Rosetta Performance (or lack thereof)

With no Universal Binary versions of Adobe or Microsoft applications, you're bound to run into something that isn't native on the Mac Pro.  Of course if there's performance to be lost, we're there to benchmark it. 

First off, let's look at our Word HTML conversion test.  Note that this test used to crash on earlier builds of OS X, but Apple has thankfully fixed the problem so it now completes.  The only other problem is that it takes a long time to complete:

Rosetta Performance - Microsoft Word HTML Conversion

The fastest Mac Pro configuration we tested took about three times as long to complete this test as the PowerMac G5, and that's about how things feel when you're running a Rosetta application.  The application is always bearable, but it feels like everything takes 2 - 3x as long as it would if it were native. 

Next up we ran PSBench under Photoshop CS2 and came away with some more interesting results:

  Apple Mac Pro 2.66GHz (Quad) Apple Mac Pro 2.66GHz (Dual) Apple PowerMac G5 2.5GHz (Dual)
Rotate Clockwise - 90 degrees
0.6
0.5
0.5
Rotate Clockwise - 9 degrees
2.2
3
1.2
Rotate Clockwise - 0.9 degrees
4
4.1
3.6
1 pixel Gaussian Blur
2.2
2.3
2.1
3.7 pixel Gaussian Blur
2.5
3.4
2.8
85 pixel Gaussian Blur
3
4.2
3.1
50%, 1 pixel, 0 level unsharp mask
2.3
3
2.2
50%, 3.7 pixel, 0 lever unsharp mask
3.4
4.3
3.6
50%, 10 pixel, 5 level unsharp mask
3.2
4.6
4
Despeckle filter
2.2
2.4
2.5
RGB to CMYK
3.8
5.2
3.4
60% Reduction
1.4
1.6
1.4
Lens Flare
5.3
5.3
4.9
Color Halftone Filter
21.5
23.1
9.2
NTSC Colors Filter
5.9
5.9
4.1
Accented Edges Brush Strokes
13.3
13.7
10.7
Pointillize Filter
31
36.9
15.8
Watercolor Filter
28.8
31.2
20.8
Polar Coordinates
2.1
2.9
1.6
Radial Blur Filter
7.3
11.3
17.1
Lighting Effects Filter
3.5
4
2.9
Total
149.5
172.9
117.5

 

The PowerMac G5 is still faster, overall it completed all of the tasks about 32% faster than the dual core Mac Pro 2.66GHz but comparing it to the shipping quad core configuration closed that gap even more.  There were even some tests that the non-native Mac Pro could complete quicker than the PowerMac G5, which bodes well for how fast the Mac Pro will be when Photoshop CS3 eventually comes out. 

Overall, Rosetta has gotten better in terms of stability, but performance is still no where near native G5 performance on average (nor did anyone expect it to be).  You can get by using Rosetta, but it will irritate you especially if you're using any Universal Binary applications on a regular basis as the difference in performance is fairly apparent. 

Multitasking Performance - The Quad Core Advantage Power Consumption
Comments Locked

96 Comments

View All Comments

  • DigitalFreak - Wednesday, August 16, 2006 - link

    Is there a 64bit version of OS X for the Intel platform? I didn't think there was, considering that until now all of the Intel Macs have only had 32bit processors.
  • kelmon - Thursday, August 17, 2006 - link

    Depends on what you mean by 64-bit. OS X has, I believe, had a 64-bit UNIX layer since 10.3 (I don't think it was introduced with 10.4) but the only applications that can take advantage of this are command-line tools. Leopard will introduce 64-bit everywhere but I'm still struggling to find a reason why that will impact me in a good way. That said, the new Mac will have a 64-bit processor so that I can feel future-proof.
  • Pirks - Wednesday, August 16, 2006 - link

    quote:

    Is there a 64bit version of OS X for the Intel platform?
    Good question. I don't know, maybe OS X on those Mac Pros is patched to 64-bit or something.. if not than I should shut up and wait till Leopard.
  • Snuffalufagus - Wednesday, August 16, 2006 - link

    it should factor in at least a 25% - 35% discount code on the Dell :).

    I have never bought anything off the Dell site without getting a substantial discount from a current promotion.
  • trivik12 - Wednesday, August 16, 2006 - link

    Does Dell offer 25-35% off for Dell Precision Workstation?
  • MrPIppy - Wednesday, August 16, 2006 - link

    The last generation of Power Mac G5s also had dual GigE ports: http://www.apple.com/powermac/specs.html">Apple's G5 specs page

    One difference though, the G5s (and the GigE G4s before them) used Broadcom 57xx chips for Ethernet, while the Mac Pro now uses an Intel 8254x chip.
  • Josh7289 - Wednesday, August 16, 2006 - link

    But what is so good about Macs? Why would I want a Mac instead of a PC? What can a Mac offer me that a PC can't? I don't like trolling, but I seriously am asking these questions and want to know what the answers are.
  • phaxmohdem - Wednesday, August 16, 2006 - link

    I used to be a mac hater because All the macs I've ever used truely were Pieces of $h!t. Old single cpu G4 towers with no Hard Drive Space or RAM, and way too much student crap spread on them. HOWEVER recently I had the pleasure of using a REAL mac (Quad G5) for a video project, and it made me think of macs a little differently. Plenty fast, and stable. My biggest problems were learning all the new Mac hot keys and keyboard shortcuts.. but once you master those you'll fly on the mac. (Some of Macs shortcuts still seem pretty stupid and complex to me though).

    However I serioualy don't understand the keyboard and mouse that Apple gives their cusotomers... The new mighty mouse is an improvement, but still an uncomfortable POS to me. Ditto for the mushy fugly keyboard that is standard. I've found that a proper Logitech (or similar) Kybd/Mouse combo makes the mac experience feel 10x better. (One more side-gripe... OS X does not have adjustments for mouse acceleration, and for me the stock acceleration speeds are wretched and piss me off... Hopefully this is something to be updated in the next release of the OS)

    So, moral of my story is... if you're going to Mac it up, do it right with proper input devices and some decent specs, and you'll have an enjoyable experience under OS X. I personally still choose Windows for its versatility w/ software and hardware... but to each his own.
  • Maury Markowitz - Thursday, August 17, 2006 - link

    Agree. I find it somewhat ironic that the only MS products I really like are their keyboards, mice, and joysticks. What's particularily maddening is that Apple used to, years ago, make the best keyboard money could buy. Seriously, solid as a rock and typing feel you'd kill for. Now they peddle crap that looks nice. Not good.
  • timelag - Thursday, August 17, 2006 - link

    Apple used to, years ago, make the best keyboard money could buy.

    Ah yes, the extended keyboard II. Better even than the famous IBM and Sun keyboards of yore. If it weren't for my Kinesis (the One True ergo keyboard), I'd be using mine through an ADB to USB connector.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now