tests
Latest
Ulduar on the 3.1 PTR: Hodir
Last night was an exciting night -- the first night of Ulduar encounter testing on the 3.1 PTR. Lead Encounter Designer Daelo, a.k.a. Scott Mercer, was on hand to open up the instance portal and guide us to our intended boss (the only boss in the instance for that night) -- Hodir. I've talked about Hodir a few times; he was featured in my Ulduar boss speculation post (and I was right), and I went through some of his datamined abilities a few days ago. Getting to finally test the encounter was exhilarating, and getting back into the process of learning a strat by hitting the ground running was something to which I've been looking forward for a long time. I brought my Elune guildies and a deadweight coworker with me for a 10-man attempt. This writeup will be spoiler-heavy. If you don't wish to know anything about this fight, don't click below. You've been warned.
MBP vs. MBA benchmarking showdown
Bare Feats continues to pit Macs against each other in a no-holds-barred, up-against-the-wall benchmarking breakdown, and this time around it's the MacBook Pro and the MacBook Air in the octagon together. And things go about as planned -- while the solid state drive in the MBA has its advantages, the processor and GPU (what little there is of it) in the MBA don't even really compare to the MBP. Sure, it's a small, super thin, super portable computer, but not only are you paying in cash for the portability, you're paying in performance, too.This doesn't mean the MBA is a bad computer at all -- for most tasks, it'll work just fine. But complicated 3D graphics (both Halo and Unreal Tournament 2004 were tested) will be almost unplayable in games, and there will be a substantial wait, sometimes up to minutes more, for certain processor intensive tasks. If speed is a high priority (at least higher than portability), the MBA isn't for you.I would like to see how the MacBook compares, though. It's not surprising that the MBP is a fast machine, but where does the MBA line up compared to the cheaper model?[Via IMG]
Battleship Mtron: the absurdly fast SSD RAID array
Listen, we know you think your RAID setup is pretty snazzy, and, truth be told, it probably makes our rig look silly by comparison. However, in the computer world, there's always someone out there with a bigger, nastier system -- and we've just spotted one of the nastiest of them all. Next Level Hardware is a site that specializes in putting outrageous setups to the test, and this time they haven't disappointed with their benchmarks on the Mtron 16GB SSD (reportedly the fastest SATA drive in the world). Oh, did we mention the test was on a RAID 0 array of nine drives? Dubbed the "Battleship Mtron," the sickening collection of hardware blazed past the competition (a WD Raptor, less stacked Mtron RAID setups), delivering mind-boggling data swaps like copying a 1GB folder in four seconds. You read that right: four seconds. Like where this is headed? Truck over to the test page and peep all the stats... seriously, it's upsetting.[Thanks, David]
India caves to OLPC, gets 22 units to try out
A lot can change in a year -- tastes, moods, the value of one's currency... -- and apparently, India's stance on One Laptop Per Child has shifted so dramatically from last July that 22 of the low-cost machines have actually arrived for testing. Reportedly, officials didn't give up after being practically rejected by India's education minister, and now 22 lucky youngsters in a one-room school in Maharashtra are getting the chance to participate in a pilot program. Carla Gomez-Monroy, the education consultant who launched the test, stated that OLPC "has learned that working with local partners will be crucial in India, where dozens of languages are spoken." Of course, the far smaller minimum order quantity probably helped matters too, and while there's no commitment from India to buy heaps of XOs anytime soon, Gomez-Monroy suggested that distribution could broaden "as soon as June" of next year.[Image courtesy of Flickr]
Researchers develop artificial nerve
Regular nerves getting you down? Why not try a bionic nerve? According to reports, researchers at the University of Michigan have developed an artificial nerve which could have the ability to bring damaged limbs and organs back to life. In a study published in the medical rag Experimental Neurology, Dr. Paul Kingham and his team at the UK Centre for Tissue Regeneration managed to take fat tissue from adult animals and differentiate them into nerve cells to be used for repair and regeneration. The team will repeat the study with human volunteers, and then develop an artificial nerve constructed from a biodegradable polymer. The "bio-material" will be rolled into a tube-like structure and inserted between two cut nerves, so that regrowing nerve fibers can spread from one end to the other. Next, the researchers hope to create a species of tyrannical man-bots called the Borg, whom they hope will move outward through the galaxy, assimilating all who stand in their way.[Via Slashdot]
Still no discernable difference between 1080i and 1080p?
