Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

fhenry

macrumors regular
Original poster
Feb 28, 2012
120
0
Hello everybody,

With the Easy upgrade to 10.9, the Mac Pro 2006/7 has acces to the last gpu. We know that there is limitations from the hardware but we dont know it exactly. So if people could post unigine bench with the default setting in full hd for better comparison. May be some octane bench would be also appreciated.

Thx for your contribution
 
I can post tests of 7950, 7970 and GTX 680 4GB later this day, if you're interested. I have only demo of Octane, so maybe Blender Cycles will do instead? Stay tuned.

Edit: due to attchments limit, updated this post with GTX 680 Blender 2.69 Cycles result.
 

Attachments

  • 680cycles.jpg
    680cycles.jpg
    155.7 KB · Views: 523
Last edited:
I can post tests of 7950, 7970 and GTX 680 4GB later this day, if you're interested. I have only demo of Octane, so maybe Blender Cycles will do instead? Stay tuned.

yes thx you, i need to change my graphic card, i don't want to buy something useless !
 
Here you go. GTX 680 was the worst performer of these three.
7950 and 7970 are overclocked (7950 much higher, hence scores very close to 7970), 680 runs at stock clocks.

Heaven and Valley are in some % CPU dependent, so results aren't very clear.
Luxmark showed PCIe bandwidth limit penalty more accurately IMO (I got about 10% higher scores in 5,1).
 

Attachments

  • Heaven.jpg
    Heaven.jpg
    174.1 KB · Views: 743
  • Valley.jpg
    Valley.jpg
    166.2 KB · Views: 491
  • Lux7950.jpg
    Lux7950.jpg
    276.1 KB · Views: 662
  • Lux7970.jpg
    Lux7970.jpg
    277.1 KB · Views: 591
  • Lux680.jpg
    Lux680.jpg
    276.3 KB · Views: 564
3d - OctaneRender

Hello everybody,

With the Easy upgrade to 10.9, the Mac Pro 2006/7 has acces to the last gpu. We know that there is limitations from the hardware but we dont know it exactly. So if people could post unigine bench with the default setting in full hd for better comparison. May be some octane bench would be also appreciated.

Thx for your contribution

Here they are for a 2007 Mac Pro 2,1 with 2 early EVGA GTX Titans/6g SC (GK110A) plus an EVGA GT640/4g: The first one using OctaneRender's RenderTarget DL (11 sec.) and the second using OctaneRender's RenderTarget PT (39 sec) (which was used in Barefeats test - http://www.barefeats.com/gputitan.html - where the one Titan that he used rendered the scene in 95 sec. OctaneRender linearly leverages like GPUs, so two of the Titans used by Barefeats would have rendered that scene in 47.5 sec. The GT640, that I use mainly for making interactivity smooth in scene building and tweaking, didn't appreciably affect the scores: it improved the PT render by 1 sec., but did nothing to improve the DL render (see two small pics below.); thus, the scores with only two Titans are - RenderTarget DL (11 sec.) & OctaneRender's RenderTarget PT (40 sec). So one of my Titan SCc (Super Clocked) would render the scene in 80 sec. using RenderTarget PT.
 

Attachments

  • 2xTitans1xGT640OctaneBenchRTDL.png
    2xTitans1xGT640OctaneBenchRTDL.png
    1 MB · Views: 436
  • 2xTitans1xGT640OctaneBenchRTPT.png
    2xTitans1xGT640OctaneBenchRTPT.png
    1 MB · Views: 428
  • 2xTitansOctaneBenchRTPT.png
    2xTitansOctaneBenchRTPT.png
    30.7 KB · Views: 372
  • 2xTitansOctaneBenchRTDL.png
    2xTitansOctaneBenchRTDL.png
    54.4 KB · Views: 365
Last edited:
3d - Blender

Hello everybody,

With the Easy upgrade to 10.9, the Mac Pro 2006/7 has acces to the last gpu. We know that there is limitations from the hardware but we dont know it exactly. So if people could post unigine bench with the default setting in full hd for better comparison. May be some octane bench would be also appreciated.

