New Barefeats Tests for Nehalem Mac Pros

[nanofrog]

Slower slightly slower single threaded performance and a sub-1000 point difference in multithreaded performance are worth $1,000? The 2.8 is still a better deal, especially now that their prices have dropped considerably.

The new Mac Pros on the other hand are still over-valued for their modest performance gains.

Don't you mean over priced?

Really, we'll have to wait for other vendors to release products, but I somehow doubt the '09 MP will be less expensive than their counterparts this time. Perhaps very similar, but I've a feeling, they may be lower, given what is possible going DIY. Usually not an extreme difference using identical, or nearly so, parts. Seems to be somewhat similar in cost, comparatively speaking.

Obviously, a vendor has to include things like assembly costs,... but the system is ready to go, and comes with a warranty from a single point of origin, rather than from individual component manufacturers.

To me, that's the real cost of DIY'ed systems.

 

[m1stake]

Don't you mean over priced?

Really, we'll have to wait for other vendors to release products, but I somehow doubt the '09 MP will be less expensive than their counterparts this time. Perhaps very similar, but I've a feeling, they may be lower, given what is possible going DIY. Usually not an extreme difference using identical, or nearly so, parts. Seems to be somewhat similar in cost, comparatively speaking.

Obviously, a vendor has to include things like assembly costs,... but the system is ready to go, and comes with a warranty from a single point of origin, rather than from individual component manufacturers.

To me, that's the real cost of DIY'ed systems.

I wouldn't be surprised to see the prices be similar. The difference would be that Dell's price will be the same, with a better warranty.

As far as the single destination for all warranty issues, I'm not so sure. I've never had more than one part at a time fail on me, and companies like Intel, EVGA, and AMD, have never made me jump through hoops the way Apple and Dell do.

 

[Infrared]

Also dont forget to consider the turbo boost when that kicks in it should see about 400mhz more so bumping the 2.26ghz up to 2.66ghz

I wonder if Apple have enabled that feature.

 

[Infrared]

All the argument on here aren't helping the community. Honestly the price is just the price. Inflation is apart of this crazy, messed up economy. Prices go up, especially on brand new hardware that's just been released to the public.

Yes, but at a certain point it goes too far. When people start turning
up, as they will, and show that Photoshop runs faster on a $1000
Dell than on a $3299 Mac Pro, that will be hard to dismiss.

Quite a lot of Mac Pro/Power Mac users have traditionally been heavy
Photoshop users. It's important that Apple offers something that is
good for them. The single quads don't cut it (not enough RAM), and
the 2.26GHz octo is too slow and will lead to comparisons such as the
one I mentioned above.

 

[AdamTro]

Slower slightly slower single threaded performance and a sub-1000 point difference in multithreaded performance are worth $1,000? The 2.8 is still a better deal, especially now that their prices have dropped considerably.

The new Mac Pros on the other hand are still over-valued for their modest performance gains.

+1

I'm picking up a 2.8 on eBay for around $2500. This will do me fine until the next refresh.

 

[nanofrog]

As far as the single destination for all warranty issues, I'm not so sure. I've never had more than one part at a time fail on me, and companies like Intel, EVGA, and AMD, have never made me jump through hoops the way Apple and Dell do.

The worst I ever had was the result of FedEx. The driver kicked an new system out of the back of the truck. Opened it, and found the case was damaged, and had to deal with a return. (Needless, had the driver not abused it in front of me).

Beyond that, it's always been for individual components, whether DIY'ed or from a vendor. Hoops have become common place it seems. (Ye olde vendor - manufacturer shuffle crap).

 

[jjahshik32]

+1

I'm picking up a 2.8 on eBay for around $2500. This will do me fine until the next refresh.

Thats the thing though, the next refresh will still be the same architecture just probably lower in nm and a little bump up in clock speeds. But basically now is the time to buy if you want the Nehalem or wait 2 more bumps until the next architecture.

 

[iMacmatician]

Thats the thing though, the next refresh will still be the same architecture just probably lower in nm and a little bump up in clock speeds. But basically now is the time to buy if you want the Nehalem or wait 2 more bumps until the next architecture.

2 more cores.

 

[barefeats]

I confirmed today that 6x2G does memory transfers 15% faster than 8x2G on the Nehalem using DigLloydTools.

It appears to be supported by the tests run by OWC using After Effects. They sent me their numbers for 6GB to 16GB configs on an 8-core 2.26.

