MacBook Pro :: XBench Results With Intel 160G SSD G2
Nov 18, 2009Here are my results after running XBench on my Mid 09 MBP with 3.06GHz with 4G RAM. What do you think ?
XBench Results ....
Here are my results after running XBench on my Mid 09 MBP with 3.06GHz with 4G RAM. What do you think ?
XBench Results ....
I ran a few standard QuickBench tests on my week old SSD. It is quite a bit faster than the G. Skill Titan drive I was considering (the end of this post has results of the G. Skill on the same tests). The numbers are nice to look at, but it just feels extremely fast. Also note that the drive linked above seems to only have the OS loaded. My drive has about 100 GB of data (everything from my old computer) in addition to the OS X installation. Here's a video of the drive loading 35 apps at once It'd be great if someone with an intel x-25m could post QuickBench results. The computer is a 2.4 GHz unibody MacBook with 4 GB of ram.
View 17 Replies View RelatedMost of the results were OK but the "User Interface" one. It got a 13 at 61 refresh/sec.
This computer is a Macbook Pro (Early 2008) C2D 2.6 with 4gb of RAM and the 7200rpm HD, and comparing the results in the xbench site there is clearly something wrong.
The problem is that I don't have a clue of what exactly is "User interface" testing and how to fix it, does anybody know something about this?
Got my 17" MBP a couple of weeks ago. Just ran xbench disk test and was truly surprised:
Results246.57
System Info
Xbench Version1.3
System Version10.5.7 (9J3050)
Physical RAM8192 MB
ModelMacBookPro5,2
Drive TypeAPPLE SSD TS256A
Disk Test246.57
Sequential165.88
Uncached Write186.92114.76 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write182.08103.02 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read107.3431.41 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read252.81127.06 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Random480.09
Uncached Write315.6633.42 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write333.97106.92 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read1976.2314.00 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read601.14111.54 MB/sec [256K blocks]
The test was done with a computation intensive job running (99% of one CPU, not a lot of I/O) and was reproducible. However, with no job running (fresh restart), this is what I have:
Results205.53
System Info
Xbench Version1.3
System Version10.5.7 (9J3050)
Physical RAM8192 MB
ModelMacBookPro5,2
Drive TypeAPPLE SSD TS256A
Disk Test205.53
Sequential138.57
Uncached Write182.17111.85 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write167.4394.73 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read76.6022.42 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read229.95115.57 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Random397.68
Uncached Write243.0125.72 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write307.7798.53 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read1157.148.20 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read546.49101.41 MB/sec [256K blocks]
What's going on with xbench? But by all means these are not bad numbers. Maybe the Apple SSD is not that bad now.
Whn I am using Safari which is the default browser on my IMAC, opening a web-based pdf results in a black page? This does not happen when using firefox. Also does not happen when opening an emailed pdf.
Info:
iMac, Mac OS X (10.6.8)
Some time in the past week or to, the search results that are returend from Finder, are now in descending order. I have no idea when or how that was changed, but I'd like to change it back to ascending. How do I accomplish?
I tried clicking and right clicking the column header. Nothing. Can't find anything Settings either.
Info:
iMac, Mac OS X (10.7.4), New hardrive installed may 2012
What worked for me to fix mission control lagging (after upgrading from SL) was to run the xbench graphics test a few times. That's it. It worked perfectly!
Info:
MacBook Pro, Mac OS X (10.7.3)
I can type a search word into Spotlight. It will show results. I then open let's say an Appleworks text document from that search. Then I close that document and retry the same search: Now that same document will not show up in the search results for that exact word and it WILL NEVER show up again in search results. In other words after a file has been found and opened in search once , it will never appear in search results again for the same word.
