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

Updated Mac Pro Benchmarks and Video of Internals

commander.data said:
Comparison between CPU pricing between generations is a perfectly valid comparison simply because that is precisely how Intel does things. Intel has fairly stable price points and when new models are released they directly replace processors in existing price points. Often older models remain at the same price point, alongside their replacements, and don't drop in price.
Click to expand...

I included system prices the last time I posted my graph. I want to know what the processor prices are too actually. When I find them I think I'll add those in as well.
Here's my last post of that graph:


https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/7270035/
Here's the Cinebench10 results.

Cinebench10_Numbers.jpg


Here's all of the base prices including the 2009 models just released:

2006
Mac Pro Quad 2.0GHz $2,199 NEW *
Mac Pro Quad 2.66GHz $2,499 NEW *
Mac Pro Quad 3.0GHz $3,299 NEW

2007
Mac Pro Quad 2.0GHz $2,199 *
Mac Pro Quad 2.66GHz $2,499 *
Mac Pro Quad 3.0GHz $3,299
Mac Pro 8-core 3.0GHz $3,997 NEW *

2008
Mac Pro Quad 2.8GHz (2008) $2,299 NEW
Mac Pro 8-core 2.8GHz (2008) $2,799 NEW *
Mac Pro 8-core 3.0GHz (2008) $3,599 NEW
Mac Pro 8-core 3.2GHz (2008) $4,399 NEW *

2009
Mac Pro Quad 2.66GHz $2,499 NEW *
Mac Pro Quad 2.93GHz $2,999 NEW *
Mac Pro 8-core 2.26GHz $3,299 NEW *
Mac Pro 8-core 2.66GHz $4,699 NEW *
Mac Pro 8-core 2.93GHz $5,899 NEW *​

* = Appears in the above benchmarks.​
Click to expand...

Anyone interested in looking up the release prices of all the chips used in the Mac Pro models listed above? :D
 
Flavioparentiq said:
If you got the money, the best buy is the octo 2.66 nehalem with the new radeon.
Click to expand...

Think about what you just said... "If you got the money..." and "best buy..." Hmm seems to be some conflict in that remark. :D

Actually the best buy for a 2.66 quad nehalem is to buy corei7 parts off the shelf and add an EFI-X into the system. Then you'll have a mac with MUCH better specs, nearly identical CPU specs (identical but there's some question about the ECC functions which are not important at all), and it'll only cost about $1,000 ~ $1400 as apposed to the $2,500 Apple wants. :)

.
 
Tesselator said:
Think about what you just said... "If you got the money..." and "best buy..." Hmm seems to be some conflict in that remark. :D

Actually the best buy for a 2.66 quad nehalem is to buy corei7 parts off the shelf and add an EFI-X into the system. Then you'll have a mac with MUCH better specs, nearly identical CPU specs (identical but there's some question about the ECC functions which are not important at all), and it'll only cost about $1,000 ~ $1400 as apposed to the $2,500 Apple wants. :)

.
Click to expand...

Sure, but then you don't have apple care, you risk to loose the efi boot when snow leopard comes out, and your system isn't stable enough for a professional workstation... not supported drivers/hardware and oh yeah, it's illegal. Let's say the best buy isn't the nehalem, just a powerful i7 core and a 1gb geforce so you play crysis, and surf the net. If it's what you want to do.

PS: I was pointing the OCTO 2.66, not the quad :)
 
Flavioparentiq said:
Sure, but then you don't have apple care,
Click to expand...
All I can say is LOL! Besides it's more like $2,800 is you want Apple Care. :(

you risk to loose the efi boot when snow leopard comes out, and your system isn't stable enough for a professional workstation... not supported drivers/hardware and oh yeah, it's illegal.
Click to expand...

EFI-X takes care of all of that and it is NOT illegal!


PS: I was pointing the OCTO 2.66, not the quad :)
Click to expand...

