Hosted by site sponsor WebMate.
Silver Tower Mac Pro (Dual Optical) Q&A - Published September 23, 2010
All Mac Q&As >> Silver Tower Mac Pro Dual Optical Q&A (Home)
To be notified of new Q&As, sign up for EveryMac.com's bimonthly email list.
How fast are the "Mid-2010" Mac Pro models compared to one another? How much faster are the "Mid-2010" Mac Pro models compared to the "Early 2009" models replaced?
In the company press release unveiling the "Mid-2010" Mac Pro models, Apple declared that these models deliver "up to 50 percent greater performance than the previous generation."
This claim is based on the difference between the performance of the Mac Pro "Twelve Core" 2.66 (2010/Westmere) custom configured with two 2.93 GHz Six Core Xeon X5670 processors for an additional US$1200 (US$6199 altogether for the system) and the earlier Mac Pro "Eight Core" 2.26 (2009/Nehalem) custom configured with two 2.93 GHz Quad Core Xeon (X5570) processors for an additional US$2600 (US$5899).
Apple also released an abundance of real-world tests that again show the top-of-the-line custom configured "Mid-2010/Westmere" model to be between 1.3 and 1.5 times faster than the previous top-of-the-line custom configured "Early 2009" model.
Regardless, as the marketing department at any company generally is compelled to present the most favorable set of test results, rather than objective ones, independent third-party analysis always is essential. Additionally, it would no doubt be worthwhile to know the performance of the stock models rather than just the most expensive options.
In its review, the industry-standard MacWorld reported:
Compared to the previous [US]$2499 Mac Pro with its single quad-core 2.66 GHz Intel Xeon Nehalem processor, 3 GB of RAM, a 640 GB hard drive, and 512 MB nVidia GeForce GT 120 graphics card, the new 2.8GHz quad-core Mac Pro was 13 percent faster overall in our Speedmark 6 benchmark suite of tests. . .
Overall, the new 2.4 GHz eight-core model was only 3 percent faster than the new 2.8 GHz quad-core Mac Pro. When we look at individual test results, however, we see that the eight-core system is much faster with the programs that take full advantage of multiple cores. MathematicaMark, for example, scored nearly 44 percent higher on the eight-core system than the new quad-core system. Cinebench was 28 percent faster on the eight-core system. With many programs, though, having fewer but faster processors was preferable, which gave the quad core 2.8 GHz Mac Pro an edge over the eight-core 2.4 GHz Mac Pro in our tests for Aperture, iTunes, and Photoshop. Even our Compressor test showed the quad core Mac Pro to be 4 percent faster.
Comparing the new 2.4 GHz eight-core Mac Pro to its predecessor, a 2.26 GHz eight-core model, we see a 15 percent improvement in our Speedmark 6 overall system performance test suite. Times for the new eight-core system were faster performance across the board, again with the biggest gain coming in our graphics tests.
The always excellent BareFeats put the "Mid-2010" Mac Pro models through a whole slew of detailed tests covering real world "extreme" applications, a real world "shootout", graphics and more and these definitely should be reviewed in their entirety for the full picture, but the site wisely concludes:
The difference between a 12-core, 8-core, and 6-core 2010 Mac Pro is not always dramatic when running cpu intensive pro apps. Even when all cores appear to be pedaling, they are not always functioning efficiently. In other words, there is not a one-to-one correlation between what you spend on a new Mac Pro, how many cores it has, and the performance you will experience in the real world.
MacPerformanceGuide hit the "Mid-2010" Mac Pro models with a full assault of tests covering Photoshop, Logic Studio, After Effects, Handbreak and more. After this complete analysis, the site concludes that the "'sweet spot' is the 3.33 GHz 6-core model" for most users. To be precise, that would be the "Six Core" 3.33 (2010/Westmere) custom configuration of the "Quad Core" 2.8 (2010/Nehalem).
Ultimately, it is clear that the "Mid-2010" Mac Pro models are solidly faster than the "Early 2009" Mac Pro models replaced although the differences can be modest for some tasks. In addition, performance differences between "Mid-2010" models varies greatly upon the software used and it is important to buy a system geared toward the software one uses the most.
To dynamically compare the performance of any "Mid-2010" Mac Pro model to any other G3 or later Mac with Geekbench benchmarks, please see EveryMac.com's Ultimate Mac Comparison feature.
To purchase a used Mac Pro, high-quality storage or memory for the Mac Pro, visit site sponsor Other World Computing.
Permalink | Report an Error/Typo | Sign Up for Site Update Notices
<< Mac Pro Dual Optical Drives Q&A (Main) | All Mac Q&As
Established in 1996, EveryMac.com has been created by experts with decades of experience with Apple hardware. EveryMac.com includes, and always has included, original research incorporating detailed, hands-on inspection of packaging, computers, and devices as well as extensive real-world use. All information is provided in good faith, but no website or person is perfect. Accordingly, EveryMac.com is provided "as is" without warranty of any kind whatsoever. EveryMac.com, and the authors thereof, shall not be held responsible or liable, under any circumstances, for any damages resulting from the use or inability to use the information within. For complete disclaimer and copyright information please read and understand the Terms of Use and the Privacy Policy before using EveryMac.com. Copying, scraping, or use of any content without expressed permission is not allowed, although links to any page are welcomed and appreciated.