I will guess around 24000 in 32-bit.
Just imagine how high it would have been with a real update (not that I would've bought the top model given the price).
The 2 x 3.1 GHz (which Apple probably wouldn't have used) gets around 41,000
The 2 x 3.1 GHz (which Apple probably wouldn't have used) gets around 41,000
Anyone have scores from their new machines?
I retract my comment peabo.
Since it's almost a given that Apple will be employing the currently unreleased Ivy Bridge based XEONS in the 2013 model Mac Pro, you will be looking at over 41,000. Likely 46,000 or so since they're presumed to be 10 - 15% faster than the current XEON E5's that Apple are not using yet.
I don't think so. If Apple were to sell a 2013 Mac Pro model with two top of the line IvyBees, I'd agree with you. However, Apple has never offered a top of the line processor, not even now in the 2012, and will not do so because of TDP/heat and pricing concerns. Thus, you be very lucky to see a 40,000 Geekbench from a 2013 Mac Pro because, at best, it would probably have a low to middle of the line IvyBee. Moreover, Apple' most recent behavior, putting middle of the line Westmeres from 2010 into a 2012 system, raises the suspicion that it would have the gall to put low to middle of the line 2012 Sandy Bridge Xeons in a 2013 machine just to extract from purchasers the highest margin while calling those systems "New."
Don't worry, I'm probably the onlyfoolperson who actually bought one.
My 3.06 turned up today. It got a very respectable 26039 on Geekbench:
Also, incase anyone didn't notice, it has a model identifier of 5,1, not 6,1
Can't they use 1666mhz RAM ?
What a shame, explains the 5,1 model no. if they didn't even apply a bump to the memory speed.![]()