Apple G5 Benchmarks?

[toonpang]

There is way too much bs flying around from both sides of the fence. I'm getting a G5 in a few weeks and I'll be setting the record straight for myself and anyone else who cares.

In the meantime all you'd get is marketing bs and flame wars.

-Toon

[Array]

NASA performed a series of benchmarks on the new G5. I would look those up.

[ZrO-1]

The G5 doesn't actually hit the streets untill August 5th (and most will get it around September). So maybe we'll start seeing independent reviews by the middle/end of August. For reviews then check the usual hardware review sites: Tom's Hardware (http://www.tomshardware.com) , anandtech (http://www.anandtech.com) , Exterme Tech (http://www.extremetech.com) , etc...

I'm sure they will all want to do a test to see how it stacks up against the x86 and x86-64 platforms.

[toonpang]

There will be pleanty of bias filled benchmarks out there. But I don't care about random numbers coming out of a spec test or a render time. I'm much more interested in how it feels to work on, crashing, app switching, and if it overall feels faster. fi my dual amd 1.2 renders almost twice as fast as my dual g4 1.2, but flipping between photoshop, maya and a few web browsers is twice as fast on my mac. I'll be doing the render tests as well though to satasfy all of our curiosity, and those numbers do play a role in some pipelines.

I love both platforms for what they are and I'm excited for us to receive our G5's and see how they are. I've been told we get our in a few weeks and I hope I can give an objective artist pov on this techie pissing contest.

-Toon

[beaker]

This picture was posted on the siggraph pics thread. I zoomed in on the important information from it.

Pixar's numbers for rendering a scene from Finding Nemo:
2.8 Ghz Xeon with the Intel compiler: 4:06
2.0 Ghz G5 with the gcc compiler: 3:36

[Array]

hehe, did anyone else catch the news earlier about the IBM ppc 970 based servers? a 4 processor server is going for 3500$. I wonder if a hack to run OSX on it is possible?

[mark_wilkins]

The moderator of the Highend3D Maya mailing list was planning to do some focused Maya and Shake benchmarks on the G5 at the earliest opportunity. When he does this, I'll post a link here, if I remember.

-- Mark

[X3M]

Originally posted by beaker
This picture was posted on the siggraph pics thread. I zoomed in on the important information from it.

Pixar's numbers for rendering a scene from Finding Nemo:
2.8 Ghz Xeon with the Intel compiler: 4:06
2.0 Ghz G5 with the gcc compiler: 3:36

What is so great about those numbers. You are comparing something that is not out yet, 64-bit CPU which supposed to be the fastest workstation in the world with Intels 32-bit, one year old CPU and it beats it by only a fraction of a second. Is the new G5 so bad? I guess, I will be switching to Linux on ether Intel or AMD. All the excitment for nothing.

[elvis]

Originally posted by beaker
Pixar's numbers for rendering a scene from Finding Nemo
of interest, pixar bought 2000 pentium 4 cpu's for their latest renderfarm upgrade. also of interest is that steve jobs (CEO of apple) is also CEO of pixar.

what a funny old world it is.

[deepinspace]

Anyway, I think Pixar is migrating to Mac OS X.......;)

Check this .....
http://www.pixar.com/companyinfo/jobs/openings/macosmigrationcontractor.html

[mark_wilkins]

Originally posted by X3M
fastest workstation in the world

No, they've taken great pains to distinguish "personal computers" from "workstations" when making comments like that. :D

Frankly, I don't care whether it's 2% faster than my dual Xeon at work or 50%. It's still a very fast machine with a clean, well-executed UNIX-based OS and excellent support for the software I use. Besides, a faster Opteron workstation would set me back an additional $750 for a similar configuration, or more (and I checked.)

-- Mark

[mark_wilkins]

BTW I understand that the Pixar truth is that they're moving to the Mac for some functions and staying on Intel for others.

