PDA

View Full Version : Mac Pro Performance Tests | 2.8 | 8800GT | 74 gig Raptor




Wild-Bill
Feb 13, 2008, 09:43 PM
Ok,

So I was curious to see what the difference would be between
10.5.1 to 10.5.2
2 gigs of RAM to 6 gigs of RAM


So, when I first got the Mac Pro I ran both Geekbench and Xbench. I haven't tallied the Geekbench results, but the overall scores go like this:


10.5.1 |2 gigs RAM = 7324 | Memory Score = 2486
10.5.2 |6 gigs RAM = 7793 | Memory Score = 2693


I forgot to run Geekbench with 10.5.2 and 2 gigs of RAM. Sorry. :eek:

Attached are the numbers for Xbench. I also graphed them in Numbers. For all those who enjoy this stuff, here you go.

.. If someone notices something that seems jacked up with these numbers for this system in its various states of configuration, PLEASE let me know!! I'm not savvy with these benchmarking programs. I just thought some folks out there would like to see the info. :D ** The chart can't fit in all the chart titles, so you'll have to look at the raw data to interpret what belongs to what.

Feedback always appreciated. I'm off to finish loading some Windows programs and my games, and then move that partition to the 400 gig drive, and then tell VMware where to go git 'er done!



Wild-Bill
Feb 14, 2008, 12:23 AM
No one cares about this stuff?


Wow.

Mr.PS
Feb 14, 2008, 12:45 AM
Take it easy dude, I care :) The others though do not care, mainly because they're too busy clicking refresh on their order status page. ;) Great post - was going to comment on the graphs. Really nice work! As for the results, they look good. No real performance gains or losses, the graphics update seemed to have done alot for OpenGL performance which is good. Let's hope they fix the sleep issue in the next update, which will probably come sooner then later since their are still some bugs that need to be worked out.

I'm really happy with my new Mac Pro so far, let's hope it doesn't have the nasty sleep issues.

4God
Feb 14, 2008, 12:48 AM
Thanks for posting those. Any chance you could run the 10.5.2 tests without the extra ram?

Mr.PS
Feb 14, 2008, 12:58 AM
I'm going to post some results from Xbench when I throw in 6gb of ram and my Samsungs in raid0!

aibo
Feb 14, 2008, 04:29 AM
my xbench results for comparison under 10.5.2...
score... 191.80 (http://db.xbench.com/merge.xhtml?doc1=268812)
Early 2008 Mac Pro
Dual-Quad 2.8GHz (8-core) Xeon
10GB RAM
GeForce 8800
WD GreenPower 1TB (no raid)

Pressure
Feb 14, 2008, 06:15 AM
Care to post the EFI/BIOS Geforce 8800 GT ROM? :D

Sharky II
Feb 14, 2008, 07:44 AM
xbench doesn't make any sense to me...

my g5 dualcore pci-e 2ghz, 4.5gb ram, ati x1900gt etc etc comes up with 121... and a 2.8ghz mac pro with 8 processors and 10gb of ram is 'only' 191?!?

i know the new mac pros are leaps and bounds faster.... not just around 60% faster...

similarly my mbp is faster than my g5... but it gets a much lower score because of the HD...

netdog
Feb 14, 2008, 07:46 AM
How much of a gain is the raptor? Especially subjectively. Thinking about putting one in as my boot/application drive so I am wondering if the read times make a huge difference in feel. Also, how is the noise of the raptor?

Wild-Bill
Feb 14, 2008, 06:32 PM
Thanks for posting those. Any chance you could run the 10.5.2 tests without the extra ram?

Under Xbench? I did. The '181' score was 10.5.2 + graphics update with 2 gigs of RAM. Or were you talking about Geekbench?

yeroen
Feb 14, 2008, 07:23 PM
By comparison, my 'old' Quad 2.66Ghz Mac Pro w/X1900, 6GB RAM, and WD 750GB HD scored a very competitive 183.50 in Xbench: http://db.xbench.com/merge.xhtml?doc2=269805