Oh, the octad.. hehehe My bad. :D But I guess 3rd party 5500 series systems will be available at far less than Apple wants relatively soon. A month or two? And.. it's NOT illegal! :D Apple really is going overboard on the 2009 price structure. It's nothing short of crazy.
 
Tesselator said:
I included system prices the last time I posted my graph. I want to know what the processor prices are too actually. When I find them I think I'll add those in as well.
Here's my last post of that graph:


https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/7270035/


Anyone interested in looking up the release prices of all the chips used in the Mac Pro models listed above? :D
Click to expand...
I included links to Intel's price lists with my last post.

I'll break them out here so it's easier to see. I'm only going to do the current 2009 and the previous 2008 Mac Pros.

2008 Models:
1 x 2.80GHz E5462 Harpertown: $797 ($2299 overall Mac Pro price)
2 x 2.80GHz E5462 Harpertown: $797 x 2 = $1594 ($2699 overall Mac Pro price)
2 x 3.00GHz X5472 Harptertown: $958 x 2 = $1914 ($3599 overall Mac Pro price)
2 x 3.20GHz X5482 Harpertown: $1279 x 2 = $2558 ($4399 overall Mac Pro price)

2009 Models:
1 x 2.66GHz W3520 Bloomfield: $284 ($2499 overall Mac Pro price)
1 x 2.93GHz W3540 Bloomfield: $562 ($2999 overall Mac Pro price)
2 x 2.26GHz E5520 Gainestown: $373 x 2 = $746 ($3299 overall Mac Pro price)
2 x 2.66GHz X5550 Gainestown: $958 x 2 = $1916 ($4699 overall Mac Pro price)
2 x 2.93GHz X5570 Gainestown: $1386 x 2 = $2772 ($5899 overall Mac Pro price)

Once again, the 2009 base 1 x 2.66GHz Mac Pro at $2499 only contains $284 worth of processors compared to $1594 worth of processors in the previous 2 x 2.80GHz $2799 2008 Mac Pro. The cost of 2 x 2.26GHz processors in the $3299 2009 Mac Pro is less than that of a single 2.80GHz processor in the 2008 Mac Pro. Even if Nehalem is faster, Apple is choosing significantly cheaper processors without corresponding changes in overall model pricing. In other words, there is a lot more performance to be had at the same processor price points as the old Mac Pro, that Apple is converting to profit instead. (Which may well be smart considering the economy). For example, 2 x 2.53GHz E5540 Nehalem based Xeons has a launch price of $744 each ($1488 total) which is actually less than the $797 each ($1594 total) of the old 2.80GHz E5462 Harpertowns.

Intel's price lists:

Nehalem based Xeon launch pricing:
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-product-roadmap-2009,6384.html

Pricing for all other Intel processors:
http://files.shareholder.com/downlo...1EA-87F8-410F752F12EF/Feb_22_09_1ku_Price.pdf

Edited to add in overall Mac Pro pricing beside raw CPU pricing for better comparison.
 
commander.data said:
I'll break them out here so it's easier to see. I'm only going to do the current 2009 and the previous 2008 Mac Pros.

2008 Models:
1 x 2.80GHz E5462 Harpertown: $797
2 x 2.80GHz E5462 Harpertown: $797 x 2 = $1594
2 x 3.00GHz X5472 Harptertown: $958 x 2 = $1914
2 x 3.20GHz X5482 Harpertown: $1279 x 2 = $2558

2009 Models:
1 x 2.66GHz W3520 Bloomfield: $284
1 x 2.93GHz W3540 Bloomfield: $562
2 x 2.26GHz E5520 Gainestown: $373 x 2 = $746
2 x 2.66GHz X5550 Gainestown: $958 x 2 = $1916
2 x 2.93GHz X5570 Gainestown: $1386 x 2 = $2772
Click to expand...

Awesome! Thank you. Yeah, I skim sometimes when the post is long. :D

PS: Apple DID actually change the pricing structure! They ADDED $1000 to $2000 to every Mac Pro model while as you point out, using cheaper parts at the same time. :(

.
 