Although HomeTheaterMag has already told us that there's no (discernable) difference between 1080i and 1080p, it's quite understandable to still be skeptical when television manufacturers are screaming otherwise and touting 1080p as the new "must have" feature. In the latest battle between the two outputs, eagle-eyed testers at CNET compared the 1080p output from the Blu-ray version of the hot-selling M:I III film on five different displays. With monitors sporting resolutions ranging from 1,024 x 768 to 1,366 x 768 to 1,920 x 1,080, the conclusions were unsurprisingly similar to various other studies. Essentially, reviewers stated that in a vast majority of the scenes, the "level of detail was virtually identical" across the higher resolution sets, and that even the (relatively) low resolution Philips 42PF9631D plasma showed imagery "difficult to discern" from more elite monitors. Overall, testers felt that native 1080p rendered "slightly more detail in near background images in scenes with long depths of field," but was otherwise not really "necessary," and recommended that prospective buyers save their cash for the time being rather than buying in (literally) to the 1080p hype right now.
Test your MacBook for random shutdowns
Some MacBook owners around the web are reporting a 'random shutdown' issue, where the machine will - as you might guess - seemingly shutdown at random; either during work or patiently idling for your next command. If you haven't experienced this issue yourself yet but are still concerned about it, The Apple Files has devised an unofficial test to see if you might be a victim. The test involves entering a few simple commands into the Terminal and testing a few things over roughly half an hour of your time. Just to be thorough, the author recommends running this test two or three times to be sure, but it's really up to how paranoid you're feeling. Again, this is an unofficial test, and we haven't seen any official reports or announcements from Apple on this issue, its cause or how widespread it might be, but it's simply nice to have options, hey?[via digg]
Mac Pro benchmark roundup
Other sites are already getting their hands on Mac Pros and putting them through the benchmark ringer, and since we aren't done checking the couch for change yet, I figured a benchmark roundup would be the best way to let you sink your teeth into some cold, hard numbers. If you've been waiting to see how well these things perform in real world tests, your wait just might be over: Macworld pits a 2.66 Quad Core Ghz Mac Pro against 2.5 Quad and Dual 2.7 G5 Power Macs - G5s run crying to mama in everything but Adobe Photoshop tests (hint: that will be a benchmark theme across the board) MacInTouch posts some initial impressions as well as a wide variety of benchmarks, including some real low-level geek stuff like "multi-threaded scalar." Until now, I thought a 'scalar' was just a monster in Unreal Bare Feats posts their own set of tests, including the only After Effects test I've found so far (AE still isn't a UB either; I guess Adobe misunderstood the phrase 'fashionably late to the party') Geek Patrol, as you might glean from the name, also posts some extensive low-level tests in categories such as memory performance, floating point, integer and more Apple's product page also seem to think pretty highly of their own new Mac Pros That's it for now. Just don't blame us for the credit card interest if this pushes you over the edge to buy one.
PC World welcomes Apple to their charts
In a move that's causing many to check out their window to see if the sky is falling, PC World has laid out a welcome mat for Apple's hardware into their Top Power PCs testing charts, thanks to Boot Camp. So far, no Macs have made the charts due to some policy quirks (they typically only test stock PCs - Macs don't ship pre-installed with Windows) and test compatibility hiccups, but from a blog entry covering their initial tests, the iMac running Windows XP fared pretty well.We certainly live in interesting times with Macs running Windows, rumors of virtualization in Leopard and now Apple's hardware being put to the test alongside its now (let's face it) PC brethren hardware. We'll keep our ears out for more results on just how well these new Macs stack up.
MacBook Pro vs PowerBook 2.0 GHz benchmarks
No, that headline is not a typo. I found an extensive set of MacBook Pro benchmarks over at Bare Feats that pits the machine against a Dual Core G5 2.0 GHz, an iMac Core Duo 2.0 GHz, a MacBook Pro Solo 2.0 GHz (for good measure I guess) and a PowerBook G4 that has been upgraded to 2.0 GHz, thanks to Daystar Technology. Yes, from checking out their site it looks like it's possible to upgrade some PowerBooks to 2.0 GHz G4 chips, but it'll cost ya - the upgrade is $499.Getting back to the benchmarks topic: Bare Feats ran the typical Cinebench and Photoshop tests between these machines, and as usual the iMac Core Duo typically won out, with the MacBook Pro pleasantly nipping at its heels. They also produced some pleasant frame rates when testing Doom 3 and Unreal Tournament 2004. Bare Feats also tested whether matching memory pairs - such as two 1 GB sticks - made any difference in performance over a 1 GB 256 MB configuration. Fortunately, there was virtually no difference in their tests, save for small, single digit improvements in iMovie and Photoshop CS that aren't really anything to write home about.[via IMG]
