I'll have a double of whatever you're drinking tonight
someone give this man a quad jack & ginger then
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
nMP 12 Core gets a good clock cleaning from cMP
- Thread starter MacVidCards
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
someone give this man a quad jack & ginger then
someone give this man a quad jack & ginger then
A couple of those would give me a good clock-cleaning too
Imagine if Apple jumped back to RISC processors and equipped their Mac Pros with IBM's Power7 processors. 8-core processor, 4 threads per core, all humming along at 3.5 GHz. 
You can bet that deep within the bowels of Cupertino HQ, a team has OSX running on exactly that platform, just in case.
If the nMP is form over function, so was the old Mac Pro. It only had dual sockets. Why not 4 sockets? If it had a bigger case, most certainly they could have put in 24 cores back in 2010.
So I think we can all agree that the number of core counts can always grow, the only important thing is where you draw the line. So we should all drop the single socket vs dual socket argument.
Same with memory.
About dropping PCIe I agree that it's a limiting factor, but it's not about the form of Mac Pro. Apple didn't say "We want to do a small machine, but then we can't put in any PCIe expansions". If that was the case, then I'd say the form limited the function. But Apple said "We want to build a machine without any PCIe expansion because we want to force the manufacturers to go the TB route". That's the main reason behind dumping PCIe slots. And then they went "since the machine won't have any PCIe anyway, we can make it smaller."
About everything being proprietary I agree though. They could have put in standard GPU boards so we could upgrade them as long as they fit the thermal envelope and keep the size exactly the same.
Last edited:
This must be the worst test from barefeats in a long time. You allow for the highest end GPU's for the old Mac Pro but choose the D500, not the D700 for the nMP.
780Ti would perform better than D700 as well but at least the results would have been closer. This is just click bait.
Needling aside, the real question is, are most nMP owners satisfied with their purchase? There seemed to be loads of 1,1 and 2,1 owners making the move at the time. With that leap the nMP's should be great! I went from a G5 2.0 Dual to the 2008 oMP 2.8 8 core. Also remember people speaking of render times. Those times should have been drastically reduced!
I asked Barefeets about it on Twitter, and he said he would include it if he had it.
To be fair, if you care about gaming so much, your not going to buy a Mac Pro. And if you do, you REALLY don't want to see a current generation gaming PC compared to either the nMP or cMP
While I do agree with you on many points, the link you provided there is garbage, you cannot compare a D500 v 780Ti. Someone who wants to game will upgrade to D700.
As I recall, there is a long thread where virtual rain compares a mid level older CMP with a much higher species nMP. To similar results.
Not every test has to be "fair", not everyone is getting D700s, those who don't still need to know where they line up with current cards, don't they?
Not every test has to be "fair", not everyone is getting D700s, those who don't still need to know where they line up with current cards, don't they?
They just need to google 780Ti review, it will show them were the 7970 fits in.
Current nMP users : they line up as owing downclocked 7970s in SLI.
I just ran the Tomb Raider benchmark on my 6C/512GB/32GB/D700 nMP in Bootcamp/Windows 8.1. Using the same presets as the Bare Feats test (High image quality, 2560x1440) and the latest Catalyst drivers, my computer scored 143.3fps -- just about double what the Bare Feats oMP scored. I didn't see anywhere in the Bare Feats article whether the tests were run under Bootcamp or in OS X -- but one would assume that if you're looking for optimum gaming performance, you'd be Bootcamping it.To be fair, if you care about gaming so much, your not going to buy a Mac Pro. And if you do, you REALLY don't want to see a current generation gaming PC compared to either the nMP or cMP
While I do agree with you on many points, the link you provided there is garbage, you cannot compare a D500 v 780Ti. Someone who wants to game will upgrade to D700.
THat's right. In OS X, CrossFire mode is not enabled, so the video cards are not being used to their full potential.
>
Bare Feats actually has Windows test results (nMP 8c D700) here.
Last edited:
What an odd spot this puts barefeats in.
If he wants the nMP to look good in the results the only answer is to ditch OSX and run Windows.
Funny times we live in.
If he wants the nMP to look good in the results the only answer is to ditch OSX and run Windows.
Funny times we live in.
If you want to do any gaming on any machine, you should switch to windows.... It's not a nMP vs cMP argument you are trying to make this out to be. Quite honestly the only thing this whole thread proves is that you can extend the live of a cMP by upgrading the GPUs. Problem is, eventually the lack of USB 3.0, SATA3/PCIE SSD, Thunderbolt, etc. will catch up.
for example: you want dual 280x GPUs, PCIE SSD, AND USB 3.0? How? That's 6 slots when you only have 5....
Exactly this. Skipping windows results while comparing gaming performance is at least misleading. Especially if you consider the fact that nMP has the ability of running Windows outside bootcamp, using external TB disk.
Let's call this "the thread of the misleading articles" and get done with it, shall we ?
Correct about using windows for gaming. The drivers are so much better (GPU)
Why is it 6 slots? I count 4.
2x 280x : 2 slots
PCI ssd : 1 slot
USB 3.0 PCI card : 1 slot
GPU's are double slots, and it assumes that under normal PCIe arrangement they will take up a slot with their HSF. Although that also depends on the type of card, and size of HSF.
Dual 280x will occupy 4 slots as these cards are higher than a smaller GPU (ex. R7 240). They will use only two PCIe slots, but as these GPUs are higher they will also occupy the slot next to it.
I've been building watercooling PC's for so long now I have forgotten about how much room the HSF take lol.
I have a Asus Mars 2.... 3 slot unit!
I've been building watercooling PC's for so long now I have forgotten about how much room the HSF take lol.
I have a Asus Mars 2.... 3 slot unit!
Yup! It's amazing how large some HSF get. I remember my old 4870X2 being a triple slot, I ended up water-cooling as well.
- Status