Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

2009 Mac Pro in hand - unboxing etc.

Correction: Had a chance to talk to an Apple Systems Engineer, turns out you can only have multiple GT's or 1 ATI 4870 otherwise a powerdraw will occur. :mad:
 
Tesselator said:
Here's a graph of all the unique systems that have been posted so far. If you don't see your Mac Model listed here please run Cinebench10.1 (aka "Cinebench10") and post your results! A more complete list might be fun! :)

Be sure to include the Model and the CPU speed. Like "2009 Mac Mini 3.5" or whatever. ;)

Thanks!
Click to expand...

For reference, here is the Unibody 2.4Ghz MBP:


CINEBENCH R10
****************************************************

Tester : J the Ninja

Processor : Intel Core 2 Duo P8600
MHz : 2.4Ghz
Number of CPUs : 2
Operating System : OS X 32 BIT 10.5.6

Graphics Card : NVIDIA GeForce 9400M OpenGL Engine
Resolution : <fill this out>
Color Depth : <fill this out>

****************************************************

Rendering (Single CPU): 2499 CB-CPU
Rendering (Multiple CPU): 4905 CB-CPU

Multiprocessor Speedup: 1.96

Shading (OpenGL Standard) : 3810 CB-GFX


****************************************************
 
Hi Guys,

I am a long term lurker here, I have been following this thread for the past few days, finally have something to add.

Here are some benchmarks from my new 2009 Mac Pro Quad 2.66 It's a basic spec machine, 3Gb RAM etc... so these maybe useful for anyone in the same position as me when deciding between an iMac and a basic Mac Pro...

http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/116320

CINEBENCH R10
****************************************************

Tester :

Processor :
MHz :
Number of CPUs : 8
Operating System : OS X 32 BIT 10.5.6

Graphics Card : NVIDIA GeForce GT 120 OpenGL Engine
Resolution : <fill this out>
Color Depth : <fill this out>

****************************************************

Rendering (Single CPU): 3572 CB-CPU
Rendering (Multiple CPU): 14753 CB-CPU

Multiprocessor Speedup: 4.13

Shading (OpenGL Standard) : 6028 CB-GFX


****************************************************

If anyone has any questions or benchmarks you would like me to run I would be more than happy to help.

Cheers

Cris.
 
ddolde said:
WonderSaugage, can you identify the hard drive make and model?
Click to expand...

I bet it's either a WD Caviar Blue or Black.
If you go to Hard Disk Utility, you should be able to get the model number.
Same should be true of System Profiler.
 
CrisMatthews said:
Here are some benchmarks from my new 2009 Mac Pro Quad 2.66 It's a basic spec machine, 3Gb RAM etc... so these maybe useful for anyone in the same position as me when deciding between an iMac and a basic Mac Pro...
Click to expand...

Finally a quaddie! :D
I don't suppose you have any 4GB DDR3 DIMMs laying around? ;)

The biggest question by far is namely if the quad can handle more than 8GB (since Apple claim it takes 1GB or 2GB DIMMS..)
 
rylin said:
Finally a quaddie! :D
I don't suppose you have any 4GB DDR3 DIMMs laying around? ;)

The biggest question by far is namely if the quad can handle more than 8GB (since Apple claim it takes 1GB or 2GB DIMMS..)
Click to expand...

Sorry I can't help you there :)

I have got 6Gb or RAM on order from Crucial, but rather annoyingly they have gone out of stock in the UK and have put back my order! It should have been here in time for the Mac Pro turning up today. For me 6Gb is all I am ever likely to put in this machine if it does only take 2Gb modules.

What I can tell you is that there are only 4 slots for the memory and only one CPU is possible on the board. As expected. Other than that everything else looks the same as the Octo models.

I have made the jump today from my old MacBook (the first 2GHz version) and boy this thing feels like greased lightning to me! Just for giggles I ran the same tests on the old machine, Geekbench = 2579 Cinebench OpenCL = 875 Single CPU = 1981 Multi CPU = 3706. So this really is a massive leap ahead for me, there was never any question of spending more money so I am happy with my purchase and I think I am square in the middle of their target audience for this machine, was buying a high end iMac, but for a little but extra I get so much more :)

Cheers

Cris.
 
