Mac Pro ($3800 model) on sale for $2500 at Best Buy and Amazon. (Merged) - Page 8

Ccrew · Mar 20, 2013, 08:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GXPvince

Seemed like a good place to put this for the 12 core.

Can someone who owns the Adobe suite run this test on their 12 core 2.4ghz. I see only one in the thread.

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=200558

I would appreciate it.

13.1 seconds.

Funny part? Same test on a Late 2011 15" MBP with a SSD and 16gb of ram took 21.1 seconds. Not too shabby when you look at older machine benchmarks in that thread.

GXPvince · Mar 20, 2013, 08:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ccrew

13.1 seconds.

Funny part? Same test on a Late 2011 15" MBP with a SSD and 16gb of ram took 21.1 seconds. Not too shabby when you look at older machine benchmarks in that thread.

Did you jump on this deal? How do you like it so far, you keeping it?

Ccrew · Mar 20, 2013, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GXPvince

Did you jump on this deal? How do you like it so far, you keeping it?

Yeah, I jumped on it. Honestly expected something other than what I ordered to show up, but at $1300 off list and around the cost of a nice MBP it was hard to say no.

Have I used it? Yes (as I type this on my iMac). Will I ever use it to it's potential? Probably not. Pretty much fired it up, updated it to ML, installed software, and haven't looked at it since. Hey, just being honest!

GXPvince · Mar 20, 2013, 11:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ccrew

Yeah, I jumped on it. Honestly expected something other than what I ordered to show up, but at $1300 off list and around the cost of a nice MBP it was hard to say no.

Have I used it? Yes (as I type this on my iMac). Will I ever use it to it's potential? Probably not. Pretty much fired it up, updated it to ML, installed software, and haven't looked at it since. Hey, just being honest!

Haha. I'll give you $2600 for it.

What version OS did it have?

jjahshik32 · Mar 20, 2013, 01:40 PM

Is this deal still valid?

ssdaytona · Mar 20, 2013, 02:03 PM

Nope. It was "supposedly" a price mistake

bearcatrp · Mar 20, 2013, 02:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GXPvince

Haha. I'll give you $2600 for it.

What version OS did it have?

Unless your stuck to the OS, you can build one for less money. Under 2 grand.

GXPvince · Mar 20, 2013, 02:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bearcatrp

Unless your stuck to the OS, you can build one for less money. Under 2 grand.

Ill pay $600 premium for the brand and the 1 year warranty.

jjahshik32 · Mar 20, 2013, 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ssdaytona

Nope. It was "supposedly" a price mistake

Ccrew · 08:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GXPvince

Haha. I'll give you $2600 for it.

What version OS did it have?

LOL. Thanks for the offer. Maybe in a month if it sits here simply consuming electricity! It had 10.7 on it.

Been distracted building a Windows box from hell in a G5 tower. Using this Mobo: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16813128569 and a 3770 i7 CPU. Debating what to do with 4 way SLI

goodcow · Mar 21, 2013, 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ssdaytona

Nope. It was "supposedly" a price mistake

Why is "supposedly" in quotes? Why would either company purposely take a $1,000+ loss on these? Best Buy goofed and Amazon auto-price matched them because that's what they do with one another.

slieu92 · Mar 22, 2013, 11:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fastlanephil

Amazon is selling the 3.2 single core for $2199.99 but you'll save the $.99 at B&H Photo.

*only pertains to california residents* b&h option has the comparative advantage of not being taxed.

pertusis1 · Mar 23, 2013, 12:00 AM

Well, my 12-core arrived earlier this week and I finally got all of the software updates done over my extremely slow internet connection.

Not surprisingly, software that does not use all of the cores runs at an average speed, but using FCPX was oh so delightful

It was several multiples faster than my Mac mini (I eventually gave up using FCPX on my maxed out Mini i7). I noticed that when I looked at the activity monitor while it was processing video, the 12 *2 cores were humming along at 30%, but my read/write seemed to be the limiting factor. I have a 7200 standard drive, but I'm going to have to do some reading to see whether this is a true bottleneck right now.

Oh, and I never did hear the fan. Similar work would have had my Mini whining incessantly.

Please don't flame me with 'I told you so' messages about the technology being 10 years old

GXPvince · 05:34 PM

I just posted this in the Real test Photoshop thread but I figured it would be more relevant here....

I have been using my 12 core for a few days now and this is what I experienced. PS does at some points use all cores specifically some actions I use. However, if you look at the % used its no where near maximum in photoshop tasks.

