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.
Base MP vs MBP 2011
- Thread starter frocco
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
answers are here. Well photoshop use anyway.
http://macperformanceguide.com/Reviews-MacBookProFeb2011-Photoshop.html
http://macperformanceguide.com/blog/2011/20110303_1-MacBookProTests--reviews.html
The new MBP's are cranking machines up until the point you reach the maximum that 8GB of RAM can offer and it then drops off significantly.
http://macperformanceguide.com/Reviews-MacBookProFeb2011-Photoshop.html
http://macperformanceguide.com/blog/2011/20110303_1-MacBookProTests--reviews.html
The new MBP's are cranking machines up until the point you reach the maximum that 8GB of RAM can offer and it then drops off significantly.
Mac Pro's in general are faster but the base 2.8GHz Mac Pro is not faster than the new MBP Quad 2.3GHz. It is also slightly slower than the iMac 2.93GHz i7-Quad. That is for processor only. And there is way more going on than processor in a performance equation. The 5770 is slightly faster than the mobile, they are based on similar specs but thermals are always something to take into consideration. For quick "everyday" apps the MBP and iMac will be faster and maybe better for your needs. The Mac Pro would be better if you need the I/O and need to have it chew on stuff all the time. It stays cool and quiet. Or you could get a higher specced Mac Pro and it'll be faster.
For expandability, the Mac Pro cannot be beat; the GPU between the two is similar, but you can get the 5870 which the 6750M cannot beat; if you need more than 8GB of RAM, the MacBook Pro cannot be upgrade more than that; you can add many hard drives, etc. The MacBook Pro is pretty limited there.
However, in terms of processing power the new MacBook Pro is sometimes faster than the 2.8GHz Mac Pro. You also get added portability and you can still expand to an external mouse, keyboard, and monitor solution.
So instead of just comparing raw power in terms of CPU and GPU performance, look into what you plan to do with your machine, if you need portability, etc.; they are both very capable machines.
I'm sure the OP means the 2.8GHz 2010 Mac Pro, not the first generation Mac Pro.
However, in terms of processing power the new MacBook Pro is sometimes faster than the 2.8GHz Mac Pro. You also get added portability and you can still expand to an external mouse, keyboard, and monitor solution.
So instead of just comparing raw power in terms of CPU and GPU performance, look into what you plan to do with your machine, if you need portability, etc.; they are both very capable machines.
I'm sure the OP means the 2.8GHz 2010 Mac Pro, not the first generation Mac Pro.
As said before the strength of the Mac Pro is expandability and upgradability.
Processing power-wise the MBP can exceed the Mac Pro through Turbo Boost 2.0 and architecture improvements. You can upgrade the Mac Pro GPU to crush the MBP plus you can always add new ones. The Mac Pro is expandable, you can stuff many drives in there and PCI-E cards etc. OTOH the MBP is super portable while the Mac Pro definitely is not.
Processing power-wise the MBP can exceed the Mac Pro through Turbo Boost 2.0 and architecture improvements. You can upgrade the Mac Pro GPU to crush the MBP plus you can always add new ones. The Mac Pro is expandable, you can stuff many drives in there and PCI-E cards etc. OTOH the MBP is super portable while the Mac Pro definitely is not.
also if you buy 16gb ram sticks the 2.8 base mac pro will run 48gb ram with no problem. ( no one has posted a test result but it works in theory ) a mbp maxes at 8gb ram. so if you have big photo files that use ram the base mp will beat the mbp.
If you use 3 8gb sticks in the base mp
( proven test results with that ram setup exist )
large photo files will process faster then with 8gb ram max in a mbp
If you use 3 8gb sticks in the base mp
( proven test results with that ram setup exist )
large photo files will process faster then with 8gb ram max in a mbp
According to the Intel specs, the SP processors (3500 and 3600 series) support only 24GB of RAM.
Although various people run 32GB on the SP boards, it has yet to be confirmed that the system can really utilise 32GB of RAM or if the system just recognises it. The 5520 chipset itself supports up to 192GB of RAM.
You are correct , I thought I was clear enough, but upon reading over my post your correction is welcome.
Only in theory the base mp can handle three 16gb sticks of ram no one has purchased and posted a test result on this site. My writing using 48gb is no problem is not clear even though I then said it was in theory.
Three sticks of 8gb ram does works and tests have been posted.
which is "faster" is complex. different software depends on different pieces of hardware. some want fifty cores, others wants a million GB of memory. having ten HD6990's won't help in either case.
do you want a laptop or a desktop? answer that and everything is solved for you.
No, only if you use all that 24GB or ram. But have you not looked at all the test results? The geekbench results? They all show the new MB Pro's as being faster:
http://www.primatelabs.ca/geekbench/mac-benchmarks/
But if you have a Pro then you have exbandability, the new MB Pro's can play games fine, but so can a Mac Pro. I would sit down and write the pro's and cons of each and decide what you want to do, or wait for the next Mac Pro, if Apple make one...
The biggest problem with laptops is you can't change the GPU later without re-buying the laptop. You can with the Mac Pro. It depends on how important that flexibility is for your you long term. You also get options for running SLI in Windows on a Mac Pro that you probably won't get for a long time (if ever) on an Apple laptop.
Well if people only need 16GB RAM and don't need the expandability options of the Mac Pro, the choice may have just got a bit tougher as the new MBP supports 16GB RAM (see https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1112437/)