As we saw in ourfirst circle of benchmarks , the raw Mac Pro is more of a specialized workstation than ageneral purpose information processing system . In fact , unless you ’re using a pro app that takes vantage of multiple processing cores , a flim-flam - out iMac may surpass the new Mac Pro .
Sapphire HD 7950 Mac Edition graphics card .
For this rung of examination we require to see how upgrade our 2012 Mac Pros would help shut the performance break with the novel Mac Pro . We started with our stock 2012 quad - core and treble six - core ( 12 cores total)Mac Prosand upgraded them with fast instant storage via OWC’sMercury Accelsior E2 PCIe SSD($630 ) , 32 GB of RAM fromCrucial , and fasterSapphire HD 7950 Mac Edition($500 ) art .
Results are scores. Higher results are better. Best score inbold.—Macworld Lab testing by James Galbraith and Albert Filice
Speedmark 9 scores
resultant role are scores . Higher results are better . good score inbold.—Macworld Lab testing by James Galbraith and Albert Filice
The stock 2012 quad - core 3.2GHz Mac Pro with a 1 TB strong drive , 6 GB of RAM , and Radeon HD5770 artwork earn a Speedmark 9 grade of 171 . After upgrading , the same system scored a 241 , 41 percent eminent than the broth system . As you might ask , the processor - intensive run did n’t show much remainder after the upgrades , but booklet transcript and uncompressing tests were much , much quicker with the accession of the Accelsior self-colored - State Department storage . The upgraded 3.2GHz quad - kernel Mac Pro was able to imitate a 6 GB folder from one part of the drive to another in less than one - fifth of the meter of the broth mannikin . The Heaven and Valley benchmarks showed the Sapphire card instal in the upgraded Mac Pros capable to display twice the identification number of frame per second as the Radeon HD5770 the system shipped with . Despite the performance gain , the new Mac Pro was 45 percent faster overall than the upgrade quadriceps - core 2012 Mac Pro .
Upgrading the 12 - heart 2012 Mac Pro raised the Speedmark 9 score by a goodish 31 pct , though the new 8 - core Mac Pro was still 37 percent quicker overall than the updated 12 - sum modeling .
Results are scores. Higher results are better. Best score inbold.—Macworld Lab testing by James Galbraith and Albert Filice
We also run a new Photoshop natural process script made up of project that take reward of hardware acceleration . The beefed - up 2012 quad - core Mac Pro was 31 per centum faster than the stock model , but the new Mac Pro was still faster—22 pct faster — than upgraded 2012 Mac Pro . OurCTO 2013 27 - inch iMacscored similarly to the kick upstairs 12 - core 2012 Mac Pro in this test .
Final Cut Pro X benchmarks
Results are clock time in seconds . Lower results are good . secure result inbold.—Macworld research laboratory testing by James Galbraith and Albert Filice
In our Final Cut Pro X trial run , the new Mac Pro importantly surpass the stock 2012 Mac Pros , but the raise do aid the sure-enough motorcar . On a stock quadrangle - core 2012 Mac Pro , an signification fourth dimension in Final Cut Pro X go from 131 seconds to just 26 secondment .
Our CTO 2013 iMac was quite a minute faster than the stock 2012 12 - core Mac Pro in the Final Cut moment test , but our upgrade 2012 12 - core Mac Pro finished the import in half the time of the iMac
The stock Mac Pros took doubly as recollective to render our mental testing Final Cut Pro X project as the CTO iMac . After the upgrades , the 12 - sum render the Book of Job 25 percent quicker than the CTO iMac , but the quad - core was still 25 percent irksome than the CTO iMac .
OWC Mercury Accelsior E2 PCIe SSD
We substantially increase the Final Cut Pro X labor distance to see how the new Mac Pro fare under a more sustained load . We took 30 minutes of 4 K picture and utilize a variety of effects to the footage and then rendered the project . The stock 2012 space - core group Mac Pro contract over 70 minutes to litigate the snip . After upgrading , the quadriceps - essence Mac Pro knocked 18 minutes off the metre . The stock 2012 12 - core Mac Pro took just over 64 minutes to finish our tenacious Final Cut Pro test ; after ascent it aim about 39 minutes . The promote 12 - core rendered the labor in about the same amount of clip as the CTO iMac . The raw Mac Pro stop first yet again , take just 25 minute to render the project , 36 percent quicker than the upgraded 12 - nub 2012 Mac Pro .
Xcode benchmarks
Results are times in seconds . Lower solvent are good . Best account inbold.—Macworld Lab testing by James Galbraith and Albert Filice
Several readers postulate us to run an Xcode project on the raw Mac Pro to see how well it fared . We cloned the code repository for OpenEmu onto our Mac Pros and CTO iMac and used the Xcode instruction communication channel tools to make the labor on each system . The test is central processing unit - intensive .
The upgrades to the Mac Pros made little difference in the amount of time that it took to build the project . The new Mac Pro take 151 minute to dispatch the undertaking , 43 percent quicker than the upgraded 2012 12 - heart Mac Pro and 46 percent quicker than the advance 2012 quad - kernel Mac Pro . The 2013 Mac Pro was also libertine than our CTO 2013 iMac , but only by 16 percent .
Finder tests
Results are times in seconds . Lower results are better . Best resultant inbold .
iMovie 10.0.1 enhance/export
depleted results are better . good consequence inbold .
iPhoto 9.5.1 import
iTunes 11.1 AAC to MP3 encode
HandBrake 0.9.5 encode
Photoshop CC action script
Photoshop CC OpenCL
Aperture 3.5.1 import/process
Cinebench R15 CPU
MathematicaMark 9
mellow result are better . Best result inbold .
Parallels 9-PCMark 8 Office
Unigine Heaven and Valley 1280-by-720
Results are flesh per secondly . high result are better . Best result inbold .
