Processor Comparisons

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by Schkeen, Aug 10, 2009.

  1. Schkeen macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2009
    #1
    I would like to know if anybody has an idea about this:

    Rendered a 30 second clip in Premiere Pro CS4 with some effects on it,
    Took my PC Intel D 3.40, 3GB RAM, to render in 4 minutes
    Took my MacBook Pro 2.4 Core 2 Duo, 4GB Ram, to render in 4.5 minutes

    First of all, do you think that sound accurate?
    Secondly, how long would you estimate it to render in a Mac Pro, Dual 2.66 Eight Core, 16 GB Ram?
     
  2. geoffreak macrumors 68020

    geoffreak

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2008
    #2
    More GHz is not more power.

    Those numbers sound about right.

    I'd say that could render in half a minute or less on a Mac Pro of that power.
     
  3. velocityg4 macrumors 68040

    velocityg4

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2004
    Location:
    Georgia
    #3
    Sounds about right. Though I would have expected the Macbook to do better. Is this a desktop vs. Notebook as the hard drive would be a good cause for the performance decrease.

    Since the Pentium D is a dual core Pentium 4 and a 3.2Ghz P4 is about equal to one of the cores of a 1.86Ghz C2D, based on assumptions from tomshardware when there CPU charts were good. My assumptions were from a 1.86Ghz Core2Duo e6300 was about equal to an Athlon 64 X2 at 2.2Ghz and a regular Athlon 64 3200+ (2.0 to 2.2 Ghz depending on if Socket 754 or 939) was equivalent to a Pentium 4 3.2Ghz.

    While a Pentium Dual Core is actually a Core 2 Duo with less cache, and less some other features.

    Given that the the Quad 2.26Ghz 2009 MP stomps the bejesus out of the Dual 3.0Ghz 2006 MP, andandtech. I would safely venture that the Octo 2.66Ghz Nehelem MP would make the 2.4Ghz Macbook look like it is standing still. Especially with all that RAM and likely RAID array.
     
  4. nanofrog macrumors G4

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    #4
    It depends, as the task may or maynot depend on other subsystems like memory and disk throughputs.

    So the MP's have an advantage, especially if those areas have been upgraded. ;) But as a general rule, and all other things being equal, higher clocked parts will outperform slower ones. Comparing different architectures does make this a little more difficult though (i.e. core count, whether or not the memory controller is on the CPU or chipset,...). Nehalem (55xx xeon) vs. C2Q (54xx xeon) is a perfect example.
     

Share This Page