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

Mac Pro GeekBench-Whats your score?

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2013-05-08 at 6.30.37 PM.png
    Screen Shot 2013-05-08 at 6.30.37 PM.png
    215.4 KB · Views: 270
Section Description Score Geekbench Score
Geekbench 2.4.3 for Mac OS X x86 (64-bit)
Integer Processor integer performance 6096 6140
Floating Point Processor floating point performance 9600
Memory Memory performance 2252
Stream Memory bandwidth 1964

This is with Snow Leopard, the earlier post was with Lion.
 
dongiorgio1959 said:
:p
Hi All
I have upgraded my cpu to 2 x 6cores Xeon 5679 added a PCIE ssd card from OWC for boot as the standard ssd don't read or write well in sata2 mode.
refer geekbench score:
http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/28820

using Macpro 5.1 2010 model with nvidia gtx570 hacked as the standard ATI card crap.
Click to expand...

Hi dongiorgio, is this your real mac pro or hackintosh??
That score is insane for running at stock 3.2GHz.... usually have to start overclocking to see that kind of score!

- - - -
Ok I just ran GB3 and my scores are much higher as well... 28,000+ in ML 10.8.4 so as flowrider pointed out below 10.7 would show even higher results. I have a feeling the X5679 CPUs perform better in real Mac Pros than they do in hackintosh machines.
 
Last edited:
I have changed CPUs to dual W5590s. My OS scores are different, the Lion score is higher than ML.

Lou
 

Attachments

  • Geekbench 3.0.1 10.7.5 W5990.jpg
    Geekbench 3.0.1 10.7.5 W5990.jpg
    73.1 KB · Views: 308
  • Geekbench 3, 10.8.4, W5590.jpg
    Geekbench 3, 10.8.4, W5590.jpg
    69.2 KB · Views: 661
mcfx I just sneaked past you, although I am cheating in a way :p

Geekbench 3 score - 31435

http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/44157

I was messing around and dropped my RAM back to 2 x single 8GB sticks so I will go back to full 48GB triple channel config tomorrow and try again. Results should be even better.

At least I can claim I made it to the first page of the results... only one other OSX running system above mine at the moment which is a 16 core, not 12.

Won't last long though I'm sure!!!
 
^^^^What CPUs do you have? Geekbench is reporting Intel 000 @ 4.06 GHz. Well, I googled it and it looks like you have engineering samples running @ 4.06GHz. Any heating issues?

Lou
 
flowrider said:
^^^^What CPUs do you have? Geekbench is reporting Intel 000 @ 4.06 GHz. Well, I googled it and it looks like you have engineering samples running @ 4.06GHz. Any heating issues?
Click to expand...
I think his machine is a Hackintosh. Take a look at the motherboard and BIOS sections of his post and you'll notice the difference. That's why he could overclock the CPUs to 4.06GHz, not a fair comparison to Apple Mac Pros.
 
xcodeSyn said:
I think his machine is a Hackintosh. Take a look at the motherboard and BIOS sections of his post and you'll notice the difference. That's why he could overclock the CPUs to 4.06GHz, not a fair comparison to Apple Mac Pros.
Click to expand...

Yep it's a hack of course ;)

The processors are X5679. Not engineering samples, but not retail either. They were released as oem for a series of HP servers. A few people have them running in real mac pros as well.

As far as cooling they are only air cooled with two Noctua DH14 units. Idle is 32-34° and under full extended load around 60° but I've never seen any more than 70°. Most guys water cool these things, so for air cooling I have been unexpectedly impressed. :)
 
Last edited:
DJenkins said:
The processors are X5679. Not engineering samples, but not retail either. They were released as oem for a series of HP servers. A few people have them running in real mac pros as well.
Click to expand...
The X5679 is a rather obscure CPU and it is not listed in Intel's official database. I finally found some details from this page, especially the 3rd post. Can you confirm the official memory speed is 1066MHz instead of 1333MHz? Thanks.
apparently the X5679 was originally built for a contract with a PC manufacturer who goes by two initials. it was spec'd for servers that needed fast cores for rendering but cost savings with lower memory speeds (and memory speed doesn't matter with rendering). it was built from the i7-965 with its disabled features turned back on (second QPI, higher memory support, TXT, AES NI, etc.). oddly enough, the i7-965 has two less cores yet retained the full 130W TDP by final production specs. weird.
Click to expand...
 