Also, as long as we're discussing benchmarks vs. Pixar's purchasing decisions, you have to realize that raw speed is not the primary consideration when picking machines for a render farm at a large installation. Sure it's *a* consideration but there are many others, and those are probably controlling assuming a certain minimum baseline performance is met.

-- Mark

[Sieb]

In the end, until one of us here gets ahold of one, believe none of what you read/hear. REAL speed benches with software WE use is all that counts, not optimized coded compiler goodness.. For me, its all hot air right now. And will be for some time till the apps on it are all native 64bit.

I want one, but I don't need the bleeding edge hardware without the software...

[X3M]

Originally posted by deepinspace
Frankly, I don't care whether it's 2% faster than my dual Xeon at work or 50%. It's still a very fast machine with a clean, well-executed UNIX-based OS and excellent support for the software I use. Besides, a faster Opteron workstation would set me back an additional $750 for a similar configuration, or more (and I checked.)

-- Mark

Really, at the end of the day it is about trust and the company that cares about their customers and not only about their money. Most of us don't like Microsoft because they play dirty. 3rd party developers are already complaining about Apple and their ether dropping or are thinking about dropping their products support for MAC. How good is that? I was a user of Shake, at first I was very upset about it but well there is always something better. I have a chance to work with Nuke, and with all the new improvements and additions to it I had already forgot about shake. Also, why there is no professional 3d video card for MAC like NVIDIA Quadro or 3D Labs Wildcat. Are all those companies already sick with Apple too or Apple is not a professional workstation like it was mentioned above that it is only a "personal computer” (for kids to play games). Ops, I forgot there aren’t many games for it. So what is it for? … Graphics? Last benchmarks that I had seen Photoshop was running twice as fast on Windows computer. I think most of the MAC users should say that they like MAC instead of Windows or Linux PC not because it is faster, etc. it is because they are non-technical, they cannot tell the difference between cpu and memory, they would never be able to install their own video card or so on… All they want is to sit in front of something and create. There is no problem with that and I it is easier for users of other systems to buy that… :) Well, really, I don’t care what it is, MAC, PC, SGI, I am writing it only because I see all those MAC users always shouting MAC this, MAC that, and whenever some 3rd party company seats down and run all the benchmarks MACs are not even close to what they state. It happened in the past, and I don’t think it will be different this time.

[mark_wilkins]

Just so we can be clear about where I'm coming from with this, I use Linux at work and Windows and the Mac at home.

Also, I want to point out that I do not find Apple's "personal computer" vs. "workstation" distinction at all compelling -- I was joking about it above, not adopting it for my own.

I do happen to think that the G5 has made them very competitive again performance-wise, ASSUMING that they ship at the end of the month, as promised. If they don't, that's a big problem.

Originally posted by X3M
3rd party developers are already complaining about Apple and their ether dropping or are thinking about dropping their products support for Mac. How good is that?

There are two categories of companies which have dropped support for the Mac over the years: first are the small companies that have to make tough choices about platform commitment, and that's just a side effect of being a niche platform.

Second are cases like Adobe where Apple's moved into their product areas. Let's be honest: Apple's moving into those areas with application software has been entirely motivated by the desire to get attractive, high-quality applications on the platform. Premiere on the Mac languished for a long time and Final Cut Pro kicked the crap out of it in the marketplace.

Adobe can claim that it's unfair for Apple to compete with them, but it's not as though FCP was being offered for free with Macs -- it was beating Premiere in the marketplace at almost twice the price, and Adobe chose not to try to compete. This was a rational business decision, as they were fighting from a losing position, but speaking as someone who's used Premiere and FCP extensively I don't miss Premiere.

On the Shake front, Apple's behavior is obviously driven by a desire to move hardware out the door rather than serve existing users of the software. I don't know what state Nothing Real was in at the time of the sale, but I've gotten the impression they were not in such great shape, despite their relatively lean business and great product. If that's the case, had Apple passed on the Nothing Real deal, you might well have found that Shake went away anyway, on its own. As it is, there's continuing support on Linux for the moment and an opportunity to migrate to Apple's platform at half the previous license cost for interactive and free render licenses (which if they produce rack-mount G5 machines might not be so bad after all.)

