2.66 Ghz 1,1 Quad vs. 3.33 GHz 5,1 Hex

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by akadmon, Jun 20, 2012.

  1. akadmon macrumors 68010

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2006
    Location:
    New England
    #1
    I just got my 5,1 6-core MP that is replacing my 1,1, and since I still have the old machine, I'd thought I run some side-by-side comparisons.

    First off, the specs:

    Old Machine

    2.66 Ghz 4-core Xeons
    12 GB RAM
    Radeon 4870
    128 GB Crucial SSD Boot Drive

    New Machine

    3.33 Ghz 6-core Xeons
    16 GB RAM (soon to be 24 GB)
    Radeon 5870
    512 GB Crucial SSD Boot Drive



    Now the comparison, expressed as Speed New/Speed Old:

    Launch Lightroom 4,1: ~1.4X
    Launch Photoshop 5: ~1.3X
    Launch Win XP VM under Fusion 4: ~1.5X
    Import Canon RAW files into Lightroom 4.1: ~1.0X
    Create 1:1 previews in Lightroom 1.1: ~3.0X
    Merge into a panorama in Photoshop 5: ~2.0X
    Geekbench (32-bit): ~2.5X



    For what I do, the 5,1 hex is on average about 2X faster than my old 1,1 Not as fast as I thought it would be, but fast enough for me to keep it.

    If ANybody want's me to run some other comparisons. I'll be glad to run them, provided I have the software.
     
  2. Amethyst macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2006
    #2
    I think the task you try not showing your hex performance. may be you must try something like handbreak encoding or something that throttle all 12 threads?

    Ps. What is your model name in about this mac (mid 2010 or mid 2012)? And what is your model identifier?
     
  3. akadmon thread starter macrumors 68010

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2006
    Location:
    New England
    #3
    5,1
     
  4. Jst0rm macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2012
    #4
    I just updated a 2009 quad to a 3.33ghz 6-core

    I moved from a 2006

    My geekbench scores

    2006 quad 2.66ghz with 14gb of ram (my old comp) = 5529

    2009 quad 2.66 with 24gb of ram = 8333

    "hacked" 2010 hex 3.33ghz with 24gb of ram = 13936!!!!
     
  5. Buffsteria macrumors regular

    Buffsteria

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2012
    #5
    How did you hack it? Do you mean a Hackintosh? My i7 Quad-core Hackintosh gets 13330 Geekbench.
     
  6. Jst0rm macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2012
    #6
    2009 macpro quad 2.66ghz with 2gb or ram $1000

    24 gb of owc 1333ghz ram $270

    w3680 6 core 3.33ghz cpu $500

    Total cost = $1770

    Firmware hack and cpu swap.

    Its the 32bit test not 64 bit test.
     
  7. thekev macrumors 604

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #7
    Perhaps he means firmware + cpu upgrade.

    For the OP, photoshop isn't very effective past 4 cores. Processing a lot of files in lightroom should show a more respectable difference. Depending on how big your panoramas, it can be well worth going for 24 to 32 GB, especially if you like history + thumbnails. Photoshop still isn't as great as I'd like for editing spherical hdris:mad:.

    I wanted to mention that launching applications is mainly drive dependent. You're looking at the speed of the ssds. If they open fast and don't slow you down, that is what counts. The last thing I want to mention is that CS6 will probably push these benchmarks further apart. Adobe still seems intent on making upgrade eligibility only track back one version.
     
  8. Buffsteria macrumors regular

    Buffsteria

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2012
    #8
    How's the Hex-core going? I hope you're having better luck than we did with our iLemon.
     
  9. akadmon thread starter macrumors 68010

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2006
    Location:
    New England
    #9
    The transition from 1,1 Quad to 5,1 Hex has been totally seamless. I've had to remind myself a few times already that I have a new computer :)
     
  10. Buffsteria macrumors regular

    Buffsteria

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2012
    #10
    Did you get a boost in speed?
     
  11. akadmon thread starter macrumors 68010

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2006
    Location:
    New England
    #11
    The short answer is yes. However, since the boost in speed is on average only about 2X (with many common disk based functions at best 10-20% faster), after a while it becomes difficult to perceive the difference. Still, having run some side by side real world benchmarks (see the top of this thread) I know I'm saving time in LR and PS. Is it enough to warrant $3000+ that I've spent (including extra RAM and a large SSD)? Realistically - no. But it's my money and I'll spend it as I please! One thing's for sure: I won't be riding this horse for more than 3 years (I rode my last one for over 5 and a 1/2).
     
  12. Buffsteria macrumors regular

    Buffsteria

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2012
    #12
    Thanks for the update, I think about your hex-core every time I read this forum and I look forward to hearing about it. The reason is that if I had had the money I'd have bought one myself. I'm happy to hear it's working out for you and I don't think you wasted money.
     
  13. derbothaus, Jun 25, 2012
    Last edited: Jun 25, 2012

    derbothaus macrumors 601

    derbothaus

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2010
    #13
    You will see very little benefit when opening apps and booting up your computer. Get an SSD for those spiritual effects. Reason users claim that a MacBook Air is so much faster than a stock Pro. Really? Your hex is easily 3x faster than your previous Mac.
    Cinebench multi:
    Mac Pro 2.66 1,1: 9500
    Mac Pro 3.33 5,1: 27700
    You need to look at apps that use ONLY the CPU for a better indicator. The more CPU heavy the app is the more speed up you will feel. HDD's have only changed 20% faster in the last 5 years. So disk based tests will show an average of...20% increase. If you previously had an SSD you may feel zero speed benefit launching apps. Because that is not any way to test a computer but to test the HD's only. CPU and bus can't help you very much there. It does appear that this is a "in ma gut" type of thread anyway so maybe I am barking up the wrong tree. I feel a car analogy is in order. It's like you had a Yugo and you bought a Ferrari. But all you do is drive it around town at 45 mph. Then wonder why you bought it and say it feels just a little bit faster. It is not the Ferrari's fault it is being underused.
     