Tesselator said:
All I can say is LOL! Besides it's more like $2,800 is you want Apple Care. :(



EFI-X takes care of all of that and it is NOT illegal!




Oh, the octad.. hehehe My bad. :D But I guess 3rd party 5500 series systems will be available at far less than Apple wants relatively soon. A month or two? And.. it's NOT illegal! :D Apple really is going overboard on the 2009 price structure. It's nothing short of crazy.
Click to expand...

what part of "your system isn't stable enough for a professional workstation... not supported drivers/hardware" don't you understand? This systems are for pro... can't play, kiddo
 
commander.data said:
I included links to Intel's price lists with my last post.

I'll break them out here so it's easier to see. I'm only going to do the current 2009 and the previous 2008 Mac Pros.

2008 Models:
1 x 2.80GHz E5462 Harpertown: $797 ($2299 overall Mac Pro price)
2 x 2.80GHz E5462 Harpertown: $797 x 2 = $1594 ($2699 overall Mac Pro price)
2 x 3.00GHz X5472 Harptertown: $958 x 2 = $1914 ($3599 overall Mac Pro price)
2 x 3.20GHz X5482 Harpertown: $1279 x 2 = $2558 ($4399 overall Mac Pro price)

2009 Models:
1 x 2.66GHz W3520 Bloomfield: $284 ($2499 overall Mac Pro price)
1 x 2.93GHz W3540 Bloomfield: $562 ($2999 overall Mac Pro price)
2 x 2.26GHz E5520 Gainestown: $373 x 2 = $746 ($3299 overall Mac Pro price)
2 x 2.66GHz X5550 Gainestown: $958 x 2 = $1916 ($4699 overall Mac Pro price)
2 x 2.93GHz X5570 Gainestown: $1386 x 2 = $2772 ($5899 overall Mac Pro price)

Once again, the 2009 base 1 x 2.66GHz Mac Pro at $2499 only contains $284 worth of processors compared to $1594 worth of processors in the previous 2 x 2.80GHz $2799 2008 Mac Pro. The cost of 2 x 2.26GHz processors in the $3299 2009 Mac Pro is less than that of a single 2.80GHz processor in the 2008 Mac Pro. Even if Nehalem is faster, Apple is choosing significantly cheaper processors without corresponding changes in overall model pricing. In other words, there is a lot more performance to be had at the same processor price points as the old Mac Pro, that Apple is converting to profit instead. (Which may well be smart considering the economy). For example, 2 x 2.53GHz E5540 Nehalem based Xeons has a launch price of $744 each ($1488 total) which is actually less than the $797 each ($1594 total) of the old 2.80GHz E5462 Harpertowns.

Intel's price lists:

Nehalem based Xeon launch pricing:
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-product-roadmap-2009,6384.html

Pricing for all other Intel processors:
http://files.shareholder.com/downlo...1EA-87F8-410F752F12EF/Feb_22_09_1ku_Price.pdf

Edited to add in overall Mac Pro pricing beside raw CPU pricing for better comparison.
Click to expand...

EXCELLENT post. I have noticed along ALL of Apple's current Mac products, that Apple is using lower cost CPUs or "same" technology CPUs and charging the same pricing... OR, with the Mac Pro, when Apple does truly UPGRADE/UPDATE the components, it is absolutely charging a MUCH higher price for the update. Time for most Apple products is not yielding significantly faster Macs. For the Mac Pro, the "option" is there to truly upgrade.

It appears that the iPhone and iPod have shown Apple that it can yield much higher margins and profit ratios per cost of dollar spent on the consumer products that are NOT Macs. So, it is using that modeling on the Macs and what we are seeing is disappointing as Mac computer users/BUYERS.

When Apple truly updates the CPUs, we are seeing exactly where Apple intends to make higher margins. This is unfortunate for everyone, as most Mac buyers do NOT see CPU upgrades, not in last few years. When the Mac Pro does see true CPU upgrades, Mac Pro buyers have to fork out the extra cash to make sure Apple gets its margin.

