Geekbench testing for Macs/workstations

[AP90]

Do any of you ever Geekbench your workstations or look at what other machines are running at?

I was amazed to find that the old tower Mac Pro's with 12 cores are still out running anything other than the brand new i9 core iMacs. And the new mac mini's pack a pretty hard punch and beat out anything we used to think was a fast machine.

Just thought it was interesting how some of these older machines will still outpace new ones when put to the testing. Not sure about real world capabilities though.

 

[DYP]

That is why I am still running a 12 core 2012 with 48GB of ram. Problems is that with all programs now 64bit that that is barely enough ram but just not sure I want to put more in it. With triple channel memory all 6 8GB chips should be replaced but I just don't see spending money on DDR3 1333 MHz ram. Might be better off in the long run to move this box down a level and go for the 2019 MacPro. With the W5700X video card when it becomes available.

 

[PricelineNegotiator]

DDR3 vs DDR4 memory is night and day. Applications run much differently, especially with clock frequencies of DDR4 memory being 1866 or above, with the same GB of memory.

 

[OffsetStorefront]

I feel like this illuminates less how good the older machines were and instead how little Apple has advanced their raw hardware & performance over the years. The Apple Tax gets you a nice and highly optimized OS (which is where most improvements have come from over the years I'd say) but not much in the way of hardware...

 

[kdw75]

It is pretty sad how poorly most Adobe applications are at utilizing multiple core CPUs.

 

[benstarr]

While geekbench scores are interesting they are not very directly related to actual performance. As mentioned Adobe Applications do not utilize the multiple cores (or CPUs) very well, so a high multicore geekbench score means much less than a high singe core score of your spending your days in Photoshop.

I can't find the page I'm looking for that compares Photoshop performance but this post gets into some of it.

6 core mac pro faster than 12 core mac pro??

Hello Everyone, I have a bit of an unusual observation that i found this afternoon. I have been doing some of my typical 3D work in cinema 4d R12 and today i discovered that the extensive 3D animation i was rendering out was rendering faster in the on screen preview on the 6-core than my...

forums.macrumors.com

 

[PricelineNegotiator]

While geekbench scores are interesting they are not very directly related to actual performance. As mentioned Adobe Applications do not utilize the multiple cores (or CPUs) very well, so a high multicore geekbench score means much less than a high singe core score of your spending your days in Photoshop.

I can't find the page I'm looking for that compares Photoshop performance but this post gets into some of it.

6 core mac pro faster than 12 core mac pro??

Hello Everyone, I have a bit of an unusual observation that i found this afternoon. I have been doing some of my typical 3D work in cinema 4d R12 and today i discovered that the extensive 3D animation i was rendering out was rendering faster in the on screen preview on the 6-core than my...

forums.macrumors.com

This man gets it. Adobe has done wonders in the last 5 or 6 year optimizing their apps, but there is always more work that can be done. The best way to get ahead of the curve is to use Intel for CPU and nVidia for GPU. Unfortunately the latest Mac Pros only have a SHITTY $300 AMD graphics card in it. For a computer that costs $5000 minimum! It's a joke. The rest of the computer is actually amazing, but I guess they made it modular so you could pay for the upgrade down the road, which they will inevitably release.