See graphs of both:
http://www.barefeats.com/nehal04.html

 

[m1stake]

The worst I ever had was the result of FedEx. The driver kicked an new system out of the back of the truck. Opened it, and found the case was damaged, and had to deal with a return. (Needless, had the driver not abused it in front of me).

Beyond that, it's always been for individual components, whether DIY'ed or from a vendor. Hoops have become common place it seems. (Ye olde vendor - manufacturer shuffle crap).

I've recently dealt with Intel (Bad board) and Western Digital (Bad raptor), and not only was the service extremely fast (2 week turnaround), it was completely painless. The most painful part was trying to install my OS on this build, fail, and trouble shoot all sorts of things, only to realize that the OS wouldn't take because the hard disk was dead as a door nail.

Speaking of such, my G4's hard disk is starting to crash daily. Not much more time baby, not much more! Just hold out another month for daddy.

I've also realized that I'd probably be better off buying a laptop now in order to avoid any issues with buying one in August, and I already have a PC to work with. The biggest thing on my mind is that ANYTHING will be faster than this thing.

 

[nanofrog]

I've recently dealt with Intel (Bad board) and Western Digital (Bad raptor), and not only was the service extremely fast (2 week turnaround), it was completely painless. The most painful part was trying to install my OS on this build, fail, and trouble shoot all sorts of things, only to realize that the OS wouldn't take because the hard disk was dead as a door nail.

Speaking of such, my G4's hard disk is starting to crash daily. Not much more time baby, not much more! Just hold out another month for daddy.

I've also realized that I'd probably be better off buying a laptop now in order to avoid any issues with buying one in August, and I already have a PC to work with. The biggest thing on my mind is that ANYTHING will be faster than this thing.

Well, if you make up your mind to build your system, get a drive now, and stuff it into the G4 to buy you some time to get things sorted. Cheaper solution than a laptop.

 

[canonballs]

I confirmed today that 6x2G does memory transfers 15% faster than 8x2G on the Nehalem using DigLloydTools.

It appears to be supported by the tests run by OWC using After Effects. They sent me their numbers for 6GB to 16GB configs on an 8-core 2.26.

http://www.barefeats.com/nehal04.html

So it appears that 12GB trumps 16GB when shifting data between RAM and processors. I would still expect that 16GB should be faster when the amount of data shifted exceeds 12GB, for then it's slots 4 and 8 vs scratch disk. Would it be possible to devise an application that tells the computer "now, pretend slots 4 and 8 are empty" without restart?

 

[Infrared]

I confirmed today that 6x2G does memory transfers 15% faster than 8x2G on the Nehalem using DigLloydTools.

It appears to be supported by the tests run by OWC using After Effects. They sent me their numbers for 6GB to 16GB configs on an 8-core 2.26.

See graphs of both:
http://www.barefeats.com/nehal04.html

Is tri-channel access 3X the speed of single channel access?

If true, then for 8GB the average access speed might be:

(3 X 3N + N)/4 = 2.5N

I.e., 83% of the average access speed with 6GB.

Then again, that could be complete rubbish.

 

[jgp]

In regards to memory...

So the question is whether it is the physical slots OR multiples of 3 that makes the difference. For example, if I have a 6Gb quad now, but down the road (when they get cheep!) I take out one of the 2Gb module and put in two 4Gb modules, giving me 12Gb in four slots, would I still be in the sweet spot?

 

[Bubba Satori]

Yes, but at a certain point it goes too far. When people start turning
up, as they will, and show that Photoshop runs faster on a $1000
Dell than on a $3299 Mac Pro, that will be hard to dismiss.

Quite a lot of Mac Pro/Power Mac users have traditionally been heavy
Photoshop users. It's important that Apple offers something that is
good for them. The single quads don't cut it (not enough RAM), and
the 2.26GHz octo is too slow and will lead to comparisons such as the
one I mentioned above.

It's already happening. Sold a customer a Nikon D90 in January. Was a Lightroom user. Needed a new tower to replace his old Pentium 4 unit. Showed him the 3GHz iMac. Didn't like the glossy screen for photo work and already had an 24" NEC. Showed him the MacPro quad for $2400.

His budget for the tower was $1K. That got him a Gateway quad with 8GB of memory, 2.6GHz Phenom II, 750GB HD and an ATI 4850 video card. $950 including tax.