Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

New 12-Core Mac Pro Once Again Shows Up in Benchmarks

MacRumors

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
63,537
30,845



mac_pro_2013_internals-250x340.jpg
Back in June, just days after Apple teased the new Mac Pro at its Worldwide Developers Conference, a Geekbench result appeared for a version of the machine using Intel's 12-core Xeon E5-2697 v2 Ivy Bridge-E processor running at 2.7 GHz. Entries for 8-core and 6-core models followed in September and November respectively, but with those benchmarks coming under Geekbench 3 and the original 12-core model having been tested under Geekbench 2, the results were not directly comparable.

Still, John Poole of Primate Labs, the company behind Geekbench, outlined the likely processor performance options under Geekbench 3 for the new Mac Pro based on the tested Mac Pro machines where available and filling in the gaps with data from Windows machines running the same processors destined for the Mac Pro.

Now, with the Mac Pro launch likely very near, new sets of benchmarks from the 12-core Mac Pro running Geekbench 3 have surfaced, offering a better look at the performance of the high-end custom configuration. MacRumors and Poole both believe the results to be legitimate.

Three sets of Geekbench results have been posted, two run in 32-bit mode and a third in 64-bit mode. Averages for the two 32-bit runs (1, 2) yield scores of 2909 for single-core testing and 29721 for multi-core testing, fairly close to Poole's predictions based on results from Windows machines running the same chip.

As predicted, the single-core score for the high-end Mac Pro is actually lower than seen with the other new Mac Pro models due to the lower maximum clock speed of the 12-core chip, but multi-core testing obviously shows a significant boost in performance compared to the Mac Pro model carrying the 8-core processor. The new 12-core Mac Pro unsurprisingly also compares favorably to the 12-core Mid 2012 Mac Pro and high-end models of the current iMac and Retina MacBook Pro.

late_2013_max_gb3.jpg
Comparison of high-end models using 32-bit multi-core Geekbench 3 scores​
The third Geekbench result for this machine uses the 64-bit version of the testing suite, which yields scores roughly 10-11% higher than their 32-bit counterparts for both single-core and multi-core testing.

mac_pro_12_2013_gb3.jpg
As with previous Mac Pro benchmarks believed to be legitimate, this latest 12-core Mac Pro is running a custom build of OS X Mavericks, the same 13A4023 build seen on the 6-core model last month.

Apple has announced that it will be launching the new Mac Pro sometime this month, but has yet to offer a more specific launch date or publicly outline full pricing details beyond the $2999/$3999 stock configurations. According to a price quote provided to one business customer, maxing out the new Mac Pro with the 12-core CPU, 64 GB of RAM, 1 TB of internal flash storage, and high-end dual AMD FirePro D700 graphics chips could bring pricing to roughly $10,000.

Article Link: New 12-Core Mac Pro Once Again Shows Up in Benchmarks
 
Article Link
https://www.macrumors.com/2013/12/15/new-12-core-mac-pro-once-again-shows-up-in-benchmarks/
U

undesign

macrumors regular
Nov 4, 2013
241
0
For the price of the 12 core, I would expect better results. But more important than the results is the lack of a swappable GPU. No point in having Firepro GPU for sound engineers or those who don't need it. A standard GPU like an AMD 280 would suffice and bring the cost down. I'd be all over the new Mac Pro if it weren't for Apple's continued stupidity in the graphics card department.
 
P

proline

macrumors 6502a
Nov 18, 2012
630
1
undesign said:
For the price of the 12 core, I would expect better results. But more important than the results is the lack of a swappable GPU. No point in having Firepro GPU for sound engineers or those who don't need it. A standard GPU like an AMD 280 would suffice and bring the cost down. I'd be all over the new Mac Pro if it weren't for Apple's continued stupidity in the graphics card department.
Click to expand...
As expected, haters gotta hate. How do you know there won't be a BTO option to eliminate the high-end graphics cards? You don't. You're just spouting speculation. Maybe wait until there is an actual product out to complain.
 
