-
New Mac Pro not faster for FCP than G5
I’m amazed at this BareFeats test but there it is…
https://www.barefeats.com/quad06.html
For rendering HD material the 2.66ghz Xeon Mac Pro was exactly the same speed as the G5 2.5ghz.
I can read. That basically says that if you had a G5 2.66 it would be FASTER than a Xeon. Wow.
Due to huge amounts of cache on the mac pros, there is quite a bit of improvement in some apps, and AE in Rosetta actually runs faster on Mac Pro than it does natively on G5 quad. Adobe utilizes cache, especially in AE for rendering. But that aside, looking at the benchmarks, the G5 is actually a faster processor than the Xeon in almost every test. Especially when you consider that the Intel RAM and Cache is superior in the new machines.
Am I nuts to be unimpressed?
-
35 Replies
-
Hi
A year ago I read this:
“My Wintel colleague and I have just completed some large SIMD optimizations for a very well known image processing application. I also see the same performance ratio – the AltiVec version is easily more than twice as fast as the SSE2 version (take the fastest G5 you can find and the fastest x86 you can find and the AltiVec-G5 version is easily twice as fast). I’ve taken pride in being able to handily beat the SSE2 version and in many cases doing so with far less instructions. I don’t drink the Kool-aid.I had a conversation with an engineer from a certain fruit company today and he said that even Intel engineers were having problems getting SSE2/3 versions of some of the Apple Altivec sample code running at anything better than half the speed of the Altivec code, and this on a CPU with twice the clock speed of a G5. Steve can sit in his distortion field all he wants but that doesn’t change the fact that Altivec is far superior to SSE2/3.”
From https://www.simdtech.org/altivec/archive/msg?list_name=altivec&monthdir=200506&msg=msg00037.html -
[Bret Williams] “For rendering HD material the 2.66ghz Xeon Mac Pro was exactly the same speed as the G5 2.5ghz.
I can read. That basically says that if you had a G5 2.66 it would be FASTER than a Xeon. Wow.”
Um, the 2.66 and the 2.5 are essentially the same speed. So for non-Universal apps, like AE and Photoshop, I would expect the G5 Quad to be faster. But quoting the article:
There’s no doubt that both versions of the Mac Pro are faster than the G5 Quad-Core running Universal Binary apps like iMovie, Final Cut Pro, etc.
This is what I would expect. Only Universal Apps will take advantage of the extra speed on the Mac Pro and they note that the Mac Pro Quad 3.0 is faster even running AE than the G5 Quad which is impressive being a non-universal app.
That’s the machine I’ll have here as soon as the ATI 1900’s are ready to ship.
Walter Biscardi, Jr.
https://www.biscardicreative.com
HD Editorial & Animation for Food Network’s “Good Eats”
HD Editorial for “Assignment Earth”“I reject your reality and substitute my own!” – Adam Savage, Mythbusters
-
[walter biscardi] “This is what I would expect. Only Universal Apps will take advantage of the extra speed on the Mac Pro”
The author used the universal version of FCP for the test – and the 3.0ghz Intel Mac only beat the Quad 2.5Ghz by a handful of seconds (154 to 167). The Quad 2.66 Intel Mac took EXACTLY the same time.
I must admit, I was expecting more of a speedup from these new systems. When will Apple stop using 2x, 3x multiplier figures to sell new Intel kit, when it never plays out on Pro Apps? I’ve been listening to keynotes for long enough to ignore the hype – but I guess Steve J. standing there and saying “hey – it’s just as fast as the old one” doesn’t play too good. I’m a little weary now of people telling me “yeah – but wait til they get the software OPTIMISED for the new hardware”. Oh yeah? Think from now on I’ll believe it when I see it.
I’m sure, however, that if you use software that uses the GPU heavily, these new Mac Pros are just great – As Walter points out.
Perhaps I’m being a bit harsh – after all, I don’t run a G5 quad either, but I just might pick one up after reading this….
Ben
Editec Broadcast Editing Ltd
EVS & FCP specialists for live OB operations.Producer/Director “The Supercar Run” now available for international distribution from http://www.electricsky.com
-
[Ben Holmes] “The author used the universal version of FCP for the test – and the 3.0ghz Intel Mac only beat the Quad 2.5Ghz by a handful of seconds (154 to 167). The Quad 2.66 Intel Mac took EXACTLY the same time.
I must admit, I was expecting more of a speedup from these new systems. When will Apple stop using 2x, 3x multiplier figures to sell new Intel kit, when it never plays out on Pro Apps?”
First off, Barefeats is probably using FCP 5.1.1. Apple is using FCP Beta 5.2.1 for their tests. So obviously some tweaking is going on with FCP for the new desktops.
Second, I take barefeats with a grain of salt, like the old adage goes, ‘your results may vary.’ I have no idea how they actually test their stuff, but I never find I get the same results they do because they don’t use the stuff in a real world workflow. They just use a standard set of tests so that “based on X, then Y must be true.”
Last, between the two machines I would take the Mac Pro if only for all the additional options internally and open layout. Have you compared in the inside of the G5 vs. the Pro? I have the Quad and the processors take up almost 2/3 of the inside of the machine. The Pro has four hard drive slots, double wide graphics slots, removeable RAM ‘sleds,’ tool free installation of PCI cards and just an easier space to get your hands in and out of.
It’s your choice, but if you’re looking at a new machine, for my money the Pro is the better machine if all things between the two were equal.
