Professional Application Performance with Final Cut Pro, Xcode and CineBench

Our first "Pro" application test uses Apple's famed Final Cut Pro 5.1.1.  The test is simple, we are just rendering a video we dragged into our project:

Final Cut Pro 5.1.1

If you spend a lot of time in Final Cut, you can't get faster than the Mac Pro.  At 2.0GHz it's already faster than the PowerMac G5 (even when you extrapolate out the performance of the 2.7GHz G5). 

Our next test is for all you developers out there, we're simply measuring build time using Xcode 2.4 and building our favorite OS X IM client: Adium.  Compiling is very disk intensive but it's also quite CPU bound as well; while there's no benefit to quad processors when only compiling a single application there is a benefit to higher clock speeds.

Xcode 2.4

The Mac Pro completely demolishes the PowerMac G5 in build time, cutting the time to build Adium almost in half.  The performance improvement is tremendous and it echoes some of the feelings we've had when using Intel based Macs; anything involving I/O seems to be faster and smoother. 

Our final professional benchmark is CineBench 9.5, which measures 3D rendering performance.  Two versions of the benchmark are run, one that's single threaded and one that spawns as many threads as you have cores. 

CineBench 9.5

The single threaded test shows a reasonable advantage over the PowerMac G5, about 8% at the same clock speed.  The PowerPC G5 architecture was no slouch and floating point performance was its strong point, thus even the almighty Woodcrest can't really put it to shame too much. 

CineBench 9.5

The multithreaded test shows the advantages of having four cores, as the Mac Pro maintains a significant lead.  Note that the Mac Pro 2.66GHz held a 15.4% performance advantage over the PowerMac G5 in the single threaded test, but that grew to 19.4% in the multithreaded test.  The performance scaling shows one of the advantages of Intel's shared L2 cache, making for better performance scaling when going from one to two cores. 

iWork '06 Performance with Pages and Keynote Multitasking Performance - The Quad Core Advantage
Comments Locked

96 Comments

View All Comments

  • michael2k - Wednesday, August 16, 2006 - link

    1:) Well, according to Anandtech's calculations, it's cheaper to buy a quad CPU Mac than to build one.
    2:) iLife is better than "free crap"
    3:) Macs can run Windows, BSD, Linux, and OS X all at once; PCs cannot
    4:) Drive sleds
    5:) Ram risers
    6:) Quiet case
    7:) 6 SATA connectors
    8:) 4 PCIe slots and 8 monitors
  • retrospooty - Thursday, August 17, 2006 - link

    Yes, in general, good quality components cost more than cheap crap... This is why Acura and Lexus cost more than a Ford, even though they are all built in hte USA. Would you rather get the mobo, memory, HDD, and video card that some kind and caring (cough cough) company landed a mulimillion dollar cotract to buy 10's of thousands, or pick your own?

    What is your point?
  • nexcom - Saturday, November 28, 2009 - link

    yes good and quality also mater aswell ok.
  • michael2k - Thursday, August 17, 2006 - link

    My point was that you got better build quality than the average DIY case:
    You get HDD sleds, cablefree installation, 2 gigE ports, 6 SATA connectors, etc, etc, etc.

    Not everyone has the skill, time, or resources to do their own research, shopping around, and haggling, you know.

    Are you arguing against, similarly, mass produced cars, TVs, homes, fridges, and furniture over DIY solutions?

    Or do you shop at Target and Walmart too?
  • retrospooty - Thursday, August 17, 2006 - link

    MAybe I am dense, but I am still missing your point... Anyhow, Apple's MAC's, or Dell, or any other vendor for that matter are not of high quality parts. The CPU's are great, most of the rest is cheap deal based components. Yes, most people lack the knowledge to build thier own systems, and they buy Dell's, and MAC's and such. All I am saying is that those systems arent at all using all the best high quality/high performance parts.
  • michael2k - Thursday, August 17, 2006 - link

    So I'm asking if you are consistent.

    Do you refuse to buy at Walmart and Target because they sell mass produced furniture, clothing, and household goods because they don't happen to use the highest quality materials? Do you, instead, build your own furniture, make your own clothes, grow your own produce, and make your own electronics?

    I don't see your point, because you haven't proven it, that Macs use "cheap deal based components". The case is definitely not "cheap deal based components" because it is crafted of aluminum ONLY for Apple, and it is quite nonstandard compared to the average PC case. Then there is the Mac motherboard, which as far as I can tell is also unique, being a Xeon EFI based motherboard, crafted singularly for Apple, most likely by Intel itself. The video card, yes, it is cheap, but that saves the user money too, and is no worse than an off the shelf NVIDIA video card.

    Where is your proof that the Mac Pro has cheap, unreliable, components?
  • retrospooty - Friday, August 18, 2006 - link

    you're wearing me out... I give. Long live the MAC, may Apple break thier 10 year rut and finally get more than 3% global marketshare, maybe even 5%. Whoopdeedoo. Yippee skip.

    BTW, Apple's beautiful aluminum cases are a total ripoff (if not an out right purchase)of the Lian Li design. EFI is an average/cheap mobo maker at best (not to say unreliable, just average in function, and performance). They are no DFI, or ASUS, not even close.
  • Maury Markowitz - Friday, August 18, 2006 - link

    You really are trolling...

    > total ripoff of the Lian Li

    Well I've actually used one of these, which I really doubt you can claim, and they're certainly nothing at all like the Apple case. Or are you overheating those two brain cells because both cases happen to use aluminum? I guess, by that brilliant logic, that Apple stole the design of their cases from the Dornier Dr.I from World War I. After all, that used aluminum too.

    For the record, the Lian Li design doesn't show a single one of the features that the Apple industrial design team put into the Mac Pro. They are, quite simply, bog-standard PC cases made of aluminum instead of stamped steel. That's it. For instance, the drives slide in from the front through a removable panel, are fastened into place with tiny little screws, and connected to the mobo with cables. Does this sound like the Mac Pro in any way whatsoever? Well pictures are worth a thousand words:

    http://silverpcs.com/product_info.php?products_id=...">http://silverpcs.com/product_info.php?products_id=...

    > EFI is an average/cheap mobo maker

    Stop! Please, stop! My ribs are aching!

    Hey brainiac, EFI is not a company.

    > They are no DFI, or ASUS, not even close.

    I hope not, considering it's an acronym for a boot standard.

    If this is the basis of your "Apple is cheap" argument, you really are a moron.

    Maury
  • retrospooty - Friday, August 18, 2006 - link

    Sorry to all, my bad, I read too quickly and I thought the post above was stating that EFI (the company) made Apple's new mobo's.

    Anyhow, I was not saying they are particularily bad, or cheap, I was saying ALL manufacturers use "average" parts in thier systems, including Apple. Aplle may well be at or very near the best of the list of major manufactureres, but its still not like hand picking your own motherboard, ram, v card, HDD etc. In other words, if Apple was an open standard, and any manufacturer could make parts for it, you would see alot of higher quality parts from some of those vendors.

    Any Yes, the case appearance is a TOTAL ripoff of Lian Li. The interior is certianly not, bute the look and feel externally, is identical, right down to the holes.

    Anyhow, I am done on this one, I have riled up enough MAC fanboy anger for now :D LONG LICE MAC, may their marketshare double to a whopping 6% !
  • michael2k - Friday, August 18, 2006 - link

    Right, a total ripoff... you sound like a broken record. Look at Anand's review here:
    http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2040&p...">http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2040&p...

    It was introduced in April of 2004... almost a full year after Apple introduced their PowerMac G5 in June of 2003. The case design, with the cooling zones, grill face, and inverted motherboard all debuted in an Apple design and then was copied by Lian Li. This has nothing to do with being a fanboy and everything to do with being right.

    You believe Apple ripped off the Lian Li... fine, link the Lian Li that preceeded the PowerMac G5 case!

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now