Updated Mac Pro Benchmarks and Video of Internals

[apple4mark]

Yawn yawn!

Apple is Apple!

Dell is Dell!

There's a different in wanting either, I'm glad I bought a Refurb x2 2.8ghz Mac pro last October and put a Nvidia 8800GT, 8 gig ram and 4x 500gb HD.

The things fly and it does what I want it to do with my work and I haven't looked back since.

A Mac pro is a professional equipment for professional people and we are happy to pay for equipment that will do the job.

Why you lot debating over cost, this is better, oh no, that one better, yeah but you get this for X and that for X huh?

 

[AidenShaw]

Why you lot debating over cost, this is better, oh no, that one better, yeah but you get this for X and that for X huh?

The debate isn't "go buy a Dell" - it's why does Apple have this

...... h u g e ........ g a p i n g .......... h o l e .....

in the Apple product line between the Mini and the Mac Pro?

The Dell we're talking about is simply a proof point that Apple could design a $900 to $1100 mini-tower/mid-tower using desktop parts to fill the hole.

The Dell is $799 - add a 25% Apple tax for a designer case using the same internals.

 

[DoFoT9]

The debate isn't "go buy a Dell" - it's why does Apple have this

...... h u g e ........ g a p i n g .......... h o l e .....

in the Apple product line between the Mini and the Mac Pro?

The Dell we're talking about is simply a proof point that Apple could design a $900 to $1100 mini-tower/mid-tower using desktop parts to fill the hole.

The Dell is $799 - add a 25% Apple tax for a designer case using the same internals.

to us it may be a hole, to apple - there is a thing called the iMac.

 

[AidenShaw]

to us it may be a hole, to apple - there is a thing called the iMac.

A "thing" that to many people is not worth mentioning - a laptop built into a monitor is not wanted by a sizeable group of (non-)customers.

 

[AidenShaw]

I'll let you know how quiet they are...

The reviews of the Studio XPS mini-tower all comment on how quiet the system is (although a few people also noted that the power-on test of the fans is impressively loud).

I was just given some "end of quarter" budget that "has" to be used, so I bought six of the Studio XPS mini-tower systems.

• Intel® Core™i7-940 Processor(8MB L2 Cache, 2.93GHz)
• 12GiB Tri-Channel DDR3 SDRAM at 1066MHz - 6 DIMMs
• 750GB - 7200RPM, SATA 3.0Gb/s, 16MB Cache
• Blu-ray Disc (BD) Combo (Reads/Writes 6X BD and Reads/Writes to DVD/CD)
• ATI Radeon HD 4670 512MB
• 24 inch Ultrasharp™ 2408WFP Digital Flat Panel
• Genuine Windows Vista® Ultimate SP1 64-bit
• PowerDVD Blu-ray player
• Roxio Creator 10.2 Premium Blu-ray edition
• Integrated 7.1 Channel Audio
• Dell 19 in 1 Media Reader with Bluetooth
• Dell 1505 WLAN PCIe card with 802.11n mini-Card & external antenna
• 3 yr Next Business Day service + Complete Care

Price was just slightly over the starting price for the quad 2.66 Mac Pro (Dell does have sales and discounts). Mac Pro config that's close is $4525 (for 8 GiB instead of 12 GiB, no Blu-ray (D'oh), but LED backlight 24" instead of CCFL).

 

[DoFoT9]

A "thing" that to many people is not worth mentioning - a laptop built into a monitor is not wanted by a sizeable group of (non-)customers.

its worth mentioning - APPLE THINKS it fits in their lineup, who cares what you THINK the linup should be like, who cares what i THINKS it should be like??

 

[Tesselator]

For interest sakes, my Hackintosh seems to work reliably at 3.42GHz but anymore kernel panics start to happen. This is achieved by increasing the clock speed under the BIOS.

Added the Mac Pro results from the story and my MacBook Pro for a comparison

And here are the results:

View attachment 162723

So the Corei7 with it's 4 cores is doing very well against an 8 core Mac when you overclock it huh? And it's right on the money with the mac equivalent quad at normal speeds. Sweet.

 

[Tesselator]

The debate isn't "go buy a Dell" - it's why does Apple have this

...... h u g e ........ g a p i n g .......... h o l e .....

in the Apple product line between the Mini and the Mac Pro?

