Benchmarks

there lots of geekbench threads people boasting how high there scores are, mean?

example, there few people have more doubled scores upgrading cpu's, mean system twice fast? can believe stock 2.6 mac pro 1,1 (2 x dual core cpu's)which scores around 5000 half fast stock 2.8 mac pro 3,1 (2 x quad core cpu's) can score close twice that. if mac pro 1,1 gets upgraded fastest quad core cpu's can take, can score around same or higher stock mac pro 3,1. there things mac pro 1,1 should hold performance back, such slower bus , slower ram, not mention less on cpu cache.

i'm trying understand real world performance relative these scores. upgrading cpu's in machine increase performance, how much?

thoughts?

 

if cpu's run @ 100% (e.g. during video crunching), ram , storage still fast enough - , have 8 cores (upgraded 1,1) loaded @ times.

in "normal" tasks (like word processing, internet-related stuff etc.) user won't notice faster ram, bus or other (minor) improvements - 3,1 still on same core micro architecture 1,1.

noticeable difference in demanding games, pcie 1.1 in 2006 mp bottleneck capable graphic cards.

4,1 changing nehalem architecture difference got big enough noticed user without using stop watch... (which again reflected nicely respective geekbench scores).

 

Forums Macs Desktops Mac Pro

• iPhone
• Mac OS & System Software
• iPad
• Apple Watch
• Notebooks
• iTunes
• Apple ID
• iCloud
• Desktop Computers
• Apple Music
• Professional Applications
• iPod
• iWork
• Apple TV
• iLife
• Wireless