Mac pro is gonna be FAST

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ace134blue

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Sep 17, 2009
733
2
So i just ordered another 6gb pack of ram (total of 12gb) for my mac pro 2.26 octo-core, two 20,000 rpm SAS drives, a raid card, and 1 X-25M 160 gb SSD. The sas drives are going to be for the OS and the X-25 for the apps. I just found that that i had my vista partition on a 1.5gb/s 4800 rpm sata drive(I know, i dont know why i didnt check to see how fast it was). Anyone think it will make a world of difference in crysis or was it just a waist of money? Also, anyone know the amount of ram it takes to completely turn of swap files?

Oh and its going to be in raid1
 

gauchogolfer

macrumors 603
Jan 28, 2005
5,556
5
American Riviera
Nope, just curious to see if an ssd actually makes a difference in gaming. :p
I'm going to say that you probably won't see a lot of difference. Is there really that much HD access during gameplay? I think you'd be able to figure this out for yourself by monitoring how much your current system is hitting the HD during play.
 

Ace134blue

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Sep 17, 2009
733
2
I'm going to say that you probably won't see a lot of difference. Is there really that much HD access during gameplay? I think you'd be able to figure this out for yourself by monitoring how much your current system is hitting the HD during play.
Well as you could see i was using a 1.5gbs HD and ing-game there was a bunch of stuttering. I saw on intels website someone that upgraded to an x-25 from a raptor and it nearly doubled the frames. Do you think that its bogus?
 

ManiG

macrumors member
Aug 11, 2009
44
0
i am mystified as to why you would not put the OS on the SSD ...

either way, enjoy your new machine!

Well as you could see i was using a 1.5gbs HD and ing-game there was a bunch of stuttering. I saw on intels website someone that upgraded to an x-25 from a raptor and it nearly doubled the frames. Do you think that its bogus?
i've experienced frequent stuttering while playing crysis, as it dynamically loads in level content as you move from one location to another. at the time, i only had 3g of RAM though, which was probably the main cause. still, an SSD would definitely help improve gameplay in these situations. most of the time though, the real difference will be non-gameplay related (starting the game up, loading levels).
 

Ace134blue

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Sep 17, 2009
733
2
i am mystified as to why you would not put the OS on the SSD ...

either way, enjoy your new machine!
Well theres two os's snow leopard and Vista. Right?

i am mystified as to why you would not put the OS on the SSD ...

either way, enjoy your new machine!
Ohh and the game has the most disk activity.
 

Abidubi

macrumors 6502
Feb 13, 2009
329
0
Montreal
I saw on intels website someone that upgraded to an x-25 from a raptor and it nearly doubled the frames.
Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! Those idiots crack me up. Faster HD access wont give you even 1 more FPS. If you have enough RAM, in 5 hours of playing your HD should be sleeping for the last 4.5 hours. Once all the textures etc are in video memory or RAM there is nothing left for the HD to do. FYI, windows 7 reports that my 512MB 4870 has 3GB of video ram... 2.5GB of it is shared RAM.

I can max the details in any game and while the FPS might drop, the HD remains silent the whole time dispite the measly amount of VRAM. That goes for any game, Crysis and ArmA2 specifically which have the most textures I know of.

And if you wanted good gaming performance, the 2.26 was to put it bluntly, a stupid choice. The max any game uses is 2 cores, and clocks count most (as well as architecture).

i've experienced frequent stuttering while playing crysis, as it dynamically loads in level content as you move from one location to another. at the time, i only had 3g of RAM though, which was probably the main cause. still, an SSD would definitely help improve gameplay in these situations. most of the time though, the real difference will be non-gameplay related (starting the game up, loading levels).
3GB + of RAM is in use when running Crysis, so yes thats why. Also if you are running 32-bit Vista/Windows 7 that screws you big time since it will only ever use 2GB.
 

alphaod

macrumors Core
Feb 9, 2008
22,047
1,104
NYC
So i just ordered another 6gb pack of ram (total of 12gb) for my mac pro 2.26 octo-core, two 20,000 rpm SAS drives, a raid card, and 1 X-25M 160 gb SSD. The sas drives are going to be for the OS and the X-25 for the apps. I just found that that i had my vista partition on a 1.5gb/s 4800 rpm sata drive(I know, i dont know why i didnt check to see how fast it was). Anyone think it will make a world of difference in crysis or was it just a waist of money? Also, anyone know the amount of ram it takes to completely turn of swap files?

