Let's compare the new Mac pro

[mbimac]

My old 2008 Mac pro @ 8 core 2.8Ghz RAM 2GB 320GB HDD

Running vista 32bit test 3Dmark vantage results: P11598 GPU score:9322(BFG Nvidia GTX260 Maxcore ; CPU score:43369


someone please post new Mac pro results thanks

Since I order the new Mac pro with single CPU @ 2.66 I had returned and exchanged for old model Mac pro with 8 core 2.8Ghz,bcz I think old mac pro 8 core 2.8 will beat the new 1 cpu at 2.66Ghz ,am I right???

thanks please post your scores

[Mac Husky]

I think old mac pro 8 core 2.8 will beat the new 1 cpu at 2.66Ghz ,am I right???
Did you have a look at all the benchmark tests
that have been published so far here on Mac Rumors and elsewhere?!

Let's compare sounds as if it had never been done before :D

[rylin]

Did you have a look at all the benchmark tests
that have been published so far here on Mac Rumors and elsewhere?!

Let's compare sounds as if it had never been done before :D

Give him a break, he's Canadian ;)

[joubex]

Give him a break, he's Canadian ;)

What do you have against canadians?
:)

[surflordca]

What do you have against canadians?
:)

Our money. It's not worth S*** :D

[Tesselator]

My old 2008 Mac pro @ 8 core 2.8Ghz RAM 2GB 320GB HDD

Running vista 32bit test 3Dmark vantage results: P11598 GPU score:9322(BFG Nvidia GTX260 Maxcore ; CPU score:43369


someone please post new Mac pro results thanks

Since I order the new Mac pro with single CPU @ 2.66 I had returned and exchanged for old model Mac pro with 8 core 2.8Ghz,bcz I think old mac pro 8 core 2.8 will beat the new 1 cpu at 2.66Ghz ,am I right???

thanks please post your scores

No, you're not right. But they are very close to each other.

http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=7270035&postcount=179

Please note that it's the green bar that is of the most importance to most of the people most of the time and here I guess "most" is the overwhelming majority of all three - probably in the 90% range. :o

http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Equipment_n_Tutorials/Cinebench10_Numbers.jpg

So it's like:

2008 3.20 - 3682
2009 2.66 - 3603
2008 3.00 - 3511 (iMac)
2008 2.80 - 3244

Is 359 points noticeable? Yeah, you'll notice it if you look for the difference but it's not shocking enough to stand out on it's own.

[rylin]

What do you have against canadians?
:)

They have better junkfood than we do.

[Tesselator]

They have better junkfood than we do.

Yeah but how do they eat it with two-piece heads? :D

[mbimac]

Give him a break, he's Canadian ;)

YOU ARE SOB!!!!!!!!!!!

[mbimac]

Did you have a look at all the benchmark tests
that have been published so far here on Mac Rumors and elsewhere?!

Let's compare sounds as if it had never been done before :D

I did read the benchmark if i was not wrong it did not comparing these 2 mac pro (2009 2x2.26ghz > 2008 2X2.8ghz of cause 2009 2x2.66ghz >>2008 2x2.8Ghz so i think 2008 2x2.8ghz > 2009 1x2.66ghz )

I did read all of them but these 2 mac pro on my hand (2009 single cpu 2.66(did not test 3Dmark2006 before I returned it;2008 later edition 2 cpus 2.8Ghz I am having now)

In 3Dmark2006 this 2008 mac pro CPU sorce is over 40000+ does this mean powerful?? and the main problem i return the 2009 1 cpu 2.66 is running in vista it always bluescreen and restart itself,,I heared somebody here got some problem so I deciede to exchange to Old 2008 mac pro with 2 cpu 2.8ghz

Thanks

[Salavat23]

YOU ARE SOB!!!!!!!!!!!

Give him a break. He's just an American.;)

[ozontheroad]

Give him a break, he's Canadian ;)

i thought canadians spoke english and french