The Dell we're talking about is simply a proof point that Apple could design a $900 to $1100 mini-tower/mid-tower using desktop parts to fill the hole.

The Dell is $799 - add a 25% Apple tax for a designer case using the same internals.

Exactly right!

its worth mentioning - APPLE THINKS it fits in their lineup, who cares what you THINK the linup should be like, who cares what i THINKS it should be like??

Apple cares! They spend hundreds of thousands of dollars trying to find out what we think and then they spend millions trying to meet those expectations.

 

[Sehnsucht]

Please note that this report describes only one set of tests using one program.

Unless you are running Cinebench, and using scripts similar to those in the bench, this information may be very misleading.

It would be foolish to make purchasing decisions based on this limited report.

Look at more benchmarks, like the ones at BareFeats http://www.barefeats.com/nehal04.html.

Don't worry, I don't think anybody's going to out and "impulse-buy" a Mac Pro after reading one measly little benchmark chart on MacRumors.

The debate isn't "go buy a Dell" - it's why does Apple have this

...... h u g e ........ g a p i n g .......... h o l e .....

in the Apple product line between the Mini and the Mac Pro?

The Dell we're talking about is simply a proof point that Apple could design a $900 to $1100 mini-tower/mid-tower using desktop parts to fill the hole.

As you pointed out earlier, the iPhone got MMS and copy & paste because The Steve is out of the picture...temporarily or for good, who knows. As soon as the latter turns out to be the case, Apple will make their mini-tower and it will be amazing.

The Dell is $799 - add a 25% Apple tax for a designer case using the same internals.

Yep, but Dell keeps accidentally shipping their systems with Windows. In terms of success, the Apple mini-tower will be the iPod of the Mac lineup. If they'd just hurry the f**k up and produce it!

Not that I'd actually buy a mini-tower or anything...there is a fully loaded 8-core Mac Pro out there somewhere with my name on it.

 

[drsmithy]

Actually it's neither - Dell uses custom form factor boards in most of its systems. Only in a few low end systems do they put standard ATX boards.

Most Dell systems use the BTX standard.

 

[AidenShaw]

Don't worry, I don't think anybody's going to out and "impulse-buy" a Mac Pro after reading one measly little benchmark chart on MacRumors.

If you read some of the posts here, it looks like some people who have decided to buy an MP are making their configuration decisions based on this one chart, though.

Yep, but Dell keeps accidentally shipping their systems with Windows.

You mean you keep checking that "OS X 10.5 Leopard" box under the operating system selection on the Dell build-to-order page, and they still ship them with Vista? That needs to be fixed.

Most Dell systems use the BTX standard.

The Studio XPS 435MT ("435 mini-tower") is not a BTX system.

One key design feature of BTX boards is that the layout is "reversed". If you set the mobo down flat on a table with the ports in the back:

• BTX has the ports and CPU on the left side, PCIe slots on the right.
• ATX has the ports and CPU on the right, with PCIe slots on the left.

The Wikipedia entry on BTX states that:

BTX's thermal design specifies a particular processor location at the front of the board, where a special case ventilation duct is located. It places the northbridge behind the processor, and memory DIMMs beside the northbridge, arranged parallel to front-to-back airflow.

Unfortunately, this is not possible for processors with an integrated memory controller (on-die northbridge), such as the Athlon 64 and Intel Core i7.[3]

 

[drsmithy]

The Studio XPS 435MT ("435 mini-tower") is not a BTX system.

I didn't say it was, I said "most Dell systems use BTX".

I was actually thinking mainly of the Optiplex systems, but I assume the (non-Core i7, apparently) other desktops are the same, these days.

 

[AidenShaw]

I didn't say it was, I said "most Dell systems use BTX".

I didn't say that you said it was.

I was actually thinking mainly of the Optiplex systems, but I assume the (non-Core i7, apparently) other desktops are the same, these days.

OptiPlex 960 mini-tower systems are BTX-like, but don't look strictly compliant. The smaller ones might be BTX-like as well, but not sure if they match smaller form factor BTX specs.

Dell Inspiron desktops look ATX-like. Dell workstations are definitely unique.

