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

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

C

Ccrew

macrumors 68020
Original poster
Feb 28, 2011
2,035
3
GXPvince said:
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.

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/200558/

I would appreciate it. :D
Click to expand...

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.
 
G

GXPvince

macrumors regular
May 12, 2008
114
0
Ccrew said:
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.
Click to expand...

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

Ccrew

macrumors 68020
Original poster
Feb 28, 2011
2,035
3
GXPvince said:
Did you jump on this deal? How do you like it so far, you keeping it?
Click to expand...

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! :eek:
 
G

GXPvince

macrumors regular
May 12, 2008
114
0
Ccrew said:
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! :eek:
Click to expand...

Haha. I'll give you $2600 for it. :D What version OS did it have?
 
C

Ccrew

macrumors 68020
Original poster
Feb 28, 2011
2,035
3
Last edited:
G

goodcow

macrumors 6502a
Aug 4, 2007
749
1,001
ssdaytona said:
Nope. It was "supposedly" a price mistake
Click to expand...

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.
 
P

pertusis1

macrumors 6502
Jul 25, 2010
455
161
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 :cool:
 
G

GXPvince

macrumors regular
May 12, 2008
114
0
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
 
Last edited:
C

Callumbear845

macrumors member
Sep 24, 2011
85
0
Ccrew said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
G

GXPvince

macrumors regular
May 12, 2008
114
0
Callumbear845 said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
B

bearcatrp

macrumors 68000
Sep 24, 2008
1,733
69
Boon Docks USA
pertusis1 said:
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.
Click to expand...
Are you using a second disk for a scratch disk? If not, your choking the disk with multiple read/writes.
 
ericthered

ericthered

macrumors member
Jan 31, 2007
70
4
no where
JesterJJZ said:
Really kicking myself for not jumping on this...:mad:
Click to expand...

Ha!

After the FAIL of the new "Mac Pro" I'm smiling inside for snapping one up
 

Attachments

  • smile.png
    smile.png
    28 KB · Views: 303
J

jamesbarns

macrumors member
Feb 9, 2013
31
0
Cedar Hills, Utah
Ha dang wish I had been active on these forums when that happened, or even active on the internet at all. Sounds like quite the steal, but there seems to be some cons that would bug me about not. Then again it's not like I have $2500 sitting around anywhere.
 
BJonson

BJonson

macrumors 6502a
Aug 26, 2010
866
147
I would have loved to grab the last of the great mac computers. Might still get one even at regular price but I am waiting until they are almost gone to jump on it. My 8 core 3,1 mac pro is chugging along until then.
 
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