Walter Biscardi, Jr.
https://www.biscardicreative.com
HD Editorial & Animation for Food Network’s “Good Eats”
HD Editorial for “Assignment Earth”“I reject your reality and substitute my own!” – Adam Savage, Mythbusters
-
Agree with the comments about the internals. No contest on the newer machines.
Based on new prices, the new machines are better value. But you won’t have to pay new prices for a G5 Quad any more, will you? Keep a beady eye on those refurbs…
Intel Macs still represent a leap of faith for pro users, when you see AJA, for example, bringing out new drivers for the new machines ‘at the end of the month’ or that Sapphire filters are available as beta versions for Intel Macs.
[walter biscardi] “I take barefeats with a grain of salt” – I take Apple’s test with a beta with an even BIGGER grain. As I said, I’m a little weary of Apple’s claims.
My point is that many people have held off purchasing new towers for a year, expecting something more than this. All we really have is rev 1 hardware with beta software. Doesn’t sound like the Pro choice to me yet.
Just my view, obviously.
Ben
Editec Broadcast Editing Ltd
EVS & FCP specialists for live OB operations.Producer/Director “The Supercar Run” now available for international distribution from http://www.electricsky.com
-
[Ben Holmes] “Based on new prices, the new machines are better value. But you won’t have to pay new prices for a G5 Quad any more, will you? Keep a beady eye on those refurbs…”
Actually, that was the biggest surprise for me with the new Mac Pros. The G5 Quad has not dropped in price and still sits at $3,299 to start. Very strange to keep that priced so high when the new machines are a better dollar value.
Walter Biscardi, Jr.
https://www.biscardicreative.com
HD Editorial & Animation for Food Network’s “Good Eats”
HD Editorial for “Assignment Earth”“I reject your reality and substitute my own!” – Adam Savage, Mythbusters
-
[walter biscardi] “The G5 Quad has not dropped in price and still sits at $3,299 to start”
Maybe that’s an indication of Apple’s real view on this – they know some people will still pay good money for a machine they claim they have made obselescent? 😉
If we don’t keep the noise down about this, their won’t be a glut of G5 Quads for sale!
Ben
Editec Broadcast Editing Ltd
EVS & FCP specialists for live OB operations.Producer/Director “The Supercar Run” now available for international distribution from http://www.electricsky.com
-
[Ben Holmes] “My point is that many people have held off purchasing new towers for a year, expecting something more than this. All we really have is rev 1 hardware with beta software. Doesn’t sound like the Pro choice to me yet.”
That’s always the case! No company ever release rev2 hardware right from the start. Same for software, when you make a dramatic architecture change like this software always lag behind. It’s just like the OS9 and OS X a few years ago and look where we’re at now – every software is OS X capable. I bet GenArts will have universal plugins within a fews months.
I think the new machines are a good buy if you’re in need of an upgrade. I wouldn’t buy a Quad G5 right now. Especially if you intend to keep the machine for 3 or 4 years. Will FCP and other software be universal 3 years from now? How about 4 years? Hard to say, but I would guess no. I bet universal support will die down after 2 more years.
So a G5 will be kinda stuck “in time” in 3 or 4 yrs since it won’t be able to run intel apps in the future. I’m guess but I don’t think I’m too far off.
-CHL
Chi-Ho Lee
Film & Video Editor
Apple Certified Final Cut Pro Trainer
http://www.chiholee.com -
[Chi-Ho Lee] “That’s always the case! No company ever release rev2 hardware right from the start”
All the more reason not to buy one yet. If the performance gains were there, you may feel more like a gamble.
[Chi-Ho Lee] “Will FCP and other software be universal 3 years from now? How about 4 years? Hard to say, but I would guess no”
Isn’t that the point of universal software? It’s our guarantee of backward compatability for older kit, isn’t it? You mean Mac will drop the support, like it did with classic, in a few years? That’s different surely, as all THAT did was force me to buy a new OS – by which time OS X was actually stable enough to use. At any rate, my guess is that 3-4 years would be more than long enough to expect my systems to work with up-to-date software. I’d be looking to upgrade again before then – OS 10.8 will probably CRAWL on a Quad 2.5….
Not convinced – sorry.
Editec Broadcast Editing Ltd
EVS & FCP specialists for live OB operations.Producer/Director “The Supercar Run” now available for international distribution from http://www.electricsky.com
-
[Ben Holmes] “Isn’t that the point of universal software? It’s our guarantee of backward compatability for older kit, isn’t it? You mean Mac will drop the support, like it did with classic, in a few years? That’s different surely, as all THAT did was force me to buy a new OS – by which time OS X was actually stable enough to use.”
Of course they’ll drop support in a few years! How long have you been using computers and software? Try getting support for a G3 tower or try to get support for FCP 2. OS X has been stable to use since 10.2 since many people, including many people on this forum has been running FCP since 10.2 . Not sure what your point is.
And NOBODY forces you to buy anything new. I know working Pro Tools mixers who uses OS9 on a G3 tower and they mix tons of broadcast shows here on those officially unsupported rigs. Apple agents don’t knock on your door and force you to upgrade or else they break your legs.
[Ben Holmes] “Not convinced – sorry.”
No one is trying to convince you. Just pointing out how your argument doesn’t hold up. I don’t give two cents on whether you upgrade or not. LOL.
CHL
Chi-Ho Lee
Film & Video Editor
Apple Certified Final Cut Pro Trainer
http://www.chiholee.com
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up