At any point, it's basically moot since Intel abandoned BTX a few years ago. Newegg sells exactly zero BTX motherboards.

 

[mjteix]

Here are some of the next desktop cpus/price cuts from Intel.

- Core i7 at 3.06 and 3.33GHz...

- Price cut on the 65W quad S series + new model
FWIW, I don't think that the S series will be EOL soon, and it will be replaced by the 65W Lynnfields late 2009/early 2010. Perfect cpu for SSFs (AIO or other small form factor).

Too bad those will probably never see the inside of a Mac.

----------------------------
Intel: Desktop CPU price schedule, April-July 2009 (US$)

CPU.....................................Old Price New price Reduction
April 19
Core 2 Quad Q8400 (2.66GHz)....N/A..........183.........N/A
Core 2 Quad Q8400S (2.66GHz)..N/A...........245........N/A
Core 2 Quad Q9300...................266...........213......19.92%
Core 2 Quad Q9550S.................369...........320......13.28%
Core 2 Quad Q9400S.................320...........277......13.44%
Core 2 Quad Q8200S.................245...........213......13.06%
May 31
Core i7-975 (3.33GHz)...............N/A...........999........N/A
Core i7-950 (3.06GHz)...............N/A...........562........N/A
Core 2 Duo E7600.....................N/A...........133........N/A
Pentium Dual-Core E6300...........N/A............84.........N/A
Celeron Dual-Core E1600............N/A............53........N/A
July 19
Core 2 Quad Q8300...................183...........163......10.93%
Core 2 Duo E7500.....................133...........113......15.04%
Pentium Dual-Core E5400............84.............74......11.90%
Pentium Dual-Core E5300............74.............64......13.51%
Celeron Dual-Core E1500.............53............43......18.87%
--------------
source: Digitimes

 

[Anuba]

to us it may be a hole, to apple - there is a thing called the iMac.

...which is essentially a gargantuan laptop, not just technology-wise but Apple themselves apparently don't think it qualifies for a "desktop".

My iMac 24" broke down a few weeks ago and I thought I'd make use of the ludicrously expensive AppleCare plan for the first time. Since I'm used to Dell doing on-site repairs the next business day for less money than AppleCare costs, I expected the same from Apple except that the repair dude would have a pin-striped suit and white gloves, like the famed Rolls-Royce mechanics. So I call up Apple Support and talk to this snooty chick who explained that they don't do on-site repairs on iMacs. "But the AppleCare contract says on-site repairs of desktop computers, and that's what I paid for, or so I thought", I said. "Yes, but the iMac isn't a desktop model". "Well", I said, "let's see. It weighs like 30 pounds, it's huge, it has no battery, no built-in keyboard or trackpad, and it's got a non-detachable desktop stand, so it sure as **** can't be a laptop now can it?" But the girl just kept going on about how Mac Pro is the only thing they repair on location and that I have to drag the iMac about 60 miles, where the nearest authorized Apple service center is. I guess that's the "care" part of AppleCare...

Anyway... the iMac is non-expandable which defeats the purpose of a desktop computer as far as most users are concerned. What people want is simply a decently priced Apple desktop machine that you can stick a couple of cards in. Apple has completely skipped over the consumer desktop line of processors from Intel. The style of processor that the lion's share of Dell's product lineup is based on... XPS gaming machines, Dimension/Studio/Vostro desktops and so forth. Apple have the iMacs, Macbooks and Mac Minis with portable-grade processors, then nothing, then the full-blown Xeon line for business users and professionals, which is a huge jump in price, moreso than performance. And by their own admittance (see my AppleCare story above) they don't have a consumer desktop model, period.

 

[-hh]

1. The hardware will not "break", it will just not boot into Mac OS X.
2. Before updating can check out on forums to see if it works..

The hardware 'not breaking' is a moot point. Afterall, the whole purpose of having a computer is to run Applications (via its OS) ... because otherwise, its merely a very expensive space heater.

And the idea of letting the other guy go first has its limitations. For example, while the community can be helpful, they're not under any particular obligation to find out if it works, etc.

Bottom line is that a Hackintosh can be a fine hobby, but realistically, its not for business.

No there are more types, the types who:

• Wants more than 1 hard drive, and doesn’t want a bunch of slower external ones.
• Who likes to upgrade their machine when the time comes; better graphics, better CPU.
• Likes to dual screen
• Wants more performance than from a Mac mini and wants to use their own monitor.

Desire for DIY upgrades merely points again to the hobbiest who wants to play with a toy, not someone who merely relegates the PC as a tool to get a job done.

Insofar as multiple HDs, Firewire800 is available on all desktop Macs today, so there's no excuse to use USB. And while FW800 isn't quite as fast as SATA (internal or external), the reality is that the bottleneck is in the HD's themselves: even for the fastest tests (sustained reads), the performance bottleneck passes from FW800 to the HD itself when you go from the faster outermost tracks to the slower innermost tracks. The bottom line is that while FW800 has now been pushed to its limits, its not the "DOG" that everyone wants to claim that it is: just go read through the comparison test benchmarks on barefeats.com yourself...you'll find that they average out to roughly a 20% advantage for eSATA, but that eSATA slows down by 40% as the disk fills up. Also note that when it comes to random r/w, both are well below their theoreticals because the drive is the bottleneck...not the I/O protocol.

For dual screen, the iMac can do it. And the iMac has the "more power than the mini" that is desired. Two birds killed with one stone.

There are plenty of these types around. I was happy to buy the low end Power Macs in the past since they were reasonably priced, but the current low end Mac "Pro" is not.

See one of my older posts that incorporates present-value calculations versus historical prices of Mac Pros and PowerMacs. The short bottom line is that while they have been bumped up some, its not really as dramatically higher as many people try to suggest.

I finally understand for a Pro who makes a lot of money with their machine the relative cost of the machine is negligible. Although if *I* were a Pro who'd need the *single CPU* Mac Pro, I'd still get the Hackintosh, I don't know, I just couldn't throw AU$2500 out the window, so much more I could do with that.

No Pro worth his salt will take that risk because the risk is unnecessary, and the downside loss is too high. To fly fast & low without the safety net of a solid OEM warranty is a primer on just how to wreck your business. If you're willing to bet your entire business on AU$2500, what you're really saying is that you don't really have a business to lose.


-hh

 

[Goona]

...which is essentially a gargantuan laptop, not just technology-wise but Apple themselves apparently don't think it qualifies for a "desktop".

My iMac 24" broke down a few weeks ago and I thought I'd make use of the ludicrously expensive AppleCare plan for the first time. Since I'm used to Dell doing on-site repairs the next business day for less money than AppleCare costs, I expected the same from Apple except that the repair dude would have a pin-striped suit and white gloves, like the famed Rolls-Royce mechanics. So I call up Apple Support and talk to this snooty chick who explained that they don't do on-site repairs on iMacs. "But the AppleCare contract says on-site repairs of desktop computers, and that's what I paid for, or so I thought", I said. "Yes, but the iMac isn't a desktop model". "Well", I said, "let's see. It weighs like 30 pounds, it's huge, it has no battery, no built-in keyboard or trackpad, and it's got a non-detachable desktop stand, so it sure as **** can't be a laptop now can it?" But the girl just kept going on about how Mac Pro is the only thing they repair on location and that I have to drag the iMac about 60 miles, where the nearest authorized Apple service center is. I guess that's the "care" part of AppleCare...

Anyway... the iMac is non-expandable which defeats the purpose of a desktop computer as far as most users are concerned. What people want is simply a decently priced Apple desktop machine that you can stick a couple of cards in. Apple has completely skipped over the consumer desktop line of processors from Intel. The style of processor that the lion's share of Dell's product lineup is based on... XPS gaming machines, Dimension/Studio/Vostro desktops and so forth. Apple have the iMacs, Macbooks and Mac Minis with portable-grade processors, then nothing, then the full-blown Xeon line for business users and professionals, which is a huge jump in price, moreso than performance. And by their own admittance (see my AppleCare story above) they don't have a consumer desktop model, period.

Why didn't dell send someone to my house when my Inspiron laptop broke?

 

[AidenShaw]

Why didn't dell send someone to my house when my Inspiron laptop broke?

Beats me - looks like InHome service is the default now - even on $850 laptops.

 

[drsmithy]

Insofar as multiple HDs, Firewire800 is available on all desktop Macs today, so there's no excuse to use USB.

This is just another example of Apple's passive-agressive relationship with cabling. They tout that you only need a single cable for an iMac, but then expect you to end up with a desk covered in spaghetti for external drives.

You see the same thing in their laptop line, and the refusal to build a docking stations, instead choosing to do silly things with proprietry connectors and cables for monitors so that there are "fewer cables to plug in".

you'll find that they average out to roughly a 20% advantage for eSATA, but that eSATA slows down by 40% as the disk fills up.

I'm not quite sure why you'd think eSATA vs FW800 would make any difference in this instance.

For dual screen, the iMac can do it. And the iMac has the "more power than the mini" that is desired. Two birds killed with one stone.

No. You can connect a second screen to the iMac, but you cannot do "dual screen". If you already own screens, if you want two identical screens, if you want screens in portrait mode, if you need to use screens that meet some third party certification, etc, etc. In all these cases, the iMac is insufficient.

No Pro worth his salt will take that risk because the risk is unnecessary, and the downside loss is too high. To fly fast & low without the safety net of a solid OEM warranty is a primer on just how to wreck your business. If you're willing to bet your entire business on AU$2500, what you're really saying is that you don't really have a business to lose.

Not everyone whose "requirements" are only met by a Mac Pro, is running a business. For example, all the stuff I want a computer for, a Mac Mini or iMac cannot do. Therefore, I need to own two PCs (or a Hackintosh). A mid-range Mac tower should be an instant buy for my household, even if it cost nearly as much as two separate computers on its own (simply for the convenience factor).

Even in the business case, for someone buying, say, 50 machines, then the difference between a $2500 Mac Pro and the $1200 a possible mid-range tower should cost starts to count as real money.

 

[BenRoethig]

...which is essentially a gargantuan laptop, not just technology-wise but Apple themselves apparently don't think it qualifies for a "desktop".

My iMac 24" broke down a few weeks ago and I thought I'd make use of the ludicrously expensive AppleCare plan for the first time. Since I'm used to Dell doing on-site repairs the next business day for less money than AppleCare costs, I expected the same from Apple except that the repair dude would have a pin-striped suit and white gloves, like the famed Rolls-Royce mechanics. So I call up Apple Support and talk to this snooty chick who explained that they don't do on-site repairs on iMacs. "But the AppleCare contract says on-site repairs of desktop computers, and that's what I paid for, or so I thought", I said. "Yes, but the iMac isn't a desktop model". "Well", I said, "let's see. It weighs like 30 pounds, it's huge, it has no battery, no built-in keyboard or trackpad, and it's got a non-detachable desktop stand, so it sure as **** can't be a laptop now can it?" But the girl just kept going on about how Mac Pro is the only thing they repair on location and that I have to drag the iMac about 60 miles, where the nearest authorized Apple service center is. I guess that's the "care" part of AppleCare...

That is rather annoying. When the motherboard my ibook broke (several times) I got a box shipped to be next day at their expense and it was back in my hands within 3-4 days. With the iMac, its make an appointment that's convenient for the nearest Apple store, drive 100 miles round trip at my expense (thank God Madison opened or it would have been 180), have them do additional repairs without then even notifying you (good or bad depending on whether I get a bill), wait a week for the store to get parts in where the service center had everything on hand and then make another close to 4hr 100mile trip at my expense. Would it be too much to certify the best Buy people in AppleCare? They're two minutes away.

 

[Anuba]

Why didn't dell send someone to my house when my Inspiron laptop broke?

Because... you didn't pay extra for CompleteCare, I suppose? Or whatever it's called on the consumer side of things (CompleteCare is for businesses I think).

I run a small business and need my desktop and my laptop 24-7, so I got Dell's CompleteCare plan for both of them. I discovered that you can get insane deals if you talk to a sales rep rather than order online... the last time I updated my tiny 'machine park' I got about 10% off on the two computers, plus I got CompleteCare, business support and some insurance thingy thrown in for free. If I have some issue with a machine I call a number and the next day a guy shows up and replaces whatever parts they think might be causing the problem, no questions asked. I've had motherboard issues on one of the machines, and CompleteCare was definitely a lifesaver... I just called a number one afternoon, the next morning a guy showed up and replaced the motherboard, wham bam - almost no downtime and very convenient.

