Mac Pro "Sandy Bridge-E" Performance Analysis

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by Amethyst, Sep 11, 2011.

  1. Amethyst, Sep 11, 2011
    Last edited: Sep 11, 2011

    Amethyst macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2006
    #1
    This is only my opinion about Mac Pro Single Processor "Sandy Bridge-E".

    Assume:
    1.) Next SP Mac Pro will use this line up.
    3.6 Quad Core Xeon E5-1620
    3.2 6 Core Xeon E5-1650
    3.3 6 Core Xeon E5-1660

    2.) Sandy Bridge-E and Sandy Bridge have identical clock-byclock performance but different on Memory , I/O Speed and etc.

    Evidence:
    [1] http://www.barefeats.com
    [2] http://hwbot.org/blog/wp-content//sandybridgee-results.jpg
    [3] http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/di..._Boost_Performance_by_Up_to_65_Estimates.html

    Analysis:
    - E5-1620 will be faster than i7-2600K ~ 5-6% on both Multi-Threads and Single-Threads according to it's faster clock
    - E5-1620 will be faster than Xeon W3680 ~ 10-15% on Single-Threads and On-the-par on Multi-Threads according to iMac Testing + 5% that E5-1620 faster than i7-2600K [1]
    - E5-1650 faster than Xeon W3680 ~ 4-5% on Single-Threads and ~5-10% on Multi-Threads according on [2]
    - E5-1660 faster than Xeon W3680 ~ 8-12% on Single-Threads and ~10-15% on Multi-Threads according on [3]
    - E5-1620 will be faster than E5-1650 ~ 4-5% On Single-Threads and ~15-18% Slower Than E5-1650 on Multi-Threads according to it's faster clock.
    - E5-1620 will have same speed with E5-1660 On Single-Threads and ~20-25% Slower Than E5-1660 on Multi-Threads according to it's equal turbo boost.

    My Bottom Line:
    1) Mac Pro vs iMac : If you consider to buy an iMac or Mac Pro. Next Entry-Level Mac Pro will 5-6% faster than Top-of-the-line iMac.
    2) WAIT For Entry-Level Mac Pro Buyer : You will get ~20-30% Performance boost with 3.6GHz Quad Mac pro. (VS. 2011 2.8GHz Quad Mac pro) and on-the-par with 6Core 3.3GHz Mac Pro in Multi-Threads situation.
    3) For 6-Core Mac Pro : If My Assumption are true you will be get 6 Core system much cheaper.
     
  2. Tanax macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2011
    Location:
    Stockholm, Sweden
    #2
    I love numbers.
    These types of speculations are so awesome and I can't wait to see the new Mac Pro's!
     
  3. Inconsequential macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2007
    #3
    If the E5-1650 is only going to be ~5% quicker than a W3680 then I really hope the new Mac Pro isn't more than the current second level Mac Pro.

    Otherwise I'll be getting myself:

    W3680
    16Gb DDR3-1333
    PC 6870

    For ~£800

    Price of my current MP: £1200

    So the 2011 MP has to be Around ~£2100 for me to even consider buying one. :/

    *After HE discount!
     
  4. Amethyst, Sep 11, 2011
    Last edited: Sep 11, 2011

    Amethyst thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2006
    #4
    Current Mac Pro line up.
    $2499 - Xeon W3530
    $2899 - Xeon W3565
    $3499 - 2x Xeon E5620
    $3699 - Xeon W3680
    $4999 - 2x Xeon X5650
    $6199 - 2x Xeon X5670


    This numbers is only came from my guess based-on speculation+assumption. Its not a final fact.

    but i'm pretty sure Quad 3.6 GHz E5-1620 will outperform Quad 3.2 GHz W3565.
     
  5. Inconsequential macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2007
    #5

    Well a 2600K is 95% the multi-thread of the W3680 so a 6 core 2600K should be quite abit faster?

    Either way I'll be doing my upgrade maths for my best route.

    Wouldn't mind a new Mac Pro tho :p
     
  6. Amethyst thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2006
    #6
    From this -> http://hwbot.org/blog/wp-content//sandybridgee-results.jpg
     
  7. Inconsequential macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2007
    #7
    Edit: Nevermind, reading it wrong.