Oh and its going to be in raid1
Where the heck did you get a 20,000 RPM SAS drive? :confused:
 

seisend

macrumors 6502a
Feb 20, 2009
506
0
Switzerland
I think you can only expect faster loadtimes with faster harddrives. But not more FPS ... I got my Windows partition on a standart WD Caviar 640GB Apple harddrive and my crysis levels are loading in 10-15 sec. ...
 

nanofrog

macrumors G4
May 6, 2008
11,718
2
Where the heck did you get a 20,000 RPM SAS drive? :confused:
There isn't a 20k rpm SAS unit out, or announced. I even checked Seagate, Fujitsu and Hitachi to be sure.

The only press release is for a 20k rpm drive, is a WD Raptor (SATA).
 

CountBrass

macrumors regular
Mar 17, 2009
114
0
So i just ordered another 6gb pack of ram (total of 12gb) for my mac pro 2.26 octo-core, two 20,000 rpm SAS drives, a raid card, and 1 X-25M 160 gb SSD./QUOTE]

- The 2.26 comes with 6x1GB of memory so I'm wondering where you'll find the slots to put the extra 6GB that you just bought...

- Can you link the "20,000 rpm SAS drives" you're buying, or at least give the make and model number?

Am I alone in thinking "epeen troll"?
 

jjahshik32

macrumors 603
Sep 4, 2006
5,259
1
I've had a intel x25-m before and for gaming it wasnt really that big of a difference. The only difference you'd see is the loading time being 5-8 seconds faster than a regular 7200rpm hdd. Other than that gameplay and all is about the same.

However the SSD drive made the biggest difference when using it as the main drive to run the os. Apps launched very fast and almost instantaneously.

But if you bought an SSD drive purely for gaming, I think its a waste of money. I'd stick in a regular hdd that has a bigger space and use it to install windows to run games. Just use the SSD as your main osx boot drive.

Yep... OP is in for a surprise. LOL.
LOL! Thats why I ordered a 4x4GB so that I can stick another 4x4GB sometime next year for a total of 32GB of RAM. :)

Crappy part is that the stock 1GB RAM that came with the mac pro cannot be paired with the current 4GB modules. Seems like a waste.
 

ReanimationLP

macrumors 68030
Jan 8, 2005
2,765
25
On the moon.
I can assure you, it really makes no difference in Crysis.

Machine in my sig, first it was loaded on a 400GB 7200RPM 16MB Cache Seagate ATA/100 drive. 45-60 FPS, High, 1920x1200.

Then loaded on dual 250GB 7200RPM 16MB Cache SATA/300 drives in RAID 0.
46-63 FPS, High, 1920x1200.

1-3 FPS is not really worth it.

You're going to need some kind of mounting thing for that X-25M, otherwise it will be just dangling there and you could damage your machine.

BTW, I've never seen a 20,000 RPM SAS drive. Linkplz.

I hope you bought 12GB of RAM, otherwise you will only end up with 11GB at best. (5x1GB, 3x2GB)
 

whooleytoo

macrumors 604
Aug 2, 2002
6,559
628
Cork, Ireland.
i've experienced frequent stuttering while playing crysis, as it dynamically loads in level content as you move from one location to another. at the time, i only had 3g of RAM though, which was probably the main cause. still, an SSD would definitely help improve gameplay in these situations. most of the time though, the real difference will be non-gameplay related (starting the game up, loading levels).
Ah, that's key info.

