(the same applies for a given app that may be not optimized for your system, which ruins its performance, no matter the amazing score it has.64251687027 Logo Ameba Icon Security Icon Security White Icon Privacy Icon Performance Icon Privacy Icon Security Icon Performance Icons/45/01 Security/Other-Threats Icons / 32 / Bloatware removal Icons / 32 / Registry Cleaner Icons / 32 / CleanUp Icons / Feature / 32 / Mac Icons / 32 / Browser cleanup Icons/32/01 Security/Malware Icons/32/01 Security/Viruses Icons/32/01 Security/Other-Threats Icons/32/01 Security/phishing Icons/32/01 Security/Scams Icons/32/01 Security/hacking Icons/32/01 Security/Security-tips Icons/32/01 Privacy/Privacy-tips Icons/32/01 Performance/Software Icons/32/01 Privacy/Identity-Protection Icons/32/01 Privacy/Digital-life Icons/32/01 Performance/Performance-tips Icons/32/01 Security/Passwords Icons/32/01 Security/Ransomware Icons/32/01 Security/Business Icons/32/02 Privacy/Browser Icons/32/02 Privacy/IP adress Icons/32/02 Privacy/VPN Icons/32/02 Privacy/Proxy Icons/32/02 Privacy/Streaming Icons/32/03 Performance/Celaning Icons/32/03 Performance/Drivers Icons/32/03 Performance/Gaming Icons/32/03 Performance/Hardware Icons/32/03 Performance/Speed Icons / 32 / Bloatware removal Icons / 32 / Registry Cleaner Win Icons / 32 / CleanUp Icons / Feature / 32 / Mac Icons / 32 / Browser cleanup Icons/60/02 Privacy/02_Privacy Icons/60/01 Security/01_Security Icons/60/03 Performance/03_Performance Icons/45/01 Security/phishing Icons/45/01 Security/Scams Icons/45/01 Security/hacking Icons/45/01 Security/Security-tips Icons/45/01 Privacy/Privacy-tips Icons/45/01 Performance/Software Icons/45/01 Privacy/Identity-Protection Icons/45/01 Privacy/Digital-life Icons/45/01 Performance/Performance-tips Icons/80/01 Security/phishing Icons/80/01 Security/Scams Icons/80/01 Security/hacking Icons/80/01 Security/Security-tips Icons/80/01 Privacy/Privacy-tips Icons/80/01 Performance/Software Icons/80/01 Privacy/Identity-Protection Icons/80/01 Privacy/Digital-life Icons/80/01 Performance/Performance-tips Icons/80/01 Security/IoT Icons/80/01 Security/Malware Icons/80/01 Security/Passwords Icons/80/01 Security/Ransomware Icons/80/01 Security/Viruses Icons/80/01 Security/Other-Threats Icons/80/03 Security/Business Icons/80/02 Privacy/Browser Icons/80/02 Privacy/IP adress Icons/80/02 Privacy/VPN Icons/80/02 Privacy/Proxy Icons/80/02 Privacy/Streaming Icons/80/03 Performance/Celaning Icons/80/03 Performance/Drivers Icons/80/03 Performance/Gaming Icons/80/03 Performance/Hardware Icons/80/03 Performance/Speed Icons/80/03 Performance/03_Performance Icons/80/02 Privacy/02_Privacy In the end, the most important thing is the day to day ‘feeling’ in current tasks and those benches are not really telling you much about that.
Other trials on a more recent Intel mac gave worse results with OS 10.8 than with 10.6. I had to use v220 because it's the last one supporting Tiger and that's funny to notice that my 10.4 partition gave a 1281 score, which appears a lot better than Leopard in v220 and slightly worse in v227. This is apparently because they introduced new tests for newer computers and OSes. I've tried v220 against v227 on an iMac G5 running OS 10.5.8: To all the GB enthusiasts here: One thing to consider is that scores can be very different between two versions of GB! I can see a use for memory benchmarking, as people do buy third party memory and would want to compare brands or the impact of more/less memory. If one suspected there was a problem with their system, yes, running a benchmark might help troubleshoot a problem, but if it's just to gauge and compare between models, I would think the results posted in Mactracker are sufficient for comparison.īTW, I'm not advocating that you shouldn't use Geekbench.
If the answer is yes, it could be significantly (+/- 5%) different, then I would say, why? if the answer is no, i should expect pretty much the same result, then running the same benchmark when test results for a model have already been posted, seems redundant? So if I own a iMac10,1 at 3.06GHz for example, why should I or should I not expect that my benchmark result would be significantly different from that listed in Mactracker, for the same iMac10,1 3.06GHz? Since the list of Apple models is finite (large, but finite) and the specs are consistent between models, I would think there would be little variance in benchmark results for a specific model, once a particular model (for example, a "iMac10,1") is tested and the results posted, whether posted by Mactracker or just other users with the same model. Mactracker provides CPU benchmarks for the majority of the Mac models, including the variants within the same model line, where the CPU speed differs.
0 kommentar(er)
