nMP 4 quad-core vs rMBP early 2013 performance

SvK · Mar 29, 2014

nMP 4-core vs rMBP early 2013 performance

hi there,

My singular usage is Music composition, orchestral mock ups etc. The rMBP I own performs like a champ, while powering a Thunderbolt 27 inch display and 2nd HDMI display. I own a thunderbolt Audio interface ( UA apollo ) ....

2 things.....though I get great performance, those fans do kick in quite soon and the 16 gig RAM limitation is a real issue, as I would like to expand my orchestral sample libraries within my template so 32 gig would be my sweet spot.

QUESTiON:

I am intrigued by the new Mac Pro 4core but geek bench scores it pretty much the same as my rMBP ( 2.7 w 768 gig SSD, 16 gig RAM ) .......

Can one of you kind geniuses clue me in and hopefully tell me that my real life results of CPU crunching will be substantially better with the Desktop over the laptop or is this just wishful thinking on my part?

GEEKBENCH scores ( 32 bit multi-core )

Mac Pro (Late 2013)
Intel Xeon E5-1620 v2 3700 MHz (4 cores)
12781

MacBook Pro (15-inch Retina Early 2013)
Intel Core i7-3840QM 2800 MHz (4 cores)
11781

Thanks in advance,

Best,
SvK

Truthfulie · Mar 29, 2014

I don't know much about applications for composing and how CPU based they are but Xeon will have superior and far more reliable performance compared to any mobile CPU. Same goes for the fans. Laptops will never have as efficient cooling solution as desktops have hence more work is expected of the fans naturally.

But seeing that your fans does seem to kick in high RPM pretty fast, I would guess whatever application you are using does demand quite a bit of CPU horse power in which case upgrading to a proper desktop CPU will most likely help. Even if it doesn't increase effectiveness of your workflow, it will definitely give you better cooling and ultimately acoustics (which I assume is an important factor when you work with audio.)

SvK · Mar 29, 2014

thanks for taking the time to help me out here.

The primary "hit" the rMBP is taking is streaming ( reads no writes ) samples of of it's internal SSD ( which is blazing fast ).

Do you know whether SSDs get hot while they are doing their thing? Because I always assumed they didn't since there are no moving parts.

Best,
SvK

VirtualRain · Mar 29, 2014

SvK said:
2 things.....though I get great performance, those fans do kick in quite soon and the 16 gig RAM limitation is a real issue, as I would like to expand my orchestral sample libraries within my template so 32 gig would be my sweet spot.

QUESTiON:

I am intrigued by the new Mac Pro 4core but geek bench scores it pretty much the same as my rMBP ( 2.7 w 768 gig SSD, 16 gig RAM ) .......

Can one of you kind geniuses clue me in and hopefully tell me that my real life results of CPU crunching will be substantially better with the Desktop over the laptop or is this just wishful thinking on my part?

GEEKBENCH scores ( 32 bit multi-core )

Mac Pro (Late 2013)
Intel Xeon E5-1620 v2 3700 MHz (4 cores)
12781

MacBook Pro (15-inch Retina Early 2013)
Intel Core i7-3840QM 2800 MHz (4 cores)
11781

Thanks in advance,

Best,
SvK

SvK said:
thanks for taking the time to help me out here.

The primary "hit" the rMBP is taking is streaming ( reads no writes ) samples of of it's internal SSD ( which is blazing fast ).

Do you know whether SSDs get hot while they are doing there thing? Because I always assumed they didn't since there are no moving parts.

Best,
SvK

As you point out the CPU performance for these two systems is very similar. So, No... the nMP won't be any better at CPU crunching than your rMBP. However, it will be able to do sustained heavy computations for longer without stressing the cooling system. Heat, more than anything else, can lead to premature failure of computers, so if you're regularly stressing the rMBP to the extent its fans are running at full speed, you may want to invest in AppleCare at the very least

The SSD should not be contributing much to the overall thermal load on the system... they run pretty cool and don't consume a lot of power compared to the CPU.

The key benefits of the nMP as you already pointed out are the extensibility (more RAM as well as more more TB and USB ports) and the aforementioned ability to work with heavy CPU loads for longer without stressing the cooling system. On the other hand, it comes with a pair of high-end GPUs that you're paying good money for that may not get utilized with your workload.

FrankHahn · Mar 29, 2014

An SSD will become warm and hot when you read a lot from it. Although an SSD has no moving parts, it contains a circuit board with quite a few electronic parts and it, therefore, consumes some electricity (much less than that consumed by an HDD). Anything that consumes electricity will generate heat. For example, a flash light generates heat.

SvK · Mar 29, 2014

Hi V-Rain,

Thanks for that. Learned something here. both systems have similar CPU capabilities but due to smaller sizes and other compromises the rMBP will heat up quicker at same task than the nMP during sustained CPU loads.

Makes sense.
This helps me in my decision.

Thanks!

Best,
SvK

----------

FrankHahn said:
An SSD will become warm and hot when you read a lot from it. Although an SSD has no moving parts, it contains a circuit board with quite a few electronic parts and it, therefore, consumes some electricity (much less than that consumed by an HDD). Anything that consumes electricity will generate heat. For example, a flash light generates heat.

Hi Frank,

So since Drive reads are not a CPU intensive task; If I keep the rMBP, and offload the SSD reads to a external TB array of ssd drives, then there's a good chance the rMBP fans might just calm down?

Food for thought.

Thanks

Best,
SvK

VirtualRain · Mar 29, 2014

FrankHahn said:
An SSD will become warm and hot when you read a lot from it. Although an SSD has no moving parts, it contains a circuit board with quite a few electronic parts and it, therefore, consumes some electricity (much less than that consumed by an HDD). Anything that consumes electricity will generate heat. For example, a flash light generates heat.

You're right in that all electronics generate heat, but most current SSDs under load consume less than a few Watts of power (which represents the maximum heat it can generate). Compared to the processor in his rMBP which has a TDP of 45W, the SSD will not have any impact on the fan speed.

SvK said:
Hi Frank,

So since Drive reads are not a CPU intensive task; If I keep the rMBP, and offload the SSD reads to a external TB array of ssd drives, then there's a good chance the rMBP fans might just calm down?

Food for thought.

Thanks

Best,
SvK

As I said above, I don't think moving your storage will do anything to help with fan speeds. Look up reviews of the Samsung 840 Pro which uses similar technology to the Samsung supplied SSDs Apple uses. You will find power consumption results that are under 3W. That's about 1/10th the power your CPU will consume under load.

SvK · Mar 29, 2014

V-Rain,

Got it.
thanks!

Best,
SvK

OS6-OSX · Mar 29, 2014

Don't know what combo you are using but I run DP7, Kontakt 5 with NI Libs. VERY Ram intensive! I upgraded to the 26GB from 20GB just for NI!

SvK · Mar 29, 2014

Hi .... I have a 2nd "slave" mac ( 2010 quad core Mac Pro ) . She's running windows in order to stream Hollywood Strings and Brass using "Play" .....that's a 28 gig RAM load.
I pipe the slave via optical into the rMBP through the UA Apollo.
My rMBP runs all the Vienna winds and Adagio Strings, the synths and Logic 10

Best,
SvK

Search

Search

nMP 4 quad-core vs rMBP early 2013 performance

SvK

macrumors 6502

Truthfulie

macrumors regular

SvK

macrumors 6502

VirtualRain

macrumors 603

FrankHahn

macrumors 6502a

SvK

macrumors 6502

VirtualRain

macrumors 603

SvK

macrumors 6502

OS6-OSX

macrumors 6502a

SvK

macrumors 6502

Our Staff