When everything should go right, and openCL is so much integrated into the 3d apps and pro apps, we wouldn’t even need to care about Intel and it’s redicoulous prizes. We saw the same thing with the quad-core G5 that i bought around 4 years ago. Now don’t get me wrong, this is the fault of Intel. Then the next was a freaking Quad-core 2,66Ghz for 2300€ that couldn’t even beat mine in a mile.Īnd 5300€ for a octo-core 2,93 Ghz that isn’t even double the speed of mine ? This is crap. The former one – the one i am typing this on – was the basic octo-core 2,83Ghz that costed around 2500€ 2 years ago. What i wish is for the price of the mac to be reasonable.
In the test they even compared speed for multitasks, so for as far as i care, the 50% increase could just be caused by having 50% more cores that that quad-core model.Īnd for who said Autodesk is keeping an eye on this: Keep dreaming! Autodesk never even optimizes for it’s os’s so the hell they would optimize for hardware. Lacking the internal expansion that once drew advanced hobbyists to the line, the new Mac Pro is truly a workstation-class computer designed to shave minutes and hours off projects that video, audio and programming pros run day-in and day-out.They said with the test they compared at equal clockspeed, but never with how many cores. The new Mac Pro redefines Apple’s highest-end system. The Mac Pro was much faster at at Phoshop, especially the OpenCL action script, Final Cut Pro import and render tests, as well as MathematicaMark and Cinebench CPU tests. The iMac was faster at iTunes, zipping and unzipping files, PCMark Office suite tests and even 3D game tests. But while the scores averaged out to be similar overall, individual results show some major differences.
The new 6-core Mac Pro had an overall Speedmark 9 score almost identical to a $2699 CTO 27-inch iMac that was our Speedmark 9 champ before testing the new CTO Mac Pro. In many tasks, a consumer-oriented system like the iMac might perform better. The custom Mac Pro’s D700 graphics helped the CTO Mac Pro post frame rates 22 to 29 percent higher in the Heaven and Valley benchmarks at higher resolutions.Īs we’ve seen before, the Mac Pro is not for everyone. CPU tests showed the custom Mac Pro’s 8-core advantage, posting an 18 percent higher Cinebench CPU score, 17 percent faster Final Cut Pro render result, and a 41 percent higher MathematicaMark score.
Apple 6 core mac pro zip#
Many tests showed less than 5 percent difference between the systems, including Photoshop, iTunes, Aperture, File copy, file Zip and Unzip, and PCMark Office suite running on a Parallels virtual machine. MathematicaMark was 41 percent faster on the CTO Mac Pro.
Cranking the resolution to 2560 by 1600, the new Mac Pro was able to display 10 times as many frames per second as the 2012 Mac Pro.Īs one would expect, the stock 6-core Mac Pro couldn’t quite keep up with the new custom 8-core Mac Pro, which was 8 percent faster overall than the stock 6-core Mac Pro. PCMark Office tests were twice as fast on the new stock Mac Pro and graphics tests showed the dual AMD FirePro D500 GPUs in the new Mac Pro pushing twice as many frames per second in the Heaven graphics benchmark at 1280 by 720 resolutions than the 12-core Mac Pro with its Radeon HD 5770 graphics. Our file copy test was more than 4 times as fast on the new Mac Pro’s PCI-connected flash storage than on the 12-core system’s 7200 rpm drives. The new Mac Pro was faster in every test except the Cinebench CPU test, which was 10 percent faster on the 12-core system. In terms of overall performance, the 6-core Mac Pro was an impressive 65 percent faster that the previous high-end stock Mac Pro, the 2012 12-core Mac Pro with two 6-core Intel Xeon processors running at 2.4GHz.
0 kommentar(er)
