Which Xeon is used in the 6-core system?

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by hajime, Aug 2, 2012.

  1. hajime macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2007
    #1
    Hello, anybody knows which Xeon is used in the 6-core system? On the product website, it only mentions the 12-core and Quad-core systems. I want to know the cache size and its clock speed under turbo boost.
     
  2. hajime thread starter macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2007
    #3
    Thanks. It is relatively outdated compared with the E5-2687w.
     
  3. Umbongo macrumors 601

    Umbongo

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Location:
    England
    #4
    Well yeah it's 2 and a half years old.
     
  4. Inconsequential macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2007
    #5
    Stil performs extremely well, the new E5 chips are between 1 and 2 times faster, depending on what your doing. But the average performance difference is about 15%.
     
  5. steveOooo macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2008
    Location:
    UK
    #6
    So the mp2013 will be a whopping 30% faster ! Well duh apple - u did miss out on a processor generation!
     
  6. hajime, Aug 3, 2012
    Last edited: Aug 3, 2012

    hajime thread starter macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2007
    #7
    If I forget about the MacPro and get a HP Z820, the configurations would be like: E5-2687w (8 cores, 3.1GHz, 3.8GHz under TurboBoost) or E5-2643 (4-core, 3.3HGz), Nvidia Quadro 5000. Will that be just 15% faster than the 6-core MacPro?
     
  7. El Awesome macrumors 6502

    El Awesome

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2012
    Location:
    Zurich
    #8
    Is there any possibility to get this E5-2687w working in a MP4.1?
    If Sandy Birdges are working in all other Macs, there must be somehow a possibility to include that in a MP firmware, or not?
     
  8. Umbongo macrumors 601

    Umbongo

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Location:
    England
    #9
    No they use a diffrent socket and chipset.
     
  9. thekev macrumors 604

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #10
    There is 0 chance of this. It's not a firmware thing. These use a completely different socket and chipset. Westmere and Nehalem were compatible. Anything after that is 100% non compliant.

    Even if they perform remarkably well today, I have to wonder how long term support will look given that it has retained a large number of the same components since 2009. Once the 2013 model hits, will this one receive sub-par support?
     
  10. El Awesome macrumors 6502

    El Awesome

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2012
    Location:
    Zurich
    #11
    *facepalm*
    Thanks, sometimes I'm too stupid to live.
     
  11. thekev macrumors 604

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #12
    I'm really not sure about the intended tone of that response :p. Anyway I probably could have worded it differently, but I'm 100% certain on this one. The new ones use LGA2011.
     
  12. El Awesome macrumors 6502

    El Awesome

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2012
    Location:
    Zurich
    #13
    No, you're right. Unless there is a chance to get the CPU board from the 2013 MPs running in the older ones, you can forget it.

    I didn't even check the socket type before I asked. That's what I just facepalmed myself. (You know, I'm not awesome all the time :p )
     
  13. derbothaus macrumors 601

    derbothaus

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2010
    #14
    1-2 times faster? Am I missing something? Wouldn't that be 100-200% faster! Or is that 1x = nothing/ same, 2x = 100% faster? All are wrong except the 15% faster average.
     
  14. TableSyrup macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 29, 2012
    #15
  15. deconstruct60 macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    #16
    No, it does outline the other options.

    http://www.apple.com/macpro/specs.html

    Scroll down and select the pop up table marked by .

    "....View processor upgrade options chart ... "
     
  16. frabber macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2008
    #17
    2.5 years old, sitting on 300 billion dollar and still not be able to hire enough personell to upgrade these other than iphone/tablet/macbook computers .
    as if everything has to be blessed by john ive first.
    i tell you apple is severely bottlenecked in the wrong way
    kill it, or upgrade it, but don't leave it half-dead
     
  17. Inconsequential, Aug 3, 2012
    Last edited: Aug 3, 2012

    Inconsequential macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2007
    #18
    When I was looking at the benchmarks there are a few specialist cases, for example, something like AES encryption/decryption performance which is MUCH faster than the W3680 chips due to dedicated circuitry.

    Example: http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/core-i7-3930k-3820-test-benchmark,review-32336-6.html - Graph 4.

    In cases where pure clock speed counts and the app uses areas of the chip which haven't been optimised, the E5s have a small advantage.

    Go and have a look at the benchmarks yourself.

    More here: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/142?vs=552

    Even my mates mobile Sandy Bridge 2Ghz chip slams my W3680 in AES benchmarks.
     
  18. derbothaus macrumors 601

    derbothaus

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2010
    #19
    ^^^ Thanks for the clarification. I was initially like. No freakin way. Then I was like "OK, specialty apps". Now your post makes sense.
     
  19. deconstruct60 macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    #20
    And directly under graph 4 is the text ....

    " ... In my Sandy Bridge-E review, we figured out that the AES256 throughput of Intel’s AES-NI-equipped CPUs is tied directly to memory bandwidth. With only four cores mated to a quad-channel DDR3-1600 subsystem, the -3820 rises right to the top of our Cryptography results. ..."

    The W3680 has the dedicated circuitry.

    "AES New Instructions YES"
    http://ark.intel.com/products/47917...W3680-(12M-Cache-3_33-GHz-6_40-GTs-Intel-QPI)

    The fact that E5's have 4 memory controllers , better/faster internal ring bus, and higher RAM speeds are the primary differentiating factors. The instructions work so fast that if you have more cores lit up with them you can outstrip the memory bandwidth.

    It is not too hard to compose AES circuitry to en/decrypts as fast as you can pass bytes through the encoder. Basically "live streaming". So it boils down to how fast can stream bytes from memory.
     
  20. Inconsequential macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2007
    #21

    Ok, it is still twice as fast, proving my original comments as there is nothing you can do with the W3680 in a Mac Pro to make up the difference.
     

Share This Page