Here are the results and relevant remarks with V2 of the patch:

(ROB RAMIREZ - about the old patch:

the nvidia card is showing poor results in the two gpu-geometry tests because those patches are using fixed function shading. most likely the newer cards are not optimized to perform fixed-function shading. simply connecting a gl.material object to the gl.multiple, and the 3 gl.gridshape objects in the gpu-geometry sub-patches gives similar results with the nvidia card.)

==================================================================================================

PHIOL

mbp 15" OSX 10.9.4 Processor 2.8 GHz Intel Core i7 Memory 16 GB 1600 MHz DDR3 Graphics NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M 2048 MB

CPU: 170.4 GPU Geometry 1: 51.6 GPU Geometry 2: 198.1 GPU Pixel Shaders: 90.8

=======================================================================

DTR

i5 4690k 3.5GHz (slight OC) GA-Z87X-OC mobo EVGA (Nvidia) GTX670 2GB FTW gfx card 8GB RAM 1600Mhz Win 7 pro 64 bit

max 6.1.9 first run CPU: 126.0 GPU Geometry 1: 242.1 GPU Geometry 2: 236.2 GPU Pixel Shaders: 245.7

max 6.1.9 subsequent runs CPU: 164.6 GPU Geometry 1: 175.3 GPU Geometry 2: 247.1 GPU Pixel Shaders: 246.4

max 7 first run CPU: 197.2 GPU Geometry 1: 277.9 GPU Geometry 2: 307.8 GPU Pixel Shaders: 331.3

max 7 subsequent runs CPU: 204.7 GPU Geometry 1: 243.1 GPU Geometry 2: 301.7 GPU Pixel Shaders: 331.5

I stated first and subsequent run results because there are weird discrepancies. Getting faster on 1 element and slower on the other…

Max 7 clearly improves performance over 6. Both tested in 32bit mode.

===============================================================================

PEDRO SANTOS

It’s funny, I was just going to post something related to what Rob Ramirez wrote (welcome to the thread, Rob!). When I wrote the original patch, I noticed discrepancies between using the fixed-function OpenGL pipeline and the current programmable pipeline (using shaders). For instance, in the GPU Geometry Test 1 (using jit.gl.multiple), with my AMD Radeon HD 4870, the results were something like: fixed-function pipeline (plain OpenGL material): 100 fps programmable pipeline (using shaders – jit.gl.material): 68 fps So I thought that the standard OpenGL implementation would always be quicker.

As the tendency has been for a while to "deprecate the fixed-function pipeline (here’s a nice article about the subject), probably more recent graphics cards’ drivers don’t optimise for it.

Thinking about this, I was going to suggest to build a complex OpenGL scene with objects using jit.gl.material, render-to-texture, depth buffers and post-processing effects (maybe Max7 shadows and other render passes).

Anyway, here’s another nice lesson from this thread: USE JIT.GL.MATERIAL! It’s probably faster! Who would have thought?

By the way, if that is the case, shouldn’t Jitter’s default behaviour be NOT to use the fixed-function pipeline? Or, at least, there could be a simple option similar to the OpenGL Readback mode present in the OpenGL Status menu? Just a thought…

DTR: nice numbers! Finally! Thanks to MRMAARTEN’s findings and visits to the Apple Store ;-) , thanks to SPA’s results’ compilation and thanks to everyone’s contributions and for making this thread useful.

=============================================================================== DTR

Btw, for direct comparison we’re gonna need some of the AMD graphics owners to run the new version too. The outcome may be that the one shading method is better for Nvidia gfx and the other for AMD. Will be useful to be aware of this. Same for Intel integrated gfx.

=============================================================================== DADDYMAX

Rob Ramirez – thanks for explaining that to us – i’d been a bit worried id just bought a new computer that was going to bottleneck due to an inexplicably crap graphics card – greatly appreciated.

===============================================================================

ZIPB

Hackintosh OSX.9.5 i7 2700k AMD 6870 1 GB Jitter Benchmark 1.012 Max 7.0.0

CPU: 174.6 GPU Geometry 1: 31.1 GPU Geometry 2: 185.0 GPU Pixel Shaders: 175.7

Max Runtime 6.0.8 CPU: 134.0 GPU Geometry 1: 30.4 GPU Geometry 2: 105.5 GPU Pixel Shaders: 172.7

===============================================================================

JESSE

Mac Pro 6-core 3.33 Ghz 12GB RAM OSX 10.8.5 GeForce GTX680 2048MB

Benchmark v. 1.012

Max 7.0.0

CPU: 147.2 GPU Geometry 1: 54.2 GPU Geometry 2: 193.9 GPU Pixel Shaders: 182.9

Max 6.1.9

CPU: 109.2 GPU Geometry 1: 51.4 GPU Geometry 2: 143.1 GPU Pixel Shaders: 127.7

===============================================================================

DTR

@Jesse: Interesting, your Mac system is kinda in the same league as my Win PC. Your GTX680 gfx card should be a bit faster than my GTX670 yet my system is faster by a large margin. This might point out OSX vs Windows performance differences. Would you happen to have a Bootcamp/Windows install on it for direct comparison?

Though I wonder how meaningful the results are when they’re in the 200+fps range. I’ll try to make a new/adapted test soon, with multi-display rendering etc to stress those high end systems more and see what comes out then. Got a bunch of gigs coming up again so no guaranteed ETA though.

=============================================================================== JESSE

No bootcamp install here but would be glad to run multi-screen tests. I agree the results are troubling regarding Mac/PC performance differences, it’s likely a driver optimization issue.

