Mac Pro 6 core slower than i7 980x?

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by aquablue, Aug 14, 2010.

  1. aquablue macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2010
    #1
    Why is the W3680 Xeon processor in the new Mac Pro 6 core 3.33 so much slower on this benchmark (http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html) than the consumer i7 980x? In the real world, is this gap as pronounced as this? Is it because Xeon's are just slower overall due to their need to correct errors?
     
  2. TheBritishBloke macrumors 68030

    TheBritishBloke

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2009
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #2
    Xeons are server parts, not consumer parts.. And many CPU benchmarks only tesr so many cores.
     
  3. aquablue thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2010
    #3
    but the 980x has the same core number, no? Why is it so much faster than the Xeon?
     
  4. skiffx macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2008
    #4
    it also shows that Intel Xeon X5680 @ 3.33GHz is slower than Intel Xeon X5670 @ 2.93GHz which doesnt make sense.
     
  5. sboerup macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2009
    #5
    agreed, they have some splainin' to do.
     
  6. Umbongo macrumors 601

    Umbongo

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Location:
    England
    #6
    Don't rely on those numbers. They are on different hardware, there is no indication of what else was running during tests and the number of samples for Xeons is tiny compared to those of consumer parts.
     
  7. thagomizer macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 26, 2005
    Location:
    USA
    #7
    Although 980x and W3680 have same CPU performance, ECC RAM used by W3680 is 2 wait states slower than regular RAM used by the 980x, all other things being equal. And if they used registered ECC RAM it might be slower still.
     
  8. skiffx macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2008
    #8
    So why does apple bother using server tech which is slower instead of opting out for desktop chips/memory?
     
  9. Inconsequential macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2007
    #9
    Because stability is more important than out and out speed.

    It's a workstation, NOT a overclockers dream.

    Besides the performance difference of the CPUs are at max 1-2% from benchmarks i've seen, ECC vs non-ECC etc so that graph has ALOT of explaining to do.
     
  10. thagomizer macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 26, 2005
    Location:
    USA
    #10
    True. True.
     
  11. eponym macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2010
    #11
    LOL @ getting worked up over 1,500 Pts. in a synthetic test where one has hundreds of samples and the other a dozen. Not to mention a benchmark that makes not indication about hardware and overclocking.
     
  12. derbothaus macrumors 601

    derbothaus

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2010
    #12
  13. Chilz0r macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2007

Share This Page