Fastest Mac Pro on Earth

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by 300Billion, Jan 7, 2011.

  1. 300Billion macrumors newbie

    300Billion

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2011
    #1
    Hello all,

    I wanted to share my hardware config and see if anyone has done this as well.

    I just bought a MAC PRO base model.

    I added 8GB RAM
    I added 2 60GB SSD's drives and RAID0 them together
    I use the included 1TB drive for my data
    I added a 2TB Drive for Time Machine.

    The result is ridiculous - its boots in 12 seconds and you name it, it does it fast - I mean fast.

    I write this post because I dont see anyone else doing this?
    I see lots of you spending extra money for the 3.33Westmere or dual CPU's or adding 4 7200RPM drives and raiding that way.

    Am I missing something?
     
  2. DoFoT9 macrumors P6

    DoFoT9

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2007
    Location:
    Singapore
    #2
    that sounds like a very good machine!

    you should post some pictures :)

    the 2x60GB SSDs isnt really the fastest configuration you can get, but its mighty quick!
     
  3. 300Billion thread starter macrumors newbie

    300Billion

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2011
    #3
    2x60GB SSD mind you they each read/write 270/280 Striped in RAID0 is the speed part.
    I did that do i could best use the other 2 slots for data and then backup without worry about failing drives etc.
    I still have an external 1TB drive that I keep in the safe

    anyone else have simular hardware they want to share?
     
  4. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #4
    Depends what kind of speed you need. Faster CPU provides more number crushing power so a 12-core Mac Pro would run circles around your Mac Pro in encoding or rendering tasks for instance. Faster GPU will help with graphics intensive apps like gaming though it might help with video editing and 3D stuff as well (especially if OpenCL or CUDA is supported).

    SSDs or other fast storage only help when disk access is needed, i.e. in booting and app launching mainly. It doesn't help when raw processing power is needed
     
  5. DoFoT9 macrumors P6

    DoFoT9

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2007
    Location:
    Singapore
    #5
    its still not very fast compared to what you could get from other, more advanced configurations.
     
  6. 300Billion thread starter macrumors newbie

    300Billion

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2011
    #6
    Hi guys I completely agree with the 12core vs 8 or even 4 - RAW CPU power computes. the SSD's read/wite

    This 2.8Quad still does well for rendering but its the daily tasks and navigation, moving, loading data that I find (most of us) do all day and that takes so much time. With these SSD's in RAID0 it makes the daily use of this beast Xtimes more enjoyable and impressive

    I come from an iMac27 and the comparison is clear (must have a lot to do with the 1GB vid card for rendering)

    The SSD's improve over all performance of the MP just wondering if anyone else has tried similar configs and their feedback
     
  7. Sankersizzle macrumors 6502a

    Sankersizzle

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2010
    Location:
    Canadadada
    #7
    Is this really the fastest Mac Pro on earth? Because my MBP boots from dead cold to desktop in 11 or 12seconds. Gotta love 'em SSD's!
     
  8. 300Billion thread starter macrumors newbie

    300Billion

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2011
    #8
    not a notebook
     
  9. Sankersizzle macrumors 6502a

    Sankersizzle

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2010
    Location:
    Canadadada
    #9
    I understand. I was poking fun at how a Mac Pro should be faster than a MacBook Pro.
     
  10. DoFoT9 macrumors P6

    DoFoT9

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2007
    Location:
    Singapore
    #10
    he was being sarcastic i think ;)

    what do you use your MacPro for?
     
  11. 300Billion thread starter macrumors newbie

    300Billion

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2011
    #11
    Everything really
    Video Editing in FCExpress and iMovie
    Paralells for Windows so I can run CPU intensive applications not avail on MAC (stock market things)

    photoshop/fireworks editing huge pics

    so CPU power is important while moving stuff around is equally if not more important.

    no games
     
  12. DoFoT9 macrumors P6

    DoFoT9

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2007
    Location:
    Singapore
    #12
    wouldnt you want to use BootCamp for CPU intensive windows applications? because virtualisation software is not very good for power requirements.

    the SSDs in RAID0 do appear to be a good idea for you. nice choice.
     
  13. 300Billion thread starter macrumors newbie

    300Billion

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2011
    #13
    Oddly enough I have not considered bootcamp....
    Often I need to leave the WINDOWS system running for days to collect data (not crunching it) so If I had bootcamp its one or the other running not both.

    ye syou are right parallels is convenient but in no way a replacement
     
  14. DoFoT9 macrumors P6

    DoFoT9

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2007
    Location:
    Singapore
    #15
    thats the main thing, convenience, no need to reboot :D
     
  15. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
  16. DoFoT9 macrumors P6

    DoFoT9

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2007
    Location:
    Singapore
    #17
    HAHAHAHAH! funny.

    imagine with 4xRAID0 SSDs :D
     
  17. rrdiaz30 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2010
    Location:
    Austin TX
    #18

    Yeah buddy! All four of them in the lower optical bay with this! YUM.

    Rick
     
  18. Transporteur macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2008
    Location:
    UK
    #19
    You can easily put twenty SSD's in there and make a large striped array out of it, but the question is whether this this practical?

    In fact, the OS won't benefit much from a striped SSD array. It isn't really faster than with a single SSD.

    And at any rate, boot times to determine the speed of the machine? :confused:

    There are way to many parameters that affect the boot time. Amount of hard drives, extension cards, RAM, OS version...
     
  19. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #20
    You would only get ~660MB/s because that's the limitation of the chipset or something (I remember Nano saying this) :( So even if you added third SSD, you couldn't take full advantage of it and fourth one would be more or less useless in terms of performance. A RAID card or PCIe SATA card might solve the bottleneck though ;)
     
  20. DoFoT9 macrumors P6

    DoFoT9

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2007
    Location:
    Singapore
    #21
    correct, its a chipset/bus limitation. forgot about that :p

    RAID card would help, but even they have limitations.
     
  21. philipma1957 macrumors 603

    philipma1957

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2010
    Location:
    Howell, New Jersey
    #22
  22. Cindori macrumors 68040

    Cindori

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Location:
    Sweden
    #23
    A Mac Pro is not "the fastest one on earth" because you can load data from the disk relatively fast.

    "Fast" can also refer to computational power or graphical computational power.



    2x SSD's is not the fastest setup either, I believe PCI-E SSD's are way faster (and expensive)
     
  23. Transporteur macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2008
    Location:
    UK
    #24
    Not necessarily. OCZ has these drives available for about two years now and they're getting cheaper and cheaper. A 160GB RevoDrive X2 is about 550€ and is good for 740MB/s reads and 690MB/s writes.
    The only disadvantage of these drives is, they don't boot OS X. OCZ claimed to be working on that issue, though.
    Hopefully we will see some bootable PCIe SSD's soon. SATA 6.0Gb/s doesn't really cut it, software raiding SSD's in the Pro has too much limitations (throughput limit = limited amount of total drives), as does hardware raiding (no sleep support).
     
  24. DoFoT9 macrumors P6

    DoFoT9

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2007
    Location:
    Singapore
    #25
    this is the PCIe SSD you are after.

    1.4GB/s each way.
     

Share This Page