Info:
PowerMac, Mac OS X (10.5.8)
selecting illustrator file results in numerous test files in folder
Info:
iMac (27-inch Mid 2011), Mac OS X (10.7.3)
I'm debating on macbook memory upgrade. I want to upgrade memories on my macbook 2007
Model Name:MacBook
Model Identifier:MacBook2,1
Processor Name:Intel Core 2 Duo
Processor Speed:2 GHz
Number Of Processors:1
Total Number Of Cores:2
L2 Cache:4 MB
Memory:1 GB
Bus Speed:667 MHz
I think the maximum capacity is up to 3 GB. , so wondering what's the best pair matching for most efficient result.
2 x 1 GB.
1x 1 GB. + 1x 2GB.
2 x 2 GB.
Is there a site where I can see Benchmark results between certain machines. I wanna see if the results between the iMac 1.84 Core Duo vs the new Aluminium Macbook 2ghz.
View 3 Replies View RelatedPlease post your battery capacity on your Gen 2 Air. Just received mine on Thursday. I have the following unfavorable results.
Capacity: 4789 mAh
94% Life
Original Capacity 5090 mAh
Battery loadcycles 11
Age of my Mac 2 Weeks....
Am I correct in assuming that my capacity should be around 5200 mAh and that this is indeed a defective battery? Please share with me if I am incorrect, as web browsing after a full recycle is about 2.25 hours, without doing anything else.
unsure if this has already been done, but i wouldn't mind having MBAir owners post their xBench results here...i would like to have the results for all 8 configurations eventually..shouldn't be too difficult to get all of the info I'll start it off with the xBench results for the rev B 1.86 SSD config.
View 24 Replies View RelatedI was testing out my umbp 2.4ghz (late 2008) on youtube hd videos and it seems to feel jittery or choking up. Does anyone go through the same problem? or is it my specs? Or better yet, is it normal?
View 4 Replies View RelatedIm planning on purchasing a Samsung 2494HM 24" 1080p LCD monitor w/ HDMI input. Will this work with the new 13" mpb perfectly? and if it does what extra stuff do i need. I googled "macbook to lcd display" but the results were so scattered that I didnt know where to start. would the samsung monitor look just as good as the apple cinema display or would it look good but not as good. redundant i know hah.
View 5 Replies View RelatedHow can I highlight a website in the search results as I visit them so I can know I have already been there?
Info:
MacBook Pro, Mac OS X (10.7.3)
Within the past two days, I think my laptop has gotten a virus or been hacked. Every time I open a new tab a pop up window comes up even though I have pop-up blocker turned on. In addition, when I google anything the results are below many more ads than normal. I got a virus detecting app from the App Store and it said my laptop was clean so I don't know what to do!
Info:
MacBook Pro, OS X Mavericks (10.9.4)
when I search, it shows only results until 16th April,
Eventhough there is matching results after 16th April, it doesn't show on search results,
Info:
MacBook Pro, Mac OS X (10.6.8)
I'm on a MacBook, 10.6.8. I just got an iPad 3 & iPhone 4GS. The Apple store set them up for me. They also set up Mail for me, which I've never had before (because I use Yahoo), and which totally confounds me and which I suspect is related to this problem. Now when I search for, say, a document, hundreds of emails are listed as well, making it difficult, time-consuming and frustrating to find the item I really want. Is there a way to filter out or turn off email results (and websites for that matter, since I don't search for them that way) in search results?
Info:
MacBook, Mac OS X (10.6.8)
I recently picked up the Intel 80GB SSD. First thing I did was update it to Intel latest firmware (02HD). I did a clean install of Snow Leopard and then created a bootcamp partition, splitting the drive 20GB for Mac OS X and the remaining for Windows 7 Pro. I installed Windows 7, bootcamp drivers and then did a windows update and I'm getting disappointing random read results in Windows 7.
I've attached a picture of my benchmark results. I haven't tested the drive in Mac OS X yet. I believe X Bench would be a good tool from reading the forums. Does anyone have any idea why it might be performing so slow, at reads no less! The write performance numbers seem to be on par with the results I've seen on the web, however all the reads are much slower than others.
I have a new macbook pro. Scrolling, i.e. 2-finger, on the trackpad often, but randomly, results in font size changes (e.g. in Safari, mail, etc.); in word and powerpoint it often changes a word or paragraph to subscript or superscript. This also happens often with cursor movement on the trackpad, i.e. single finger sweeps. It appears that trackpad usage is randomly triggering command+ or command-.
