- 2010 6 CORE MAC PRO MOVIE
- 2010 6 CORE MAC PRO UPDATE
- 2010 6 CORE MAC PRO DRIVER
- 2010 6 CORE MAC PRO PRO
Should you get the 2010 with the 5870 instead of the 5770? For $200 more, it's a no-brainer for me. That could change in the future but for now, I say, "Bon Appetit." My theory is that none of them use all the bandwidth. Though memory stress tests showed the 3 and 6 stick config to be 20% faster than the 2, 4 and 8 stick config, we found no advantage in real world apps. (Be sure to read the paragraph preceding each graph for insights into optimizing each of the three apps.)Īs for memory, we played with different configurations. on what you are running." Or I'll say, "What do you have more of, time or money?" That's why when someone asks me, "Should I get the 12-core or 8-core or 6-core? The short answer: "It depends. However, with the Compressor and Motion, the advantage is only slight. In the case of After Effects, the 12-core is almost twice as fast as the 6-core.
2010 6 CORE MAC PRO UPDATE
Case in point is the recent SL Graphic Update which made all games run significantly faster on our 2009 iMac and Mac Pro.
2010 6 CORE MAC PRO DRIVER
As driver updates are released, we will update this graph since driver improvements and bug fixes can make a significant performance difference.
2010 6 CORE MAC PRO PRO
NOTE: All graphics cards in the graph above were installed in the 6-core Westmere 3.33GHz Mac Pro (2010) with 32G of RAM. The render time is clearly affected by what graphics card you have installed, but the effect varies depending on the filters and effects used in a given project. In the graph you can see total render time using the 6-core Mac Pro with five different graphics cards.
However, it hands off certain parts of the job to the graphics processor which is capable of massive parallel processing. IMac i7 2.93 = 4-core Core i7 2.93GHz iMac (2010) with 16G of RAMĪpple Motion (part of Final Cut Studio) only uses one core to render the RAM Preview. Though the 12-core had 24 virtual cores, we found that 8 instances produced the fastest render times.ġ2-core 2.93 (32G) = 12-core Westmere 2.93GHz Mac Pro (2010) with 32G of RAMġ2-core 2.93 (16G) = 12-core Westmere 2.93GHz Mac Pro (2010) with 16G of RAMġ2-core 2.66 = 12-core Westmere 2.66GHz Mac Pro (2010) with 8G of RAMĨ-core 2.93 = 8-core Nehalem 2.93GHz Mac Pro (2009) with 16G of RAMĦ-core 3.33 = 6-core Westmere 3.33GHz Mac Pro (2010) with 32G of RAMĨ-core 2.4 = 8-core Westmere 2.4GHz Mac Pro (2010) with 24G of RAMĤ-core 2.66 = 4-core Woodcrest 2.66GHz Mac Pro (2006) with 10G of RAM
2010 6 CORE MAC PRO MOVIE
You can't control memory use but you can choose the number of instances (cores) that are used to render portions of the movie simultaneously.
Notice how the 12-core with only 16G ran slower.Īpple Compressor (part of Final Cut Studio) uses QMaster and QuickClustering to achieve a similar effects. You need more than 16G of RAM to achieve it since AE reserves 3G for the app itself. The "sweet spot" for the 12 core was 12 cores at 2GB each (though 24 virtual cores are available). It lets you not only define how much memory is reserved for each core but you can vary the number of cores used by reserving some for other apps. But does that translate into real world performance advantage? I picked three high-end apps to answer this question.Īdobe After Effects CS5 has a multiprocessing mode that spawns a subprocess for each core in use. We published some artificial benchmarks (Cinebench, Geekbench) that show the 2010 Mac Pro with the most cores beating up on the ones with less. Posted Wednesday, September 1st, 2010, by rob-ART morgan, mad scientist
0 kommentar(er)