=============================================================================== MRMAARTEN

i7 920 2.7Ghz 18Gb RAM NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 2048 MB

Hackintosh 10.8.5

MAX7

CPU: 99.2 GPU Geometry 1: 34.5 GPU Geometry 2: 150.7 GPU Pixel Shaders: 131.3

MAX6.1

CPU: 86.0 GPU Geometry 1: 30.7 GPU Geometry 2: 101.4 GPU Pixel Shaders: 109.6

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Windows 7

Max7

CPU: 152.0 GPU Geometry 1: 175.1 GPU Geometry 2: 196.9 GPU Pixel Shaders: 199.3

Max6.1

CPU: 120.4 GPU Geometry 1: 161.9 GPU Geometry 2: 158.9 GPU Pixel Shaders: 165.8

=============================================================================== MRMAARTEN

MacBook Pro (Retina, 15-inch, Late 2013) 2,3 GHz Intel Core i7 16 GB 1600 MHz DDR3 NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M 2048 MB

MAX7 10.10.1

CPU: 168.5 GPU Geometry 1: 50.7 GPU Geometry 2: 176.0 GPU Pixel Shaders: 96.0

—–

MAX6.1.9 10.10.1

CPU: 109.9 GPU Geometry 1: 44.1 GPU Geometry 2: 140.8 GPU Pixel Shaders: 94.4

Did also a test with Windows via Bootcamp

MacBook Pro (Retina, 15-inch, Late 2013) 2,3 GHz Intel Core i7 16 GB 1600 MHz DDR3 NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M 2048 MB

WINDOWS 7

max7 32 CPU: 163.8 GPU Geometry 1: 54.1 GPU Geometry 2: 215.2 GPU Pixel Shaders: 110.1

max7 64 CPU: 216.6 GPU Geometry 1: 54.3 GPU Geometry 2: 213.1 GPU Pixel Shaders: 109.2

Hi MrMaarten thanks, I got the right new benchmark patch now, it seems much smoother on my screen, never lower than 50fps, but the results seems worse?

MBP 2014 Retina OS 10.10.1 2.5 GHz Intel Core i7 16 GB 1600 MHz DDR3 NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M 2048 MB

Max7

CPU: 179.6 GPU Geometry 1: 51.4 GPU Geometry 2: 193.1 GPU Pixel Shaders: 99.1

MacBook Pro (Retina, 15-inch, Late 2013) 2 GHz Intel Core i7 16 GB 1600 MHz DDR32 GHz Intel Iris Pro 1536 osX 10.10.1 Max7

CPU: 60.0 GPU Geometry 1: 34.9 GPU Geometry 2: 59.0 GPU Pixel Shaders: 59.5

CPU: 161.8 GPU Geometry 1: 34.4 GPU Geometry 2: 187.2 GPU Pixel Shaders: 70.0

Here are my results. Please note that i am actually using the integrated graphics of my CPU for the test.

Max 6 Windows 7 i7-4770k CPU @ 3.50Ghz, 3501 Mhz, 4 cores 8Gb Ram

CPU: 164.5 GPU Geometry 1: 6.1 GPU Geometry 2: 138.6 GPU Pixel Shaders: 47.5

What's changed between v1.012 and v1.0121?

@DTR Ah by re-downloading that must have happened. Nothing changed :)

i7-2600K 16GB Ram AsusHD7970 Win7 64bit

Max6, 32bit CPU: 143.9 GPU Geometry 1: 124.9 GPU Geometry 2: 164.0 GPU Pixel Shaders: 166.9

Max7, 32bit CPU: 165.7 GPU Geometry 1: 163.9 GPU Geometry 2: 170.4 GPU Pixel Shaders: 247.5

Max7, 64bit CPU: 221.4 GPU Geometry 1: 163.8 GPU Geometry 2: 171.3 GPU Pixel Shaders: 249.3

i7-3820 3.6GHz 4 Core Asus R.O.G. Rampage IV Formula 8 GB Ram DDR3 NVidia GeForce Gainward GTX 680 2GB GDDR5 Win 7 64 bit

Jitter Benchmark 1.012: Max7 32 Bit CPU: 179.6 GPU Geometry 1: 191.4 GPU Geometry 2: 195.2 GPU Pixel Shaders: 249.5

Max6 32 Bit CPU: 121.2 GPU Geometry 1: 162.0 GPU Geometry 2: 160.6 GPU Pixel Shaders: 248.7

Chart for JITTER_BENCHMARK-V1.0121 - Max7 -32bit

Some results... Same Desktop PC by MrMaarten i7-920-2,7 GTX-660 Win7 is 1,5x faster than Hackintosh osX8.5

Same MacBookPro by MrMaarten i7-2,3 GT-750m-2Go Bootcamp-Win7 is similar to osX10.1

MacPro(new) 2014 is really expensive for poor results...

Want Performances? well logically,get a recent Desktop GPU in Windows: GTX-680, R9-285, HD-7970

Spa: great chart! I'm going to do a Apple Store run again with MAX7 when I have time, and possibly a store with some nice Win laptops...

I am very curious to the lappies with a 850m - 870m, 970m or 980m

Mac Pro 6.1 (nMP) 6core Xeon E5 Firepro D700 (x2)

OS X (10.10.1) ---------------------------- Max 7 32 bit

CPU: 191.5 GPU Geometry 1: 40.5 GPU Geometry 2: 183.9 GPU Pixel Shaders: 217.5

---------------------------- Max 7 64 bit

CPU: 244.6 GPU Geometry 1: 40.7 GPU Geometry 2: 181.3 GPU Pixel Shaders: 216.7

GPU Geometry values are embarrassing.

yup, how about when you run the first version of the test, with the fixed function shading?

@ LIGHTSPEED.JOHNNY: What DTR means is that the previous version of this bench mark could work better on AMD graphics.

Maybe you could try? On top of the thread https://cycling74.com/forums/benchmarking-jitters-cpugpu-performance-on-your-computer/ you can download the patch, please also post your results in that thread, as it keeps the data nice and clean...

i7-3820 3.6GHz 4 Core Asus R.O.G. Rampage IV Formula 8 GB Ram DDR3 NVidia GeForce Gainward GTX 680 2GB GDDR5 Win 7 64 bit

Jitter Benchmark 1.012: Max7 64 Bit CPU: 233.3 GPU Geometry 1: 237.0 GPU Geometry 2: 199.7 GPU Pixel Shaders: 249.6

Remarks: It seems to make a difference if I run the test several times. on the first run the numbers were closer to Max 7 32 bit.

GPU2 and PixelShader seem to have a cap on my machine on 200 rsp. 250.