For the next update cycle, due this summer, I've seriously been considering replacing the Dells with a Mac Pro and a MacBook Pro 17", but I'm a little hesitant.

First off, in terms of service I'll be going back to the stone age, even if I get the AppleCare plan. If the MBP breaks down I have to get on a train to Stockholm (because Apple are too aloof to repair laptops on location), leave it at some service center and go back and pick it up a couple of days later. If the same thing happens to the Mac Pro, I'll actually have to do the same thing because apparently I live about 6 miles outside whatever radius Apple can be arsed to cover around any given service center. So AppleCare is just a rudimentary and lame warranty extension in my case, and I'd be looking at several days of downtime I really can't afford.

Then there's the cost... I'd be paying a serious amount more for the Macs, not just because of the 25% Apple tax but also because I seriously doubt AppleStore is Dell-style friendly and would give me 10% off and throw in AppleCare for free. Apple is more like the Soup Nazi in that respect. I keep trying to get myself to buy the "Porsche argument" (i.e. that the premium pricetag on Apple's machines is justified for various reasons), but a Porsche is handmade in Germany, whereas an Apple computer is mass manufactured in a Chinese sweatshop, probably next door from where they make Wal-Mart Durabrand boomboxes... and a Porsche is built with exclusive parts all the way, whereas an Apple computer under its glorious aluminium enclosure has the same dime-a-dozen components as any given Dell/Gateway/HP/ASUS/Acer box.

Then there are some minor technical issues as well, such as BootCamp being flakey. Apparently, firewire audio works very poorly under BootCamp because Apple's keyboard driver is causing a huge amount of DPC spikes, resulting in massive audio dropouts. Or the fact that the MBP allegedly gets smoking hot when running Vista or Windows 7. If Macs are crippled PCs I can't do my work on them.

So yeah, I'm really not sure what to do. The industrial design sucker in me wants to go Apple across the board, and punish Dell for their lack of interest in nice design and their fascination for plastic, but the rest of me is vehemently against rewarding Apple for their crappy service and raw, predatory greed. The vibe they give me is that it won't be long before the power cable costs extra. I wonder if Gene Simmons, the greediest extortionist in showbiz history, is secretly running Apple...

 

[im2fast]

to us it may be a hole, to apple - there is a thing called the iMac.

Tough part about the Imac is the lack of upgrading a video card, ram (yeah, only 8 gigs on a single quad machine), internal hard drives and optical drives. A top of the line Imac would do me just fine...today. But what of tomorrow?? And what exactly will a 2.66 nehalem quad give over the previous quad processors? I wouldn't be getting a Macpro for status nor for making a living from it. My G4 tower is just too far behind and I need/want a machine that can last me five or so years.

 

[Goona]

I got that Inspiron in 2005 with 3 years warranty bringing it to over 2000 dollars, when it started overheating and I called them, they made me ship it back to them, didn't send anyone to my house to fix anything. I'm in Canada.

 

[AidenShaw]

Tough part about the Imac is the lack of upgrading a video card, ram (yeah, only 8 gigs on a single quad machine...

There are no quad Imacs - they're duals.

Apple's cheapest quad is $2499, Dell's cheapest is $489 (with a Core i7 for $799).

 

[Tarkio]

Tough part about the Imac is the lack of upgrading a video card, ram (yeah, only 8 gigs on a single quad machine), internal hard drives and optical drives. A top of the line Imac would do me just fine...today. But what of tomorrow?? And what exactly will a 2.66 nehalem quad give over the previous quad processors? I wouldn't be getting a Macpro for status nor for making a living from it. My G4 tower is just too far behind and I need/want a machine that can last me five or so years.

If you have to ask you might as well save money and buy a PC

I'm upgrading from a 733mhz SP G4 w/original ACD. It still works perfectly and I've been a happy camper for years, but all good things come to an end.

I just ordered a new MP 8-core 2.26 w/12GB RAM (6x2GB), Radeon HD 4870 and 30" ACD. Did I pay too much? Sure I did! But this machine will be perfect for my needs, and I'm so excited I could spit!

(It helps that my company gives 1-year interest-free computer loans, and my company discount saved me about $500.)