In a lot of free roaming games, the content is constantly being loaded as the character moves around. Personally, I reckon these games also add a hell of a lot of wear 'n' tear onto hard drives/DVD drives on the systems they're being played on (the drive on my 360 failed after playing Oblivion & Crackdown quite a bit; both games mentioned almost always when googling 360 drive failures).

In that case, the SSD drive performance will be very relevant during the game - though not as important as CPU, graphics card, bus etc.. Your hard drive is fast anyway, so the difference between that and the SSD may not be huge. It'll also mean the game will be quieter. Nothing draws attention to performance stutters more than having a lot 'crunch' as the hard drive starts reading like crazy.

i am mystified as to why you would not put the OS on the SSD ...

either way, enjoy your new machine!
One theory why you might not want to - if the OS is on the SSD, then presumably so will the virtual memory swap file. SSDs have (relatively) limited read-write cycles, so you might not want to put large files which are being constantly read/written on it?
 

alphaod

macrumors Core
Feb 9, 2008
22,047
1,104
NYC
There isn't a 20k rpm SAS unit out, or announced. I even checked Seagate, Fujitsu and Hitachi to be sure.

The only press release is for a 20k rpm drive, is a WD Raptor (SATA).
I just hope the OP isn't taking 2 10K RPM SAS drives, adding them in RAID 0 and calling it 1 20K RPM drive :eek:
 

Ace134blue

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Sep 17, 2009
733
2
Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! Those idiots crack me up. Faster HD access wont give you even 1 more FPS. If you have enough RAM, in 5 hours of playing your HD should be sleeping for the last 4.5 hours. Once all the textures etc are in video memory or RAM there is nothing left for the HD to do. FYI, windows 7 reports that my 512MB 4870 has 3GB of video ram... 2.5GB of it is shared RAM.

I can max the details in any game and while the FPS might drop, the HD remains silent the whole time dispite the measly amount of VRAM. That goes for any game, Crysis and ArmA2 specifically which have the most textures I know of.

And if you wanted good gaming performance, the 2.26 was to put it bluntly, a stupid choice. The max any game uses is 2 cores, and clocks count most (as well as architecture).
Wait a few years xD. Besides i plan on putting a couple of i7s in it

3GB + of RAM is in use when running Crysis, so yes thats why. Also if you are running 32-bit Vista/Windows 7 that screws you big time since it will only ever use 2GB.
Its Vista ultimate 64-bit

Where the heck did you get a 20,000 RPM SAS drive? :confused:
xD. CDW( like new egg)

Yep... OP is in for a surprise. LOL.
DOnt worry. i got 3x2gb sticks.

So i just ordered another 6gb pack of ram (total of 12gb) for my mac pro 2.26 octo-core, two 20,000 rpm SAS drives, a raid card, and 1 X-25M 160 gb SSD./QUOTE]

- The 2.26 comes with 6x1GB of memory so I'm wondering where you'll find the slots to put the extra 6GB that you just bought...

- Can you link the "20,000 rpm SAS drives" you're buying, or at least give the make and model number?

Am I alone in thinking "epeen troll"?
Its 3x2gn sticks. I will post link later today
 

Shivetya

macrumors 68000
Jan 16, 2008
1,543
223
So i just ordered another 6gb pack of ram (total of 12gb) for my mac pro 2.26 octo-core, two 20,000 rpm SAS drives, a raid card, and 1 X-25M 160 gb SSD. The sas drives are going to be for the OS and the X-25 for the apps. I just found that that i had my vista partition on a 1.5gb/s 4800 rpm sata drive(I know, i dont know why i didnt check to see how fast it was). Anyone think it will make a world of difference in crysis or was it just a waist of money? Also, anyone know the amount of ram it takes to completely turn of swap files?

Oh and its going to be in raid1
All that for a game?
 

CaptainChunk

macrumors 68020
Apr 16, 2008
2,142
6
Phoenix, AZ
Two two biggest contributors to actual performance in games (FPS-wise) will almost always be CPU and GPU. Even modern games rarely use more than 4GB of RAM while running.

The only real difference you might see with a faster hard drive or SSD will be in load times, perhaps.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.