Mac Pro 4,1 on the fence, need advice

[Modmike]

I need crunching power for CAD and video editing. I am trying to decide between a Hackintosh and an upgraded Mac Pro 4,1 with dual X5690's, 32GB of ram, and a Sapphire Radeon 580.

What is the typical geek bench cpu scores on a tricked out 12 core 4,1? I can't seem to get reliable numbers.

I saw some as high as 33K with 5650s but that doesn't make sense. About the best I've seen for a hackintosh is 23K.

Talk me into the Mac pro, I hate Hackintoshes.

Thanks.

 

[jscipione]

What is the typical geek bench cpu scores on a tricked out 12 core 4,1? I can't seem to get reliable numbers.

https://create.pro/blog/imac-pro-vs-mac-pro-series-processor-storage-performance/

 

[Modmike]

Thats consistent with what I'm seeing. It seems like an I7 8700K is either the same as or faster than a 12 core 5690 equipped machine.

Sigh.....

 

[fhturner]

I just finished up one of these for a client today. Running macOS 10.13.6 w/ firmware v138.0.0.0.0 from the Mojave DP8, the original 8 x 2.26GHz config scored 2102 on single-core, and 11983 on multi-core (GeekBench 4). After upgrading to Dual X5690s, single core went to 2959 and multi to 19,542 or 24,582, depending on whether I had the RAM running 48GB triple-channel @ 1333MHz or 52GB double-channel @ 1066MHz (he had 2 extra 2GB PC3-8500 sticks).

That difference seemed excessive to me, and I doubt it'll manifest itself that significantly in real-world usage, but I'm going to ask him to possibly try some Premiere & After Effects rendering comparisons between the 48GB & 52GB configs.

We also upgraded him from a Sapphire Radeon HD 7950 Mac Edition (that card is gorgeous, BTW) to a Sapphire Pulse RX 580. OpenGL scores went from 83109 to 136021. While this GPU performance boost may be somewhat incremental, I think the HEVC support that it looks like the RX 580 will get in Mojave is going be a huge boon.

I think a Hackintosh would be fun and interesting, but I just love the Mac Pro towers...they're beasts! And thoughtfully and functionally designed beasts at that. We may be (hopefully) coming into a late renaissance for these machines w/ the support and attention that Apple appears to be giving them lately w/ not only support for, but actually *recommending* the RX 560 & RX 560 with Mojave, plus all of the firmware updates we've gotten w/ High Sierra and Mojave DP/Beta.

You don't say what specific type of video you'll be editing or what tool to edit it with, but I think the 3.46GHz clock speed and 12 cores to play with definitely give you a fighting chance, even on some H.264 4K stuff. And hopefully the AMD UVD support will help that (playback) in Mojave as well. If not, you can always transcode the really hard stuff to ProRes— quite easily in Final Cut Pro X.

Just re-read and saw your last line. Go get you an inexpensive, high-value cMP beast and enjoy building it into the most it can be!

HTH,
Fred

 

[Matty_TypeR]

I think the Mac Pro 5.1 holds up well considering its quite old tech now. these geek bench scores are from my build of a 5.1 dual X5690's Ive found the memory can make a big difference in triple Chanel config, also make sure its CL9 memory. also it will throttle when it gets warm, heat spreaders and some extra cooling stops this. single core score of course is not great, these cpu's are showing there age, but as more applications become multicore its not so shabby.

 

[pl1984]

I would highly recommend ignoring Geekbench scores. While they make for some interesting discussions they're only good at indicating how well a system runs Geekbench. If you look solely at Geekbench scores a 2017 27" iMac is your best bet. How many here would recommend such a system over a cMP for CAD and video editing.

Best bet is to find a website which is focused on the applications you use and inquire there.

 

[orph]

id look at the imac like pl1984 says or a hack.

if your on a i7 8700K you will have AVX, IGPU and much faster single threaded speeds as well as the joys of USB3 nvme (is it nvme?) and faster ram etc
also makes options like a Vaga 56/64 or FE an easy plugin without messing with power problems.

PP/FCX use the IGPU

+ all parts are new so no problems with 10 year old PSU or how well last owner looked after the cMP

but you will have to have reglar backups encase you brake something and need to restore to an old version
ie if an update brakes stuff

for problem free imac is a nice option and you wont have to waist time learning then making a hack

edit
just want to add it is relay good to check the website off apps you need to run to see what they relay need to run fast.

 

[kohlson]

Talk me into the Mac pro, I hate Hackintoshes.

In its own way, 4/5,1 MP's are remarkable in that they still seem to be somewhat viable - 9 years later! They are old, and certainly very near end of life. But they are inexpensive to acquire and fix up. And there is hope that they will be pretty good under 10.14. I think a mackintosh could be more powerful, but more expensive. From a component perspective, more reliable, but less so from an OS and software perspective. I think both machines will need constantly fiddling. You may view that as either a pro or a con.

 

[jscipione]

I need crunching power for CAD and video editing. I am trying to decide between a Hackintosh and an upgraded Mac Pro 4,1 with dual X5690's, 32GB of ram, and a Sapphire Radeon 580.

Talk me into the Mac pro, I hate Hackintoshes.

OK Now that the numbers are out of the way, here's why you should still buy a Mac Pro.

1. It is a genuine Mac
2. It is a workstation class machine with few other computers coming close to the fit and finish of its internal design. 4 internal 3.5" SATA bays, 2 internal optical drive bays, 4 PCIe slots, all with hardly any cables, just look inside a Mac Pro and the insides are clean and organized.
3. PC Cases are ugly, they range from hideously ugly to plain but still ugly. Ironically you pay more for hideously ugly.

 

[Naimfan]

I need crunching power for CAD and video editing. I am trying to decide between a Hackintosh and an upgraded Mac Pro 4,1 with dual X5690's, 32GB of ram, and a Sapphire Radeon 580.

What is the typical geek bench cpu scores on a tricked out 12 core 4,1? I can't seem to get reliable numbers.

I saw some as high as 33K with 5650s but that doesn't make sense. About the best I've seen for a hackintosh is 23K.

Talk me into the Mac pro, I hate Hackintoshes.

Thanks.

https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/8393990

That's from my 2010 5,1 with X5690s. It's SLIGHTLY faster than the one I had with X5680s:

https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/9074606

They are also very close in Cinebench, which is a more reliable gauge of sustained performance (IMO). Note also that you can run a MP 24/7, which would not be recommended with an iMac, etc.

 

[SneakyTLoD]

People love posting benchmarks and I get it. I will say that my 4,1>5,1 dual 5690 is the most stable machine I've ever used. That really goes a long way when you're getting payed for your work. Is it as fast as a Hackintosh? Maybe not but I'll take stable over fast all day long when it comes to my clients' material. It all depends on what you value.