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

iMac i7 Faster than entry Mac Pro

A

apparatchik

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Mar 6, 2008
908
2,754
Actually don't want to fuel any ongoing debate but to call attention on that both machines offer some points more or less about the same raw processor perfmormance on its 'stock' offering by apple (this means, in practice, the i7 comes with 1 GB more RAM):


MacPro Base Early 2009 (Xeon 2.66 4 cores, $2499):

macpro.jpg


source: http://www.primatelabs.ca/blog/2009/03/mac-pro-benchmarks-early-2009/



iMac i7 ($2199):

iMaci7.jpg


source: https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/818833/


That said there a of course real life diffrences and diffrent targets, expandability replacements being the pro's main advantage, a bigger HD, more RAM, 27" monitor going for the iMac... all said I think the new iMac has given the permormance everyone expects from a current generation desktop computer, I'm waiting for the quads to be ready available here in Mexico to make the move :), congrats to the new owners!
 
there are some other posts on this forum showing the base model mac pro pulling higher numbers on geekbench than the i7 imac
 
My base mac pro scores in the 8300's also, but has a slower processor and less ram, so... what is slowing down the new imac with a faster processor speed and more ram?
 
I just saw another thread with an i7 scoring above 8.4k... but yeah the point here being not which may be faster (in real life Im sure the diffrences would be neglible) but that the new iMac finally offers desktop-like performance and is overall a very good deal
 
apparatchik said:
I just saw another thread with an i7 scoring above 8.4k... but yeah the point here being not which may be faster (in real life Im sure the diffrences would be neglible) but that the new iMac finally offers desktop-like performance and is overall a very good deal
Click to expand...

completely agree
 
Actually the i7 860 and the W3520 in the base MacPro are pretty close in performance. The reason the W3520, at a lower clock speed, can match the i7 is because of the triple channel memory advantage it has. Look at Geekbench memory performance stats and you'll see it.

The amount of RAM in the box shouldn't make much of a difference in testing, as long as there is enough to prevent swap-out.

I think MacPro owner's can breath a slight sigh of relief that they haven't been completely outclassed with their investment. Though I'm still surprised Apple chooses not to drop the price on the base MacPro to at least match that of the i7 iMac. :confused:
 
eelpout said:
Actually the i7 860 and the W3520 in the base MacPro are pretty close in performance. The reason the W3520, at a lower clock speed, can match the i7 is because of the triple channel memory advantage it has. Look at Geekbench memory performance stats and you'll see it.

The amount of RAM in the box shouldn't make much of a difference in testing, as long as there is enough to prevent swap-out.

I think MacPro owner's can breath a slight sigh of relief that they haven't been completely outclassed with their investment. Though I'm still surprised Apple chooses not to drop the price on the base MacPro to at least match that of the i7 iMac. :confused:
Click to expand...

well that's an easy one, the mac pro has many features that the imac can not compete with. it's not all about the performance when it comes to pricing. the 4 internal hdd bays, the pci slots, dual ethernet, the cooling system etc... is what makes the mac pro a mac pro.
 
a350 said:
well that's an easy one, the mac pro has many features that the imac can not compete with. it's not all about the performance when it comes to pricing. the 4 internal hdd bays, the pci slots, dual ethernet, the cooling system etc... is what makes the mac pro a mac pro.
Click to expand...

That's true, also in graphic power (and the ability to swap a newer desktop card later on), will give the pro a sure advantage in graphic aware benchmarks... the mobile 4850 is in my opinion the only weak point on the iMac
 
eelpout said:
Actually the i7 860 and the W3520 in the base MacPro are pretty close in performance. The reason the W3520, at a lower clock speed, can match the i7 is because of the triple channel memory advantage it has. Look at Geekbench memory performance stats and you'll see it.

The amount of RAM in the box shouldn't make much of a difference in testing, as long as there is enough to prevent swap-out.

I think MacPro owner's can breath a slight sigh of relief that they haven't been completely outclassed with their investment. Though I'm still surprised Apple chooses not to drop the price on the base MacPro to at least match that of the i7 iMac. :confused:
Click to expand...

Geekbench scores can have ~1000 pt discrepancies depending on a host of variables. My base '09 MP scored 9481 the first time I ran it, and that was with throttled dual channel RAM (four modules)
 
Up until now, the iMac was a nice laptop in disguise. I think it's beautiful Apple has two styles of gorgeous machines that are as powerful as they are. The iMac and Mac Pro are worthy machines for whatever taste and needs the end user has.
 
Techhie said:
Geekbench scores can have ~1000 pt discrepancies depending on a host of variables. My base '09 MP scored 9481 the first time I ran it, and that was with throttled dual channel RAM (four modules)
Click to expand...

Yeah I agree with the discrepancies. While mine haven't been that large, more like 10-20 points, that is still a variable. Also depends on how the person conducts the test; how many programs are running in the background, test run right after bootup, how warm the CPU is...etc.
 
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