tyranos Posted August 16, 2007 Share Posted August 16, 2007 Good lord this geekbench thing is ass. When athlon x2 systems with os/x are scoring higher than an 8 core intel setup because it's running windows....HA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GingerPrince Posted August 16, 2007 Share Posted August 16, 2007 I don't know if it's good or not but my hackintosh gets 4495. see my sig. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gimpyviper Posted August 16, 2007 Share Posted August 16, 2007 Not this again...lol. You're wrong. For the money of a Mac Pro, you can't build anything that will beat it. Go look at the first 3-4 pages of GeekBench scores and tell me if you see anything other than "Mac Pro 8-Core." If you're talking about buying comparable components, they will end up being just as much as a Mac Pro, sometimes even more. Remember you have to compare apples to apples, or dual CPU Xeon 5000 series board with two woodcrests, not a 965P with a single processor slot and 4 RAM slots and a single Conroe. Also, far as I know you can't even get a Xeon Quad Core at 3.0GHz anywhere other than Apple. I'm sure Apple has an exclusive deal with Intel at the moment for the top tier. One thing to keep in mind too when comparing Hack rigs to the MacPro, the MacPro is Xeon based with means FB-DIMMs which have been shown to be much slower than straight up DDR2 similar to the old Rambus fiasco. I have a Xeon 5130 rig at home. I would need to dump at least a second proc and a video card into it to come close to a MacPro. If I did so the cost of the system would be around 1600-1700 or so, but my motherboard I have isn't as capable as the MacPro's which would easily make up up another 100-200 bucks I'd say. (Base MacPro price = 2200) the remainder would be software etc. For what you're getting the MacPro's are actually fairly well priced. If I was in the market for a new machine, I'd DEFINITELY would be looking at a MacPro no doubt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Synaesthesia Posted August 16, 2007 Share Posted August 16, 2007 Intel has JUST released those 3ghz quad-core xeons to the general public. The Mac Pro is a killer system, however, I just don't like the high price of FB-dimms and the way that they are slower than DDR2 ram. But the way it's put together, and the hard-drive rack might just make up for it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manic Posted August 16, 2007 Share Posted August 16, 2007 I've tested my new MacBook Pro (Core 2 Duo, 2.2 ghz w/ 2gb of ram, nVidia 8600M GT) and my Hackintosh (Pentium D 820 @ 2.8 ghz w/ 2 gb of ram, nVidia 6600 GT) with GeekBench and XBench. No apps running on the computer except one Finder window. GeekBench results: MacBook Pro: 2908 Hackintosh: 2278 XBench results (without disk test): MacBook Pro: 150.81 Hackintosh: 113.55 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mlmorg Posted August 16, 2007 Author Share Posted August 16, 2007 @Manic Interesting...are the HD's comparable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manic Posted August 16, 2007 Share Posted August 16, 2007 I don't think there's a way to compare the 5400 RPM hard drive of my MBP vs. the 7200 RPM drive inside my PC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GingerPrince Posted August 17, 2007 Share Posted August 17, 2007 Manic - any idea why my geekbench (4495) is so much higher than your MBP? HD? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gimpyviper Posted August 17, 2007 Share Posted August 17, 2007 Intel has JUST released those 3ghz quad-core xeons to the general public. The Mac Pro is a killer system, however, I just don't like the high price of FB-dimms and the way that they are slower than DDR2 ram. But the way it's put together, and the hard-drive rack might just make up for it... :censored2: Agreed, FB-DIMMs suck ass. But at least they're not proprietary like RDIMM was. Ugh I'm SOOO happy the consumers told Intel to go F-themselves on that one. FB-DIMMs will come down in price eventually and as speeds ramp up they're inherent advantages will outweigh their inherent disadvantages. Or so they say... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manic Posted August 17, 2007 Share Posted August 17, 2007 Manic - any idea why my geekbench (4495) is so much higher than your MBP? HD? I don't know... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts