Post OS X Cinebench CPU and Graphics Benchmarks

[rayd]

Post OS X Yosemite Cinebench CPU and Graphics Benchmarks

I've got really low scores as well... about 1/2 of what some of you have.
51 fps
640 cpu

MSI 970
i7-4970K

geekbench is 14,400

what could be going on?
iMac 15,1 (i've tried Mac Pro 3,1 and iMac 14,2 with similar geekbench results. haven't tried different SMBIOS for Cinebench yet)
Chimera
10.10.1
latest nvidia drivers (343.02.01f01)
all stock clocks

some of you with identical hardware are scoring 100fps and 836cpu hmmm



edit: just tested EVGA 750ti SC... 73fps
similar system, i3, h87n, same version of drivers

You are not alone. Same problem with me and others. no ideas on what the problem is.

 

[Messerjo]

Post OS X Yosemite Cinebench CPU and Graphics Benchmarks

My super cheap GA-B85M-HD3 / Core I3-4130 / GTX 750 TI build:

 

[TriDE]

Post OS X Yosemite Cinebench CPU and Graphics Benchmarks

Go to finder, right click on cindebanch app => show package contents => go to contents/MacOS/CINEBENCH OSX

Then open Terminal:
chmod +x /Desktop/CINEBENCH_R15/CINEBENCH\ OSX.app/Contents/MacOS/CINEBENCH\ OSX

Thats it!!! Work for me.

 

[rj985]

Post OS X Yosemite Cinebench CPU and Graphics Benchmarks

 

[rwillett]

Post OS X Yosemite Cinebench CPU and Graphics Benchmarks

 

[nobodyinparticular]

Post OS X Yosemite Cinebench CPU and Graphics Benchmarks

The "Pre-Release Graphics ..." would be a GTX 960. The web driver doesn't have direct support for that device yet.

 

[cookme]

Post OS X Yosemite Cinebench CPU and Graphics Benchmarks

You are not alone. Same problem with me and others. no ideas on what the problem is.

It could be something else at play here, but judging from CINEBENCH's heavy memory usage it's probably Yosemite's memory compression feature that's getting you inconsistent results. Look at the fps difference of the 3 OpenGL runs on the same machine below. The worst case was 40 fps lower. I had over 120 Chrome/Firefox windows & tabs opened at the time and the machine had been running for many days. The best result (103 fps) was gathered after a fresh reboot.

The less physical memory there is the worst the result gets.

 

[randombrain]

Post OS X Yosemite Cinebench CPU and Graphics Benchmarks

With the new (343.02.02) drivers.

 

[_mikey]

Post OS X Yosemite Cinebench CPU and Graphics Benchmarks

It could be something else at play here, but judging from CINEBENCH's heavy memory usage it's probably Yosemite's memory compression feature that's getting you inconsistent results. Look at the fps difference of the 3 OpenGL runs on the same machine below. The worst case was 40 fps lower. I had over 120 Chrome/Firefox windows & tabs opened at the time and the machine had been running for many days. The best result (103 fps) was gathered after a fresh reboot.

The less physical memory there is the worst the result gets.

View attachment 129670View attachment 129669

Yeah that looks to be the case. It's not 100% consistent but generally a fresh boot will get high scores and after a while they will drop to almost a half. Not sure why physical memory would affect GPU speed though.

 

[cookme]

Post OS X Yosemite Cinebench CPU and Graphics Benchmarks

I don't know what Yosemite uses to determine old vs in-use data in memory, but when there is not enough free memory, some of CINEBENCH's memory gets compressed even when the application is in focus.

I guess the lesson here is that if you run high-performance or memory-heavy apps and don't want to OS swapping or compressing your loaded memory, turn memory compression off... or reboot a lot and don't multi-task.