Wake 101
Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
WakeWorld Home
Email Password
Go Back   WakeWorld > Video and Photography

Thread Tools Display Modes
Old     (richd)      Join Date: Oct 2003       03-16-2008, 4:23 PM Reply

My MacBook Pro 2.4 ghz with 4 gigs of Ram and CS3 did 46.3 seconds. I don't have a real fast harddrive however. I'd be interested if someone has a fully loaded MacPro 8 core and what one of those would do. Also PCs (of course!)
Old     (scott_a)      Join Date: Dec 2002       03-16-2008, 6:10 PM Reply   
MBP 2.6ghz, 4gig RAM, 200gb @ 7200rpm -> 40-45 seconds in several back to back tests.

Internal temp never exceeded 130F w/ fan speed set at 2000rpm.
Old     (pierce_bronkite)      Join Date: Jul 2003       03-16-2008, 6:11 PM Reply   
40.8 seconds on a Core 2 Duo 2.8Ghz iMac with 4GB of ram.

I couldn't find how to set processor at Max usage though (running Leopard).
Old     (scott_a)      Join Date: Dec 2002       03-16-2008, 6:45 PM Reply   
MagG: In Photoshop go up to the top menus and go Photoshop -> Preferences -> Performance

That will let you change the amount of history states, cache and performance.
Old     (richd)      Join Date: Oct 2003       03-16-2008, 7:04 PM Reply   
MattG: look in system preferences/energy saver and make sure it's set on optimum performance.
Old     (pierce_bronkite)      Join Date: Jul 2003       03-16-2008, 7:06 PM Reply   
Scott, yes I changed the RAM Usage, History and Cache Levels but didn't find how to set processor at max usage like the read me said.

I am not aware that you can set your processor at max usage? That was the first time I have heard of that.

Rich, it must be different on MBPs, I dont have that option on my iMac.

(Message edited by Pierce Bronkite on March 16, 2008)
Old     (hot_karl)      Join Date: Jan 2008       03-16-2008, 8:44 PM Reply   
MBP 2.2 Core 2 Duo, 120gb @5400rpm, 4gb ram, temp around 120* with fans set to 6k rpm. 55.36 seconds

(Message edited by hot_karl on March 16, 2008)
Old     (dcervenka)      Join Date: Sep 2002       03-17-2008, 2:16 AM Reply   
Proc: Intel Q6600 (oc'ed to 3 Ghz)
Mem: 8GB DDR2 (PC2 6400)
HD: 150 GB 10k Raptor
OS: Vista64
Temp: 35C for CPU... 52F outside with slight chance of rain tues - weds.

Time: 25.9 seconds

What surprised me the most was that my PC found this thread on it's own, downloaded the test file, ran the test 10 times, and presented me with the avg time. I thought stuff like this only happened on a MAC?!?!?!?
Old     (helix_rider)      Join Date: Mar 2003       03-17-2008, 8:42 AM Reply   
Old     (dcervenka)      Join Date: Sep 2002       03-17-2008, 11:18 AM Reply   
Actually in this case this is more appropriate..


WOW it's amazing what I can do with an extra 20 seconds of my time.
Old     (scott_a)      Join Date: Dec 2002       03-17-2008, 11:59 AM Reply   
Saving 20 seconds over the span of several tests should clear enough time on your schedule to test your laptop and post the results on here ;)

and does that tortoise have two heads? haha...
Old     (richd)      Join Date: Oct 2003       03-17-2008, 6:26 PM Reply   

I'm a little unhappy with that time of yours, I always expect you to have the latest/greatest!

I found this on Naturescapes:

"It's a new world record. Intel Skull Trail board with 2 3.2GHz quad core QX9775 (Penryn) processors running Vista 64 Ultimate with 8GB of DDR2 at 800MHz and 32GB SSD scratch:
13.3 seconds!

Total system cost: $10,273"

You need to go shopping!
Old     (dcervenka)      Join Date: Sep 2002       03-17-2008, 7:18 PM Reply   
I feel your pain Rich, but you should see what I'm doing with the $8500 I saved by *not* purchasing the Skull Trail system. Unfortunately I cannot post those pictures here.

Yes scott - it's the two head dragon.. cough.. I mean turtle. Do you want to look cool and be slow too? That is the question..
Old     (dakid)      Join Date: Feb 2001       03-17-2008, 7:22 PM Reply   
wow, i need a new comp.

1 minute

proc: amd athlon 64 x2 2.4ghz
mem: 4gb
hd: 300gb
os: xp pro
app: ps cs3
Old     (scott_a)      Join Date: Dec 2002       03-17-2008, 7:25 PM Reply   
Well, two heads ARE better than one...

And next time we go on a road trip I'll be expecting to see your hare next to my tortise!
Old     (dakid)      Join Date: Feb 2001       03-17-2008, 7:39 PM Reply   
and it just gets worse.

laptop = 1min 20secs

proc: intel t7250 2.0ghz
mem: 2gb
hd: 200gb (dunno speed)
os: vista
app: ps cs3
Old     (wakeboardern1)      Join Date: Aug 2007       03-18-2008, 9:31 AM Reply   
Gar... My computer sort of almost froze up trying this. I dozed off around 9 minutes...

Computer: Toshiba Satellite M45
Processor: Intel Pentium M 2.00 GHz
RAM: 1gb
HD: 115gb (Brand spankin new...)
OS: XP Home
App: PS CS3
Brand new motherboard, cause it all decided to break at once.

My computer has been running slower than normal, and certain things that normally work really fast have been really slow as well... And iTunes keeps locking up for some reason, which is just frustrating.

But yeah, I woke up around 25 minutes in, and it was just barely finishing up...
Old     (wakeboardertj)      Join Date: May 2005       03-27-2008, 2:53 PM Reply   
wtf... 1 minute??

q6600 no OC
7200 400 gig HD, one big partition, could be the problem
8800gts 512mb video card
2 gig of very fast RAM, must need 4gb

so what do you think my bottleneck is? slow hard drive and not enough RAM? i expected faster than 1 minute with this new setup.
Old     (scott_a)      Join Date: Dec 2002       03-27-2008, 3:27 PM Reply   
Was your history levels set to 1? My first test was super slow, and it sped up when I went from 999 levels of history to just one.
Old     (wakeboardertj)      Join Date: May 2005       03-27-2008, 5:12 PM Reply   
ya it was on 1, and full memory usage, and the cache
Old     (oldschoolripper)      Join Date: Jul 2004       03-27-2008, 6:02 PM Reply   
MBP 2.2 Core 2 Duo, 120gb @5400rpm, 2gb ram

53 sec.
Old     (tdeneka)      Join Date: Aug 2002       03-31-2008, 9:40 AM Reply   
Dell precision T7400
E5440 (2.83GHz,2X6M L2,1333) (wish more processor was utilized by CS2)
2x 750GB SATA 7200RPM in RAID 1
XP Pro (32 bit)

46 seconds, most of which were the gaussian blur
Old     (wakeboardertj)      Join Date: May 2005       04-02-2008, 2:19 AM Reply   
i am completely baffled. I was in my bios and noticed i had my quad core 6600 underclocked from 2.4 to 1.8! I thought, this has to be the reason the test took so long. I went so far as to overclock my system to 3.2ghz with fast ram timings and redid the test, only to shave off 13 seconds...... Would a slow Hard drive and only 2 gigs of Ram really bottleneck that bad for this test?
Old     (dcervenka)      Join Date: Sep 2002       04-02-2008, 9:27 AM Reply   
I don't think it was under-clocked are much as it was "throttled." I forget exactly which setting it in in the BIOS (it also depends on your make/model), but this is "by design" to save power.

I would think RAM and CPU are all that's really needed here. I'm running 8GB, but if I recall during the time of the test the system was only using around 4GB....? I will have to check later.
Old     (wakeboardern1)      Join Date: Aug 2007       04-02-2008, 12:30 PM Reply   
Taylor, I wouldn't complain. My computer never actually finished the test.
Old     (wakeboardertj)      Join Date: May 2005       04-02-2008, 12:50 PM Reply   
kung fu, it was underclocked, i accidentally had the multiplier at 7 with stock FSB, so therefore the speed was 1.8 . i turned all the energy saving throttling options off so as to not mess with the OC that i did later.
Old     (cali_rider)      Join Date: Feb 2004       04-03-2008, 11:23 PM Reply   
Dave you got me by 11 seconds



2x2.66 Dual Core Xeon
4 GB ram
500GB 7200rpm (my start up disk)

Old     (richd)      Join Date: Oct 2003       04-04-2008, 7:27 AM Reply   
In checking your time Travis I must say I'm happy to have a laptop that's even remotely in the same neighborhood as a MacPro, it certainly wasn't that way back in the G4/G5 days!

I'm going to check that site and see if anyone has posted a time from one of the new 2.6 MBP's, evidently they're 20-25% faster given the new construction of the chip. Apple sure made the right decision in switching to the Intel MPs!

Don't worry about Dave he's probably has to have a refrigerator attached to that thing! Upload
Old     (cali_rider)      Join Date: Feb 2004       04-04-2008, 1:35 PM Reply   
Yea those new MacBook Pros are sweet, im sure they would smoke my Macbook, but even being the 1st Gen Intel Duo and having 2 GB of Ram it still handles the RED files ok, i Can almost play back 2K at normal speed.

But yea Dave has a monster machine, too bad its a PC. haha jk Dave!
Old     (wakeboardertj)      Join Date: May 2005       04-04-2008, 3:00 PM Reply   

(Message edited by wakeboardertj on April 04, 2008)
Old     (rson)      Join Date: Jun 2002       04-08-2008, 7:17 PM Reply   
Just wait.......I just ordered a:
AMD Phenom 9850 QuadCore
MSI Platinum Board
4 gig HyperX 1066mhz
AMD x1900 Video 512Meg
320gb Raid Zero array
200gb B/u Scratch Disc

We'll see what she can do Friday

(Message edited by rson on April 08, 2008)
Old     (rson)      Join Date: Jun 2002       07-14-2008, 10:14 PM Reply   
41 seconds......Fresh system.

I returned the Phenom and got a Athlon 6400 same system though. I still have to tweak PS and update it.
Old     (rson)      Join Date: Jun 2002       07-15-2008, 10:44 PM Reply   
Ran the same test on the phenom system....
Phenom 9850
4 gb ram
Win x64
Mirrored 750 gb assembly
1 gb video

28 seconds!!!!
Old     (alans)      Join Date: Aug 2005       11-05-2008, 1:19 PM Reply   
MBP 2.2 Core 2 Duo, 120gb @5400rpm, 2gb ram, CS3

53 sec.
Old     (richd)      Join Date: Oct 2003       11-05-2008, 1:59 PM Reply   
I've got the new MBP now with 2.8 ghz and Nvidia 9600 graphics and I'm getting 38.2 seconds on it. running 4 gigs of RAM with 10.5.5. & CS3. The new graphics card really makes a difference with Aperture.
Old     (scott_a)      Join Date: Dec 2002       11-05-2008, 4:16 PM Reply   
Any issues with the new touchpad? Hows the display?
Old     (richd)      Join Date: Oct 2003       11-05-2008, 5:12 PM Reply   
The touchpad is nice once you get used to it but it's way better to tap it then to physically click it. I have mixed feelings on the gloss screen, I had one before and liked it but my last MBP was a matte. I use it at home with a 23" ACD so most of the time I'm not using the built in screen. If I didn't need a computer out on the jobsites I'd probably roll with the MacPro.

I really like how well Aperture & CS3 work now with the new Nvidia graphics, I drag the sliders around and the images changes instantly - no more spinning balls or stuttering. that was the main reason I wanted one. changing harddrives is a snap as well, took me about 10 minutes to put a 500 gig drive in it.


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 1:19 AM.

Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
Wake World Home


© 2019 eWake, Inc.    
Advertise    |    Contact    |    Terms of Use    |    Privacy Policy    |    Report Abuse    |    Conduct    |    About Us