There is a hackintosh that does 40.000 in Geekbench
How does it do that? Computer array?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
New MBPs are basically portable mac pros
- Thread starter jbg232
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
How does it do that? Computer array?
http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/360093
He can.
But a single Sandy Bridge desktop is pretty fast too, overclocked though. Scores 37000 points.
http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/351571
Just wanted to add those new i7 2.3 quads are beating 3.33GHz W3580's (Fastest 4-core Mac Pro chip) in Cinebench and 3dmark. Outside of storage. yes, they appear to be just as powerful in synthetic benches,.
Where does it say he has two of those?
It's impossible to run 2x Sandy Bridge, they don't have the necessary interface to be used in a multi-processor system. You'll need to wait for Sandy Bridge-EX for that.
How do you figure that? They have the 2nd fastest chip Intel makes in the 6-core. If you are not concerned about a paltry 133MHz then they have THE fastest chip at stock clocks. Plus all the Dual configs that are hardly outdated. Is X58 and westmere no more? Still kicking and still beating i7-2600K.
I'm tempted to quote all the people who said "they won't break 10000 in GB", and going on about the mobile i7's being slower than the desktop versions. It's always amusing watching people open their mouths too soon.
Owners of newer Mac Pro's are still set. But, for me, with a 2008 2.8 oct, the new MBP's should be noticeably faster. Is there any advantage to keeping my Mac Pro? The only ones I can see are that it's nice to have easily variable internal storage, RAM, and GPU's. The GPU especially. I want better gaming performance under W7, and it's cake to throw in an ATI 5870.
But, I use CS5 and LR3 on a daily basis. Neither can take advantage of 8 cores, and neither maxes out the modest 10GB of ram in my MP.
All that to say, I'll most likely be selling both my machines and getting the 2.2 (or 2.3) 15". For ME, it's a more-than-acceptable Mac Pro replacement.
Owners of newer Mac Pro's are still set. But, for me, with a 2008 2.8 oct, the new MBP's should be noticeably faster. Is there any advantage to keeping my Mac Pro? The only ones I can see are that it's nice to have easily variable internal storage, RAM, and GPU's. The GPU especially. I want better gaming performance under W7, and it's cake to throw in an ATI 5870.
But, I use CS5 and LR3 on a daily basis. Neither can take advantage of 8 cores, and neither maxes out the modest 10GB of ram in my MP.
All that to say, I'll most likely be selling both my machines and getting the 2.2 (or 2.3) 15". For ME, it's a more-than-acceptable Mac Pro replacement.
I really don't think apple should take out optical drive unless somehow people will can get everything from online instead of hard copy DVDs.
I rent movies from red box time to time and I need Dvds. Unless they can offer better streaming option... I don't like netflix much.
I rent movies from red box time to time and I need Dvds. Unless they can offer better streaming option... I don't like netflix much.
I completely disagree with the OP..
The new i7 quad-cores are a good alternative for people looking for high-performance mobile systems but it's not a direct replacement for a WORKSTATION!! Being physically limited to only 8Gb ram is one hell of a setback considering the oldest MacPro still had a minimum of 16Gb expandability, plus Macbook Pro's don't have any expansion ports unless you invest into a Magna chassis (http://www.magma.com/), then again if you can afford one of those, you'd mostly likely to have both a MacPro for in-house development and a high-performance laptop for those days away from the studio.
Seriously, if your using the machine to render high-end video, the updated Macbook Pro's will barely scrape the surface. Sure, it has Thunderbolt, but MP's can buy add-on cards later!
Completely agree here! Obviously the OP isn't using his MacPro to it's full potential...
The new i7 quad-cores are a good alternative for people looking for high-performance mobile systems but it's not a direct replacement for a WORKSTATION!! Being physically limited to only 8Gb ram is one hell of a setback considering the oldest MacPro still had a minimum of 16Gb expandability, plus Macbook Pro's don't have any expansion ports unless you invest into a Magna chassis (http://www.magma.com/), then again if you can afford one of those, you'd mostly likely to have both a MacPro for in-house development and a high-performance laptop for those days away from the studio.
Seriously, if your using the machine to render high-end video, the updated Macbook Pro's will barely scrape the surface. Sure, it has Thunderbolt, but MP's can buy add-on cards later!
Completely agree here! Obviously the OP isn't using his MacPro to it's full potential...
Lets see an MBP with 16 or 32 GB of fast ram and we`ll talk
Still pretty impressive tho...
Don't you mean 64Gb o'RAM and 12 cores...?
It might not beat out current MP's, but for those of us running 2008 or even 2006 MP's, I'm pretty sure these new MBP's are just as fast. So in that regard, they're basically portable Mac Pros.
Lets see an MBP with 16 or 32 GB of fast ram and we`ll talk
Still pretty impressive tho...
What are you guys doing that you NEED 32 GB of RAM? I know every user has different needs, but Adobe (or anyone else that makes software I use) doesn't make anything for photographers (my job) that comes close to utilizing the full power of a Mac Pro. I don't see much need for a MP anymore, for me. I realize we're all different, though.
And, tell me if I'm wrong, but a 2008 Mac Pro loses to the new MBP every time, every way.
Yes but as mentioned earlier, 8GB memory will be pretty slow in something like After Effects or any kind of extended rendering will get it really hot. It is it's achilles heal when coupled with a fast SSD. Those super loud mini fans running all the time will kill your nerves. No SSD? Now you have a very limited HDD as well.
I don't own a mac pro, I currently own what's in my sig and I use it for aperture with an externally located 30,000 RAW image file database. Now, it's not great, but if I want to have the convenience of a laptop, these MBPs are a pretty nice upgrade for a serious hobbyist like myself. Even with an 8GB RAM limit, there's nothing I see myself doing that requires more than an i7 2.2 quad core sandybridge, 8GB RAM, ATI 6750, and a thunderbolt drive array. That's just me though, and I think these new MBPs come very close to mac pros for MOST people.
Agree. The price to performance is sick. Even living through all the tech "planned obsolescence".