--note - new mac with AMD card, doesn't seem any better than nvidea

iMac (Retina 5K, 27-inch, Late 2014) processor: 4 GHz Intel Core i7 Memory: 8 GB 1600 MHz DDR3 graphics: AMD Radeon R9 M290X 2048 MB

v1.012

Max 7 CPU: 178.8 GPU Geometry 1: 45.8 GPU Geometry 2: 176.8 GPU Pixel Shaders: 214.5

CPU: 180.0 GPU Geometry 1: 47.4 GPU Geometry 2: 190.1 GPU Pixel Shaders: 214.9

I finally decided to buy a GTX 970 after this version of the benchmark. There are clear improvements by using Max 7 64bits. Thank you guys.

Hackintosh OSX 10.10.1 Processor: i7 4770k 3.9Ghz Motherboard: Gigabyte z87x-ud5h Ram: 16Gb GPU: Gigabyte / Nvidia Geforce GTX 970 4Gb DDR5

Max 7.0.1 64bit CPU: 257.6 GPU Geometry 1: 97.7 GPU Geometry 2: 271.9 GPU Pixel Shaders: 265.8

Max 7.0.1 32bit CPU: 171.9 GPU Geometry 1: 84.1 GPU Geometry 2: 264.9 GPU Pixel Shaders: 267.5

Max 6.1.9 64bit CPU: 212.4 GPU Geometry 1: 74.4 GPU Geometry 2: 214.4 GPU Pixel Shaders: 215.2

Max 6.1.9 32bit CPU: 114.1 GPU Geometry 1: 72.6 GPU Geometry 2: 207.5 GPU Pixel Shaders: 215.8

It's indeed becoming quite clear that Jitter openGL performs better on Windows than OSX. Especially in GPU geometry 1. That being said, 200fps is in most cases much more than needed.

@Juandaco Do you have a Windows install on that machine too?

Sorry @DTR, I currently don't have a Windows partition on my system, but I'm curious about those benchmarks as well. I can probably do an installation just to compare, but I'm kind of busy this week. I might have some time available next week.

MacBook Pro (Retina, 15-inch, Late 2013) OS 10.10.1 2.3 GHz Intel Core i7 16 GB 1600 MHz DDR3 NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M 2048 MB

CPU: 234.7 GPU Geometry 1: 51.8 GPU Geometry 2: 190.0 GPU Pixel Shaders: 98.1

@ DTR

Here is the comparison of v1 vs v2 test. I noticed a extreme drop (326189) in the Geometry1 benchmark (cross checked both versions running on 7.01)!?

Self build PC XEON E3 1241v3 (3.5/3.9GHz Quadcore) AMD R9 285 8GByte RAM WIN 64 Pro, mATX board

MAX 6.1.9 Standalone (32bit)

CPU: 165.2 GPU Geometry 1: 248.4 GPU Geometry 2: 240.3 GPU Pixel Shaders: 249.5

MAX 7.0 (32bit, couldn´t build standalone because "cg.dll missing"?)

CPU: 193.4 GPU Geometry 1: 326.7 GPU Geometry 2: 244.5 GPU Pixel Shaders: 247.9

MAX 7.01 (32bit) v2 Test

CPU: 196.1 GPU Geometry 1: 189.0 GPU Geometry 2: 248.9 GPU Pixel Shaders: 247.8

Bene

Addendum: VERY bad performance still in 7.0/7.1 compared to 6.19 with 4 contexts on 4 screens (less than half fps)

MacBook Pro 15" Retina Mid 2014 OSX 10.9.5 2.5GHz Intel Core i7 16GB 1600MHz DDR3 NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M 2048MB

Max7.0.1 32bit CPU: 166.7 GPU Geometry 1: 50.4 GPU Geometry 2: 182.2 GPU Pixel Shaders: 86.2

Max7.0.1 64bit CPU: 227.4 GPU Geometry 1: 51.5 GPU Geometry 2: 180.0 GPU Pixel Shaders: 85.4

Max6.1.8 32bit CPU: 108.2 GPU Geometry 1: 49.7 GPU Geometry 2: 132.1 GPU Pixel Shaders: 83.7

Max6.1.8 64bit CPU: 143.7 GPU Geometry 1: 50.0 GPU Geometry 2: 173.6 GPU Pixel Shaders: 85.6

MacBook Pro Retina 15" 2.8 GHz Intel Core i7 16 GB 1600 MHz DDR3 NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M-1024 MB OSX V 10.9.5

MAX 7.0.1 64 bit CPU: 140.8 GPU Geometry 1: 47.1 GPU Geometry 2: 169.8 GPU Pixel Shaders: 87.2

Macbook pro. 15 inch. 2000. 2.2 Ghz. Intel Core i7. 8 GB 1333 Mhz DDR3 OSX 10.9.5

"Copy these values: CPU: 125.8 GPU Geometry 1: 19.8 GPU Geometry 2: 116.1 GPU Pixel Shaders: 48.8

Anyone understand the variance between benchmark v1 and v2 here: HP z230 Xeon E3 3.4 gHz 16.0 GB RAM Nvidia Quadro k2000 Windows 8.1 Max 7.0.1 64bit v2 Test: CPU: 198.7 GPU Geometry 1: 49.3 GPU Geometry 2: 322.6 GPU Pixel Shaders: 112.6 v1 Test: CPU: 188.4 GPU Geometry 1: 88.2 GPU Geometry 2: 446.5 GPU Pixel Shaders: 113.1 The expectation is that geometry 1 would be better on v2, correct?