I know where you live! - Just Kidding

WonderSausage said:
• Processor 065-8315 Two 2.93GHz Quad-Core Intel Xe
• Memory 065-8333 6GB (6X1GB)
• Graphics Card 065-8316 ATI Radeon HD 4870 512MB
• RAID 065-7901 None
• Hard Drive Bay1 065-8537 640GB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/
• Hard Drive Bay2 065-7908 None
• Hard Drive Bay3 065-7913 None
• Hard Drive Bay4 065-7918 None
• Optical Drive 065-7923 One 18x SuperDrive
• Wireless Option 065-7925 None
• Mini Display Port Adapter 065-8677 NONE
• Mini Display Port Adapter2 065-8679 NONE
• Fibre Chl Card 065-7929 None
• MAC OS X SERVER 065-7932 None
• Apple Software App- iWork 065-7672 None
• Apple Software Final Cut Exp 065-7674 None
• Apple Software App-Aperture 065-7673 None
• Apple Software App-Logic Exp 065-7675 None
• SW APP-FILEMAKER 065-8307 NONE
• SW-MSO 065-8198 NONE
• Mouse from AOS 065-7938 Apple Mighty Mouse
• KEYBD + USER'S GUIDE FOR AOS 065-7943 APPLE KEYBD/USERS GUIDE
• Country Kit 065-7963 Country Kit Mac Pro

Stand by for more
Click to expand...

:apple:

Dude you are the envy of the Mac community!

I hope late summer I can find a decent PowerMac G5 2Ghz (Single/Dual) on the cheap. I've loved ALL Mac cases in the pro line

733Mhz QuickSilver (which I'm buying next weekend for nastalgia) was my
true experience with OS X 10.0.5 - 10.1.0 Puma (?). All the way to last years Mac Pro. I don't like how the CPU & Memory slots are on a daughtercard for a riser on the MoBo. Still must be good for simple repairs.

Prior was OS 7 on PowerBook 3400c

Congratulations on the setup! May it bring you supreme joy & productivity - even make back its worth in gold.
 
CrisMatthews said:
Hi Guys,

I am a long term lurker here, I have been following this thread for the past few days, finally have something to add.

Here are some benchmarks from my new 2009 Mac Pro Quad 2.66 It's a basic spec machine, 3Gb RAM etc... so these maybe useful for anyone in the same position as me when deciding between an iMac and a basic Mac Pro...

If anyone has any questions or benchmarks you would like me to run I would be more than happy to help.

Cheers

Cris.
Click to expand...


Pics of the CPU drawer would be good. Is the second socket and set of RAM slots actually there? Or is actually a different board? nvm, ninja'd

Also, judging by that score, the 2.66 Quad is indeed slower than the 2.8 Pennryn on multithreaded apps, even more so than the price drop would indicate. If you wanted to keep the CPU performance/$$ ratio the same, based on this benchmark alone (not worth much, I know), it should be $2200. It'll be interesting to see what other benchmarks come up with.
 
CrisMatthews said:
...my new 2009 Mac Pro Quad 2.66

Rendering (Single CPU): 3572 CB-CPU
Rendering (Multiple CPU): 14753 CB-CPU

Multiprocessor Speedup: 4.13
Click to expand...

I added you in to the graph! Thanks for this man!

Here's the new one:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here's a graph of all the unique systems that have been posted so far. If you don't see your Mac Model listed here please run Cinebench10.1 (aka "Cinebench10") and post your results! A more complete list might be fun! :)

Be sure to include the Model and the CPU speed. Like "2009 Mac Mini 3.5" or whatever. ;)

Thanks!

 
J the Ninja said:
Pics of the CPU drawer would be good. Is the second socket and set of RAM slots actually there? Or is actually a different board?
Click to expand...

How many times do you need to hear that the single CPU model has a different daughter card for the CPU/memory?

I would like part numbers off the main board so we can see if they are the same on both models or not.

S-
 
sidewinder said:
How many times do you need to hear that the single CPU model has a different daughter card for the CPU/memory?

I would like part numbers off the main board so we can see if they are the same on both models or not.

S-
Click to expand...

Go check the edit, pl0x
 
Just for fun, the updated 15" 2.66 MacBook Pro:

CINEBENCH R10
****************************************************
Processor : MacBook Pro
MHz : 2.66
Number of CPUs : 2
Operating System : OS X 32 BIT 10.5.6
Graphics Card : NVIDIA GeForce 9600M GT OpenGL Engine
****************************************************
Rendering (Single CPU): 2997 CB-CPU
Rendering (Multiple CPU): 5869 CB-CPU
Multiprocessor Speedup: 1.96
Shading (OpenGL Standard) : 5254 CB-GFX
****************************************************
 
rylin said:
Finally a quaddie! :D
I don't suppose you have any 4GB DDR3 DIMMs laying around? ;)

The biggest question by far is namely if the quad can handle more than 8GB (since Apple claim it takes 1GB or 2GB DIMMS..)
Click to expand...

Indeed. I too would love to hear an authoritative confirmation of this.

But honestly, I really can't think of any reason why it wouldn't be able to accept 4 4GB DIMMs. Obviously, I could be missing something. Is there any way we can find out for sure besides someone actually buying a 2009 quad and trying it?
 
J the Ninja said:
Also, judging by that score, the 2.66 Quad is indeed slower than the 2.8 Pennryn on multithreaded apps
Click to expand...

I don't think it was ever realistic to expect 4 cores to beat 8 when the clock speed is not that different. What is more important for me at this price point is the improvement in single core performance at 2.66. I think this Mac Pro is aim right at me, I can't afford 8 cores, and nor do I really need them. From what I can see it's a great improvement over the machine I was going to buy, a 3.06 iMac.

sidewinder said:
I would like part numbers off the main board so we can see if they are the same on both models or not.
Click to expand...

Any ideas of where I would find these on the board?

I am not going to take apart my new machine to post pictures, I am too busy playing with my new toy right now :) but I will when my 6Gb of memory turns up. The CPU is mounted to the RHS of the board, the heatsink looks even bigger than on the Octo's and there is a large empty space of the LHS where the other CPU should be. There isn't even holes for the missing components, this is a completely different daughter board. The rest of the machine doesn't seem to be missing any features or components from what I can tell, so I would suspect that the main board is the same.

Cheers

Cris.
 
In for a penny in for a pound. Here is a picture of the daughter board in-situ on the 2009 Quad Mac Pro...

Notice how smooth the PCB is on the LHS, this was never going to have a 2nd CPU :)

Cheers

Cris.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_9525.jpg
    IMG_9525.jpg
    300.9 KB · Views: 289
rylin said:
Finally a quaddie! :D
I don't suppose you have any 4GB DDR3 DIMMs laying around? ;)

The biggest question by far is namely if the quad can handle more than 8GB (since Apple claim it takes 1GB or 2GB DIMMS..)
Click to expand...

I would love to know as well. But, according to Newegg, there are only (5) 4GB sticks of RAM in their system, all DDR2. Anyone know if 4GB sticks are even manufactured?
 
Tesselator said:
I added you in to the graph! Thanks for this man!

Here's the new one:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here's a graph of all the unique systems that have been posted so far. If you don't see your Mac Model listed here please run Cinebench10.1 (aka "Cinebench10") and post your results! A more complete list might be fun! :)

Be sure to include the Model and the CPU speed. Like "2009 Mac Mini 3.5" or whatever. ;)

Thanks!

Click to expand...

This is great news for me. It is turning out like I hoped. The quads are still a very good machine compared to the octos, and in single threaded apps they beat the old harpers clock for clock, while still being decent in multi-thread.

If you run single threaded apps this is a great update (and thats me). You can now get better than 3.2GHz performance without paying the 8 X 3.2 price. The 2.93 quad is quite a bit cheaper than the old 3.2. From geekbench and cinebench results, I think the quad 2.93 will be just under the octo as far as single threading goes.

Now I just need those real world benchmarks to place my order. Common barefeats!!!! Should you have been the first to get a Mac Pro anyway?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back