PDA

View Full Version : Mac Pro vs Macbook Pro...



virtualcomposer
11-29-2009, 01:19 PM
How does a first generation Mac Pro compare to a brand new Macbook Pro processingwise? I do allot of processing musically that doesn't seem
to be as hard on my processor as it is the Ram. Is the dual proc Macbook Pro with 8 gigs of RAM comparable to the newest Macbook Pro processor chip? There's about a four year tech difference so I wasn't sure if
my quad proc mac pro was just as fast as a new tech dual proc Macbook Pro. ( :

virtualcomposer
11-29-2009, 06:25 PM
I know some Apple junkies must know. Lol!

ingo
11-30-2009, 03:05 AM
Just look at bearfeets.com, they have some sample tests of MacBook Pros.

http://barefeats.com/mbpp15.html

dsol
11-30-2009, 03:54 AM
the first-gen mac pro is based on the core2 architecture so clock-for-clock it's largely identical to the current gen core2 based macbook pros. However, it does have 2 processors (with 2 cores each) and those processors are likely clocked higher than a laptop CPU too - so it's still considerably faster than any laptop, particularly for anything that makes good use of multiprocessing (Lighwave and Audio both do).

Combined with the far greater RAM and HD capacity (and faster internal drives running at 7200rpm), your MacPro will be much faster than a laptop.

That situation won't change until Apple start using the new i7/i5 laptop parts that are coming out early next year, which should allow them to produce a quad-core macbook pro. Of course, by that point we should have new 12-core mac pros too ;)

IgnusFast
11-30-2009, 09:09 AM
I agree with DSOL - I love my MacBook Pro and never travel without it, but though it's decently fast, it's A) Much slower than a Mac Pro, and B) Runs hotter than a SOB when maxed out.

JonW
11-30-2009, 12:52 PM
Over at http://3dspeedmachine.com/?page=3&scene=39 my Mac Mini 2.0 Ghz doesn’t their scene in 9:14 (last on the list) & my W5580 (obviously a touch faster than the X5570 in a Mac, but similar), does the scene in 1:03

LW is all about CPUs, most of the other programs having a fast HD is just as important. Put a new Black Scorpio 7200 or similar in the laptop, or even a new SSD, but the capacity on the SSDs is a bit on the small side.

This may keep you going until the next round of CPUs

Lightwolf
12-01-2009, 05:18 AM
That situation won't change until Apple start using the new i7/i5 laptop parts that are coming out early next year...
They're out already, and have been for a few weeks. Still tricky to get though.

Cheers,
Mike

dsol
12-01-2009, 05:33 AM
Are the quad-core laptop parts out yet? I think I read somewhere that the initial laptop chips are dual-core versions of the Nehelem architecture.

Aha... looking at wikipedia, there's going to be a ton of new 32nm parts in different configurations http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Nehalem_(microarchitecture)

But seriously, unless you lead a life on the road, for any heavy graphics work a desktop (dual processor) is the only way to go. Laptops are painfully slow in comparison. Looking forward to getting a dual hexacore next year with many GBs of ram :)

dsol
12-01-2009, 05:40 AM
It looks like there aren't any quad-core laptop parts planned apart from Clarksfield which is a specialist part. Most of their mobile CPUs will remain dual-core, but add integrated graphics. I hope it's an integrated GPU based on larrabee - and not their deeply sucky existing graphics chipsets. That could be pretty awesome for GPGPU acceleration.

Clarksfield has a fairly high TDP, so it might only go into the 17" Macbook pro (to accommodate the necessary cooling)

Lightwolf
12-01-2009, 05:50 AM
Are the quad-core laptop parts out yet? I think I read somewhere that the initial laptop chips are dual-core versions of the Nehelem architecture.
Yes (as an example): http://www1.euro.dell.com/content/topics/topic.aspx/emea/corporate/pressoffice/2009/uk/en/2009_09_23_brk_001?c=uk&l=en&s=gen

The others would be the i3, and those are expected early next year (with integrated graphics).


But seriously, unless you lead a life on the road, for any heavy graphics work a desktop (dual processor) is the only way to go. Laptops are painfully slow in comparison.
Plus the ergonomics suck, price performance, etc...

Cheers,
Mike

dsol
12-01-2009, 05:55 AM
Plus the ergonomics suck, price performance, etc...


Yeah. I find it damn hard to work with anything smaller than a 30" monitor these days. And laptop keyboards are too small for my fat fingers :)

Lightwolf
12-01-2009, 05:59 AM
Yeah. I find it damn hard to work with anything smaller than a 30" monitor these days. And laptop keyboards are too small for my fat fingers :)
Still no 30" :( But one 23", two 20", one 21"... And you're right about the keyboard. Then again, even the current Apple keyboard (while being the best for years) is still too flimsy for me.

Cheers,
Mike

dsol
12-01-2009, 06:04 AM
And the performance difference is marked. Going from an 8-core macpro to an dual core macbook really sucks. And the lack of RAM capacity is going to really bite as we move into 64 bit territory on all major apps and mainstream OS's