I read in another thread that the Haswell processors in the new iMacs are faster than the older Xeon processors in the nMP's?
Is this true?
I read in another thread that the Haswell processors in the new iMacs are faster than the older Xeon processors in the nMP's?
Is this true?
I read in another thread that the Haswell processors in the new iMacs are faster than the older Xeon processors in the nMP's?
Is this true?
Depends how long and demanding the test is for. The Haswell i7 will throttle back its core speed earlier than the 4 core Xeon will due to TDP.
Yes, it's possible that an i7 processor to be faster then Xeons but there are other advantages of Xeon, which will only depend on what kind of things you are doing.
Anim stated a good point, as Xeons are mainly found in workstation computers where it's expected to run for hours or even days of simulation or rendering continuously.
For most computations, the iMac will be probably slightly faster. It will be significantly faster if the software is AVX2 optimised. The Xeon is a slower CPU, but it wins some ground back by having more cache and faster RAM. Also, as mentioned above, Xeon is likely to maintain higher clocks most of the time.
The thermal issue with throttling has nothing to do with Haswell - it's that the Imac doesn't have adequate cooling for continuous full throttle use.
If you put a Xeon in the Imac it would overheat and throttle as well.
The thermal issue with throttling has nothing to do with Haswell - it's that the Imac doesn't have adequate cooling for continuous full throttle use.
If you put a Xeon in the Imac it would overheat and throttle as well.
If you put a Xeon in the Imac it would overheat and throttle as well.
I read in another thread that the Haswell processors in the new iMacs are faster than the older Xeon processors in the nMP's?
Is this true?
Whilst the Geekbench scores of the i7-4770 in an iMac may be slightly faster than the Xeon E5-1620v2, the Xeon does have:
1) Faster memory (1866MHz vs 1600MHz)
2) 4 memory channels as opposed to 2 for the i7 (allowing nearly 60GB/s transfers)
3) 40 PCI-e lanes vs 24 on the i7.
This may make a difference on some applications if they involve lots of memory access.
Not accurate WRT Late 2013 imac. It can do 100% load without throttling but it will also have ~95degC CPU temps. If I was going to do full load often I would opt for one that runs coolser under load. I have yet to see where the fan actually ramps up on the nMP??? 60degC CPU would be great but I have yet to see any data on this!
100% load ----
Not if it is a Xeon E3.
The Xeon product range is quite broad.
A Xeon E5 would but then the iMac was never designed for a Xeon E5. It is right up there with saying if put a Power8 processor in the iMac it would overheat. Or a GTX 780 or any of the huge number of other parts never considered by the design. Apple could make a E5 fit if gutted everything else (as low as possible GPU, drop HDD, cut monitor power, etc.) , but that wouldn't be balanced.
----------
On a subset of workloads yes. If single core drag racing then the upper end Haswells have an edge. Some subset of the newer AVX instructions ( vector/SIMD processing ) yes; again limited to single core. If buying a MP 2013 to run Mac Paint in an emulator faster... the iMac is better.
On general purpose workloads.... not so much. On general usage , multiple core workloads... not really.
Not accurate WRT Late 2013 imac. It can do 100% load without throttling but it will also have ~95degC CPU temps. If I was going to do full load often I would opt for one that runs coolser under load. I have yet to see where the fan actually ramps up on the nMP??? 60degC CPU would be great but I have yet to see any data on this!
100% load ----
I don't know, probably just assume. They say the same thing about the Mac Mini. Mine just does not throttle. It gets loud and hot but will do HandBrake encodes at 3.4 Mhz for hours. A chart on mine will look identical to the one propower showed except it's 3.4 and ~44 watts.Why have people been saying that the Imac will throttle if it doesn't?
They say the same thing about the Mac Mini.
Now, if only Apple would make a desktop system without a monitor that uses the latest generation processors + TB2 and USB3. Oh, wait, that's the xMac.
Why have people been saying that the Imac will throttle if it doesn't?
Perhaps equating "throttle" with lack of Turbo mode clock upshifts. If your "norm" is Turbo mode (or an average level above base clock) then will complain if system core temps raise so high that won't let Turbo mode trigger.
Likewise can filter out the folks who tweaked and overclocked the GPU and/or tossed in some faster/hotter HDD. Also the folks who have done things to disrupt airflow and/or raise the ambient air temp pretty high.
Good point, thanks.
I ran Prime95 for a couple of hours on my i3-v2 office system, and it was pegged at 3.501 GHz the whole time (3.5 GHz rated CPU) with about 75° core temps. The 95° temps for the Imac are really scary, though.
Well, the xMac is also supposed to be internally expandable. If Apple's not even offering internal expansion in their workstation product anymore, there's zero chance they'll do it in a mid-range desktop.
However, a system that was basically a higher end (and perhaps slightly larger) mini, with a couple of TB2 ports and the same CPU/GPU options as the iMac that still seems like a product Apple could decide to offer at some point. I wouldn't exactly say it's likely, but nothing in Apple's 'DNA' rules it out. At various points in the past the mini has come much closer to the iMac than it now is.
Good point, thanks.
I ran Prime95 for a couple of hours on my i3-v2 office system, and it was pegged at 3.501 GHz the whole time (3.5 GHz rated CPU) with about 75° core temps. The 95° temps for the Imac are really scary, though.
Whilst the Geekbench scores of the i7-4770 in an iMac may be slightly faster than the Xeon E5-1620v2, the Xeon does have:
1) Faster memory (1866MHz vs 1600MHz)
2) 4 memory channels as opposed to 2 for the i7 (allowing nearly 60GB/s transfers)
3) 40 PCI-e lanes vs 24 on the i7.
This may make a difference on some applications if they involve lots of memory access.
The 95° temps for the Imac are really scary, though.