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

27-Inch iMac Core i7 With SSD Is Fastest Mac Ever

For an alternate perspective, let's check in with Barefeats.com.

Oops, looks like the 6-core 2010 Mac Pro beat the "fastest Mac ever" in 3/4 of the "Pro App" tests:

Barefeats Pro Apps Benchmarks

How about gaming? Oops, the 6-core Mac Pro (upgraded to Radeon 5870) won out against the "Fastest Mac Ever" on all 6 games tested.

Barefeats Gaming benchmarks

And here's a hodge-podge of results showing the 6-core Mac Pro beating the "fastest Mac Ever" at Cinebench, Geekbench, Luxmark, Portal, and OpenGL Extensions viewer (in fact, in everything tested).

Barefeats Various Benchmarks

So that was the 6-core Mac Pro. Now imagine the 12 Core.
 
holmesf said:
For an alternate perspective, let's check in with Barefeats.com.

Oops, looks like the 6-core 2010 Mac Pro beat the "fastest Mac ever" in 3/4 of the "Pro App" tests:

Barefeats Pro Apps Benchmarks

How about gaming? Oops, the 6-core Mac Pro (upgraded to Radeon 5870) won out against the "Fastest Mac Ever" on all 6 games tested.

Barefeats Gaming benchmarks

And here's a hodge-podge of results showing the 6-core Mac Pro beating the "fastest Mac Ever" at Cinebench, Geekbench, Luxmark, Portal, and OpenGL Extensions viewer (in fact, in everything tested).

Barefeats Various Benchmarks

So that was the 6-core Mac Pro. Now imagine the 12 Core.
Click to expand...

^^ This

and given that Barefeats did nost of their testing at the beginning of May, is this even news anymore?
 
milo said:
actually no, turns out he was the first one to figure out that apple ships a 12 core and mr is making the "fastest mac ever" assumption based on a comparison to a 6 core. Re-read his post again.
Click to expand...

it's important to note, however, that for massively parallel tasks like handbrake encoding, cinebench, mathematica, and geekbench benchmarks the mac pro still outperforms the imac because it has more cores, especially with hyper-threading
Click to expand...

but...

but, for individual application tests like encoding an mp3, importing a movie to imovie, or importing photos to iphoto, the imac beats all.
Click to expand...
 
holmesf said:
For an alternate perspective, let's check in with Barefeats.com.

Oops, looks like the 6-core 2010 Mac Pro beat the "fastest Mac ever" in 3/4 of the "Pro App" tests:

Barefeats Pro Apps Benchmarks

How about gaming? Oops, the 6-core Mac Pro (upgraded to Radeon 5870) won out against the "Fastest Mac Ever" on all 6 games tested.

Barefeats Gaming benchmarks

And here's a hodge-podge of results showing the 6-core Mac Pro beating the "fastest Mac Ever" at Cinebench, Geekbench, Luxmark, Portal, and OpenGL Extensions viewer (in fact, in everything tested).

Barefeats Various Benchmarks

So that was the 6-core Mac Pro. Now imagine the 12 Core.
Click to expand...

Haha... well there you go! Thanks for posting this. :)
 
holmesf said:
For an alternate perspective, let's check in with Barefeats.com.

Oops, looks like the 6-core 2010 Mac Pro beat the "fastest Mac ever" in 3/4 of the "Pro App" tests:

Barefeats Pro Apps Benchmarks

How about gaming? Oops, the 6-core Mac Pro (upgraded to Radeon 5870) won out against the "Fastest Mac Ever" on all 6 games tested.

Barefeats Gaming benchmarks

And here's a hodge-podge of results showing the 6-core Mac Pro beating the "fastest Mac Ever" at Cinebench, Geekbench, Luxmark, Portal, and OpenGL Extensions viewer (in fact, in everything tested).

Barefeats Various Benchmarks

So that was the 6-core Mac Pro. Now imagine the 12 Core.
Click to expand...

Lone Deranger said:
Haha... well there you go! Thanks for posting this. :)
Click to expand...

Nice . . . too bad they aren't comparing raw processing speed with SSD additions. Too bad none of those machines listed gave any inclination that they were equipped with SSD. And too bad those gaming benchmarks included the use of the GPU which is far better on the Mac Pro than iMac.

Lastly too bad that the Mac Pro was equipped with 24GB of RAM in the pro apps tests.

Once again, we are comparing the the speed of the iMac to the Mac Pro based on SSD and apps that use raw clock speed.

We all know that the Mac Pro will have the advantage with multi-core apps via the info on the previous pages. Other pages are putting forth info about how many apps are truly core aware and actually benefit from the cores.
 
Not Bad

Bozola said:
I tried on my brand new iMac i7 with SSD.

The video is real.

Just amazing... it is fast fast fast.

Geekbench score: 11835
Click to expand...

Is that in 32-bit Geekbench mode or 64? My 2.8 ghz i7 iMac gets 10064 with HDD, 12-gigs of PC1033 ram (should have swapped it for PC1333) and it's no slouch at processing demanding tasks quickly. Still, that's an impressive video.
 