  14. thekev macrumors 604

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #14
    Photoshop has a lot of poorly threaded functions and it eats ram depending on the settings used when high resolutions are considered. Watching the use of dedicated scratch disks, viewing efficiency in the lower left, and a couple other things can help. If it really must access scratch, I turn on spotlight privacy for those folders or volumes. Overall you gain so little past 4 cores with it, so the differences might be a little smaller than cinebench, but you should see differences comparable to cinebench for mass processing. The lightroom benchmark and photoshop pano results are roughly on par with what I would expect. Given Adobe's increasing use of OpenGL functions, navigation and basic painting are likely to provide a smoother overall experience. I still wish they'd improve the 32 bit tools. It would be quite useful for dealing with spherical hdr imagery. It's funny how they implement ibl nodes and a raytracing engine, yet they ignore an appropriate retouching ui for preparing images appropriate to these nodes. I mean if you were going to use image based lighting, the most common type is a spherical panoramic image with a linearized gamma, yet photoshop still sucks for stitching these and removing tripods, people, shadows cast by the camera equipment, and other undesirable things from the shot. It's not really as smooth of a process as you'd get with low dynamic range imagery if you're going for an extremely high quality result (as in seamless to where you can't tell these things were ever there.

    Adobe just implements things in a very random way. It's quite annoying as everything often ends up being slopped together without enough attention to integration. Unfortunately they have a stranglehold on some things.
     
  15. akadmon thread starter macrumors 68010

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2006
    Location:
    New England
    #15
    Well, it's possible I have more of a computer than I need. My key app is LR, with an occasional foray into PS to do panos and HDRs. For these tasks I am getting as much as a 3X boost. I also use Fusion quite a bit, especially on those days I don't feel like coming to the office (100% MS based). Having the extra RAM (cheap compared to the 1,1 RAM) and a being able to put my VM on an SSD (without sacrificing one of my 4 HDD bays) is a huge plus. Still, I freely admit that I spend as much time surfing as I do working and massaging my photos. For that I don't really need a Mac Pro.
     
  16. derbothaus macrumors 601

    derbothaus

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2010
    #16
    So true hombre. I think we all do. A reason why my hourly wage is in the toilet.
     
  17. Apple Corps macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2003
    Location:
    California
    #17
    akadmon - been following your posts. My hex core was returned via FedEx in route change when they finally found it.

    Over the past few days I have rethought my strategy and decided to ride my MP 4,1 until whatever gets announced.

    Synthetic benchmarks are interesting but not necessarily reflective of real world use.

    I also bumped my 17" quad i7 to 16GB and a 256 SAMSUNG ssd. clearly quicker on a number of uses. May be riding this one as well for some time - especially if 17" MBP are really gone for good......
     
  18. akadmon thread starter macrumors 68010

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2006
    Location:
    New England
    #18
    I'd do the same if I had a 4,1.
     
  19. derbothaus macrumors 601

    derbothaus

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2010
    #19
    With this in mind most users will not feel a difference between a G5 with an SSD and a 12-core Mac Pro with same SSD. So why even bother, right? One can watch Netflix in HD and the other can't. Synthetics are used to magnify the differences. If your eyes and a stopwatch were used no-one would ever upgrade.
     
  20. VirtualRain macrumors 603

    VirtualRain

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2008
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    #20
    For most people, it's all about I/O. Memory, SSD's and SATA3. Buy more memory, get all your workflow on solid state storage, and wait for the bums at Apple to bring us SATA3.
     
  21. Buffsteria macrumors regular

    Buffsteria

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2012
    #21
    I just realised that if I bought a 12 core MP...I'd still need to buy a SATA3 card. Wow.
     
  22. derbothaus macrumors 601

    derbothaus

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2010
    #22
    ^^^ Why? You have bandwidth concerns? Video guys are the only ones who really should be complaining. RAID0 2x SSD's. Get better performance AND the lovely 500MB/s. 6G SATA cards are really spendy for 8x lane ones and a waste of money for the cheapos that net you barely 300MB/s. I bought a $400.00 ATTO SAS HBA and returned it as I can get a 2nd SSD for the same price. Boot SSD will not even really benefit very much. So video and high sequential's should be only real reason. And ego inflation.
     
  23. akadmon thread starter macrumors 68010

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2006
    Location:
    New England
    #23
    I concur. the 512 GB SSD and 24 GB RAM are working for me just fine. It's been a few days since I've rebooted, and I have exactly zero pageouts. The machine is eerily quiet.
     
  24. Buffsteria macrumors regular

    Buffsteria

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2012
    #24
    I'm forever changing my mind. Now I'm thinking of getting the 12 core and upgrading the RAM and getting a 512 SSD.

    This is because I can get the 12 core from Amazon and not have to get robbed by tax. My student discount brings the 8-core with a 5870 to $3276, only $500 less than a 12 core.

    I could sidestep it by going through PowerMax....hmm..

    Oh scratch that, PowerMax doesn't seem to sell BTO Mac Pros.
     
  25. akadmon, Jun 26, 2012
    Last edited: Jun 26, 2012

    akadmon thread starter macrumors 68010

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2006
    Location:
    New England
    #25
    Go for it!

    Can you get a student discount on Amazon? Hm...I have the luxury of living next to the beautiful, tax free Granite State (with its 2 Apple Stores within 5 miles of MA), and get a nice 8% corporate discount on top of that.
     

Share This Page