Same machine as above, Max 6.1.9 HP z230 Xeon E3 3.4 gHz 16.0 GB RAM Nvidia Quadro k2000 Windows 8.1 Max 6.1.9 64bit v2 test: CPU: 166.2 GPU Geometry 1: 55.1 GPU Geometry 2: 286.5 GPU Pixel Shaders: 112.7 v1 test: CPU: 165.6 GPU Geometry 1: 91.1 GPU Geometry 2: 377.5 GPU Pixel Shaders: 112.9

I pulled out the malfunctioning gfx card from my hackintosh and ran the test to see if the CPU's integrated Intel HD3000 is working correctly:

i7-2600k intel HD3000 (512MB shared RAM allocated) 8GB RAM OSX 10.8.5 Max702

CPU: 110.7 GPU Geometry 1: 15.3 GPU Geometry 2: 48.0 GPU Pixel Shaders: 20.2

Windows Laptop - Graphic Workstation for Jitter an others... Finally a portable (4Kg!!) machine for everything... no more 2 systems maintenance: MBP + Win desktop and 3 video out: 2xDisplay-port+ hdmi + laptop 17" 1,5x faster then nMP w. D700 ... half the price ... and portable. :) 2x faster than MBP i7

Schencker W705 - 17" Win 8.1 Pro 64 16 Go Ram 2x SSD 512 Go i7-4790S (xeon) GTX980M-8Go - 2x DP - 1x HDMI Driver Nvidia 354.22

Benchmark works better with Overdrive off

Max 7.0.3 32bit _bench V2 CPU: 190 GPU Geometry 1: 240 GPU Geometry 2: 250 GPU Pixel Shaders: 300

Max 7.0.3 64bit _bench V2 CPU: 240 GPU Geometry 1: 310 GPU Geometry 2: 260 GPU Pixel Shaders: 300

The correct chart is the 1st one:

HP Pavilion laptop (don t remember type number right now) CPU i5-4210U 1.7-2.4GHz 8GB RAM Geforce 840M graphics Win8.1 Max 703 32bit

CPU: 79.6 GPU Geometry 1: 59.7 GPU Geometry 2: 64.1 GPU Pixel Shaders: 68.6

MacBook Pro Retina (may 2015) 2.8 GHz Intel Core i7 AMD Radeon R9 M370X 2048 MB

OSX 10.10.4 Max 7.0.4

Max32_v1.0121 CPU: 263.9 GPU Geometry 1: 37.0 GPU Geometry 2: 154.5 GPU Pixel Shaders: 93.7

The new Apple flagship MacBook Pro's GPU seems to be slower than the older models NVidia 750m. Why?

CPU: 214.3 GPU Geometry 1: 226.1 GPU Geometry 2: 222.0 GPU Pixel Shaders: 250.4

======================================= MAX 7 x64 WIN 7 x64

MSI GT60 Core i7-4700MQ 3.2 Ghz Nvidia Geforce GTX 780M/4Gb GDDR5 Nvidia driver 353.62 RAM DDR III(L) 32Gb SSD 128 OCZ SSHD 2x750Gb

This is an update from a previous post, this time with comparison to windows 8.1:

MacBook Pro Retina (may 2015) 2.8 GHz Intel Core i7 AMD Radeon R9 M370X 2048 MB

OSX 10.10.4 - Max 32bit 7.0.4 /// Win 8.1 - Max 64bit 7.0.5

v1.0121 CPU: 263.9 /// 234.6 GPU Geometry 1: 37.0 /// 72.3 GPU Geometry 2: 154.5 /// 238.2 GPU Pixel Shaders: 93.7 /// 127.5

conclusion: so far nothing new - OSX OpenGL implementation sucks.

I upgraded my dual boot hackintosh with a GTX960 and Yosemite. OSX vs Win tests:

Max705 32bit

i7 2600k 3.4GHz MSI GTX960 2GB 8GB 1600MHz RAM Gigabyte Z68MA-D2H-B3 mobo

OSX 10.10.5 // Win 7 pro CPU: 197.1 // 146.6 GPU Geometry 1: 66.3 // 158.3 GPU Geometry 2: 251.8 // 244.2 GPU Pixel Shaders: 202.5 // 246.5

2008 macpro 8x2,8 ghz ati radeon hd 5870

CPU: 119.7 GPU Geometry 1: 22.8 GPU Geometry 2: 101.4 GPU Pixel Shaders: 181.4

iMac, Windows 7 vs Yosemite test

iMac retina 5K, 27-inch, Late2014 4Ghz Intel Core i7 32GB 1600Mhz DDR3 AMD Radeon R9 M295X 4096 MB

Yosemite

CPU: 258.7 GPU geometry 1 (uses jit.gl.multiple): 37.4 GPU geometry 2 (3 high poly-count objects): 188.5 GPU pixel shaders: 205.7

Windows 7

CPU: 286.8 GPU geometry 1 (uses jit.gl.multiple): 158.5 GPU geometry 2 (3 high poly-count objects): 261 GPU pixel shaders: 238.4

As you can see Windows are way faster especially in geometry 1 test.

and another Windows vs. OSX test, both 64 bit, Max 7.1

machine: Mac Pro (Mid 2012) 2 x 3.06 GHz 6-Core Intel Xeon 28Gb 1333Mhz DDR3 ECC ATI Radeon HD 5770 1024 MB

OSX 10.10.5

CPU: 233.5 GPU geometry 1 (uses jit.gl.multiple) : 22.7 GPU geometry 2 (3 high poly-count objects): 130.4 GPU pixel shaders: 111.2

Windows 7:

CPU: 247.6 GPU geometry 1 (uses jit.gl.multiple) : 76.5 GPU geometry 2 (3 high poly-count objects): 124.4 GPU pixel shaders: 132.0

Does anybody know why Windows perform better?

Max 7.1 iMac late 2014, Retina 5k, 4GHz i7 24Gb ram AMD Radeon R9 M295X, 4 Gb OS 10.11.2

CPU: 252.0 GPU Geometry 1: 37.1 GPU Geometry 2: 185.2 GPU Pixel Shaders: 201.2

I updated my HP Pavilion laptop to Windows 10 Home and Max 7.2.4 32bit CPU i5-4210U 1.7-2.4GHz 8GB RAM Geforce 840M graphics (btw, on these dual graphics laptops it's important to tell the Nvidia drivers to use the Geforce card with Max)

CPU: 83.8 GPU Geometry 1: 61.5 GPU Geometry 2: 83.7 GPU Pixel Shaders: 58.6

And the production PC as well:

Win 10 pro 64 bit Max 7.2.4 32bit i5 4690k 3.5GHz GA-Z87X-OC mobo EVGA (Nvidia) GTX670 2GB FTW gfx card 8GB RAM 1600Mhz

CPU: 193.9 GPU Geometry 1: 242.9 GPU Geometry 2: 237.3 GPU Pixel Shaders: 309.6

MacBook Pro (early 2011) 2,2 GHz Intel Core i7 16 GB 1333 MHz DDR3 AMD Radeon HD 6750M 1024 MB OSX 10.11 ---------- CPU: 71.7 GPU Geometry 1: 7.2 GPU Geometry 2: 43.6 GPU Pixel Shaders: 28.0 ----------

seems pretty shitty to me...

@Herr Markant: sounds like Jitter is using your integrated graphics, not the Radeon card. On Windows in the Nvidia drivers settings I can select which apps will use my laptops Nvidia card instead of the Intel integrated graphics. Not sure how that works in OSX.

Hi everyone,

My results: Intel Core I7-3770K 3.5GHz (Turbo Boost up to 4.1GHz) 16Gb DDR3-1600 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 SSD Windows 10 x64 Max 7.2.5

CPU: 228.7 GPU Geometry 1: 221.4 GPU Geometry 2: 259.7 GPU Pixel Shaders: 489.3 (black window during this test!)

Benchmark seems to be incompatible with Max 7.2.4 and later. There are some errors in Max Console on load: viddll.engine version: 1.0.6 newobj: jit.gl.slab.gauss6x: No such object newobj: jit.gl.slab.gauss6x: No such object newobj: jit.gl.slab.gauss6x: No such object newobj: jit.gl.slab.gauss6x: No such object

Any thoughts?

MSI GS63VR Laptop Skylake i7-6700HQ 2.6GHz 32GB RAM Dual SSD nVidia GTX1060, driver 369.09 Win10 Pro x64

Max 7.2.5 32-bit CPU: 166.7 GPU Geometry 1: 194.6 GPU Geometry 2: 243.5 GPU Pixel Shaders: 273.0

Max 7.2.5 64-bit CPU: 200.0 GPU Geometry 1: 183.6 GPU Geometry 2: 195.9 GPU Pixel Shaders: 224

I found out that disabling Hyper-threading in my bios settings gives me a sensible better framerate in my patches. Here are the results with this test patch, with hyper-threading enabled (default bios settings), and with HT disabled :

windows 10 64 bits intel Core i7-6700k 4 Ghz ram : 16 Go nVidia GTX1070, driver 373.06

Max 7.2.5 32-bit

hyper-threading enabled : CPU: 169.8 GPU Geometry 1: 175.9 GPU Geometry 2: 228.3 GPU Pixel Shaders: 251.9

hyper-threading disabled : CPU: 196.9 GPU Geometry 1: 201.0 GPU Geometry 2: 255.8 GPU Pixel Shaders: 264.4

Max 7.2.5 64-bit

hyper-threading enabled : CPU: 210.2 GPU Geometry 1: 219.5 GPU Geometry 2: 232.4 GPU Pixel Shaders: 247.4

hyper-threading disabled : CPU: 214.6 GPU Geometry 1: 248.7 GPU Geometry 2: 251.6 GPU Pixel Shaders: 252.0

CPU: 104.2 GPU Geometry 1: 35.1 GPU Geometry 2: 233.3 GPU Pixel Shaders: 369.2

Max 7.0.1 32 bit win 10 - 64bit

Amd 1090T 3.2 ghz

Nvidia Quadro 2000 8 gb ram

after upgrade to max 7.3 64 bit all is going worst why this ?

Max 7.3 64 bit win 10 – 64bit

Amd 1090T 3.2 ghz

Nvidia Quadro 2000 2gb ram 8 gb ram

CPU: 110.4 GPU Geometry 1: 42.7 GPU Geometry 2: 231.9 GPU Pixel Shaders: 52.5

MaxForLive 7.3.0 Intel Core I7-3770K 3.5GHz (Turbo Boost up to 4.1GHz) 16Gb DDR3-1600 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 SSD Windows 10 x64

CPU: 213.5 GPU Geometry 1: 184.5 GPU Geometry 2: 212.8 GPU Pixel Shaders: 223.2

Found a workaround for "newobj: jit.gl.slab.gauss6x: No such object" problem in my previous post: Copyig jitter_benchmark-v1.0121.maxpat to "C:\Program Files\Cycling '74\Max 7\examples\jitter-examples\render\slab\" folder fixed the GPU Pixel Shaders test.

I't me again, same config as above, just closed Google Chrome windows :) CPU: 223.1 GPU Geometry 1: 261.1 GPU Geometry 2: 246.8 GPU Pixel Shaders: 262.3

hey, in case people are interested I'm at the Apple Store trying the new MacBook Pro 2016, here is what I get: MacBook Pro 15' late 2016 OS 10.12.1 - Max 7.3.1 Processor Name: Intel Core i7 Processor Speed: 2.6 GHz Number of Processors: 1 Total Number of Cores: 4 L2 Cache (per Core): 256 KB L3 Cache: 6 MB Memory: 16 GB

Radeon Pro 450: Chipset Model: AMD Radeon Pro 450 Type: GPU Bus: PCIe PCIe Lane Width: x8 VRAM (Total): 2048 MB Vendor: ATI (0x1002)

CPU: 203.6 GPU Geometry 1: 35.7 GPU Geometry 2: 142.2 GPU Pixel Shaders: 99.5

i want to buy a pc which connects permanently to a videowall with 9 full-hd monitors. right now i tested it with one with one nvidia gtx 1080 - i have 3 matrox tripleheads to go dp editions connected to its 3 dp outs and 9 dp cables to the screens. That works fine, but my question is if i could improve that setup if i use a pc with 2 gtx 1080 inbuilt (nvidia sli) - can one instance of max 64bit make use of both at the same time? If yes, could i also get rid of the matrox devices, since every graphic card has 5 outputs (3 x dp, 1 x dvi, 1 x hdmi) - so can i connect the 9 screens + 1 control monitor to the resulting 10 outputs directly? Anybody has experience with such a setup? Or what do you think would be the best graphics solution on pc at this time in general? Another question: Max 32bit had some limitations of RAM use - is the same true for Max 64 bit? + For videoplayback i guess it is still best to have two ssds - one with the system, one with the video files - right?

hello Tobias, you should probably start a new topic about this. I had very good results using two of those on one MacBook Pro recently https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B011BQ6X2U/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o01_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1 Also, using several laptops communicating via OSC works great. Hope this helps!

Razer Blade Pro 17" Windows 10 Home i7 6700HQ Quad-core 32GB RAM GTX 1080 8GB, driver 369.56 GSYNC: disabled

Max 7.3.1 32-bit

CPU: 162.9 GPU Geometry 1: 181.4 GPU Geometry 2: 242.8 GPU Pixel Shaders: 259.4

Max 7.3.1 64-bit

CPU: 214.2 GPU Geometry 1: 204.8 GPU Geometry 2: 243.8 GPU Pixel Shaders: 249.0

Just a little update to my findings in Dec. 2014. I replaced the R285 with a Zotac GTX 1050 TI, affordable and impressive.

XEON E3 1241v3 (3.5/3.9GHz Quadcore) Zotac GTX 1050TI (latest drivers) 8GByte RAM WIN7 64 Pro, mATX board

MAX 7.3.1 (32bit) v2 Test

CPU: 196.4 GPU Geometry 1: 214.9 GPU Geometry 2: 246.8 GPU Pixel Shaders: 315,4

Bene

Hi all!

CPU: 114.5 GPU Geometry 1: 15.6 GPU Geometry 2: 74.5 GPU Pixel Shaders: 31.5 Mac Mini 2.5ghz intel core i5 late 2012 8 gig ram 1600 mhz ddr3 Os 10.8.5 Max 7.3.1 Intel HD Graphics 4000 768 MB

cheers jd

A couple more cases:

MacBook Pro 2015 (11,5) 2.8GHz Quad Core i7, 16GB RAM AMD Radeon R9 M370X Max 7.3.1 macOS 10.12.1

CPU: 263.2 GPU Geometry 1: 35.5 GPU Geometry 2: 195.3 GPU Pixel Shaders: 96.9

It's interesting that these are better numbers than for the 2016 MacBook Pro above! Enabling/Disabling 'Automatic Graphics Switching' made no difference to benchmarks. __________________ Asus UX303LN 2.0 (2.6GHz) i7 Dual Core i7, 12GB RAM NVIDIA GeForce 840M Max 7.3.1 Windows 10 (1607)

CPU: 130.6 GPU Geometry 1: 57.5 GPU Geometry 2: 87.2 GPU Pixel Shaders: 60.1

New test victim:

Asus GL702VM laptop i7-6700HQ quad-core GTX1060 6GB (G-sync disabled) 16GB RAM Win 10 home Max 731 64bit

Interestingly CPU rendering can differ quite a bit between runs. Who knows what Winbugs is doing in the background. GPU performance is quite steady. Also noteable is that my desktop GTX670 (results earlier in the thread) registers faster while it's slower in gaming benchmarks. It also beats Jesse's GTX1080 here, which definitely doesn't make sense. I think this shows that we're not pushing these cards to the fullest with Jitter patches like this. Or perhaps their OpenGL support isn't optimized. GPU-Z shows max GPU core load of 55% and other loads under 25% during the Jitter benchmark.

(NB: obvisouly it doesn't surprise me that high tech commercial games utilize video cards better than our Jitter patches. )

CPU: 188.0 GPU Geometry 1: 205.3 GPU Geometry 2: 199.3 GPU Pixel Shaders: 253.1

CPU: 197.4 GPU Geometry 1: 207.8 GPU Geometry 2: 200.2 GPU Pixel Shaders: 248.9

CPU: 190.4 GPU Geometry 1: 200.4 GPU Geometry 2: 201.2 GPU Pixel Shaders: 252.1

I wasn't all to satisfied with the Asus GL702VM tested above and got an MSI GS63VR to compare. Here are the results with these tweaks applied: http://forum.notebookreview.com/threads/msi-gs63vr-stealth-pro-owners-lounge.795498/page-52#post-10425582

MSI GS63VR laptop i7-6700HQ quad-core GTX1060 6GB 16GB RAM Win 10 home Max 731 64bit

CPU: 214.4 GPU Geometry 1: 219.7 GPU Geometry 2: 218.0 GPU Pixel Shaders: 232.3

CPU: 198.1 GPU Geometry 1: 197.8 GPU Geometry 2: 222.5 GPU Pixel Shaders: 233.8

Asus GL702VM laptop i7-6700HQ quad-core GTX1060 6GB (G-sync disabled) 8GB RAM Win 10 home Max 7.3.1 64bit

Result from first trial:

CPU: 185.5 GPU Geometry 1: 204.1 GPU Geometry 2: 186.0 GPU Pixel Shaders: 245.6

However, two days later this is the result:

CPU: 135.6 GPU Geometry 1: 181.0 GPU Geometry 2: 164.5 GPU Pixel Shaders: 226.4

Actually I did several runs both days with similar results: Good the first day, bad/worse two days later. I have no idea why the values dropped. It`s a brand new computer and the only change to the system between the runs was installing Max for Live.

Anyone have an idea of what might cause the drop of values?

Maybe some Automatic Windows update installed a background application or service that is consuming resources (OneDrive, anti-virus, etc). Open Windows' Resource Monitor application and sort the services by CPU usage, maybe you see something there...

Mac Book Pro Late 2016 2.6 GHz Intel Core i7 16 GB 2133 MHz LPDDR3 Radeon Pro 460 4096 MB Intel HD Graphics 530 1536 MB

CPU: 205.2 GPU Geometry 1: 40.2 GPU Geometry 2: 154.5 GPU Pixel Shaders: 132.9

@JBAILEY: are those scores using Intel HD or the Radeon GPU?

should be Radeon because I turned off automatic graphics switching - but these results can't be right, just tested my 2012 MacBook Pro and got these results? I feel like something weird is up with max that's not taking advantage of the card.

