Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
MP 7,1 24/28 Core Cinebench 2024 Score
- Thread starter smckenzie
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Thanks for that. So that’s about the same score as a 14th gen I9 14900KF I have in a PC (thermally throttled though).
Do you use Cinema 4D or just downloaded Cinebench?
I tried to run Cinebench R23 and Cinebench 2024, on my 16-core, with Monterey. But a bug, or error, prevents it.
Cinebench R23 runs fine on my iMac Pro, also with Monterey.
The problem in my case is that the licence window is empty. I got a warning about plugins the first time. And I have tried re-installing three times.
Apple App store offers only Cinebench R23 (in my case).
Did you run a test on your 16-core smckenzie?
Cinebench R23 runs fine on my iMac Pro, also with Monterey.
The problem in my case is that the licence window is empty. I got a warning about plugins the first time. And I have tried re-installing three times.
Apple App store offers only Cinebench R23 (in my case).
Did you run a test on your 16-core smckenzie?
The question is if you can find an upgrade for a decent price.
For a long time they were hovering around $1200. The last few times I looked (many months between) there was almost nothing out there. A few "new" for $5-6000 or whatever....
There's been a steady few on eBay, pulls from existing machines. Right now 24-cores are around $1600 and $2500 for the 28-core. The 24-core seems the better buy seen as it's pretty close in terms of performance to the 28 core on Cinebench.
How either translates to real world use is another thing. The I9 14900-KF I have screams, everything is very snappy and it chews through renders. Main downside is cooling it as it thermal throttles right now. That's where the MacPro is good.
The CGI Director website has the 14900KF scoring 2200 on Cinebench but I don't think that's real world. Mine scores around 1620, so like an M1 Ultra. Googling around those that got higher scores had to overclock and in one case you liquid nitrogen to cool it lol. I need system stability, not hero scores.
I ran a few tests on a second Mac Pro with Sonoma 14.5
With a 16-core CPU, and two graphic cards for comparison.
Cinebench R23
Cinebench 2024
Radeon Pro Vega II
Radeon Pro W6800X Duo (first time I heard a fan ramp up on the Mac Pro)
With a 16-core CPU, and two graphic cards for comparison.
Cinebench R23
Cinebench 2024
Radeon Pro Vega II
Radeon Pro W6800X Duo (first time I heard a fan ramp up on the Mac Pro)
Last edited:
@Regulus67 Thanks for that. Sadly the $600-800 RTX4070 Ti Super well outperforms the Duo's. Two of them are only just behind a 4090 in the Redshift benchmark. At one point I could get a 30k+ score in Cinebench 2024 with 2x 6900XT's via eGPU's but since Sonoma eGPU's have become really unstable, so can't use them.
Not surprising really. Nvidia has the better cards.
I posted here, as it was already discussing Cinebench scores. And I am testing a 24-core at this moment.
It certainly is. I purchased mine new from China on ebay for just over $1000.
Very happy with that.
Is it really brand new, I have no way of telling. But is a genuine part
I got 30% boost running Sonoma 14.5
Single score stayed the same at 68.
Multi-core from 1219 (16-core) to 1584 (24-core)
edit: room temperature 23°C/74°F
Just keep watching.
The W3275M is worth it, very strong performing processor. I’m very happy with mine.
The GPU situation is crazy, a W7900 would be ideal if Apple would support it in Sonoma. But no, instead they happily give us bugs with NVME PCI-E storage.
Two things that concern me with the 28c - single core speed and price. I use my 7,1 for rendering with Cinema 4D. The viewport, simulations and pretty much any other task is all on the single core so I'm wondering how that would all perform given the base clock is quite a bit slower than the 16c. Whilst the price is going down a little, it's still hard to go for when I have a PC with a I9 14900KF in it.
Only game I have in Windows is Flight Simulator. I don't do much gaming.
It's pretty pointless using that - it only uses 1.5 processor cores. You might as well have a dual core 10ghz CPU if one was available.
It's like old MS Flight Sim X which was the same. Microsoft bet that processors would keep going to higher clock speeds rather than going more and more multi-core. I was involved with FSX back at those times.
What benchmarks are you looking for?
It's pretty pointless using that - it only uses 1.5 processor cores. You might as well have a dual core 10ghz CPU if one was available.
It's like old MS Flight Sim X which was the same. Microsoft bet that processors would keep going to higher clock speeds rather than going more and more multi-core. I was involved with FSX back at those times.What benchmarks are you looking for?
I play Diablo 2 Resurrected, Age Of Empires series and Counter Strike 2 in 4k 120Hz. I'm most interested in what the difference is between a 12c and a 24(28)c CPU when the top models have a lower base clock.
In Flight Simulator there is no difference at all between a 16 core and 28 core. It's not slower - but not faster either. It might be different if they supported more cores, which the rumour says they will with 2024 version. One thing, there are never any stuttering effects or slowdowns - the frame rates remain very stable.
I don't have the others - but I would guess they will be similar.
I don't have the others - but I would guess they will be similar.