Next, I was able to use about 16 threads when exporting from media encoder and exporting pictures at the same time from lightroom. Not sure why only 16 instead of 24, I got this number by watching what lightroom and media encoder was doing percentage wise. (1000-1200% media encoder- Lightroom 400-600%) I only have 12 GBs of ram right now so that might have been the limiting factor, especially on the media encoder export.

2 add to this:
I notice that the operating system in general is quicker (Ram speed??) over the 1,1. Also, when heavy multi-tasking ie: Exporting a video and pics from lightroom- Zero slow down in the other tasks I was doing at the same time. On my 1,1 I could export from Lightroom only and feel the drag.

Edit: After thinking about this a bit, obliviously I am wrong in saying only 16 threads were being used. But only 1600% of 2400% was used

Callumbear845 · Mar 24, 2013, 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ccrew

13.1 seconds.

Funny part? Same test on a Late 2011 15" MBP with a SSD and 16gb of ram took 21.1 seconds. Not too shabby when you look at older machine benchmarks in that thread.

My 2.3 GHz rMBP w/ 16 GB RAM can complete the test in 15.1 seconds consistently with CS 6 extended. It seems that the test does not scale too well with multiple cores.

GXPvince · Mar 24, 2013, 01:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Callumbear845

My 2.3 GHz rMBP w/ 16 GB RAM can complete the test in 15.1 seconds consistently with CS 6 extended. It seems that the test does not scale too well with multiple cores.

I took the test on the 12 core - 12.6. Not once did it use all the cores in that action. Its quite dated because certain actions that I use will hit most cores.

bearcatrp · Mar 24, 2013, 08:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pertusis1

It was several multiples faster than my Mac mini (I eventually gave up using FCPX on my maxed out Mini i7). I noticed that when I looked at the activity monitor while it was processing video, the 12 *2 cores were humming along at 30%, but my read/write seemed to be the limiting factor. I have a 7200 standard drive, but I'm going to have to do some reading to see whether this is a true bottleneck right now.

Are you using a second disk for a scratch disk? If not, your choking the disk with multiple read/writes.

Mar 23, 2013, 12:00 AM	#188
pertusis1 macrumors member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Texas	Sweetness Well, my 12-core arrived earlier this week and I finally got all of the software updates done over my extremely slow internet connection. Not surprisingly, software that does not use all of the cores runs at an average speed, but using FCPX was oh so delightful It was several multiples faster than my Mac mini (I eventually gave up using FCPX on my maxed out Mini i7). I noticed that when I looked at the activity monitor while it was processing video, the 12 *2 cores were humming along at 30%, but my read/write seemed to be the limiting factor. I have a 7200 standard drive, but I'm going to have to do some reading to see whether this is a true bottleneck right now. Oh, and I never did hear the fan. Similar work would have had my Mini whining incessantly. Please don't flame me with 'I told you so' messages about the technology being 10 years old
	0

Mar 24, 2013, 11:34 AM	#189
GXPvince macrumors member Join Date: May 2008	I just posted this in the Real test Photoshop thread but I figured it would be more relevant here.... I have been using my 12 core for a few days now and this is what I experienced. PS does at some points use all cores specifically some actions I use. However, if you look at the % used its no where near maximum in photoshop tasks. Next, I was able to use about 16 threads when exporting from media encoder and exporting pictures at the same time from lightroom. Not sure why only 16 instead of 24, I got this number by watching what lightroom and media encoder was doing percentage wise. (1000-1200% media encoder- Lightroom 400-600%) I only have 12 GBs of ram right now so that might have been the limiting factor, especially on the media encoder export. 2 add to this: I notice that the operating system in general is quicker (Ram speed??) over the 1,1. Also, when heavy multi-tasking ie: Exporting a video and pics from lightroom- Zero slow down in the other tasks I was doing at the same time. On my 1,1 I could export from Lightroom only and feel the drag. Edit: After thinking about this a bit, obliviously I am wrong in saying only 16 threads were being used. But only 1600% of 2400% was used __________________ Mac Pro 5,1 12core 2.4 \| Mac Pro 1,1 3.0ghz \| 30in - 23in ACD \| MPA 2011 f1.4 and be there Last edited by GXPvince; Mar 24, 2013 at 05:34 PM.
	0

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Mar 20, 2013, 01:40 PM	#180
jjahshik32 macrumors 603 Join Date: Sep 2006	Is this deal still valid?
	0

Mar 20, 2013, 02:03 PM	#181
ssdaytona macrumors member Join Date: Apr 2011	Nope. It was "supposedly" a price mistake
	0