xcodeSyn said:
The X5679 is a rather obscure CPU and it is not listed in Intel's official database. I finally found some details from this page, especially the 3rd post. Can you confirm the official memory speed is 1066MHz instead of 1333MHz? Thanks.
Click to expand...

Yeh I agree it's a bit confusing... everywhere I've seen listed the memory speed is 8x or 1066MHz, but on my EVGA SR-2 board with everything on auto/defaults it lists at 1333MHz which is 10x.

As you can see from my other GB2 results with everything on default stock settings OSX recognizes it as 1333MHz.

----------

- - - edit

Ok so the mystery further unfolds... when installed in a genuine mac pro the memory speed shows as 1066MHz

:confused:
 
DJenkins said:
Ok so the mystery further unfolds... when installed in a genuine mac pro the memory speed shows as 1066MHz

:confused:
Click to expand...
Really appreciate your time checking this out. Even with the limit of 1066MHz on Mac Pro, these processors still perform well in GB score and are great for rendering jobs. If only I could find them cheap. Thanks again for providing the interesting info.
 
xcodeSyn said:
Really appreciate your time checking this out. Even with the limit of 1066MHz on Mac Pro, these processors still perform well in GB score and are great for rendering jobs. If only I could find them cheap. Thanks again for providing the interesting info.
Click to expand...

Keep an eye out on ebay but they do come up sometimes on the [H]ard forums and overclock.net as they are a cheap favourite among the 6 core xeons
 
Single-Core Score
2762

Multi-Core Score
15852

System Information
Operating System Mac OS X 10.8.4 (Build 12E55)
Model Mac Pro (Mid 2010)
Processor Intel Xeon W3680 @ 3.33 GHz
1 processor, 6 cores, 12 threads
Processor ID GenuineIntel Family 6 Model 44 Stepping 2
Memory 24576 MB 1333 MHz DDR3
Geekbench 3.0.2 for Mac OS X x86 (64-bit)

Just upgraded my 2.66 Quad :D and could not be happier.
 
My MP Score

My Score

http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/46687

#
Benchmark Summary
Integer Score 2183 19146
Floating Point Score 2079 18511
Memory Score 1736 4236

Geekbench Score 2052 15910

System Information
Operating System Mac OS X 10.8.4 (Build 12E55)
Model Mac Pro (Mid 2010)
Model ID MacPro5,1
Motherboard Apple Inc. Mac-F221BEC8
Processor Intel Xeon E5620 @ 2.40 GHz
2 Processors, 8 Cores, 16 Threads
Processor ID GenuineIntel Family 6 Model 44 Stepping 2
L1 Instruction Cache 32.0 KB x 4
L1 Data Cache 32.0 KB x 4
L2 Cache 256 KB x 4
L3 Cache 12.0 MB
Memory 32.0 GB 1066 MHz DDR3
BIOS Apple Inc. MP51.88Z.007F.B03.1010071432
Compiler Clang 5.0 (clang-500.1.72)

Integer Performance
AES
single-core 1505 ||
multi-core 12405 |||||||||||||||||||
Twofish
single-core 2111 |||
multi-core 21736 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
SHA1
single-core 2521 |||
multi-core 18086 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
SHA2
single-core 2598 ||||
multi-core 18929 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
BZip2 Compress
single-core 1876 ||
multi-core 18610 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
BZip2 Decompress
single-core 1940 |||
multi-core 19874 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JPEG Compress
single-core 2149 |||
multi-core 22562 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JPEG Decompress
single-core 2983 ||||
multi-core 25263 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PNG Compress
single-core 2278 |||
multi-core 23022 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PNG Decompress
single-core 2236 |||
multi-core 22723 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Sobel
single-core 2170 |||
multi-core 17498 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lua
single-core 2117 |||
multi-core 18983 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dijkstra
single-core 2258 |||
multi-core 13744 |||||||||||||||||||||