Pro (15-inch, Mid 2012) 2.6 GHz Intel Core i7 16 GB 1600 MHz DDR3 NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M 1024 MB Intel HD Graphics 4000 1536 MB

CPU: 202.6 GPU Geometry 1: 44.7 GPU Geometry 2: 191.8 GPU Pixel Shaders: 91.5

You can check what jitter is using under Options> OpenGL status.

Doesn't make sense, my geekbench OpenCL score is 11473 on the 2012 and 47846 on the late 2016. Something's up with the Max Benchmarking patch or with Max.

OpenGL status reads AMD Radeon Pro 460 OpenGL Engine

OpenCL is an entirely different thing than OpenGL. But that score is definitely bad (although I don't expect much good from Apple's these days but not this bad ;). Either the drivers are no good or the rendering methods used in Jitter and/or the benchmark are not well supported by this card/driver.

ya, this can't be right. I'm going to try benchmarking in windows bootcamp to test the drivers

Tested the new MBP late 2016 on windows. As I suspected something's up with either Max or Mac OS in relationship with the radeon Pro 460. Windows is nearly 4x faster on geometry than the same test on the same machine in MacOS.

Mac Book Pro Late 2016 2.6 GHz Intel Core i7 16 GB 2133 MHz LPDDR3 Radeon Pro 460 4096 MB Intel HD Graphics 530 1536 MB

Mac OS: CPU: 205.2 GPU Geometry 1: 40.2 GPU Geometry 2: 154.5 GPU Pixel Shaders: 132.9

Windows 10: CPU: 233.9 GPU Geometry 1: 141.2 GPU Geometry 2: 229.6 GPU Pixel Shaders: 166.3

Why PC is so much faster? is it the Retina or the OS?

MacBook Pro (Retina, 15-inch, Mid 2014) 2.5 GHz Intel Core i7 16 GB 1600 MHz DDR3 NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M 2048 MB Intel Iris Pro 1536 MB

CPU: 225.0 GPU Geometry 1: 53.5 GPU Geometry 2: 220.6 GPU Pixel Shaders: 106.0

@abao Windows takes advantage of the retina resolution same as Mac OS, it's either a problem with Sierra's drivers or with Max. I'm leaning toward drivers though because it got low scores in GFX benchmark tests too, just 28fps on the Manhattan test onscreen.

Just to follow up GFXbench scores are more than double on Windows what I'm getting on Mac. Manhattan test get's 60fps to just 28 on Mac. Same exact late 2016 MBP with AMD Radeon Pro 460. Why am I not hearing this anywhere else? :(

Perhaps because folks into graphics have moved (back) to windows?

@jbailey: yes its just embarrassing the difference between OS X and Windows in the same exact Apple machine. Recently i been benchmarking in the same way you did but with a nMP 6.1 and with Windows and a modified AMD drivers the benchmarks increased almost x4.

Results of jitter_benchmark-v1.0121 with a MacPro late 2013 3Ghz 32ram & x2 D700

Mac OSX El Capitan CPU: 59.9 GPU Geometry 1: 31.6 GPU Geometry 2: 58.9 GPU Pixel Shaders: 59.3

Windows 10 Home with original AMD Bootcamp drivers: CPU: 138.9 GPU Geometry 1: 37.0 GPU Geometry 2: 120.2 GPU Pixel Shaders: 136.5

Windows 10 Home with “hacked" AMD Bootcamp drivers: CPU: 278.5 GPU Geometry 1: 161.4 GPU Geometry 2: 203.2 GPU Pixel Shaders: 171.1

The original Windows bootcamp AMD driver are downgraded, im actually using a non-official ones since one month ago without a single problem. >>> http://www.bootcampdrivers.com As mentions the video, just monitor your GPU temp and use Macs Fan Control to keep it cool.

Apple strategy is just starting to be more than ridiculous and as mentioned DTR, moving back to Windows can make sense for many of us...

fascinating! I wonder if anyone has benchmarked an External GPU with Max yet. https://bizon-tech.com/us/bizonbox3-egpu.html/

There's a bunch of these coming out soon. Razer and Alienware already released theirs.

https://egpu.io/thunderbolt-egpu-for-mac-2017-update-macos-sierra/

for the sake of completeness: 13-inch

MacBook Pro (13-inch, Mid 2012, non-retina) 2,9 GHz Intel Core i7 8GB 1600 MHz DDR3 Intel HD Graphics 4000 1024 MB

MacOS Yosemite max731

32 bit: CPU: 137.9 GPU Geometry 1: 13.6 GPU Geometry 2: 83.4 GPU Pixel Shaders: 32.7

64 bit: CPU: 140.8 GPU Geometry 1: 17.7 GPU Geometry 2: 87.5 GPU Pixel Shaders: 35.8

z270 ud5 mobo

i7700k oc'd to 4.8Ghz

ecvga gtx 1060 sc oc'd to 2 ghz

32gb ram ddr4 2400 mhz

CPU: 241.0

GPU Geometry 1: 256.5

GPU Geometry 2: 265.6

GPU Pixel Shaders: 299.7

Just wondering if there'd been any updates re: the Radeon Pro 460 4096 MB? My late 2013 MBP with NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M 2048 MB needs either costly repair or replacement. I could certainly benefit from faster jit.gl framerates so was looking into new MBP with the 460, but it looks like that might not be a given (unless I install Bootcamp?) Or has anything been updated on the OSX side in recent months?