Apple... said:
I would really love to get one of these machines (and upgrade from a 2007 Mac Pro), but I'm thinking the 27 inch model is much too big. Any suggestions?
Click to expand...

Well Apple could offer a headless iMac so people could get the fastest processor without it being tied to the largest display. But that would mean giving buyers a choice.
 
Just put the damn thing in a SFF case...many of us want the specs of these top of the line iMacs but don't want the monitor (since we have one) and don't need the expandability of a MacPro except the video card.

So tired of them missing the mid/high end user.
 
Man that was quick (the video). Seeing it in action really gets the point across, those SSD's are bloody fast.

I will want an SSD as my boot drive on the next new machine I get now - didn't know I needed one till watching that. Wow.
 
Mine arrives tomorrow. It's replacing a 2007 Mac Pro and 30" cinema display. I am wondering how to migrate as I only want apps on the SSD and data on the HDD.
 
I must say I am very impressed by this video although why do you need that much speed.

I feel like when you need that much speed it is time to take a break. :D
 
wiz329 said:
Price isn't in the picture at all. You can "fairly" compare an imac and a mac pro, even if the price points are completely different. But if you're going to, you should at least put the same drive in both of them. Or, if you're looking to find the "fastest mac ever", at least put the best BTO configs possible in both of them.
Click to expand...

I see what you're saying, but for the vast majority of users, price is always an issue.

BTW, in the interest of fairness and all, should we even be comparing a six-core Mac Pro to a four-core imac?
 
Ryth said:
Just put the damn thing in a SFF case...many of us want the specs of these top of the line iMacs but don't want the monitor (since we have one) and don't need the expandability of a MacPro except the video card.

So tired of them missing the mid/high end user.
Click to expand...

Tell me about it. We all know Apple sees the market, but just wants to push us to the un-expandable iMac or server toting Mac Pro.

Cavepainter said:
I see what you're saying, but for the vast majority of users, price is always an issue.

BTW, in the interest of fairness and all, should we even be comparing a six-core Mac Pro to a four-core imac?
Click to expand...

Sure, we can compare them as long as it's based on single threaded apps or apps that won't use more than two cores. A majority of the everyday apps we use don't use that much power. Those apps that do, tend to be far into the high end (sorry folks, Final Cut isn't far into the high end) and truly do benefit from having 4 or more cores with hyper threading.

An iMac makes a fantastic video editing rig on the cheap. it's just a PITA to repair the thing.
 
It was pointed out repeatedly that the headline is flat out false. And yet MR never bothered to correct it? Sad.
 
Hackintosh beats the imacs in cpu speed=i7 2600k overclocked
graphics= latest 6000 series amd graphics
and ssds

Apple needs to stop with the all in ones(imacs) and give us a mid range desktop.
How many times does it have to be said!
 
Since January 2010 ive had dual Intel X-25m G2 160gb SSD's running as Raid 0 in my 27" i7 iMac - it doesn't quite have the grunt of the new i7's iMacs but day to day its still faster than this with the stock SSD in.

The Intels are still fantastic 18 months later...being an early adopter rocks sometimes, 18 months of an insane Raid 0 system and people are still blow away but something not quite as good...I think my system will be impressive for another 3-4 years yet but i'll probably upgrade it as soon as the new iMac design is released...:apple:
 
My 27" i3 iMac is just as fast opening the same programs with an aftermarket intel 80GB SSD, AND I have stuff in iPhoto and iMovie it needs to load as well. SSD really does transform any machine into a beast!

On a side note, my i3 with the SSD does start up from a cold start and loads ALL programs in under 90 seconds.....including Aperture, ALL Adobe CS3 programs (Photoshop, Dreamweaver, Illustrator, Flash, InDesign, Premier, AfterEffects, etc.), and also the Final Cut Studio suite (Final Cut, Soundtrack Pro, Compressor, etc.).

Anyone on the fence about upgrading to SSD, I highly recommend it. I changed the root directory to point to my external 2TB FireWire 800 drive so only the OS and programs are on the SSD, but the entire User folder points to the external.
 
iBug2 said:
iMac would still win on non-parallel tasks. It has a newer generation CPU +chipset with higher clockspeed. Not to mention Mac Pro's lack of SATA III. So iMac will provide much faster SSD results as long as the SSD used is appropriate, which in this case is an Apple SSD so it isn't though.
Click to expand...

hmmm, maybe.

But, I know for a fact my mac 6 core is faster than this iMac and any Mac out there.

3.7 Ghz 6 core, 24 GB 1600 mhz Ram, SSD SATA III. hmm :)

(gotta love hackintosh)
 
mattbatt said:
hmmm, maybe.

But, I know for a fact my mac 6 core is faster than this iMac and any Mac out there.

3.7 Ghz 6 core, 24 GB 1600 mhz Ram, SSD SATA III. hmm :)

(gotta love hackintosh)
Click to expand...

iMac is still faster in single-threaded tasks and 12-core Mac Pro would be faster in multi-threaded tasks.
 
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
Back