Maxed out MacBook Pro vs quad GPU 28 core Mac Pro, who wins?

[rondocap]

I’m curious about how the quad w6800x 28 core Mac Pro with afterburner will do vs a maxed out m1 max. The old m1 did very poorly with anything heavy, like red raw and gpu heavy color grading/3D.


of course, pure performance here and leaving pricing out - the Mac Pro is very expensive in comparison.

what other areas do you feel each would differ?

my predictions:

1. m1 max will win with mirrorless consumer camera type codecs, but still lose vs red raw, other heavier codecs especially with color grading

2. Pro res should be closer, but I think the Mac Pro will still have an advantage

3. 3D work and gaming likely still Mac Pro, and anything that depends on ram

4. Cpu intensive tasks is a toss up, if it’s well optimized for Apple silicon I can see the 28 core losing in some tests

what do you think?

 

[phobos]

As good as the MacBook pro is it's also not magic!
I don't see the MacBook pro wining in any 3d rendering test against a 28 core machine. 3D rendering aside the MacBook pro cannot also compete with the Mac Pro on any cpu intensive tasks that utilise multiple cores. It's 10cores vs 28.

The same applies for any GPU intensive task. The Mac Pro setup mentioned on your post uses 4 GPUs. The MacBook Pro cannot compete with 4 GPUs!!

In ProRes tasks or any other tasks that Apple has embedded on the SoC the MacBook Pro might be ahead but on any generic CPU or GPU task the fully specced up Mac Pros will always win.

 

[Significant1]

Here is a some Adobe Premiere Pro results, that you might find interesting. I does not include Mac Pro, but does compare against some other beefy desktop configurations.

Apple's M1 Max Benchmarked in Adobe Premiere Pro: A Mixed Bag

Good in video, bad in GPU compute.

www.tomshardware.com

TLDR it does relatively well, very well for a laptop, especially compared to the old MBP. But it does not beat beefy desktops, except in live-playback, where it edges out even nvidia 3090.

 

[phobos]

As much as I like these results they’re not really a testament of MacBook Pro’s power but more a showcase of how unoptimised Premiere is.
I would really love to see a comparison in Final Cut Pro. Final cut can certainly take advantage of every single system resource available so I think it’s a more appropriate test.

 

[chumps]

A quad 6800 would be something like 5-6X faster than the M1 Max.

 

[Significant1]

As much as I like these results they’re not really a testament of MacBook Pro’s power but more a showcase of how unoptimised Premiere is.
I would really love to see a comparison in Final Cut Pro. Final cut can certainly take advantage of every single system resource available so I think it’s a more appropriate test.

But what is the point. The Mac Pro configuration you suggest has way more resources and if every single system resource was taken advantages of in both systems, it would win any time. It is such an uneven comparrison, that it doesn't make much sense, without considering cost and power consumption.

 

[phobos]

But what is the point. The Mac Pro configuration you suggest has way more resources and if every single system resource was taken advantages of in both systems, it would win any time. It is such an uneven comparrison, that it doesn't make much sense, without considering cost and power consumption.

I'm just answering OPs question. Rondocap wants to know if a MacBook Pro can be compared to a 4GPU 28core Mac Pro. In no shape or form should anyone expect a laptop to beat a monster of a setup. That was the question asked.
Nowhere did OP mention power consumption as part of benchmarking.
Final cut, Cinebench are the better tools to test a system. It takes poorly coded software out of the equation and what we're left with is actually testing the capabilities of the hardware since the software is not the bottleneck anymore.

 

[Slartibart]

But what is the point. The Mac Pro configuration you suggest has way more resources and if every single system resource was taken advantages of in both systems, it would win any time. It is such an uneven comparrison, that it doesn't make much sense, without considering cost and power consumption.

This.

Just did a quick check - you can buy roughly 9 maxed out M1 Max Macbook Pros (flies of the tongue ?) for one maxed out Mac Pro (no roller-feet included ?). Here is the power consumption for the Mac Pro, regarding the power consumption of the M1 Max especially in “high power mode” at the moment there seems to be no real data available. But the whole thing still doesn’t make much sense IMHO.

EDIT: you can easily buy more maxed out M1 Max Macbook Pros (?) when you add a monitor to the Mac Pro.

 

[Significant1]

I'm just answering OPs question. Rondocap wants to know if a MacBook Pro can be compared to a 4GPU 28core Mac Pro. In no shape or form should anyone expect a laptop to beat a monster of a setup. That was the question asked.
Nowhere did OP mention power consumption as part of benchmarking.
Final cut, Cinebench are the better tools to test a system. It takes poorly coded software out of the equation and what we're left with is actually testing the capabilities of the hardware since the software is not the bottleneck anymore.

Sorry I thought you where OP, when I answered.