    10% clock for clock improvements as an average, which is what I was expecting...

    We'll see when official benchmarks come up, but 10% is a very minimum it'd have to be better IMO.
     
  8. Feek macrumors member

    Feek

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2009
    #8
    Hey hey!

    I just want one, having been limited to an iMac for the last few weeks I really miss a Mac Pro.
     
  9. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #9
    I would take these early benchmarks with grain of salt. For example the Bulldozer benchmarks we saw a month ago were total crap. The clock for clock increase should be somewhere around 20%, at least that's what LGA 1155 brought.
     
  10. derbothaus macrumors 601

    derbothaus

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2010
    #11
    Well that does not look too promising. I was hoping for more. X79 looks to be a sham:( Only 2 SATAIII links? No PCIe 3.0. No USB 3.0. Small single thread benefit as expected but the lack of GPU silicon shows i7-2600 as still slightly better with legacy coded software. On the tests that are multi threaded, i7-990x (W3690) seem to hold their own, still. Let's see if or how Apple extends the functionality of X79. Fingers crossed.
     
  11. blunti macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2011
    #12
    15-20% increase is not bad though. 2xSATA 3 is better than none :) However, one can't probably tell the real-world difference between sata 2 and sata 3 when it comes down to everyday use. (booting, launching apps).

    I'm still tempted to get the current 12core 2.93 but can't justify spending that much on last years technology.

    Agree ton the i7-2600 comment of yours though.
     
  12. VirtualRain macrumors 603

    VirtualRain

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2008
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    #13
  13. derbothaus macrumors 601

    derbothaus

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2010
    #14
    I know. I did not see that 15-20% though. Showed to be slower more often than was comfortable. It should have won every test. Some not by much but the tests it did look good in were more synthetic and it lost in the real world even with the extra time and architecture changes put in. If they could do this with 95W then maybe we've got something. But no, 130W with little gain.
     
  14. blunti macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2011
    #15
    We do not know what Apple will do with those 40 lanes. I do tend to agree that the gain is minimal.

    Only interesting thing for me would be the Sata 3 connectivity and (possible) TB port.

    That being said what do you think about buying the 12 core 2.93 now?
    Or still suggesting to wait a bit?
     
  15. jsolares macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2011
    Location:
    Land of eternal Spring
    #16
    it was on par with the 2600 not the current xeons, tho it might make more sense to get an iMac with the i7 than a pro :S
     
  16. derbothaus macrumors 601

    derbothaus

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2010
    #17
    Wait. So close now. You will want to get the single thread clocks SB-E offers. If you are dropping that much scratch, make purchase right after they release so the "tax" isn't so high. Premium parts with premium price. Apple just never drops the price after PC users have access to discounts.
     
  17. blunti macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2011
    #18
    Sounds reasonable, thanks!
     
  18. zephonic macrumors 65816

    zephonic

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2011
    Location:
    greater L.A. area
    #19
    That's my view as well. I couldn't wait any longer, got an '09 Nehalem instead and will hold out until IvyBridge.

    If Apple hasn't EOL'ed the MacPro by then, that is.
     
  19. Amethyst thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2006
    #20
    As i mention before the way that apple can easily divide imac & mac pro. Is remove sp mac pro. And bring dp as standard like we seen on 1,1 2,1 3,1.
     
  20. nanofrog macrumors G4

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    #21
    The SP versions are going to continue to displace the DP models due to the increasing core counts on a single die (8 cores on a single die will be available on some of the SB-E5 2P server processors).
     
  21. Amethyst thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2006
    #22
    Yes. core on a single die are count. but it can't match a number from dual processor system. so that way we can completely divide an iMac from mac pro. (e.g. on next gen 6-Core iMac Mac pro user will get 12 Core as based.)
     
  22. Umbongo macrumors 601

    Umbongo

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Location:
    England
    #23
    Are you suggesting that the only expandable Mac should start at $4,000+ or that Apple should return to the pricing they had on pre-2009 Mac Pros?
     
  23. Amethyst thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2006
    #24
    Start at $3299
     
  24. derbothaus macrumors 601

    derbothaus

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2010

Share This Page