Originally Posted by Edtog
Now I'm confused, sorry, are there other benchmarks to look, this is what I based my opening post on, the 3.2 Harpertown is 30% up on the 4c Nehalem 2.80, or should other things be taken in consideration?
It does seem like it's a fair bit slower in some cases. There are Cinebench scores here:http://www.cbscores.com/
They list the MacPro3,1 2008 dual-X5482 around 7.5 and the single MacPro5,1 2010 single-W3530 around 5.1, which matches up with the barefeats benchmark. Even the lower 2008 MacPro3,1 8-core 2.8 E5462 gets 6.5.
Geekbench is around 10500 for the 8-core and 9800 for the quad-core so closer than the barefeats test.
The quad 3.2GHz Nehalem version of the Mac Pro you have gets a 5.6 in Cinebench and the 6-core 3.3GHz Westmere gets 8.7.
Ideally they would give you something between those two but they don't offer a single quad-core Westmere. The 3.2GHz Nehalem would still be closer to what you had though.
Closer still would be highest-end 27" iMac, which gets a 6.8: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wX0Uk_xggnM
I don't think it makes much of a difference getting the 3.2 vs 2.8 Mac Pro though and Apple seem to be making a fair decision giving you a brand new machine. I'd expect the refresh in Q3/Q4 this year will offer an entry machine that matches/exceeds your old one and you can sell the one you have (presumably with a warranty?) and get the newer one for a small upgrade cost.