At least Mac Pro buyers have the "OPTION" to truly UPGRADE their Mac Pro CPUs (not possible for all other Mac updates in last year). Hopefully Apple is now where it WANTS to be to make sure the shareholders are making their money. Hopefully, moving forward proves to see upgrades as the current shift has made up the differences among the different Apple products.

Go :apple: Stock Price... GO GO GO!

I am not saying the pricing is anything other than what a "for profit" company should do for its shareholders. It is just unfortunate for Mac buyers. It is NOT unfortunate for Apple shareholders. A large shareholder surely has to appreciate how Apple is treating new technology. As long as in the long run, Apple knows EXACTLY what it is doing and where the numbers are going. We have to expect that Apple is fully gauging the economy worldwide and will continue to grow or if not grow in number of Macs sold, grow in net income on the Mac side.

My two cents.
 
Tesselator said:
Actually the best buy for a 2.66 quad nehalem is to buy corei7 parts off the shelf and add an EFI-X into the system.
Click to expand...

You have to be careful, though. The only board confirmed to work is Intel's reference board which has the same limitations as the Mac Pro (4 Dimms). Unfortunately, the EFI-X guys took a page from Apple's book on secrecy. The last time anything was posted regarding progress on the GA-EX58 was in December I think.

Flavioparentiq said:
what part of "your system isn't stable enough for a professional workstation... not supported drivers/hardware" don't you understand?
Click to expand...
Well, since you lied about the "illegal" part, why should anyone take the rest of your assertion seriously?
 
prices from the past

As to the cinebench benchmark vs price vs time, the dual processor G4 (2002 Quicksilver) was $3000, I'm still using it, with appropriate upgrades.

I haven't checked Cinebench for the new mini, but the Xbench results for the 2009 mini are about 2.5 times faster than this quicksilver. The only place the quicksilver holds it's own is the disk drive, and that is about a tie. So the 5400 rpm laptop drive in the mini has matched the performance of the 7200 rpm SATA drive and card in the Quicksilver. And the 9400M video is faster that the ATI 9600 video card upgrade in the quicksilver.

Time to upgrade. I'll just wait a bit more for Snow Leopard.
 
Apple and Oranges

The worlds fastest computer running OS X is not a real Apple Mac Pro with 2 x 2.93GHz CPU's, but let's say a Hacktosh with Asus Z8NA mainboard and two OC'ed Nehalem CPU's (yes the 5500 series) running at a stunning clock speed, but that's like saying that Seat is a Volkswagen isn't it?

It will be cheaper, but not the real thing (which is where people pay a premium for after all).
 
TheThirdMan said:
And why does everyone think snow leopard is made for i7!?
Click to expand...
That's what I don't get too. Some people are apparently comparing Gainestown Mac Pro with Snow Leopard to Harpertown Mac Pro with Leopard.

That comparison may be more valid after Snow Leopard is released, but not now.

AZREOSpecialist said:
All of the Mac Pros have Turbo Boost which increases clock speeds by 10-15% as dictated by workload.
Click to expand...
Can someone clear this up for me: Does Turbo Boost increase the clocks of a few cores when they are heavily used (and the other ones not used), or increase the clocks of all cores when the rest of the system is relatively cool? (Or both?)

AZREOSpecialist said:
How does today's top-end Mac Pro at 3.3 GHz qualify as a "pitifully low clock speed"
Click to expand...
That was probably the 2.27 GHz CPU.

AZREOSpecialist said:
if, clock cycle for clock cycle, offers significant performance benefits over the last generation?
Click to expand...
Factor price, multiple quad-core systems, CPU prices, and the 2.27 GHz model and the new Mac Pro doesn't look quite as good.

AZREOSpecialist said:
Does the competition offer faster clock speed Nehalems?
Click to expand...
They will soon; the fastest Gainestown is 3.2 GHz (faster with Turbo Boost).
 