Zotac ZBOX Magnus-1080BE (4core Intel Core i7-7700, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080)

Windows 10, Max 734 (64 bit)

CPU: 328.3 GPU Geometry 1: 330.8 GPU Geometry 2: 330.7 GPU Pixel Shaders: 405.7 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Mac Pro 6.1 (the "Trashcan" Mac) (6core Xeon E5, 2x Firepro D700)

OSX 10.12.5, Max 734 (64 bit)

CPU: 256.0 GPU Geometry 1: 39.8 GPU Geometry 2: 175.9 GPU Pixel Shaders: 214.0 -----------------------------------------------------------------

This, in a nutshell, is why I finally switched to PC and Windows. Also, the PC is less than half the price and equally portable.

iMac 27" Late 2012 3.4GHz i7 32GB 1600MHz DDR3 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680MX 2048MB OSX 10.12.4 Max 7.3.4 (64 bit)

CPU: 192.8 GPU Geometry 1: 68.0 GPU Geometry 2: 216.0 GPU Pixel Shaders: 239.7

has anyone tried one of those eGPU for Mac?

MacBook Pro Retina, Mid 2015 2.8 GHz Intel Core i7 16 GB 1600 MHz DDR3 Startup 1TB Apple SSD AMD Radeon R9 M370X 2048 MB OS X El Capitan 10.11.6 Max/MSP 7.3.4

32 BIT: CPU: 254.0 GPU Geometry 1: 36.3 GPU Geometry 2: 151.2 GPU Pixel Shaders: 91.6

64 BIT: CPU: 265.1 GPU Geometry 1: 36.5 GPU Geometry 2: 149.4 GPU Pixel Shaders: 90.8

Hi all.

Barebone Notebook Clevo P751 i7 7700K 16GB 2400 DDR4 -gtx-1060 startup SSD 128 GB Data 1TB SSD hybrid windows 10 max latest 64bit

CPU: 280.7 GPU Geom 1: 272 GPU Geom 2: 324.7 GPU pixel shader: 301.8

another non-jitter-use computer: Mac mini Server (Late 2012) 2,3 GHz Intel Core i7 (quadcore) 16 GB 1600 MHz DDR3 Intel HD Graphics 4000 1024 MB OS X 10.10.5

max 734 64-bit

CPU: 188.1 GPU Geometry 1: 17.1 GPU Geometry 2: 85.1 GPU Pixel Shaders: 35.2

Hackintosh OS10.13/i7 6700k/32 GB RAM/AMD RX480/8G CPU: 323.6 GPU Geometry 1: 60.7 GPU Geometry 2: 262.6 GPU Pixel Shaders: 313.4

Max 7.3.4 32-bit, for the above test

Hackintosh OS10.13/i7 6700k/32 GB RAM/AMD RX480/8G CPU:

CPU: 309.3 GPU Geometry 1: 60.5 GPU Geometry 2: 278.4 GPU Pixel Shaders: 315.1

Max 7.3.4 64-bit

CPU: 189.0

GPU Geometry 1: 79.8

GPU Geometry 2: 189.7

GPU Pixel Shaders: 180.7

CPU: 162.6

GPU Geometry 1: 179.0

GPU Geometry 2: 226.2

GPU Pixel Shaders: 234.1

CPU: 183.9

GPU Geometry 1: 7.3

GPU Geometry 2: 143.4

GPU Pixel Shaders: 57.8

CPU: 182.0

GPU Geometry 1: 103.9

GPU Geometry 2: 456.9

GPU Pixel Shaders: 146.1

I would be very interested in a comparison between Sierra (Metal1) and High Sierra (Metal2).

@Herr There probably is no difference, as Jitter runs on OpenGL

@MrMaarten Thought this is kind of automatic and could even improve OpenGL software.

@ HERR MARKANT Metal is Apple's own 3D api (like DirectX is of Microsoft). It is a substitute for OpenGL, it does not interface with it... Some more info: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZaQ--Xti-k https://developer.apple.com/documentation/metal/a_brief_tour_of_metal

Some thoughts on this:

Microsoft DirectX (Direct3D) up to version 11 is comparable to the various versions of OpenGL, being that the former is exclusive to Microsoft products (Windows, XBox), and the latter is universally implemented (Windows, Mac, Linux, Android, etc).

Then came AMD's Mantle, a lower-level, lighter and potentially faster implementation of graphics drivers for its graphics cards, including multithreading, that paved the way to the "current generation" trend, letting the developer have more control over the hardware, but also having to program more of the graphics engine. DirectX 12 followed this trend, and the Khronos Group, responsible for the OpenGL implementation, used most of the Mantle specification (now discontinued) and built Vulkan with cross-vendor (AMD, NVidia) and cross-platform support. Unfortunately, to this day, Apple still hasn't implemented Vulkan in Mac OS X and iOS, choosing instead to build Metal from scratch. So, right now, there is not a single universally usable modern graphics API: Windows: DirectX12, Vulkan Linux: Vulkan Mac: Metal iOS: Metal Android: Vulkan Which brings me to the question: what can a company with a cross-platform product like Cycling74 do? I would guess these facts are a strong reason why we're still stuck with OpenGL and not Metal/Vulkan:

I think there's not an easy answer to this. The only solution would be to do it and abstract the specific implementation of each platform to the user, sort of like in a game engine such as Unreal. And that is not a simple task at all...

So... OpenGL is dead! Long live OpenGL!

Thanks for all the infos, slowly i understand it (i really thought OpenGL is a part of Metal). And maybe there is still hope for Vulkan (German for vulcano) in OS X, because Apple is a member of the Khronos Group.

Late 2011 Macbook Pro 2.8ghz intel core i7 500 GB SSD - 840 evo SATA 16GB RAM Intel HD Graphics 3000 512 MB CPU: 96.5 GPU Geometry 1: 8.2 GPU Geometry 2: 29.9 GPU Pixel Shaders: 15.0

Blackmagic eGPU test results using Jitter_Benchmark-v1.0121.

I was expecting better then this? Max 7.3.5 64 bit MacBook Pro (15-inch, 2017) OSX 10.13.6 3.1 GHz Intel Core i7 16 GB 2133 MHz LPDDR3

Blackmagic eGPU @ Radeon Pro 580 8192 MB GPU

CPU: 240.4 GPU Geometry 1: 38.8 GPU Geometry 2: 59.0 GPU Pixel Shaders: 206.6

Built-in Radeon Pro 560 4096 MB GPU

CPU: 162.5 GPU Geometry 1: 37.1 GPU Geometry 2: 115.8 GPU Pixel Shaders: 125.7