Riot Nrrrd

Riot Nrrrd

macrumors 6502
Feb 23, 2011
258
139
Lost Androideles
Wait, hold on ...

So the bottom line is, even with all this spiffy new hardware, the new 12-core model is not even 18% faster (29721 vs. 25208) than what is an essentially an upgraded Mid-2010 Mac Pro (a.k.a. "Mid-2012") model? :confused:
 
P

proline

macrumors 6502a
Nov 18, 2012
630
1
Quu said:
Says on Apples own webpage what GPU options there are:
http://www.apple.com/uk/mac/compare/desktops.html
Click to expand...
It doesn't say that that list is exhaustive of all possible configurations, nor is it known whether the graphics cards are replaceable (in which case you could sell your cards and downgrade). That list also contains internal contradictions- The 6-core model at right says it does not come with a D300, but indeed the Mac Pro can be configured as such.
 
J

jonyive4

macrumors member
Oct 14, 2013
83
1
undesign said:
For the price of the 12 core, I would expect better results. But more important than the results is the lack of a swappable GPU. No point in having Firepro GPU for sound engineers or those who don't need it. A standard GPU like an AMD 280 would suffice and bring the cost down. I'd be all over the new Mac Pro if it weren't for Apple's continued stupidity in the graphics card department.
Click to expand...

disagree. Apple is really pushing OpenCL which would make these GPUs pretty handy. For starters, there are OpenCL implementations of the FFT. are current DAWs taking advantage of OpenCL? I don't think so, but soon they should.
 
S

stefmesman

macrumors 6502
Jun 25, 2010
432
1
Netherlands
Riot Nrrrd said:
So the bottom line is, even with all this spiffy new hardware, the new 12-core model is not even 18% faster (29721 vs. 25208) than what is an essentially an upgraded Mid-2010 Mac Pro (a.k.a. "Mid-2012") model? :confused:
Click to expand...

These benchmarks are only cpu/ram and only a indication of less then a minute in compute power. The single core processor is more efficient with memory then a 2x6 processor and wil perform its tasks faster. Gpu's and ssd's are not represented in this benchmark. Wich are both a hell of a lot faster then the old model.
 
U

undesign

macrumors regular
Nov 4, 2013
241
0
proline said:
As expected, haters gotta hate. How do you know there won't be a BTO option to eliminate the high-end graphics cards? You don't. You're just spouting speculation. Maybe wait until there is an actual product out to complain.
Click to expand...

How did you manage to interpret my comment as 'hate' ??

For one, I used to own a Power Mac as well as a Mac Pro. My complaints are completely legitimate... go into the Mac Pro forum and you'll see many others who share my thoughts.

I'm actually offended by your complacency towards Apple.
 
M

MacVista

macrumors 6502
Jun 18, 2007
303
2
This is dramatic a departure from the traditional tower and the titanium-look of every Mac computer. Interesting concept computer. Will it run cool?
I guess I need to see it in person, but this black cylinder is not quite a representation of the great machine that it is…
I wonder how it would look in the same color as the old Mac Pro.
 
Quu

Quu

macrumors 68040
Apr 2, 2007
3,421
6,797
proline said:
It doesn't say that that list is exhaustive of all possible configurations, nor is it known whether the graphics cards are replaceable (in which case you could sell your cards and downgrade). That list also contains internal contradictions- The 6-core model at right says it does not come with a D300, but indeed the Mac Pro can be configured as such.
Click to expand...

1. I'd say that is an exhaustive list. It offers three graphics choices. D300, D500 and D700

2. The cards can be removed but they are non-standard so replacing them means you're replacing them with either a D300, D500 or D700 until 3rd parties make a replacment card which is unlikely.

3. The two models listed on the webpage are the two standard SKU's it is obvious (and it says it on the page!) that the 4 Core model that offers the D300 can be upgraded via build to order to a Six Core processor whilst the upper model already begins with the Six Core. The page is thus perfectly accurate.
 
