• Did you order new AirTags? We've opened a dedicated AirTags forum.

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
52,482
14,171
https://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogodarkd.png


174642-benchmarks.png

Compiled by Grimace

Since more of the new Mac Pros have been delivered, it seems some of the early benchmarks underestimated the 2.26GHz Mac Pro's performance in single threaded tasks. The latest numbers show that the new 2.26GHz 8-Core machines appear to have both single-threaded and multi-threaded performance equal to or better than the previous generation 2.8GHz 8-Core machines. Another set of benchmarks are also compiled in this graph by Tesselator.

Meanwhile, Engadget posted a nice video showing the internals of the Mac Pro including the new CPU and Memory drawer which can easily slide out of the chassis.



Article Link: Updated Mac Pro Benchmarks and Video of Internals
 

jayhawk11

macrumors 6502a
Oct 19, 2007
774
283
Isn't this how Judgement Day starts? The Mac Pro's become self aware? :D
 
Comment

fluidedge

macrumors 65816
Nov 1, 2007
1,365
16
I'm just staggered by the new breed of MPs. I've said it before, but what were Apple thinking!?
 
Comment

fiercetiger224

macrumors 6502a
Jan 27, 2004
620
0
Wow. Now I am extremely happy with my 2.8 8-Core. It was cheaper too. haha

Haha same here. Basically a 2.26 Ghz is equivalent to the last gen 2.8 Ghz Mac Pro. Maybe slightly faster here and there between the two. So it's a toss-up...Who says I wanna pay 500 bucks more for the newer one instead of the older one? :rolleyes:
 
Comment

50548

Guest
Apr 17, 2005
5,039
2
Currently in Switzerland
Wow. Now I am extremely happy with my 2.8 8-Core. It was cheaper too. haha

So, any "pundits" or PC fanboys still saying that the new MPs are more expensive and less of a value than the previous ones? The new MacPros are simply the most powerful personal workstations in the world...there is simply no room for negative comments.
 
Comment

dfs

macrumors 6502
Sep 17, 2008
347
177
California
Mac Pros

What is most striking about these speed tests is what a large amount of computing power is largely going untapped in these computing monsters (in the Mac Pro, the performance gap between single-threading and multi-threading is getting greater all the time). We all hope that Snow Leopard will begin to turn this situation around. But the cynic in me wonders exactly how much difference Snow Leopard is really going to make. Multithreading seems largely a vision concocted by hardware manufacturers, I'm not sure how effective they are at evangelizing software developers. How many developers are going to show any eagerness to get aboard the multithreading train? I'm not holding my breath waiting for a multithreaded MS Office or Adobe CS suite. The result may be that, the better the Mac Pro gets at handling multithreading, the more of a niche product it becomes (gaming, of course, may be a different issue altogether).
 
Comment

fabian9

macrumors 65816
Nov 28, 2007
1,131
133
Bristol, UK
wow those heat exchangers are massive! I'm surprised they're passive though, but I haven't looked at any new desktop internals in 2-3 years now so have these been around for long? Less fans = less noise = good stuff. :)
 
Comment

BTW

macrumors 6502
Mar 4, 2007
438
0
The video of opening the Mac Pro was pretty neat. I love that the system board with the memory and processors can slide out easy. Man those were some big heat sinks.

There's an abundance of space in a Mac Pro. One would believe Apple could downside the beast, or at least offer the option for using 2.5" disks to add more than the 4.

Overall its still a good system. Just desire a smaller brother of a system (not Mac Mini).
 
Comment

Doc69

macrumors 6502a
Dec 21, 2005
543
52
It doesn't make any sense for Apple to release a new Mac Pro model that has the same speed as last years model and is almost 20% more expensive. Because of that, there has to be plenty of advantages with the Nehalem processor that will make it much faster than the previous model when Snow Leopard is out and when other software is updated to take advantage of the Nehalems.

For this reason I'll probably buy a 2.26 over the old 2.8, even if it's $500 more. But I'm as bummed out as anyone that the clock frequency of the core model is only 2.26. If it was 2.66, everyone would probably be very happy, even with the $500 increase. My expectations for the new Mac Pros were that the clock frequencies and price would stay the same, just a new and faster generation of processors. In other words, a 2.66GHz Nehalem Mac Pro for 2799. I guess Intel screwed this one up for Apple with the Nehalem pricing.
 
Comment

Tallest Skil

macrumors P6
Aug 13, 2006
16,044
4
1 Geostationary Tower Plaza
One would believe Apple could downside the beast, or at least offer the option for using 2.5" disks to add more than the 4.

For crying out loud, MAKE IT BIGGER. :eek::confused:

Smaller? What, you want them to cut four more DIMM slots? Maybe take a PCIe slot or ODD out?

They couldn't even fit Tylersburg in the current case. It needs to be bigger.
 
Comment

twoodcc

macrumors P6
Feb 3, 2005
15,307
26
Right side of wrong
well, i'm glad to see that the 2.26 version isn't as bad as we thought. i would love to have one (but my 1st gen mac pro is still working fine)
 
Comment

Lesser Evets

macrumors 68040
Jan 7, 2006
3,511
1,277
I don't edit major video or render 3D, or play hyped up games, so my old 2.66 is quite fast enough and should be for 4 more years...

... I still lust for the newest Octo-cores.
 
Comment

mattcube64

macrumors 65816
May 21, 2006
1,286
102
Missouri
So, without any bias, what might I be better purchasing if I were to buy this week.

When it comes to the old 2x 2.8 "Octo" versus the new 1x 2.66 "Quad", which is better?

Which would you buy if they were the same price? And which would you buy if the 2.8 was a few hundred cheaper?

I really am curious, but everyone and everything says different.
 
Comment

rxse7en

macrumors 6502
Mar 18, 2005
286
5
Jacksonville, FL
Dayum

My 2.66 Quaddie is three years old now and for the graphic design work I do it's still blazing. It's really the first Mac that I've owned that hasn't seemed to slow down over the years. I can't imagine the speed of this thing. Anyone else feel that with the advent of the Mac Pro that the Macs have extended their lifespans by at least two more years than they used to last?
 
Comment

quagmire

macrumors 604
Apr 19, 2004
6,615
1,719
And since when the 2008 entry level was 8-core? There has always been a 4-core option...check your facts before posting, please.

In the last gen the stock MP had 8 cores standard. But, then the option to bump down to 4 cores as optional to make it cheaper.
 
Comment
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.