Well, they all report the same, and that is a good sign. Is there a way to test my RAM to see if it's working? They all look the same to me, should they be different? I may have mixed brands, but I don't know? is crucial the brand? the rest (the 512mb sticks) are from apple. I have a mix of RAM actually, I bought some more from Crucial, I bumped up from 4gb to 7gb (two more 2gb sticks, the 1st two in the list). Might I have not been using my mac to it's full potential? Is this a major problem or something a fresh Leopard install could fix? I'm hoping not, but this may be the answer. I have the processor prefpane and it shows all four processors going through the motions when the tests are being done. ![]() It turns out that it's my lowest score yet, what do think the problem could be? My results are all the bottom ones on the far right hand column, this is most disconcerting. ![]() You can also compare my results with the other Power Mac G5 Quad 2.5GHz's here: I have also just created a new, blank user (all apps quitted and nothing running in background) and tried it again on that to no avail, here's my result: What's going wrong? I have 7gb RAM and quit as many apps as possible, can I do any more?ĭoes anyone have an tips for me? is my mac just too old? help me increase it's score. I was surprised to see that I scored an insulting 1663 while, I think, everyone else was in the 3000's or more. This may come as a relief for anyone who was worried that having to process the Rosetta 2 translation layer would make their new M1 MacBook less powerful on some popular programs than older, Intel-based models.My lovely Power Mac G5 Quad 2.5 GHz has done me proud over the last few years and I wanted to see how it was comparing to all these new intel macs using Geekbench. Still, that gives it higher single-core scores than any current Intel Mac, including the 2020 27-inch iMac with a Core i9-10910 processor. That’s about 80% as powerful as the same laptop running the native version of Geekbench, which hit scores of 1,687 on single-core tests and 7,433 on multi-core tests. The laptop’s single-core score was 1,313, while its multi-core score was 5,888. Over the weekend, a Geekbench user shared numbers from their Apple Silicon MacBook Air which was running an emulated version of the x86 Geekbench test through Apple’s Rosetta 2 translation layer. Even if the new chips are faster in theory, would they be worth it if your favorite x86 programs need to be emulated to run on the device? What if the emulation makes your Mac slower in practice? Well, according to new benchmark results uploaded today to the Geekbench site - this doesn’t appear to be a concern. ![]() However now we’re finally starting to see statistics on just how well Apple’s emulated apps run.Įmulation allows your favorite x86 apps to run on your new Apple Silicon chip. So far, we’ve seen the chip's performance in benchmarks for native apps and in graphics tests. Apple talked a big game at their November Apple Event, making claims that CPU and graphics could be 2.8x-5x faster, respectively. This means we’ll finally start seeing some review videos and articles putting them to the test. Macs still run extremely fast, even when running emulated x86 appsĪpple’s new Apple Silicon M1 chips start shipping in new MacBook Airs, MacBook Pros and Mac minis this week.The laptop’s single-core score was 1,313, while its multi-core score was 5,888.Geekbench results seem to confirm Apple’s claims.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |