Xbench database
Lock ContentionĖ7.02Ē.88 Mlocks/sec, 4 threads
![xbench database xbench database](https://www.notebookcheck.net/fileadmin/_processed_/csm_xbench_entry_04_aa98918370.png)
The Lingotek Xbench Connector simplifies the process of analyzing translation quality using Xbench. Just load files in any of the dozens of CAT formats supported and get your translation quality to the next level. I will be sure to return to this thread and post results for you as I start upgrading this mini.įloating Point Basicē9.38ę35.71 Mflop/secįloating Point LibraryĔ3.49ė.57 Mops/secĬomputationĖ0.60đ.23 Mops/sec, 4 threads ApSIC Xbench provides simple and powerful quality assurance and terminology management tools in a single package. In fact a lot of people in the past would use ram drives to jack their scores up. One of the things I remember that will drastically change your score is the harddrive speed. Here you go clean - I ran xbench again this morning. Just run the benchmark and post your score and get on with it! It's not the final score you should focus on but the individual scores that each category gets. I compare it to what other macs I have used have scored. What the benchmark is good for is just a general comparison. (my Digital Audio G4 Tower 1.2ghz which I since sold scored close to 80 on this benchmark, and like 140 on the older rating system of the benchmark)
XBENCH DATABASE UPGRADE
My first upgrade will be a much faster harddrive. It's a bit slow, but it's a single G4 and it has a slow harddrive. (which I just bought today from someone for only $250.00 )
XBENCH DATABASE MAC
Uncached Readė5.55đ4.02 MB/sec Īfter the very first run on a Mac Mini 1.42ghz. XBench - A Family of Benchmarks for XML DBMSs Data Gathering Methodology XBench family of benchmarks can accommodate the requirements of the four classes of applications identified as text-centric/single document (TC/SD), text-centric/multiple documents (TC/MD), data-centric/single document (DC/SD) and data-centric/multiple documents (DC/MD). Lock ContentionĖ5.16Ē.80 Mlocks/sec, 4 threads
![xbench database xbench database](http://stillmantranslations.com/img/intro-carousel/head.jpg)
Because, honestly, how often do you apply a 100 pixel gaussian blur on your digital photos?įloating Point Basicē6.92Ę77.33 Mflop/secįloating Point LibraryĔ3.50ė.57 Mops/secĬomputationĖ0.58đ.23 Mops/sec, 4 threads There is no point in running testing a bunch of Photoshop filter that you'll never use. And only run the tests that are actually of importance to you. The ONLY good way to benchmark is to run the applications YOU will run, in situations similar to the ones you'll put your computer in. The fact that one computer is ten times faster than another one at Photoshop, even if we disregard Rosetta, does not mean diddlysquat if you never run Photoshop. There is no such thing as "general computing performance." All there is, is how well a certain computer performs at a certain task. So why is it that a 20" Intel iMac gets a UI test score of 20, which is about as much as the iBook G4? And one even bigger problem with it: Intel Macs always get shitty UI scores in Xbench, despite the fact that it's common knowledge that the Intel Macs "feel" a whole lot faster in terms of UI speed. Things like the vecLib FFT test are not really comparable between the Intel Macs and the PowerPC Macs. And only sometimes, at that: Xbench's results are often pretty varying even on the same hardware.Īnother problem with it is how it works. All it will tell you is that it will run Xbench better. The fact that computer A beats computer B at Xbench does NOT mean it will be faster at Safari, or Photoshop, or Doom 3, or anything else for that matter. All it does is tell you how well the computer runs Xbench. The problem with something like Xbench is that it doesn't tell you anything vital. I guess you should run a bunch of Photoshop benchmarks, or something. Might do it tonight from home.Ĭan you please check your stock RAM and post its specs and timings (if it is on a sticker on the SODIMM) here? If it's not on the sticker, check the chip numbers and manufacturers' part numbers here and post it, maybe we can figure it out from that.Click to expand.You mean that doesn't suck? None, really. Can't be bothered to check Apple's tech docs now. I don't see any site quoting any CL timings. Memory should be installed in pairs, so users will typically remove the two original 256MB modules and replace them. The new Mac offers two memory slots, which come preloaded from the factory with two 256MB PC2-5300, DDR2-667 SO-DIMMs. This means that if you upgrade the DIMMs in matched pairs, you will get up to 10.6 GB/sec of bandwidth between the memory and the system controller (versus a max of 5.3 GB/sec if you were to just use one DIMM).īut apparently the test results have not been affected. The Intel Mini uses an Intel 945 class chipset, which should support dual-channel memory. Here is where I read about that problem with having mismatched memory:
![xbench database xbench database](https://signalfasr857.weebly.com/uploads/1/2/4/9/124954671/342566280.jpg)
XBENCH DATABASE HOW TO
Now that I figured out how to extract more data from the database: