The point of fast drives (SSDs) is to let the CPUs work at their fastest, without delays.Īlthough both machines had 2TB hard drives, all tests were done on the dual/triple SSD RAID volume, thus these results are “best obtainable”. Note that the 8-core model entails a US$2200 upcharge over the 4-core 3.33GHz model, enough to pay for 24GB memory and a solid state drive upgrade.ĭrive speed is a minor factor for most of the tests (except diglloydHuge), and two SSDs almost max-out the Mac Pro internal SATA bus, so the 2-vs-3 SSD setup is not important. The solid state drive setups used are so fast that they eliminate any ordinary disk activity as a factor, hard drive systems will perform at a lower level. The Mac Pros tested here were MPG Pro Workstations speed with a vanilla Mac Pro will be slower. With Photoshop CS4/CS5, there is also increased overhead with 8 cores due to CS5 implementation weakness it’s just not very smart about knowing how many threads are useful, so it wastes time and memory allocating too many threads for tasks that won’t even benefit from them. So realistically, using 5 cores at 2.93Ghz is about the same as 4 cores on the 3.33GHz. Thus, on the 8 core model, 4.5 cores must be utilized just to achieve the same performance, and that ignores the overhead of more CPU cores, software limitations, etc. The 3.33Ghz model has a 13% clock-speed advantage over the 8-core 2.93GHz. The 8-core model is not available at 3.33GHz, but a quad-core model is available. The fastest 8-core Mac Pro to be had as of May 2010 is the Mac Pro Nehalem 2.93GHz (see the in-depth review). This special report takes a photographer’s viewpoint on the Apple Mac Pro, asking whether eight cores is really better than four. Send Feedback Related: hard drive, Mac Pro, memory, RAID, SSDĪ Mac Pro is expensive enough to begin with, but paying more for the same performance is silly.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |