First benchmarks for redesigned Mac Pro reportedly appear online
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.
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."
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.
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."
Comments
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.
http://browser.primatelabs.com/mac-benchmarks
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank
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).
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank
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
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?
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
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.
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.
My thoughts too.
The old Mac Pro scores basically got thrown into the "trash can". Seriously though, I want one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips
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.....................
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips
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.
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?
Quote:
Originally Posted by macxpress
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
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][
Double scores? As in the new Mac Pro scoring around 40,000? You must be smoking some good shit.....................
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
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.
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.