Jump to content

Geekbench show MacPro5,1 while real Mac show "Mac Pro (Mid 2010)?


solarein
 Share

18 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

I didn't use his SMBios, either. For those of you that don't know, the SMBios version in it says his domain name. Obviously the sole reason for that is to promote his website via Geekbench. It also brands your model name in Geekbench as "Hackintosh" instead of a real mac model... Screw that.

 

Hmmm...my smbios matches that of a real mid 2010 Mac Pro, however Geekbench still recognizes it as a "MacPro5,1" rather than a "Mac Pro (mid 2010)". I think in order for Geekbench to recognize the machine as a geniune Mac Pro the specs will have to match too. My computer has a Core i7 rather than a Xeon so that probably rules it out.

Edited by eep357
Posts moved to this new topic as prior was unrelated
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The SMBios plist file is fully editable, so just remove Tony's information. Leaving that field empty won't do any harm (to my knowledge).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree LatinMcG, but since the off topic can be settled in 1 line, I will do so:

Mid 2010 Mac Pro=MacPro 5,1(same thing, both genuine, different app choose different way to display it)

 

And to all who have been shunned by Tmac, be it due to the language you speak, type of processor you have, or how many email address you own, we welcome ye with open arms :santa:

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree LatinMcG, but since the off topic can be settled in 1 line, I will do so:

Mid 2010 Mac Pro=MacPro 5,1(same thing, both genuine, different app choose different way to display it)

 

And to all who have been shunned by Tmac, be it due to the language you speak, type of processor you have, or how many email address you own, we welcome ye with open arms :santa:

 

I know they are the same. The point is, Geekbench treats them as two different models. Real Macs are recognized as Mac Pro (mid 2010), hackintoshes are recognized as MacPro5,1.

 

http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/search?q=model%3A%22Mac+Pro+%28Mid+2010%29%22

http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/search?q=model%3A%22MacPro5%2C1%22

 

By the way, looking at that list of hackintoshes, a great number of them carry the tonymacx86 BIOS identifier. I guess their plan is working.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, this interest's me, I'm making a new topic and will move this post and the others about to it.

 

 

And with that bit of house cleaning out of the way...I took a look at activity monitor to see what files/folders it had open and also sampled the process to do the same, nothing stood out as a 2nd possible location it's getting info from, so the question remains, is this a DSDT issue or is Geekbench also looking somewhere else? Is it the same when using iMac or any other DSDT's? I have a Xserve DSDT laying around somewhere I can dig and see what it thinks about that?

Edited by eep357
Final post moved from http://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/278907-permanently-banned-from-tonymacx86/page__st__20
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for moving this to its own topic. I too was hoping to discuss this some more and felt bad for posting it in the original topic.

 

I think Geekbench is doing some parsing on the processor specs of the machines. For example they have benchmarks by processor model here:

 

http://browser.primatelabs.com/processor-benchmarks

 

But my Core i7 950 doesn't show up in that list, possibly because it's overclocked and not at its original 3.07GHz. I think what Geekbench is doing is restricting the benchmarks that are listed under each processor to only those that exactly match some criteria.

 

I think it may also be doing something similar for the Mac models. It seems to know the exact models of each of the Macs it keeps track of. For Mac Pro (mid 2010) it knows there's a 4 core, 6 core, 8 core, and 12 core model. So I think it may be matching up the Mac models based not only on the system identifiers but also the processor specs. So a MacPro5,1 with Intel Xeon W3565 is correctly identified as a "Mac Pro (mid 2010) 4 core" while a MacPro5,1 with a Core i7 is identified as a generic "MacPro5,1".

 

To lend some support to my theory, here's a list of MacPro5,1's with Xeon W3565 that are not being identified as Mac Pro (mid 2010).

 

http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/search?q=model%3A%22MacPro5%2C1%22+processor%3A%22Intel+Xeon+W3565%22+platform%3A%22Mac%22

 

If my theory is correct, these should've been identified as Mac Pro (mid 2010) but they are not. However, I noticed that each of them is running Geekbench 2.1.x, while those being identified as Mac Pro (mid 2010) are running Geekbench 2.3.x-2.4. So my theory could still be correct if somewhere after Geekbench 2.1.x there's been a change that allowed real Macs to be correctly identified with their models and years based on processor specs.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had a similar thought, and you even answered my next question "what if a real mac user upgraded their CPU to a non-standard model?" This is also why I was curious about iMac and others as they're not all xeon's, but alas x58 never appeared in any mac and socket 1366 only as xeon in MacPro 4,1 and 5,1. This again makes me curious to go search for my xserve one since it's not a common platform. And from what you've seen is this more just a x58 thing?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems to happen with LGA1155-based systems as well. For example, here's 27-inch iMac (mid 2011) versus iMac12,2

 

http://browser.prima...inch mid 2011)"

http://browser.prima...odel:"imac12,2"

 

You can see that the latter list is made up of mostly hackintoshes with non-standard (that is, not one that Apple sells) CPUs.

 

I suspect that if a real iMac user upgraded his or her CPU to one that Apple doesn't sell, that model will be identified as iMac12,2, and if a hackintosh user has a Core i7 2600 that model will be identified as a 27-inch iMac (mid 2011) as long as the rest of the system identifiers also line up. The latter hypothesis can be verified if one goes through the first list I linked to and see if any systems on there have BIOS strings that may indicate it's a hackintosh. Unfortunately that list is way too long to go through and I don't see any way to filter by BIOS string.

 

Something else that's interesting is that if you have a real iMac12,2 running Windows, Geekbench will identify it as an "Apple Inc. iMac12,2" (note the addition of "Apple Inc." to the model name used with hackintoshes.)

 

http://browser.prima...tform:"windows"

 

In this case, though, the processor specs and system identifiers exactly match real iMac12,2s running OS X. But it could be that Geekbench simply doesn't translate these machines into "27-inch iMac (mid-2011)" simply because they are running Windows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very interesting indeed. Thankfully this seems to confirm more that it's just Geekbench, but hey why not strive for perfection?

 

So....xServe.. Not a good choice of smbios for x58. With that being the only difference:

About This Mac.jpgUntitled2.jpg

vs

About This Xserve.jpgUntitled.jpg

 

And epic fail at making Geekbench show xServe (Early 2008) as the model too :(

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So after doing a little playing around with About this Mac and System Profiler strings, adding CPU sub model amongst othersAbout This Macm.jpg

it occurred to me Geekbench already had i7-920 when nothing else did. Then stepping info too, so it must be calling CPUID direct and not getting all its info from the OS. Opened it in hex editor and sure enough it does, so if it does infact use processor info as a basis of "real" vs "hack", you'd have to spoof it somehow. It could also be a if, then, else thing where if it's not in a certain file location it will move to next option to get system info, which would explain the bootcamp vs osx on real mac difference. There's at least a few different places this info could be gotten in OSX's file system I'll dig into as time permits. I would think maybe CPUID were mandatory for it to run low level instructions on the benches, but if so, don't think the xserve bench wouldn't have been so low just by changing a smbios.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like iStat4?

Screen Shot 2012-12-14 at 5.56.36 AM.jpg

Also history graphs CPU activity, but it doesn't work on xServe, just yellow caution triangles in the menubar, probably not a mac model on their supported list. Still I'm not a big fan of changing smbios too often as it creates different profiles in all preferences files and screws up local dns discovery. Small annoyances but still.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, so after playing around with different stuff like this:

About This Hack.jpgprohack.jpg

nothing affected GeekBench, until I changed the Model in smbios from MacPro5,1 to MacPro (Mid 2010), Geekbench then listed my Mac model as "Hackintosh". So my only conclusion then would be, that right now, it must at least have it's doubts that it's a hack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, great discovery! Although I offer a different explanation. Geekbench maintains a Mac benchmarks page with all the Mac models listed. It must care about making sure that only real Macs are on those lists (or, failing that, making sure that only self-claimed Macs with the processors that that model is supposed to have is on that list). This presents a problem for computers whose self-identification string exactly matches the model numbers that Geekbench assigns to these Mac models. So their solution: just rename them Hackintosh. For all the machines that do not exactly match the post-translation Mac model names, including those that use the pre-translation Mac model names, like MacPro5,1 etc., Geekbench doesn't care because those model names are not used for the real Macs, due to the way Geekbench translates real Macs' model names into something like "Mac Pro (mid-2010)", so it leaves those model names alone, rather than changing them to Hackintosh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, try changing your MacModel in smbios to something like DellPro and see if it goes to hackintosh or that. I have it blocked with Little Snitch so any database checking would need to be local.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

I finally realized that I needed to use Champlist to create a new valid SMBios.plist and I set it to MacPro5,1 since it was originally set to MacPro 4,1. When I rebooted the machine, it shown a dialog box with a Mac Pro image and a message next to it that said something on the lines of "all of the memory modules are in the sockets" or to that effect. When I ran Geekbench, it finally said MacPro5,1 as the model. I also included the original smbios.plist that caused the Hackintosh model problem as an attachment if anyone wants to take a look at it.

smbios.zip

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...