Thx for your contribution

Here is one (36.09 sec.) for a 2007 Mac Pro 2,1 with 2 early EVGA GTX Titans/6g (GK110A) plus an EVGA GT640/4g: Using Mike Pans' BMW BenchMark Scene.
 

Attachments

  • 2xTitans1xGT640BlenderBMW_MP.png
    2xTitans1xGT640BlenderBMW_MP.png
    1 MB · Views: 425
Hello everybody,

With the Easy upgrade to 10.9, the Mac Pro 2006/7 has acces to the last gpu. We know that there is limitations from the hardware but we dont know it exactly. So if people could post unigine bench with the default setting in full hd for better comparison. May be some octane bench would be also appreciated.

Thx for your contribution

Here're three for a 2007 Mac Pro 2,1 with 2 early EVGA GTX Titans/6g (GK110A) plus an EVGA GT640/4g: Using LuxMark's three benchmarks: 1) LuxBall (23,415); 2) Room (1,592); and 3) Sala (3,220).
 

Attachments

  • LuxMarkLuxBall.png
    LuxMarkLuxBall.png
    462.5 KB · Views: 508
  • LuxMarkRoom.png
    LuxMarkRoom.png
    505.4 KB · Views: 399
  • LuxMarkSala.png
    LuxMarkSala.png
    499.2 KB · Views: 394
don't want to turn this thread into a "what works" thread but just a quick question, i have a 1,1 currently which i will put mavericks on soon, once i have installed mavericks can i put the Sapphire 7950 straight into my Mac Pro and it would work? Also will it drive a 4K display or does the PCI bus on the 1,1 not have enough bandwidth

Cheers
Jake
 
Thx all,

It is clear that open cl and octane are not slowed by the Mac Pro but it is less clear for the open gl bench i will have a look to the 5.1 bench with these cards

Rhx again
 
Some more...

This time few AMD 7xxx series cards, in following AMD 7770 1GB, 7870 2GB (Pitcairn), 7870XT (Tahiti LE). 7870XT still as D500 (10.9.1). All overclocked a bit. 7870s work with digital bootscreens, 7770 only with analog (DVI->VGA adapter needed).
As you can see, both Unigine benchmarks are CPU bound.
 

Attachments

  • Screen-Shot-2014-02-04-at-11.53.03.jpg
    Screen-Shot-2014-02-04-at-11.53.03.jpg
    115 KB · Views: 394
  • Screen-Shot-2014-02-04-at-11.48.52.jpg
    Screen-Shot-2014-02-04-at-11.48.52.jpg
    121.2 KB · Views: 440
  • Screen-Shot-2014-02-04-at-12.06.45.jpg
    Screen-Shot-2014-02-04-at-12.06.45.jpg
    353 KB · Views: 409
  • Screen-Shot-2014-02-04-at-11.19.50.jpg
    Screen-Shot-2014-02-04-at-11.19.50.jpg
    346.7 KB · Views: 424
  • Screen-Shot-2014-02-04-at-11.43.34.jpg
    Screen-Shot-2014-02-04-at-11.43.34.jpg
    340.7 KB · Views: 419
thx for your contribution, it is clear that the open Gl is cpu limited, the border is between the 5770 and 5870 as bare feats showed. It depends the game engine also probably but we have our answer. For open cl, no limitations, could be used for FPX probably as fast as the newMP ! keep going, some FPX test would be nice !
 
Hello,

I plot a chart of different open CL results :

Mac pro 1,1 from blacksheep and tutor
and nMP and 5,1 MP from bare feats

The 1,1 MP is almost fast as the nMP with dual GPU ! and beat the 5,1 with single GPU ! Rominator has see similar result on netkas with a 7950 ! http://forum.netkas.org/index.php/topic,8206.15.html
 

Attachments

  • fps open CL.jpg
    fps open CL.jpg
    288.5 KB · Views: 536
...and another portion...

This time AMD 5850, 6870 and Nvidia GTX 570.
I put a pair 5355s instead of 5160s, so Heaven and Valley scores are ~10% lower than they would be with 3.0 GHz. Used stock OS X drivers for Geforce.
6870 is pretty well OC'ed (as for 6870): 970/4800 MHz vs stock 900/4200.

Due to attachments limit, FCP X BruceX benchmark and Blender Cycles benchmark of GTX 570 in next post.
 

Attachments

  • Valey.jpg
    Valey.jpg
    162.7 KB · Views: 314
  • Heaven.jpg
    Heaven.jpg
    178.1 KB · Views: 351
  • GTX570lux.jpg
    GTX570lux.jpg
    268.7 KB · Views: 341
  • 6870OClux.jpg
    6870OClux.jpg
    265.8 KB · Views: 353
  • 5850lux.jpg
    5850lux.jpg
    266.6 KB · Views: 377
...and FCP X 10.1

Blender Cycles on GTX 570 performed well, even a bit better than 4GB GTX 680.

I didn't include my latest OC'ed 7950 in BruceX graph, because it overloaded PSU in my 2006 during this test (tried twice). Gotta lower the TDP of 7950 for 2006 :D. 2009 handles this 225W+ card very well.

Performance of 7870 2GB (Pitcairn) is a bit disappointing.
 

Attachments

  • CyclesGTX570.jpg
    CyclesGTX570.jpg
    214.3 KB · Views: 324
  • BruceX-MP2006.jpg
    BruceX-MP2006.jpg
    48.1 KB · Views: 445
Last edited:
Hello everybody,

With the Easy upgrade to 10.9, the Mac Pro 2006/7 has acces to the last gpu. We know that there is limitations from the hardware but we dont know it exactly. So if people could post unigine bench with the default setting in full hd for better comparison. May be some octane bench would be also appreciated.

Thx for your contribution
28.72 Seconds for Mike Pan's BMW and 56 seconds for Octane Render Benchmark on Mac Pro 2007 with 3 GTX 680s for CUDA support.
 

Attachments

  • MikePanBMWonMacPro2007w:3GTX680oc.png
    MikePanBMWonMacPro2007w:3GTX680oc.png
    1.1 MB · Views: 346
  • BlenderPrefs.png
    BlenderPrefs.png
    107 KB · Views: 328
Last edited:
Fastest single one for FCP X... R9 280X!

I put flashed R9 280X in my 2,1 and it performs very well, as you can see on screenshots. It did BruceX FCP X benchmark in 49 seconds!
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2014-04-11 at 20.54.55.png
    Screen Shot 2014-04-11 at 20.54.55.png
    81.2 KB · Views: 352
  • Screen Shot 2014-04-11 at 20.40.47.png
    Screen Shot 2014-04-11 at 20.40.47.png
    377 KB · Views: 367
Hi,

Does the R9 280X run without needing an external PSU?

I have a GTX570 at the moment and i'm a little underwhelmed with the performance so was thinking of upgrading :)

Thanks,

Kam
 
Hd5870

Does anyone know if the HD5870 can have the 5.0GT/s link speed mod done?

I want to flash mine for EFI boot screen but the instructions for modifying the ROM is a little above my level of tinkering.

I have 5870_uakari_netkas and the fixrom.py but can't seem to get the instruction to work with my firmware. And with the chances of bricking my only card I don't want to take the chances.

Any help would be greatly appreciated. And afterwards I will supply some benchmarks on my upgraded MP 1,1 > 2,1 Firmware + SMC, X5355, 32gb, HD5870, SSD. It's a beast as is, but I want maximum performance and full capabilities unlocked.

Thank you
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.