That said, if I were heavily invested in Linux, Windows, or Irix and were a Shake user working on film-res live-action projects, I'd probably be switching to Nuke, which, by the way, is being offered by a company that doesn't derive the bulk of its income from software licensing.

I have a chance to work with Nuke, and with all the new improvements and additions to it I had already forgot about shake.

Nuke is really slick and beats Shake in price if you're on Irix or Linux, no doubt.

Also, why there is no professional 3d video card for Mac like NVIDIA Quadro or 3D Labs Wildcat. Are all those companies already sick with Apple too or Apple is not a professional workstation like it was mentioned above that it is only a "personal computer" (for kids to play games).

Well, like I said above, support is reportedly coming soon, though I wish it weren't so late. More likely than not, nvidia and ati probably needed to see a certain level of high-end 3D penetration before they considered doing this work.

I've also heard that this development is coupled with the Pixar arrangement.

Ops, I forgot there aren't many games for it. So what is it for? Graphics? Last benchmarks that I had seen Photoshop was running twice as fast on Windows computer.

Games often come late to the Mac platform, but that situation is not as bad as you make it sound. I use my PC for games, though.

On the speed of Photoshop, the G4 machines, like you point out, have been seriously lagging. However, the G5 brings the Mac to parity with the best current Windows PCs in performance (and the RenderMan benchmark pointed out above offers a data point that's not constrained by saying the PC side was held back by the compiler, as people have said about the VeriTest benchmarks.)

As I said before, I think rough parity in speed is enough to silence the speed concerns, because Apple's strength is in the software environment.


I think most of the Mac users should say that they like Mac instead of Windows or Linux PC not because it is faster, etc. it is because they are non-technical, they cannot tell the difference between cpu and memory, they would never be able to install their own video card or so on

It's pretty arrogant of you to assume that someone who doesn't see speed as a top priority must be an idiot, or that someone who finds ease-of-use attractive must be unable to tie their own shoes.

I'm a far more technical user than average, and a big reason that I like the Mac relative to the other platforms I use frequently is that it offers both access to mainstream applications and at the same time includes a full suite of development tools, Perl and Python pre-installed, and a UNIX foundation that provides access to all kinds of open-source software and a familiar development environment. Hard to imagine your video-card-challenged user getting much use out of that.

Linux is nice on the development side, and Windows is nice on the application-availability side, but neither has both.

Well, really, I don't care what it is, Mac, PC, SGI, I am writing it only because I see all those Mac users always shouting Mac this, Mac that, and whenever some 3rd party company seats down and run all the benchmarks Macs are not even close to what they state.

This whole discussion began with a (very reputable) third-party company's benchmarks, though I'm eager to see more that are of particular relevance to the stuff that I do, which is mostly 3D.

Anyway, I agree that the shrill tone of the fanatics always gets in the way of these discussions, but I've never known Windows or Linux zealots to be any less shrill than their Mac colleagues.

-- Mark

[X3M]

mark_wilkins, I totally agree with you, and I did not mean that if somebody does not know how to install video card is an idiot, what I had meant is that there is two types of users. Some of us like to tweak their systems to get maximum power out of it, and some of us want to spend this extra time on creating. There is nothing wrong with ether one. I really like your comment, and again I totally agree with you...

[elvis]

Originally posted by mark_wilkins
you have to realize that raw speed is not the primary consideration when picking machines for a render farm at a large installation. Sure it's *a* consideration but there are many others

in the early days people threw as much money as they could at huge cray-style suepr computers. today wit hthe power of clustering, distributed processing and "renderfarms", super computing is available to any joe. and the best thing is being nodal, upgrades just plug in and work.

there's nothing i'd love to see more than a farm of 2000 G5's. that would make me wet my pants. but honestly at the price per unit, a farm of 2000 intel or amd processors is just too hard to turn away for cost to performance ratio.

