First benchmarks for redesigned Mac Pro reportedly appear online

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
Just over one week following its sneak preview at WWDC 2013, the radically redesigned Mac Pro has supposedly shown up on a popular Internet based benchmarking site running what appears to be a specialized build of OS X 10.9 Mavericks.

The purported Mac Pro popped up on Primate Labs' Geekbench Browser on Wednesday, carrying model number "AAPLJ90,1" and an impressive hardware spec sheet, including the 12-core Intel Xeon E5-2697 clocked at 2.70GHz, and 64GB of speedy 1867 DDR3 RAM.

It is possible that the machine's name and model number were spoofed, but as MacRumors notes, the system is running build 13A2054 of OS X 10.9 Mavericks, which is a different iteration than the developer preview Apple seeded earlier in June. Also lending to the computer's authenticity is a motherboard identifier previously associated with the new Mac Pro.

As for performance, the machine achieved a 32-bit Geekbench score of 23,901, compared to Apple's current top-of-the-line Mac Pro which scored an average of 21,980. The current high-end model is also running a 12-core setup, but with a pair of six-core Westmere family Xeon CPUs clocked at 3.06GHz.

Mac Pro
Source: Geekbench


The Geekbench appearance is the first of what will likely be many such sightings leading up to the Mac Pro's launch "later this year."
«1345

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 93
    I'm curious how this ranks with the current Mac Pro.

    I've been seriously considering buying one this fall, but I'm still hesitant because of the choice of GPUs in it. My experience both Windows side, and Mac side with AMD GPUs have been less than stellar, and it's highly improbable that there will be aftermarket upgrades for it in several years time like the previous Mac Pro.
  • Reply 2 of 93
    MacProMacPro Posts: 17,985member
  • Reply 3 of 93
    drblankdrblank Posts: 3,383member
    I just went to Intel's site and couldn't find the E5-2697 listed anywhere. Is this a processor that's not been announced?
  • Reply 4 of 93
    MacProMacPro Posts: 17,985member
    This doesn't seem right given the mid 2010 Mac Pro comes in at 21980. Perhaps Geekbench tests are not suitable for this machine else this is a new Mac Pro with half its cores shut down!
  • Reply 5 of 93
    tezgnotezgno Posts: 36member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by drblank View Post



    I just went to Intel's site and couldn't find the E5-2697 listed anywhere. Is this a processor that's not been announced?


     


    Yes. The new Mac Pro is running on Ivy Bridge based Xeon processors that technically will not be released until Q3 of this year at the earliest. There are several other components within the Mac Pro that are the same way as well (i.e. haven't actually been released yet).

  • Reply 6 of 93
    emig647emig647 Posts: 2,404member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by drblank View Post



    I just went to Intel's site and couldn't find the E5-2697 listed anywhere. Is this a processor that's not been announced?


     


    It's not out yet. Supposedly shipping Q3 2013.


     


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post



    This doesn't seem right given the mid 2010 Mac Pro comes in at 21980. Perhaps Geekbench tests are not suitable for this machine else this is a new Mac Pro with half its cores shut down!


     


    Huh? This is comparing a single 2.7ghz 12 core xeon cpu to the 2010 mac pro with dual 3.07ghz 6 core xeon cpus, and it still beat it by 10%. Not to mention, ~1/8th the size?

  • Reply 7 of 93
    ifij775ifij775 Posts: 470member
    32-bit metrics? Isn't everything 64-bit any more.
  • Reply 8 of 93
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member
    ifij775 wrote: »
    32-bit metrics? Isn't everything 64-bit any more.

    Light load right now, my machine reports everything open as 64-bit except for Dashboard and Safari's QTServer. I'm certain I have 32-bit applications, though.
  • Reply 9 of 93
    aaronjaaronj Posts: 1,595member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post





    Light load right now, my machine reports everything open as 64-bit except for Dashboard and Safari's QTServer. I'm certain I have 32-bit applications, though.


     


    Yeah, for me it's just Opera, Dashboard, and some Menubar add-ons.

  • Reply 10 of 93
    MacProMacPro Posts: 17,985member
    emig647 wrote: »
    It's not out yet. Supposedly shipping Q3 2013.


    Huh? This is comparing a single 2.7ghz 12 core xeon cpu to the 2010 mac pro with dual 3.07ghz 6 core xeon cpus, and it still beat it by 10%. Not to mention, ~1/8th the size?

    Size isn't everything! ;)

    Seriously I am expecting to see double scores and more at least on the new Mac Pro when it is released but as I say I wonder if the tests will need to be re thought.
  • Reply 11 of 93
    macxpressmacxpress Posts: 4,758member
    I'm thinking GeekBench isn't optimized for a the architecture in the new Mac Pro.
  • Reply 12 of 93
    MacProMacPro Posts: 17,985member
    macxpress wrote: »
    I'm thinking GeekBench isn't optimized for a the architecture in the new Mac Pro.

    My thoughts too.
  • Reply 13 of 93


    The old Mac Pro scores basically got thrown into the "trash can". Seriously though, I want one.

  • Reply 14 of 93
    apple ][apple ][ Posts: 8,360member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post



    Seriously I am expecting to see double scores and more at least on the new Mac Pro when it is released but as I say I wonder if the tests will need to be re thought.


     


    Double scores? As in the new Mac Pro scoring around 40,000? You must be smoking some good shit.....................image

  • Reply 15 of 93
    emig647emig647 Posts: 2,404member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post





    Size isn't everything! image



    Seriously I am expecting to see double scores and more at least on the new Mac Pro when it is released but as I say I wonder if the tests will need to be re thought.


     


    I used to think the same thing. My current Nehalem Mac Pro is locking up while being pushed, so I took it to the Apple Store Monday. OMG what a pig. The current version is just way too big, especially if these need to be moved at all (filming, live audio, etc w/e). I'm no potato chip eater either :)


     


    Personally, for it being a single cpu vs dual cpu, I'm pretty stoked there is still a 10% increase in performance. Not to forget the faster SSD, faster ram and faster GPUs. This thing is gonna be a beast.


     


    I do wonder, will we be able to daisy chain Mac Pros via Thunderbolt 2?

  • Reply 16 of 93
    emig647emig647 Posts: 2,404member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by macxpress View Post



    I'm thinking GeekBench isn't optimized for a the architecture in the new Mac Pro.


     


    Buy GeekBench so John can afford to get a new Mac Pro and optimize it :). My shameless plug. He'll get it dialed soon I'm sure. I'd love to see him do a Open CL benchmark test. He knows GPUs extremely well. 

  • Reply 17 of 93
    nhtnht Posts: 4,393member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post


     


    Double scores? As in the new Mac Pro scoring around 40,000? You must be smoking some good shit.....................image



     


    Three years later, why the f**k not around 40K?  I hope it's because it was running the benchmark in 32 bit mode because otherwise it's f**king pathetic.


     


     


    In 64 bit mode the Mid 2012 Mac Pro jumps to 25K.  That's not enough of a bump between 32 bit and 64 bit so I hope that this test MacPro is gimped somehow and we do see benchmarks in the 30K+ range.


     


     



    Mac Pro (Mid 2012)







































    Section

    Description

    Score

    Geekbench Score


     


    Geekbench 2.4.0 Pro for Mac OS X x86 (64-bit)


    Integer

    Processor integer performance

    25476

    25846

    Floating Point

    Processor floating point performance

    43951

    Memory

    Memory performance

    5054

    Stream

    Memory bandwidth performance

    53















     

     

     

     


     


     


    http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/1546880


     


     



    Dell Inc. Precision T7600







































    Section

    Description

    Score

    Geekbench Score

    Geekbench 2.4.0 for Windows x86 (64-bit)

    Integer

    Processor integer performance

    35847

    40334

    Floating Point

    Processor floating point performance

    72935

    Memory

    Memory performance

    6900

    Stream

    Memory bandwidth performance

    8804

     















     

     

     

     


     


    http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/1681296


     



    Hewlett-Packard HP Z820 Workstation







































    Section

    Description

    Score

    Geekbench Score

    Geekbench 2.4.2 for Windows x86 (64-bit)

    Integer

    Processor integer performance

    37116

    40561

    Floating Point

    Processor floating point performance

    73327

    Memory

    Memory performance

    6709

    Stream

    Memory bandwidth performance

    5647


    http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/1746358


     


     


    Mac mini (Late 2012)


     


     







































    Section

    Description

    Score

    Geekbench Score

    Geekbench 2.4.0 Pro for Mac OS X x86 (64-bit)

    Integer

    Processor integer performance

    10831

    12907

    Floating Point

    Processor floating point performance

    18774

    Memory

    Memory performance

    8700

    Stream

    Memory bandwidth performance

    8053

     


    http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/2067580


     


     


  • Reply 18 of 93
    cpsrocpsro Posts: 2,442member


    Just think if Apple had bothered to design the new Mac Pro for dual Xeons... it would have benchmarked 4X as fast a 5+ year old Mac Pro rather than just 2X.

  • Reply 19 of 93
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member


    I'm sure it is spectacularly fast but right now with my 2010 Mac Pro 8 core, it is already faster than I am. I'm pretty efficient when it comes to multitasking. I usually have around  five CS applications open at the same time and switching between them constantly. If I am rendering a movie, I can still work on other stuff at the same time. In a single task environment, if movie rendering is the only important thing, then brute power is important, but in my routine, I'm usually juggling ten balls in the air at once and my current Mac Pro has not let me down yet.

  • Reply 20 of 93
    bdkennedy1bdkennedy1 Posts: 1,459member
    I think the biggest concern is what this is going to cost. Apple removing internal component upgrades means the cost of external components is passed on to the consumer. Thunderbolt components are expensive. If Apple is going to keep the Mac Pro the same price as the previous generation then I have a serious problem with upgrading. The benchmark scores compared to the previous version are not nearly as impressive as the keynote said they were.
Sign In or Register to comment.