Apple's New Mac Pro Begins Showing Up in Benchmarks

[Snowshiro]

We chatted with John Poole of Primate Labs, who highlighted the substantial improvements in many single-core measures and in memory performance, suggesting that lower multi-core scores later in the Integer Performance testing run could be indicative of thermal issues.

If this is true, and they can't fix it, which could be difficult if it's a fundamental design issue, then it's a serious problem. Essentially what he's saying is, the test scores didn't hold up as you might expect as the different multicore integer tests ran, suggesting that when the machine is being hammered it starts to overheat and the processor throttles itself back to protect the hardware - hence the scores start to dip.

I hope this proves to be unfounded, otherwise I'd be tempted to go down the 2012 refurb route with that nice roomy case for expansion options.

 

[Mr. Retrofire]

Yes, and "if" Apple can optimize all their pro software (Final cut, Logic ect.) to take full advantage of these GPU's, it could push them out front in these segments. Interesting to see how this plays out.

Final Cut Pro X uses already OpenCL, and some Adobe apps.

 

[tony3d]

God wait till Phil Schiller wakes up, and see's this!

 

[MacVidCards]

God wait till Phil Schiller wakes up, and see's this!

He'll just "innovate" his way through a second stack of waffles.

 

[tony3d]

he'll just "innovate" his way through a second stack of waffles.

lol!

 

[mac666er]

My scores have improved since last time I posted them.

The New Mac Pro reminds me of the old SGI workstations, specially this one:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SGI_O2

However, I will say this. I like where the Mac Pro is headed, I think a 2-processor mac should be offered by Apple, as GPU software is just not here yet. Note that the above sentence is meant to say I am of the belief that Apple should not left Pros stranded for multi CPU power computing again and should include them in the catalog, whether they even bother to try offering one we will have to see.

I will probably not jump in on the 1st generation, just to wait out for Apple to iron out all the kinks (remember how the Mac Pro G5 was liquid cooled and used to leak? at least for some people after heavy usage...).

Now, my biggest gripe is that the old Mac Pros just have 2 6-pin PCIE connectors. If the new Mac Pro has 2 high-end workstation class cards, I would think it is safe to say that somehow, they would each get a 1 6-pin and 1 8-pin PCIE connector. Now, this is nowhere mentioned so far, but, I will keep my fingers crossed. This could mean a Titan could be fitted in there without the regular heat sink? I am exited until someone tries to tinker with one as I would like to see what happens!

 

[SvenSvenson]

are you speaking for multiple people now? if you don't see the difference between 1 cpu and 2, I don't know what more to tell you.

You understand the relationship between 'CPU's and 'Core's right? So you understand that 12 cores in 1 CPU and 12 cores over 2 CPUs is impressive engineering, and in terms of processing power potentially a deal, as you can swap each of your CPUs to give twice the number of cores and twice the in power. However, if you now halved the number of CPUs you can install, then your total CPU power won't have increased by much - that's the problem.

If the new Mac Pro supported some new unlta-low power single-core Xeon, but allowed you to install 12 of them - still 12 cores, still very little difference to the end user.

It does seem strange that Apple have decided to not increase CPU power by any significant margin (~10%), but these 12 cores will give you 24 threads and maybe there's little advantage in going to 48 threads, and the real gains are to be seen in the utilisation of the GPUs. But again, people have stated that the old MP could also utilise these GPUs were it not for fairly arbitrarily imposed restrictions.

If your reply to this is "But it's 1 CPU! 1CPU!!!!!" - yeah - I got that.

 

[RAPTORSKI]

At this point I think it's important to keep in mind Apple has not revealed the finished product and final specs of this machine. Who knows whether this is final specs, a test version, or whatever.

Regardless, I am sure will do fine with the Mac Pro. The new design is sleek, small, yet more powerful than the previous generation computers. It is the future of the desktop computer.

Would be interesting to see some prices though, that's for sure!

 

[tony3d]

At this point I think it's important to keep in mind Apple has not revealed the finished product and final specs of this machine. Who knows whether this is final specs, a test version, or whatever.

Regardless, I am sure will do fine with the Mac Pro. The new design is sleek, small, yet more powerful than the previous generation computers. It is the future of the desktop computer.

Would be interesting to see some prices though, that's for sure!

It's the future of the Apple desktop computer. Can't see HP, or Dell doing this. Apple would like to have you believe otherwise!

 

[ChrisA]

So we waited 1500 days for an 8% boost.

No. The CPU does not really matter unless your current Mac Pro has the CPU pegged at 100% all the time. This new MP will be much faster because of the FLASH storage and the GPUs

 

[Wreckem]

At this point I think it's important to keep in mind Apple has not revealed the finished product and final specs of this machine. Who knows whether this is final specs, a test version, or whatever.

