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

New Mac Pros slower than rMBP, new iMacs plus all 5.1 mac pros

Status
Not open for further replies.
guy and gals don't get me wrong the new MP Mini
looks good

but its limitations are coming up front

Also for those looking at iMac being at higher processor speed
I thought single core on NMP mini is faster then the one on the iMac

and what about rMBP crushing it :) being so much slower chip and being mobile too :) this is just a joke.

this is so embarrassing for apple, at least they could of done their homework
 
MattDSLR said:
guy and gals don't get me wrong the new MP Mini
looks good

but its limitations are coming up front

Also for those looking at iMac being at higher processor speed
I thought single core on NMP mini is faster then the one on the iMac

and what about rMBP crushing it :) being so much slower chip and being mobile too :) this is just a joke.

this is so embarrassing for apple, at least they could of done their homework
Click to expand...

The only one looking at these benchmarks and seeing something embarrassing is you.

In the multicore benchmarks, the Mac Pro is crushing it. In the single core benchmarks, it's behind, but that's been true of every prior Mac Pro. GPU benchmarks are a little odd, but as I mentioned, every 79X0, including the 7950 on a 2012 Mac Pro, is underperforming right now. And if you think that's odd, let me tell you about all the crash-tacular adventures I had with my Mac Pro 3,1's GeForce 8800 GT at launch.
 
goMac said:
As I mentioned upthread, the 7950 on a 2012 Mac Pro is having the same problems. It's a driver thing.

http://www.tonymacx86.com/graphics/113286-bad-graphics-performance-mavericks-sapphire-7950-cf.html
Click to expand...

This is why canceled my order.
Gonna wait how it turns and while waiting gonna check iMac screen to see if I can live with it.

So when nMP GPU's turns to be really only specialized in 4k video and OpenCL I will have option but to go for iMac.

----------
goMac said:
The only one looking at these benchmarks and seeing something embarrassing is you.

In the multicore benchmarks, the Mac Pro is crushing it. In the single core benchmarks, it's behind, but that's been true of every prior Mac Pro. GPU benchmarks are a little odd, but as I mentioned, every 79X0, including the 7950 on a 2012 Mac Pro, is underperforming right now. And if you think that's odd, let me tell you about all the crash-tacular adventures I had with my Mac Pro 3,1's GeForce 8800 GT at launch.
Click to expand...

Hehe on my old MP2008 the GF8800GT actually burned to death. :)
 
ZnU said:
My desk (or, well, the desk in our color grading suite) will contain the Mac Pro, three video monitors (up-close video reference monitor for spotting stuff too hard to see on the projector, video scopes display, GUI monitor), a keyboard, mouse, and my Tangent Element color grading panel... and some Thunderbolt cables running to the equipment rack under the desk.
Click to expand...

that will be so much much slower than the internal drives as they are limited to below Sata 3 speeds :)
perfect for 4k video processing :)

Whats good TB2 if you do not have anything that can actually work at that speed
 
Bazu said:
Hehe on my old MP2008 the GF8800GT actually burned to death. :)
Click to expand...

Mine burned to death too. Ugh.

When I first got my Mac Pro 3,1, I could make it kernel panic by just pushing the right way in After Effects. Eventually it just turned into graphical corruption. Then finally by 10.6 it was fixed.

Compared to a Windows workstation, that's definitely frustrating. But if you're going to preach how this never happened with previous Mac Pros? Ahhahahaha...

But seriously, I hope they fix it. It was super frustrating on my old Mac Pro, and it's going to be frustrating for people who buy these day one. Fortunately, it's probably a driver fix.
 
goMac said:
Compared to a Windows workstation, that's definitely frustrating. But if you're going to preach how this never happened with previous Mac Pros? Ahhahahaha...
Click to expand...

I actually would never say my MP2008 was completely without issues.

goMac said:
But seriously, I hope they fix it. It was super frustrating on my old Mac Pro, and it's going to be frustrating for people who buy these day one. Fortunately, it's probably a driver fix.
Click to expand...

That's why better wait. Lesson learned. Never buy something that hasn't been fully tested / fixed
 
VirtualRain said:
Seriously? That was only mildly amusing 6 months ago when the nMP was first announced.
Click to expand...

and now its becoming a true when the actual apples to apples comprising charts come out

I will love to be an apple tech support,
I honestly do not think apple will sell more than 30K units over the next year
and the 200 to 300 people on here that will buy them will be the first looking for the new solution 6 month after they receive it.

First off you should not be defending it yet as you do not have one, so we actually do not know how it will work out for you.

second thing is the test results prove that they are slower than the 5.1 and upgraded 4.1 to 5.1 with higher end video cards and solid state drive.

So i'm happy for you that you are getting a 6 or 8 core nMP Mini

I could buy 10 of them tomorrow but since we do not know how they will actually perform and prove themselves in the true PRO field we can't comment what is faster and whats not. as it stands they are slower than 5.1 if you compare raw processor speed and cores.

so as it stands based on currant tests they are slower than my rMBP and the new iMacs that also can have up to 3TB fusion drives and thats triple of internal storage what nMPmini can handle, that should a TRUE top of the line computer from apple
OK
its faster than mac mini I give you that :)
 
MattDSLR said:
that will be so much much slower than the internal drives as they are limited to below Sata 3 speeds :)
perfect for 4k video processing :)

Whats good TB2 if you do not have anything that can actually work at that speed
Click to expand...

Could you point me to the links that mention such limitation? I am interested to know. Thanks.
 
MattDSLR said:
that will be so much much slower than the internal drives as they are limited to below Sata 3 speeds :)
perfect for 4k video processing :)
Click to expand...

Storage will be attached via an SAS RAID controller in a Thunderbolt 2 PCIe enclosure. With enough drives I suspect we'll be able to top 1500 MB/s if Thunderbolt 2 really delivers 2x the real-world performance of first-gen Thunderbolt.

That said, most of our work is still 1080p/2K and/or involves working from compressed camera formats (Red Epic and Sony F55, for instance, both use compressed raw that's under 150 MB/s). For color grading work, you only really need that kind of bandwidth for working from 4K DPX (film scans, say) or rendering to 4K DPX or TIFF to create DI master or DCDM (digital cinema distribution master). But those rendering tasks don't necessarily have to be real-time, so we probably won't replace our current storage with a 16-drive RAID system until more of our work moves to 4K.

----------
ozbimmer said:
Could you point me to the links that mention such limitation? I am interested to know. Thanks.
Click to expand...

No such limitation is in any way inherent in the design of the Mac Pro. Thunderbolt 2 has enough bandwidth to support external storage faster than the internal PCIe SSD. Some RAID systems may have internal limitations related to SATA bandwidth, but in better RAID systems these limitations will only be on a per-drive basis. For instance, on a Pegasus2, yeah, drives connect to the RAID controller via SATA, so they're limited to 6 Gbps each, but if you load an R4 up with four SSDs in RAID 0 mode you're going to be getting way more than 6 Gbps from that array.
 
ozbimmer said:
Could you point me to the links that mention such limitation? I am interested to know. Thanks.
Click to expand...

just check you Hard drive speed for read and write speeds

you external drive will be a bit slower than the rated drive read and write speed
this is an example if you have a SATA 3 drive at up to 500/500 speed if you plug it to TB2 drive your speed will be just below 500/500 read/write less 10% processing speed so if you think you get full speed of TB keep dreaming :)
 
MattDSLR said:
just check you Hard drive speed for read and write speeds

you external drive will be a bit slower than the rated drive read and write speed
this is an example if you have a SATA 3 drive at up to 500/500 speed if you plug it to TB2 drive your speed will be just below 500/500 read/write less 10% processing speed so if you think you get full speed of TB keep dreaming :)
Click to expand...

I understand your point is - in MP5.1 you can put for example OWC PCIe card with 2x 1TB or more slates attached to it.

Like: http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/SSD/PCIe/OWC/Mercury_Accelsior/RAID
 
Drobo speed is limited to 120 to 180 MB/s thats great for back up but not for your main storage
the SSD in the nMP mini is great and fast but limited to size
still waiting on actual speed test on new drives on what will be available
my SXS cards and CF cards can handle speed over 100MB/s
importing 10 to 15 64 Gig cards it will force me to use external drives
there for limits me to speeds
Canon is coming out with 40 to 60MP camera that we will be using for model and architechtual photography for bigger projects

Raw files from those cameras will be well over 100MB per file and tiff process in photoshop well over a gigabyte now hammy files do you think you can process on nMPmini vs oMP with 20TB of storage like I have in my
 
MattDSLR said:
just check you Hard drive speed for read and write speeds

you external drive will be a bit slower than the rated drive read and write speed
this is an example if you have a SATA 3 drive at up to 500/500 speed if you plug it to TB2 drive your speed will be just below 500/500 read/write less 10% processing speed so if you think you get full speed of TB keep dreaming :)
Click to expand...

Thanks, but I do realise that limitation. A single drive would not utilise the potential of TB/TB2. A RAID 0 setup or a thunderbolt to PCIe solution would be better.
 
MattDSLR said:
Drobo speed is limited to 120 to 180 MB/s thats great for back up but not for your main storage
Click to expand...

Drobo speed is limited because Drobos are slow (they do a bunch of their own proprietary RAID processing.) A JBOD array, like a Pegasus, wouldn't have any speed difference. And a single drive not in a RAID configuration would obviously have no RAID overhead.

It's just buying the right drive for your needs.
 
SSD vs. HDD performance chart
http://www.computerworld.com/s/arti...tate_drives_Are_SSDs_finally_worth_the_money_
Intel 520 Series SSD -------Western Digital WD Black HD--------Seagate Momentus XT Solid State Hybrid Drive
Capacity 240GB -------500GB -------750GB
Price $229 $72 $134 ($89 for 500GB)
First/third boot-up time 12/9 sec. ------20/21 sec. --------20/12 sec.
Max. read speed (4K blocks) 456MB/sec. ------122MB/sec. -------106MB/sec.
Max. write speed 241MB/sec. -------119MB/sec. -------114MB/sec.
1.19GB file transfer 15 sec. -------34 sec. -------29 sec.
First/third time opening a 372-page Word doc. 57/10 sec. ------48/9 sec. ------58/10 sec.
Opening a 10MB PowerPoint document 2 sec. -------2 sec. -------2 sec.
 
ZnU said:
For instance, on a Pegasus2, yeah, drives connect to the RAID controller via SATA, so they're limited to 6 Gbps each, but if you load an R4 up with four SSDs in RAID 0 mode you're going to be getting way more than 6 Gbps from that array.
Click to expand...
Just keep in mind, that Promise is using consumer grade drives in these, so there will be reliability issues in parity based arrays (5/6/50/60).

They're not selling an empty unit either, so swapping them out either for enterprise grade HDD's or SSD's will be rather expensive due to the included drives).

Promise does produce a TB2 to Fibre Channel bridge (SANlink2), that would allow you to connect the nMP to a FC based storage enclosure/system. It would at least allow for the use of enterprise grade drives, but again, it's at an additional cost.
 
goMac said:
Drobo speed is limited because Drobos are slow (they do a bunch of their own proprietary RAID processing.) A JBOD array, like a Pegasus, wouldn't have any speed difference. And a single drive not in a RAID configuration would obviously have no RAID overhead.

It's just buying the right drive for your needs.
Click to expand...

still limited to speed
SSD will be faster as it has no spin up
Green Drive will the slowest
Red drive is almost identical speed as Green drive but design for nas
Black drive is the fastest but it overheats in multi drive raid enclosures
So unless we will see 3 and 4 tb SSD you will have a very slow start ups do to spin ups slowing down your speeds

Its like people do not understand technology and think by plugging raid drive TB drive to nMP mini it will fly as an internal drive
 
MattDSLR said:
still limited to speed
SSD will be faster as it has no spin up
Green Drive will the slowest
Red drive is almost identical speed as Green drive but design for nas
Black drive is the fastest but it overheats in multi drive raid enclosures
So unless we will see 3 and 4 tb SSD you will have a very slow start ups do to spin ups slowing down your speeds

Its like people do not understand technology and think by plugging raid drive TB drive to nMP mini it will fly as an internal drive
Click to expand...

I think people understand just fine. A hard drive RAID will be very fast (as fast as a SATA3 SSD), but not as fast as the internal.

If you wanted something as fast as the internal SSD, either stick a PCI-E SSD on Thunderbolt, or start raiding some SATA3 SSDs.
 
MattDSLR said:
still limited to speed
SSD will be faster as it has no spin up
Green Drive will the slowest
Red drive is almost identical speed as Green drive but design for nas
Black drive is the fastest but it overheats in multi drive raid enclosures
So unless we will see 3 and 4 tb SSD you will have a very slow start ups do to spin ups slowing down your speeds

Its like people do not understand technology and think by plugging raid drive TB drive to nMP mini it will fly as an internal drive
Click to expand...

Err... you're quoting Western Digital's branding (Green, Red, etc.) as if it's industry-standard terminology and vaguely implying that limitations of particular drive technologies (that are the same across all computers) are in some way limitations of the new Mac Pro.

It is absolutely possible to connect enteral storage to a new Mac Pro that is as fast as, and in fact even faster than, its internal storage. The reason most options will be slower isn't because of some unique limitation of the new Mac Pro. Quite the opposite, in fact — it's because it's internal storage is unusually fast.

----------
goMac said:
If you wanted something as fast as the internal SSD, either stick a PCI-E SSD on Thunderbolt, or start raiding some SATA3 SSDs.
Click to expand...

And 8+ drive HDD RAID, while it'll get killed by an SSD (any SSD, really) for tasks involving a lot of random access, will also match or beat the internal SSD for raw sequential throughput. Which happens to describe tasks like, say, playing back video or rendering it out to disk.

This is good news, because SSD is still way too expensive to store the quantities of data involved in uncompressed video workflows.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back