the Mac Pro machine seen in my signature below, I now complete the benchmark in 10.53 seconds. That's good enough for me. I use this machine for video editing in Premiere, audio editing in Audition, and lots of Photoshop.
 
Last edited:
9.87

Hackintosh
i7 3770K overclocked to 4.4Ghz
16GB DDR3
128Gb OCZ Agility 3 SSD
GTX 670 *Cuda turned on also

This was while running other programs, such as iTunes, Mail and Safari. Not on a fresh restart either. Too Lazy lol!
 
12 Seconds Flat

2010 Mac Pro 2 x2.4Ghz 8 Core w/ 64 Gig RAM, OWC Mercury Accelsior 480Gig SSD, ATI RADEON 5770.
 
Haswell MacBook Pro iGPU

MacBook Pro 15 inch Late 2013

CPU: 2.6 GHz Intel i7
RAM: 16 GB 1333 MHz DDR3
GPU: Iris Pro
HDD: 1TB SSD

TIME:

11.95 Seconds average
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.