[elvis]

Originally posted by deepinspace
Anyway, I think Pixar is migrating to Mac OS X.......;)

Check this .....
http://www.pixar.com/companyinfo/jobs/openings/macosmigrationcontractor.html

ooh! i'll be applying for that today! :)

[mark_wilkins]

X3M:

Thanks for the clarification, and sorry for misunderstanding what you were trying to get at.

-- Mark

[paultheplumber]

Originally posted by X3M
Ops, I forgot there aren’t many games for it. So what is it for? ThinkTanks (http://www.garagegames.com/pg/product/view.php?id=12) is available for OS X, what else do you need? :D

As far as Pixar using Macs, they've been using them for a long time. Back in the "Making of Toy Story" days, I remember seeing macs al over the place being used for texture painting and other 2d related tasks.

Also, I've heard the CEO of Apple and the CEO of Pixar are good friends. I bet they cut deals for eachother once in a while... ;)


-- mark

[beaker]

Originally posted by elvis
of interest, pixar bought 2000 pentium 4 cpu's for their latest renderfarm upgrade. also of interest is that steve jobs (CEO of apple) is also CEO of pixar.

what a funny old world it is.
Steve has been the owner/CEO of Pixar since it's inception(20 years). The port of Prman to the G5 sounds much more like a true Pixar choice, not a Steve Jobs one. Otherwise Pixar would have ported it back 6-7 years ago when Steve became CEO of Apple(again). Also they would have surely moved over the G4 "supercomputer"(as apple marketed it) back many years ago.

[Ckerr812]

Originally posted by beaker
Steve has been the owner/CEO of Pixar since it's inception(20 years). The port of Prman to the G5 sounds much more like a true Pixar choice, not a Steve Jobs one. Otherwise Pixar would have ported it back 6-7 years ago when Steve became CEO of Apple(again). Also they would have surely moved over the G4 "supercomputer"(as apple marketed it) back many years ago.

yea...I agree...but you got to admit, that Steve jobs may of had a little influence in there.

The new mac OS looks very appealing, and my next computer purchase just might be a mac, considering Shake, Maya and Photoshop are on the mac, that's about all the programs I use.

I just wonder if Mac OS comes with a compiler like Unix does, so you can script in a shell window like Irix/unix, guess I'll find out when I ask the sales guys when I do make my next purchase :)

[GregHess]

http://www.wam.umd.edu/~greghess/g5.jpg

There were two of them at siggraph.

Nope...not at the apple booth, that would have made sense.

One was at the art institute booth...and the other...

Ya you guessed it...at the pixar booth, rendering nemo frames.

I felt that made one of the strongest statements out of anything I've seen on the web, or said in forums.

Pixar...Dual G5...rendering Nemo...at their booth.

[beaker]

Originally posted by Sieb
In the end, until one of us here gets ahold of one, believe none of what you read/hear. REAL speed benches with software WE use is all that counts, not optimized coded compiler goodness.. For me, its all hot air right now. And will be for some time till the apps on it are all native 64bit.

I want one, but I don't need the bleeding edge hardware without the software...
Yea, Pixar is a bunch of lying bastards, we should never trust their benchmarks. :)

BTW, if you just recompile your software for 64 bit, it will not always be faster. Actually it can run slower because of the nature of it.

[mark_wilkins]

Steve has been the owner/CEO of Pixar since it's inception(20 years).

Pixar began as the computer imaging group at Industrial Light and Magic, and spun off. Shortly thereafter, Jobs bought them. This all happened in the late 80s.

I just wonder if Mac OS comes with a compiler like Unix does

Yes. There's a new, slick IDE called Xcode coming with Mac OS X 10.3 as well that has some very nice features.

-- Mark

[beaker]

Originally posted by mark_wilkins


Pixar began as the computer imaging group at Industrial Light and Magic, and spun off. Shortly thereafter, Jobs bought them. This all happened in the late 80s.[/B]
Yea, I just meant from when they actually became Pixar, which was when Jobs bought the unit off of Lucas for 10 million.

[CGTalk Moderation]

This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.