Floating Point Performance
BlackScholes
single-core 2370 |||
multi-core 23059 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mandelbrot
single-core 2252 |||
multi-core 23940 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Sharpen Filter
single-core 2113 |||
multi-core 18636 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Blur Filter
single-core 1785 ||
multi-core 17297 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
SGEMM
single-core 2338 |||
multi-core 19113 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DGEMM
single-core 2217 |||
multi-core 18628 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
SFFT
single-core 1705 ||
multi-core 12918 ||||||||||||||||||||
DFFT
single-core 1827 ||
multi-core 15260 ||||||||||||||||||||||||
N-Body
single-core 1934 |||
multi-core 16985 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ray Trace
single-core 2406 |||
multi-core 22272 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

Memory Performance
Stream Copy
single-core 1812 ||
multi-core 4404 ||||||
Stream Scale
single-core 1780 ||
multi-core 4197 ||||||
Stream Add
single-core 1670 ||
multi-core 4065 ||||||
Stream Triad
single-core 1690 ||
multi-core 4287 ||||||
 
mac pro 1,1 2006 cpu upgrade

Hey guys!

New to this forum so forgive me if I'm posting in the wrong section.

I have a Mac Pro 1,1 with dual 2.66, I want to upgrade cpu to x5365. Is that worth it.
I have an NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GT, 16GB ram. One display. I am editing GoPro video, Its kinda slow at it now

What do you suggest?

I was also looking into the ATI 5770 HD, But heard the 5780 HD can work?

Thanks,

Lethlbu
 
lethlbu said:
Hey guys!

New to this forum so forgive me if I'm posting in the wrong section.

I have a Mac Pro 1,1 with dual 2.66, I want to upgrade cpu to x5365. Is that worth it.
I have an NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GT, 16GB ram. One display. I am editing GoPro video, Its kinda slow at it now

What do you suggest?

I was also looking into the ATI 5770 HD, But heard the 5780 HD can work?

Thanks,

Lethlbu
Click to expand...

You can probably start a new thread about this if you like. I have those same processors in one of my machines and I think it still keeps up quite well.

Run a geekbench test - what are you seeing now? My machine gets around 10,000

You can also investigate flashing the firmware to become a 2,1 mac pro.

If you don't have an SSD already this upgrade will make things feel so much faster. Won't really help render times but your apps will be far more responsive.

Also are you trying to edit the GoPro footage as is in current h.264 format or are you converting (e.g. to ProRes) first?

That h.264 codec has a very complex compression and even though most editing systems can edit it natively - it's still VERY slow to work with. Try and convert everything to ProRes 422 and see if it's easier to work with. The files will be a lot bigger but they will be far easier to work with in an edit.
 
DJenkins said:
You can probably start a new thread about this if you like. I have those same processors in one of my machines and I think it still keeps up quite well.

Run a geekbench test - what are you seeing now? My machine gets around 10,000

You can also investigate flashing the firmware to become a 2,1 mac pro.

If you don't have an SSD already this upgrade will make things feel so much faster. Won't really help render times but your apps will be far more responsive.

Also are you trying to edit the GoPro footage as is in current h.264 format or are you converting (e.g. to ProRes) first?

That h.264 codec has a very complex compression and even though most editing systems can edit it natively - it's still VERY slow to work with. Try and convert everything to ProRes 422 and see if it's easier to work with. The files will be a lot bigger but they will be far easier to work with in an edit.
Click to expand...


Thanks for the fast reply.

My Geekbench is 3185 right now.

I was converting with h.264.

Should i invest in the ATI and CPU upgrade? I love this machine, its stable.

Lethlbu

----------

What will flashing the firmware do?


Lethlbu
 
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