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

Dual Core iMac vs. Eight Core Mac Pro

D

danielsamuels

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Oct 7, 2008
21
0
Hello,

I currently have a 24" iMac with a 2.8 Ghz Dual Core but I'm looking at buying a Mac Pro.

I have been looking at the 2.26 Ghz Dual Quad, will this be faster than the iMac? I'm not really all that hot on clock speed vs cores, could someone with the relevant knowledge inform me which is better?

Thanks!
 
As far as I am aware, all the current mac pros are faster than all imacs. The iMac uses laptop components where as the mac pro uses server/workstation components therefore the clock speeds are not directly comparable
 
I believe but am not sure, that if the application is single threaded the iMac is faster. I multi threaded mac pro.
 
Hello,

I've just made that jump: from an iMac 2.8 to a Nehalem Mac Pro (quad, 2.66). As I've written elsewhere (https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/712968/), I found a general 15% speed increase. Nothing earth shattering unless you have apps that specifically can make use of all the cores.

Maybe 10.6 will change all that, but I'm not expecting a drastic performance gain. Many many apps are by design single thread, and most of the multi-processor/core-aware apps can't make 100% use of the added cores.

For now, you can use this rule of thumb: clock speed (within the same processor family) is speed; more cores is speed in very specific situations.

But adding more ram, using a SSD boot drive, setting up a RAID0, etc... are things that will make the really huge differences between an iMac and your Mac Pro. A stock Mac Pro, regardless of the numbers of cores, will NOT be a night and day upgrade in terms of raw performance.

Loa
 
Loa said:
Hello,

I've just made that jump: from an iMac 2.8 to a Nehalem Mac Pro (quad, 2.66). As I've written elsewhere (https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/712968/), I found a general 15% speed increase. Nothing earth shattering unless you have apps that specifically can make use of all the cores.

Maybe 10.6 will change all that, but I'm not expecting a drastic performance gain. Many many apps are by design single thread, and most of the multi-processor/core-aware apps can't make 100% use of the added cores.

For now, you can use this rule of thumb: clock speed (within the same processor family) is speed; more cores is speed in very specific situations.

But adding more ram, using a SSD boot drive, setting up a RAID0, etc... are things that will make the really huge differences between an iMac and your Mac Pro. A stock Mac Pro, regardless of the numbers of cores, will NOT be a night and day upgrade in terms of raw performance.

Loa
Click to expand...
It's good to hear from someone who's actually done it, thanks!

I forgot to mention I'll be running dual 30" displays, which I think means I have to go with the Mac Pro, is that right?
 
danielsamuels said:
It's good to hear from someone who's actually done it, thanks!

I forgot to mention I'll be running dual 30" displays, which I think means I have to go with the Mac Pro, is that right?
Click to expand...

If you want to run 2 x 30" displays, a Mac Pro is your only option :p

However, the 2.8GHz will still be quicker at most tasks...
 
Nehalem > C2D clock for clock.

I would expect with Grand Central Dispatch now being used, you will start to see even more improvements with the Mac Pro and Snow Leopard.
 
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