View 6 Replies View RelatedOn my i5 MBP, at times, when I move the mouse in the top left corner (next to the Apple Symbol) the machine flips out and goes in to restart. Sometimes I get a message about a unexpected error, sometimes not.
I seem to not be able to recreate the problem at will, nor does there seem to be a correlation between what programme is running at the time.
I did a combo install (10.9.3) but this did not solve the problem. Swopped the mouse (silly but, you never know).?
Users of Apple's ultraportable Mac are increasingly reporting that a firmware update might be taming processor usage, but is still leaving many of their systems too hot to use and prone to software freezes.
While a number of owners at Apple's discussion forums say the hardware patch solved a problem that would force a core to shut down entirely and ramp up the internal temperature, others still note the slim system continues to overheat and in some cases will bog down as the MacBook Air is unable to cope with a given application's demand, particularly an OS component known as kernel_task.
This happens regardless of whether any peripherals are attached that might ask more of the system.
Others also notice that their systems are simply slowing down in different ways: instead of switching off a single core, a handful report their systems keeping both cores active under most temperatures but lowering the clock speed, producing much the same result.
"This 'update' is a farce - all that it does is step the processor down to 800MHz as soon as the [temperature] rises to some ridiculously low [level]," one Air user explains.
Common troubleshooting steps appear to rule out software as the cause, even with complete operating system reinstalls. A number of less cautious owners have taken to installing the unofficial third-party app CoolBook to adjust system voltages and force the system to run at full speed but at lower voltages and thus lower heat.
For those determined to get an official solution, Apple's frontline technicians have had little success. More than one customer bringing his MacBook Air to the Genius Bar was told that a hardware repair was unlikely to help and to hope for "a software update or some other word" from Apple to provide a more permanent remedy.
While candid, the response comes with no public Apple response and is described as little consolation to customers who feel the system either too hot or too slow to be workable in real conditions.
"How long am I expected to wait? Currently, my computer isn't fit for the purpose for which it was built and sold," an affected owner says.[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]
When I am using Google image search in Safari, my MacBook freezes for about 20-30 seconds before it shows the results. It just shows me grey boxes in the beginning and loads for a long time. I had the same issue with my old MBPro, but also with my beand-new one.
Info:
MacBook Pro (13-inch Late 2011), Mac OS X (10.7.3)
I'm searching for a file in Finder. When I select "Preferences", which is the directory I'm in, it finds the file but when I select "This Mac" it doesn't.
View 2 Replies View RelatedFinally got around to testing out the differences in compression performance between my Matrox CompressHD PCI-e card and QMaster using 4 CPU cores.
Test was done using Compressor 3.51 on a MOV sequence captured at 1080i 60 (HDV) (Field upper) -- nothing was done to the sequence that is 1 min 2 secs long 206.4MB file size (not even de-interlaced).
Matrox CompressHD card software is 1.8.1 (firmware updated).
My goal was to get the 1920 x 1080 (actually 1440 x 1080) footage close to Apple TV 1280 x 720 progressive format (m4v).
The Results:
1. H.264 for Apple Devices 1280 x 720 (16:9 960 x 720) 5Mbps, progressive 44.1kHz Stereo (Medium quality 50) single pass without Qmaster:
CPU Usage - User 68-71% - System 5-7%
Time = 1 min 49 sec -- file size 39.9 MB
2. H.264 for Apple Devices 1280 x 720 (16:9 960 x 720) 5Mbps, progressive 44.1kHz Stereo (Medium quality 50) single pass with Qmaster 4 cores:
CPU Usage - User 87% - System 7%
Time = 2 min 01 sec -- file size 39.9 MB
3. H.264 (mov) Custom 1280 x 720 5Mpbs, progressive 29.97 fps - 44.1kHz Stereo High Quality Multi-pass using 4 cores Qmaster:
CPU Usage - User 88% - System 6%
Time = 4 min 02 sec -- file size 38.7 MB
4. Matrox MAX H.264 (mov) Custom 1280 x 720 5Mpbs, progressive 29.97 fps - 44.1kHz Stereo:
CPU Usage - User 28-30% - System 8%
Time = 1 min 06 sec -- file size 39.7 MB
What I find interesting is that the Apple TV quality was actually pretty good, the color was a little less vibrant that results from #3 and #4. What is really strange is that QMaster with 4 cores was actually slower than a without QMaster?? This leads me to believe the .m4v codec is able to detect and use more than 1 core regardless of QMaster -- in fact, adding QMaster just takes a little away from the efficiency of the .m4v codec.