Master Chief said:
The worlds fastest computer running OS X is not a real Apple Mac Pro with 2 x 2.93GHz CPU's, but let's say a Hacktosh with Asus Z8NA mainboard and two OC'ed Nehalem CPU's (yes the 5500 series) running at a stunning clock speed, but that's like saying that Seat is a Volkswagen isn't it?

It will be cheaper, but not the real thing (which is where people pay a premium for after all).
Click to expand...
It's a computer though. :confused:
 
iMacmatician said:
...Can someone clear this up for me: Does Turbo Boost increase the clocks of a few cores when they are heavily used (and the other ones not used), or increase the clocks of all cores when the rest of the system is relatively cool? (Or both?)...
Click to expand...

The following quotes are taken from the Intel Turbo Boost Technology white paper: "All active cores in the processor will operate at the same frequency. Even at frequencies above the base operating frequency, all active cores will run at the same frequency and voltage."

"Intel® Turbo Boost technology core frequency upside availability is ultimately constrained by power delivery limits, but within those constraints, it is limited by the following factors:
• The estimated current consumption of the processor
• The estimated power consumption of the processor
• The temperature of the processor

"The number of active cores at any given instant dictates the upper limit of Intel® Turbo Boost technology."
 
Eidorian said:
It's a computer though. :confused:
Click to expand...

Exactly! This isn't Nikon or Porsche where everything is designed by the manufacturer. Apple is essentially a VAR when it comes to hardware and an OEM when it comes to their OS.

VAR = Value Added Retailer
OEM = Original Equipment Manufacturer

Anyone treating the Apple name as a "brand" like Nikon and etc. has a few missing marbles somewhere! It's mainly about the OS and the case design when it comes to the Mac Pro and really all Mac models. While the case design is indeed pretty groovy it's certainly not worth $2,000 extra! Maybe $200 at most - if you're a freak and a fan!



Mr. 123,
Thanks for that. Point taken!
 
.[/QUOTE]

Flavioparentiq said:
what part of "your system isn't stable enough for a professional workstation... not supported drivers/hardware" don't you understand? This systems are for pro... can't play, kiddo
Click to expand...

Tesselator said:
That's completely untrue and so can be safely ignored!!!

Try googling Hackintosh stability. There's always problems. You have to be really careful about doing updates. It's more of a hobby.... One day it works fine, and the next you have to figure out quirky problems.

Like someone else in this thread said, your dick isn't the biggest one out there anymore. Just get used to yours and learn how to make it work for yourself.
Click to expand...
 
Tesselator said:
Exactly! This isn't Nikon or Porsche where everything is designed by the manufacturer. Apple is essentially a VAR when it comes to hardware and an OEM when it comes to their OS.

VAR = Value Added Retailer
OEM = Original Equipment Manufacturer

Anyone treating the Apple name as a "brand" like Nikon and etc. has a few missing marbles somewhere! It's mainly about the OS and the case design when it comes to the Mac Pro and really all Mac models. While the case design is indeed pretty groovy it's certainly not worth $2,000 extra! Maybe $200 at most - if you're a freak and a fan!



Mr. 123,
Thanks for that. Point taken!
Click to expand...

yet you still buy one lol??
 
eeboarder said:
Try googling Hackintosh stability.
Click to expand...

Which one? There's like 4 different incarnations. In almost every carnation there are incompetents and abled computerists. Heck if you read here you will find people complaining about stability on authentic Apple gear. If one pays attention and chooses wisely it's just as stable. No more and no less.
 
Tesselator said:
Which one? There's like 4 different incarnations. In almost every carnation there are incompetents and abled computerists. Heck if you read here you will find people complaining about stability on authentic Apple gear. If one pays attention and chooses wisely it's just as stable. No more and no less.
Click to expand...

im on my hackintosh right now, works 100% perfectly for me. too a while to setup but it was definitely worth it! it doesnt crash, it doesnt burn, the only problem i have with it is that the 800mhz RAM is recognised as 667mhz..

it cost 1/4 the price of my slower iMac, i love apple.. but i cant miss an opportunity when i see one (computer had been lying around doing nothing)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back