2009 Mac Pro in hand - unboxing etc.

[Tesselator]

Just for fun, the updated 15" 2.66 MacBook Pro:

CINEBENCH R10
****************************************************
Processor : MacBook Pro
MHz : 2.66
Number of CPUs : 2
Rendering (Single CPU): 2997 CB-CPU
Rendering (Multiple CPU): 5869 CB-CPU
Multiprocessor Speedup: 1.96
****************************************************

Added!

Thanks 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!

 

[Keniff]

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!

Done! PM for ya...

 

[J the Ninja]

Added!

Thanks 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!

I posted the 2.4 MBP as well earlier, it's near the top of the page.

 

[tomhayes]

2009 Quad only 22% faster than the 2006 Quad?

I'm I reading this right? The new Quad Core 2.66 is only 22% faster on single threaded operations than my ancient 2006 Quad Mac Pro?

It's more like 60% (1.6x) faster on multithreaded operations though.

I don't know if I should upgrade now. The 4870 may be the deciding factor.

Why didn't they make the 2.66 Octo the base model? For $3299 that'd been a much more compelling upgrade.

 

[grue]

I'll run it on the 2009 iMac 2.66 w/9400M we got for the secretary in a bit, and I think there's a late 2.4Ghz Unibody 15" around somewhere as well.

 

[VirtualRain]

Hey is it obvious from the pics or user's who have them now how the RAID card will intercept the HD data path given the HD's run directly into the logic board (and presumably right into the Intel chipset)?

 

[richard.mac]

i think some Windows server nerd at some datacentre got peeved off at all the Mac Pro 4,1 submissions topping the GeekBench 2 charts. an IBM 3850 M2 now tops the charts, however it does have 47.5 GB of RAM and 32 cores

 

[NightSailor]

Congrats

Nice machine. Post some benchmarks please, and internal pictures too.

 

[Tallest Skil]

Nice machine. Post some benchmarks please, and internal pictures too.

If you'd actually read the thread, you'd notice that the thread is nothing but said data.

 

[Keniff]

Just a simple/silly question, for anyone that can answer (but deep down I think I might know what that'll be)

With the Processor's (on the 8-Core), is it possible to upgrade them at a later date?

 

[Abidubi]

I'm I reading this right? The new Quad Core 2.66 is only 22% faster on single threaded operations than my ancient 2006 Quad Mac Pro?

It's more like 60% (1.6x) faster on multithreaded operations though.

I don't know if I should upgrade now. The 4870 may be the deciding factor.

Why didn't they make the 2.66 Octo the base model? For $3299 that'd been a much more compelling upgrade.

What is so difficult about that? Its faster than even the last revision 2.8. If you like the 3299 price and as you stated, the multithreading is significantly better... why not a 2.93 quad? It will be faster than the last 3.2 in single threaded apps... and literally 2X as fast as you old 2.66 in multithreaded apps (you kinda have to imagine where it would fit on the graph).

 

[Tallest Skil]

Just a simple/silly question, for anyone that can answer (but deep down I think I might know what that'll be)

With the Processor's (on the 8-Core), is it possible to upgrade them at a later date?

Yes, and you'd know if you'd do a little searching.

 

[Abidubi]

Yes, and you'd know if you'd do a little searching.

Another little question... Anyone know of a good way to search? I would search for it but I thought I'd ask first.






Not poking fun at Keniff, just bugging tallest.

 

[Tallest Skil]

Another little question... Anyone know of a good way to search? I would search for it but I thought I'd ask first.






Not poking fun at Keniff, just bugging tallest.

Yeah, no problem. The in-forum search is pretty much broken, so we use MRoogle.

http://mroogle.*************

 

[Abidubi]

http://mroogle.*************

Your link was broken but I fixed it.

http://mroogle.*************

 

[Jouhne]

Damn... can't believe that no one got a Quad 2,93 already

 

[Keniff]

Your link was broken but I fixed it.

http://mroogle.*************

Yeah, nice one!
Shouldn't you be getting ready for bed, you must have school in the morning?

 

[galstaph]

For comparison, my 2007 17" mbp (santa rosa) 2.4ghz

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

Tester : galstaph

Processor : C2D (SR MBP late 2007)
MHz : 2.4Ghz
Number of CPUs : 2
Operating System : OS X 32 BIT 10.5.6

Graphics Card : NVIDIA GeForce 8600M GT OpenGL Engine
Resolution : <fill this out>
Color Depth : <fill this out>

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

Rendering (Single CPU): 2599 CB-CPU
Rendering (Multiple CPU): 4883 CB-CPU

Multiprocessor Speedup: 1.88

Shading (OpenGL Standard) : 4802 CB-GFX


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

and geekbench (32 bit): 3165

Integer Processor integer performance 2654
Floating Point Processor floating point performance 4650
Memory Memory performance 2111
Stream Memory bandwidth performance 1873

well at least my new 2.26 will be a huge improvement for me... I do rendering

 

[Abidubi]

Yeah, nice one!
Shouldn't you be getting ready for bed, you must have school in the morning?

Ya your right, because you can't be over 12 years old and make a joke...

 

[Keniff]

Ya your right, because you can't be over 12 years old and make a joke...

Sure ya can, just try and make it a good/funny one

 

[Tesselator]

For reference, here is the Unibody 2.4Ghz MBP:

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

Tester : J the Ninja
Processor : Intel Core 2 Duo P8600
MHz : 2.4Ghz
Rendering (Single CPU): 2499 CB-CPU
Rendering (Multiple CPU): 4905 CB-CPU
Multiprocessor Speedup: 1.96

Added!
Thanks Bro!

For comparison, my 2007 17" mbp (santa rosa) 2.4ghz

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

Tester : galstaph
Processor : C2D (SR MBP late 2007)
MHz : 2.4Ghz
Rendering (Single CPU): 2599 CB-CPU
Rendering (Multiple CPU): 4883 CB-CPU
Multiprocessor Speedup: 1.88

Hi galstaph,
I just added Ninja's but your score is better so next time I'm in there I'll update the MBP 2.4!

Thanks dewd!

 

[sigmadog]

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

Tester :

Processor : Dual 2.0 G5 (June 2004)
MHz : 2.0 GHz
Number of CPUs : 2
Operating System : OS X 32 BIT 10.5.6

Graphics Card : ATI Radeon X800 XT OpenGL Engine
Resolution : 1920 x 1200
Color Depth : 32 bit

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

Rendering (Single CPU): 1522 CB-CPU
Rendering (Multiple CPU): 2630 CB-CPU

Multiprocessor Speedup: 1.73

Shading (OpenGL Standard) : 2254 CB-GFX


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

 

[jjahshik32]

Added!

Thanks 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!

I still cant find a 2.66ghz 8 core nehalem benchmarks.

 

[LeoFio]

I am thinking about upgrading to the 2.93 quad....I may see a performance difference over what I have now :

 

[sigmadog]

I am thinking about upgrading to the 2.93 quad....I may see a performance difference over what I have now :

Tough call. I'd say you'll notice most when signing on for a dial-up connection. That multi-threading really smokes the phone lines. Other than that... meh.