Last edited:
violst

violst

macrumors 6502
Jun 14, 2012
339
161
I'm more impressed with this 12 core geek bench score then I was when I saw the 6 core scores. I thought the 6-core score would be higher.

But I'm tired of all the talk about the nMP I want to see this thing in the wild. It not being realized yet is just ridiculous. Come on Apple enough is enough.
 
M

Michael CM1

macrumors 603
Feb 4, 2008
5,681
276
Wonder if Apple will develop a slightly lower-powered version as kind of a mid-pro horse. It's an awesomely designed system and could be a great alternative to the iMac if it could hit sub-$2,000. Basically something to split the middle of the Mac Mini and Mac Pro. If you dropped $1,000 on one of those Apple displays, you don't need to drop the money on the built-in iMac display.

But I do know that this is a radical redesign for very pro users using cutting-edge tech. You can't cut out all HDD-based storage without increasing price. If other companies would start building flash storage into more computers, maybe the OEMs could shift their resources more to flash and less to HDDs.
 
E

El Hikaru

macrumors regular
Dec 3, 2013
221
79
Look for it

I'm not gonna buy this machine and will ever need one, but enjoy seeing how things progress.
 
P

proline

macrumors 6502a
Nov 18, 2012
630
1
undesign said:
How did you manage to interpret my comment as 'hate' ??

For one, I used to own a Power Mac as well as a Mac Pro. My complaints are completely legitimate... go into the Mac Pro forum and you'll see many others who share my thoughts.

I'm actually offended by your complacency towards Apple.
Click to expand...
When you spout a bunch of stuff that you know nothing about, that's hate. It has been shown numerous times that the Mac Pro will cost little more than the CPU and GPUs cost on their own, so your price/performance criticism is way out of line. As for Apple not offering a low-end GPU, you have no idea what the final configuration options will be until it goes on sale. There is nothing substantive in your criticism at all.
 
U

undesign

macrumors regular
Nov 4, 2013
241
0
proline said:
When you spout a bunch of stuff that you know nothing about, that's hate. It has been shown numerous times that the Mac Pro will cost little more than the CPU and GPUs cost on their own, so your price/performance criticism is way out of line. As for Apple not offering a low-end GPU, you have no idea what the final configuration options will be until it goes on sale. There is nothing substantive in your criticism at all.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if your'e trolling or making a serious rebuttal given the fact that you seem to have a very poor understanding of the modern online term 'hate'. Having said that, the FirePro graphics cards and alternatives are not up for debate. That's all your'e going to get when the Mac Pro goes on sale.

Hold on though... are you really dismissing the needs of those who require a high end machine but not a high end GPU?
 
C

coolspot18

macrumors 65816
Aug 16, 2010
1,051
90
Canada
Perhaps someone should do a point per dollar type of benchmark. That might give people a better idea which machine is the best bang for the buck.
 
H

hexagonheat

macrumors member
May 1, 2010
69
0
proline said:
Indeed. Should be a great machine for its intended audience... but this is MacRumors! Haters, start your hate!
Click to expand...

Not to "hate", I'm sure it's a great machine... but I can't help but look at bench marks and see 10%-20% increases over the mac pro that came out 4 years ago... and I might add, the older version had much more expansion and upgrade options at a lower cost.

It looks cool, like something you might see darth vadar using for his computing needs but were professionals clamouring for a 'designer' desktop that sacrificed expansion and upgrade options? Was that really a rallying cry over the past few years? I owned a mac pro for 3 years and it worked great but I didn't buy it for its looks.

If I was in line for an upgrade I think I'd really have to mull this one over and weigh it against the alternatives.
 
Santabean2000

Santabean2000

macrumors 68000
Nov 20, 2007
1,883
2,044
I understand the reservations from various users here, esp in regards to the expandability options. Apple knows more about the roadmap heading forward than anyone here, and they ain't silly. I'm holding back judgement until they reveal their hand completely.

But for pure lust, I don't care what anyone says, I want one!:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom