|
Quick Xeon vs i7 question.
|
View this Thread in Original format
| tehlord |
How does an 8 core 3.2ghz Xeon Mac Pro compare to say whatever the fastest current i7 chip.
M'k ta. |
|
|
| Raphie |
| i7 beats the out of it..... |
|
|
| tehlord |
Well to put the question into perspective it's for a pal of mine who's doing score work almost exclusively.
There's a 2009 Mac Pro 8 core with 3 SSDs, 4TB storage and 16GB RAM with a 30" Apple Cinema Display for �1600 up for grabs, or a new build PC with an i7 and similar specs for similar money. |
|
|
| Raphie |
| He would need to do his homework on what XEON was used that that timeframe, but can tell you now, current i7's will be like 8x times at fast and 1600GBP buys you a hell of a i7 system |
|
|
| Raphie |
| quote: | Originally posted by tehlord
Hmmmm, looking here it shows that the 3.2ghz Xeon's are about 80% as quick as all but the latest i7s, but I really have no idea how real world those benchmarks are
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html |
you need to look at the older Xeons the 3.2's benchmarked in 2008 ;)
Xeon is a product range name intel has been using for more than 10 years now. |
|
|
| tehlord |
| quote: | Originally posted by Raphie
you need to look at the older Xeons the 3.2's benchmarked in 2008 ;)
Xeon is a product range name intel has been using for more than 10 years now. |
Well spotted :p |
|
|
| Looney4Clooney |
| quote: | Originally posted by tehlord
Well to put the question into perspective it's for a pal of mine who's doing score work almost exclusively.
There's a 2009 Mac Pro 8 core with 3 SSDs, 4TB storage and 16GB RAM with a 30" Apple Cinema Display for �1600 up for grabs, or a new build PC with an i7 and similar specs for similar money. |
That model is what everyone uses. You could also sell it in one year for almost the same. Those benchmarks just don't translate to specific tasks. Andre value of a 1 year old pc is nothing. People are lining up or 3.1 - 4.1 Mac pros
Not sure how pounds convert to dollars when buying computer stuff in uk but that system with no monitor or ssd at 1400 would be sold the same day.
But even itch those results the 3.2 is as you said 80%. Remember you have 2. |
|
|
| tehlord |
| quote: | Originally posted by Looney4Clooney
That model is what everyone uses. You could also sell it in one year for almost the same. Those benchmarks just don't translate to specific tasks. Andre value of a 1 year old pc is nothing. People are lining up or 3.1 - 4.1 Mac pros
Not sure how pounds convert to dollars when buying computer stuff in uk but that system with no monitor or ssd at 1400 would be sold the same day.
But even itch those results the 3.2 is as you said 80%. Remember you have 2. |
Yeah it's a bit of a bargain, it works out to about $2400 but Macs are much more expensive here than there in the first place.
The deal has been struck anyway, it's bought. |
|
|
| Timothy |
| A 15 inch 2011 Macbook Pro is even faster than a 8 core Mac Pro. |
|
|
| Looney4Clooney |
faster at what ? The mac pro , its bandwidth , ram addressing and cache makes it a much more formidable computer for audio. Faster ? no . Able to do more, yup.
I mean have you people actually tried to do similar things ?
I own a 2011 Macbook pro , a 2009 MAC PRO . a 2010 MAC PR0 and the laptop could not handle a 25% of what the towers do. It isn't all about cpu cycles. IN fact the 2010 is spec'd to be twice as fast as the 2009 model but in practice, they are identical. Benchmarks are theoretical. In practice, doing the same things, the benchmarks just don't correlate as much as you think. Unless you are doing benchmark type stuff like batch retouching child pornography. Those tears need to really dazzle off the page. |
|
|
|
|