Regardless, I am sure will do fine with the Mac Pro. The new design is sleek, small, yet more powerful than the previous generation computers. It is the future of the desktop computer.

Would be interesting to see some prices though, that's for sure!

Its not anywhere near final. Nor is OSX Mavericks near final. People are basing opinions on incomplete data from a limited sample size of 1.

 

[Inconsequential]

No. The CPU does not really matter unless your current Mac Pro has the CPU pegged at 100% all the time. This new MP will be much faster because of the FLASH storage and the GPUs

What like the flash storage I currently have in my Mac Pro?

The GPUs will only help in situations that make use of them.

For Lightroom or any other app which doesn't then this isn't much faster.

Although it should be much quicker in single threaded perf.

 

[tony3d]

No. The CPU does not really matter unless your current Mac Pro has the CPU pegged at 100% all the time. This new MP will be much faster because of the FLASH storage and the GPUs

It matters if your doing 3D rendering! Give me 24 core, and I'll be happy.

 

[RAPTORSKI]

It's the future of the Apple desktop computer. Can't see HP, or Dell doing this. Apple would like to have you believe otherwise!

Well if HP and Dell just keep selling their plain old box PCs, the only way they will go is down. This is about the most innovative damn desktop computer I've seen in ages.

 

[portishead]

You understand the relationship between 'CPU's and 'Core's right? So you understand that 12 cores in 1 CPU and 12 cores over 2 CPUs is impressive engineering, and in terms of processing power potentially a deal, as you can swap each of your CPUs to give twice the number of cores and twice the in power. However, if you now halved the number of CPUs you can install, then your total CPU power won't have increased by much - that's the problem.

If the new Mac Pro supported some new unlta-low power single-core Xeon, but allowed you to install 12 of them - still 12 cores, still very little difference to the end user.

It does seem strange that Apple have decided to not increase CPU power by any significant margin (~10%), but these 12 cores will give you 24 threads and maybe there's little advantage in going to 48 threads, and the real gains are to be seen in the utilisation of the GPUs. But again, people have stated that the old MP could also utilise these GPUs were it not for fairly arbitrarily imposed restrictions.

If your reply to this is "But it's 1 CPU! 1CPU!!!!!" - yeah - I got that.

You are actually arguing my point. I think.

----------

It matters if your doing 3D rendering! Give me 24 core, and I'll be happy.

If you just need powerful rendering, buy 2 and use Thunderbolt over IP. Problem solved. You don't need 1 ultra super fast machine when you can split the work over several machines.

 

[Colpeas]

well, at least they could have kept dual-cpu option...

 

[Walter White]

Whatever I want running Windows or Linux (or Apple OSX if I want to Hackintosh).

But honestly, this is one of the most asinine comments that I've ever seen on MacRumours. Give yourself a gold star.

All your comments are hater-mode asinine, so no loss here.

 

[Lancer]

Nope, top of the line.

I would have expected higher numbers, maybe we're missing something?

The entry level machines should really help sell Minis and iPads.

Not looking at buying a new Mac Pro as I have a new 27" iMac but will be getting an iPad soon, when they next update them.

 

[donutbagel]

removed

 

[Wreckem]

You are actually arguing my point. I think.

----------



If you just need powerful rendering, buy 2 and use Thunderbolt over IP. Problem solved. You don't need 1 ultra super fast machine when you can split the work over several machines.

Yeah I have never understood a person who does rendering(anything more than a small amount) solely on their main machine as its horribly inefficient in terms of workflow and productivity.

 

[donutbagel]

All your comments are hater-mode asinine, so no loss here.

Not all, but some. iGrip in his friends list says a lot.

 

[Walter White]

Not all, but some. iGrip in his friends list says a lot.

Some or most?

 

[roblin]

My 2008 is till kicking I guess. I feel a bit "after" still using a 2008 comp as my main computer, but damn it was good value back then... Hope this 2013 model will be the same good value as the 2008, then I might upgrade, otherwise I will probably keep the 2008 for a few more years and then get an iMac.

 

[hagar]

It’s astounding how many reactions are ignoring the fact that Mavericks is still in beta. If there’s anything that has an incredible effect on performance, it’s beta software.

Not everything is about the hardware, software optimisations are just as (if not more) important.

So, relax and wait...

 

[portishead]

Yeah I have never understood a person who does rendering(anything more than a small amount) solely on their main machine as its horribly inefficient in terms of workflow and productivity.

I mean, if you're working from home and only have 1 machine, fine, you can render overnight. But if you work at a business they will hopefully have a a farm setup for you to render to. Or at least another machine so you can keep working. Or maybe you need a nice excuse for a long lunch.