It was nice to see the Matrox CompressHD only using 28-30%, allowing my system to be very responsive to doing other tasks.
Just a small sample of H.264 results, but with the type of work I do I get anywhere from about 2X to 4X faster compression times using the Matrox CompressHD.
This is probably old news for most of you, but it's new life for my aging 2007 MacPro
recently a friend of mine advised me to check the disk permissions via the disk utility and i did. i have attached the result but how can i fix those errors and is it even important or i can just leave them as it is?
View 1 Replies View RelatedFinder and Spotlight on my 10.6.5 Macbook are no longer returning results. Even within folders, querying ".pdf", for example returns no hits. Smart-folders with 'file kind' parameters also remain empty. How do I fix this?I have tried to find an answer using the MR "search forums" function, but can't figure out how to correctly enter the query to give specific results, (for example, it just returns lots of threads with "results" rather than "no results".
View 2 Replies View RelatedI have seen lots of benchmarks and such, but can one of you lucky folks with a nice new machine rip a DVD with Handbrake and post the time and what movie you ripped, etc.. so i can compare it with my 2008MP 2.8 machine. Would also be cool if you then converted it to iPhone format and give the time for that as well.
View 24 Replies View RelatedWell, using some guides (check bottom of post), I did some experimenting with my old G4 Sawtooth to see how fast I could run its lame 400mhz cpu. Ultimately, my goal was to make Quake 3 playable at a resolution other then 800x600. These tests were all done with PC-133 ram (896MB), running 10.4.11.
Starting specs:
400mhz (4x100mhz)
Xbench cpu score: 19.9
1st overclock (with 400mhz cpu):
500mhz (5x100mhz)
Xbench cpu score: 29.3
Note: This was incredibly unstable.
In the process of moving to 450mhz on the 400mhz stock cpu, one of the jumper resistor solder pads came off (lame 10 year old glue). So, I went on ebay and got 5 450mhz G4 cpus for 50$ CDN after shipping. One of them came dead, and one failed after the jumper change.
2nd overclock (with 450mhz cpu):
500mhz (5x100mhz)
Xbench cpu score: 22.3
Note: This sucked. Now really stable, but I didn't get a performance gain like I got with the 400mhz cpu, and Quake 3 still ran like crap.
So here I decided to do the FSB overclock. Knowing I would end up with 4.5 x 133 which would be too fast, i jumpered a cpu to 3.5 multiplier for a 466 clock. This never booted. I put in a 450mhz chip and...
3rd overclock (with 450mhz cpu):
533mhz (4.5x133mhz)
Xbench cpu score: 25.6
Note: That multiply doesn't make sense. It shouldn't be 533. But hey, it worked, stable, and I got a performance gain.
4th overclock (with 450mhz cpu):
533mhz (5x133mhz)
Xbench cpu score: 29.3
Note: Ok, the clock is still not right. This is the same cpu that did the 5x100 so I know the multiplier is set right. But hey, its doing better in the scores!
Conclusion: Success! 533mhz seems to be the top out with the NVRAMRC script in place. But there is a considerable performance gain everywhere (booting, app loading, etc). Most importantly, my Quake 3 now runs very smooth @ 1280x1024 with max graphics settings. I am a very happy camper. I can take pictures of the solder job if anyone requests them. I do recommend this if you have some good technician skills.