Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple's New Mac Pro Begins Showing Up in Benchmarks
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
One factor that will substantially increase the "real world speed" far more than these posts indicate, is the PCIe SSD system. This is RAMDISC on steroids. That alone will about double the experienced speed for "some uses". The unified 12 core will increase speed for others. The very substantially increased I/O of TB2 will massively improve yet others. The substantially larger and more integrated graphics still another. Taken together this is a huge overall speed and CAPACITY update. The fact it will take months to arrive is frustrating, but between Intel CPU's and Intel TB2's and the graphics chips, it will certainly be worth the wait. The other "PC" vendors have to wait too.
Rocketman
Rocketman
I'm just gonna sit this one out and let you guys figure it out.
Meet me in the Mac Pro forum when this is finally released!How the hell could anyone be "disappointed" when the Mac Pro is clearly months away from official release? you might still be disappointed, but at least wait till then to make that decision.
Pretty much wishful thinking. PCI based is faster yes. RAMDISK speed? No freakin way. Already seen the fastest things going and they are at 1300MB/s. Of which you will feel pretty much zero over a Samsung 840 as a boot drive as the NAND and controllers still can't get 300MB/s in random 4K writes which is what a boot disk uses 80% of the time. And if I am not mistaken the nMP solution is for the boot drive. It is fancy marketing fluff right now. If you have another PCI based solution and transfer sequential data to and from it then you will fell a great speed up. Otherwise you'll go as slow as the slowest disk you are using. It's like having that 300Mb fibre uplink to the net that serves you at no more than 30Mb. Thanks. I overpaid
Sandy bridge was a huge step up from Westmere. The fact that this thing has thermal throttling issues as well means that this thing will be useless for rendering. This whole machine is a joke to any real pro and it doesn't appeal to consumers either. The only people it appeals to are snobs that wanna say they have the most expensive mac.
Well, Intel x86 CPU technology seems maxed out and Itanium is long dead, but IBM has been moving along pretty nicely with POWER.
Apple obviously clawed back a lot of market share with the ability to dual boot Windows after switching to Intel and a lot of critical high-end professional software is still Windows only, but one does have to wonder what sort of high-end Mac could be built these days with IBM chips. It's not as though running OS X on POWER has never been done before...
Is there proof that -EP has the same issues and is using the same components a year later with nothing learned? Just wondering why they would not have fixed it as consumer Ivy was easy to fix.
Oh puh-leaze... Quit jumping to conclusions without seeing the final product with a non-beta version of Mavericks.
When is the last time you looked up information on Power/PowerPC? Your information is outdated. From what I understand they laid off the majority of their design and support people in the power group a week or so ago. They are also shopping around their Server group with Lenovo being the likely purchaser.
Intel's x86 tech isn't maxed out, they have just chosen to focus on power consumption/efficiency/performance per watt over raw power.
Last edited:
So we waited 1500 days for an 8% boost.
Now we know why the wait was so long. If it had been a current generation Xeon with only 10 cores max per chip, this thing would be a downgrade from the current tower.
It's a Mac Mini Pro. So what if it's a bit slower - it's smaller! That's what pros hated about the Mac Pro tower, it was too big, lol!
And so, of course we do!
Remember, this is SUPPOSE to be a rumor site after all, and we should be encouraged to rumormonger!
I'm not in front of my Mac Pro atm, but I wonder if you measured up from the base of the unit 8" or so, would that be the same stuff that's in the new Pro sans the expansion?
IF the GPU is the real killer here this Mac Pro will do to bitcoin mining what the one man drill (the widowmaker) did to Hardrock mining.
I hate to say it, but this thing is a joke compared to other workstations on the market. Dell and HP have machines scoring 40,000+ on Geekbench. And only 4 memory slots? Many other workstations have 16. I either spend a fortune with 16 or 32GB sticks, or am limited to 32 GB in 8 GB sticks. Pair that with special graphics cards, a lack of an optical drive, and a slew of other limiting factors, and this thing begins to look more and more like a toy for people who think they need a Mac Pro, but really don't. It'll be fine for basic design, but not too ideal outside of that.
Sure, I can buy a bunch of crap to hang off of it with Thunderbolt, but it's a shame that Apple relies on outside manufacturers to make their product what it should have been to begin with. And not to mention all of the added cost.
The only thing better about this from PC workstations is that it's a Mac.
Sure, I can buy a bunch of crap to hang off of it with Thunderbolt, but it's a shame that Apple relies on outside manufacturers to make their product what it should have been to begin with. And not to mention all of the added cost.
The only thing better about this from PC workstations is that it's a Mac.
Got it... You hate the new not-yet-released Mac Pro with specs that are not yet finalized and an OS that is still in beta. You want a Dell, so go get one. There is no need to be so angry!
Well, even so, there's no getting around the fact that the CPU performance improvements seem to be around 10%, at best, which is kind-of underwhelming TBH. That said, the benchmark could be bogus, or run on an unfinished, unoptimized hardware.
You do realize the ability to do dual CPUs with Hackintosh is EXTREMELY limited right? Its possible, but your are most definitely limited on part selection.
I do seem to recall someone making a Dual E5 2690 hackintosh that only scored ~10000 in Geekbench on OSX while doing ~40000 in Geekbench in Win7.
So if I had to guess, the ~23000 figure is low and sounds like OSX isn't fully optimized for the processors quite yet.
Last edited:
So we waited 1500 days for an 8% boost.
An 8% boost doesn't seem much until you also take PRICE into consideration. The 12-core 3.06 Mac Pro costs over $6K. So if we can get a slightly faster machine, for perhaps ⅓ of the price, that would certainly be great progress and quite amazing.
I really hope they can keep the price of the new base version Mac Pro below $2K.
Nobody knows... including you! But that really doesn't matter to you, right? You will be a hater no matter what. As for me, I am reserving judgement until I see the shipping product in real-world situations.
This is so rich. A few weeks ago I just expanded my 2009 Mac Pro with a "legacy" GTX 680.
I'm going to need popcorn to watch the mental acrobatics of the fanbois apologizing for this second attempt at the failed PMG4 Cube.
It's not hard to understand if you add a 2nd proc then it would be just as fast. It is just an option you would rather avoid as you need more power, presumably. It is not a joke it's just not the fastest personal computer anymore. It is exactly half that. Apparently Apple thinks everything will be GPGPU and they may be closer to right. But I am still waiting on decent multithreading across the board.
They're going to re-formulate, more sugar to the mix.
It's good to know that you can still take a 2009 MP, toss some $$$$ at it and end up with something equal to or better than those numbers we just saw.
I think the "Thermal Issues" just means they need to install a larger fan.
Then for the mid-year refresh they can add a HEPA filter, a beater bar, and a few attachments and you can actually clean your studio while it renders. Using their new "bag less" tech, you just open her up, dump the junk, and continue rendering/cleaning.
The xMac was supposed to be expandable in the same way the (old) Mac Pro was expandable. Most notably with a replaceable graphics card and PCI, just not as many PCI and SATA bays as the (old) MacPro had.
The "Mac Semi-pro" is more like a Mac Mini with a much better processor and graphics and more ports.
You got me curious with that one, so I looked it up. Sounds huge.
Two things stand out about it;
-with a greater than order of magnitude advantage in RAM speed and with a huge reduction in power usage, those who don't have this technology might as well be competing with vacuum tubes and magnetic core memory,
-Intel doesn't have it. For some reason they seem to have dropped out. If they don't have some way to take advantage of it or something equal to it, Apple really will have to dust off their PPC code...
If this really is finally the death of x86, OS X might have a serious time-to-market advantage over Windows though given Apple's PPC heritage.