New To Mac-Forums?

Welcome to our community! Join the discussion today by registering your FREE account. If you have any problems with the registration process, please contact us!

Get your questions answered by community gurus Advice and insight from world-class Apple enthusiasts Exclusive access to members-only contests, giveaways and deals

Join today!

 
Start a Discussion
 

Mac-Forums Brief

Subscribe to Mac-Forums Brief to receive special offers from Mac-Forums partners and sponsors

Join the conversation RSS
Apple Desktops Discussion of Apple's desktop machines including Mac Pro, iMac, Power Mac, and mini

Why do the CPUs on dual-processor Mac Pros...


Post Reply New Thread Subscribe

 
Thread Tools
iHarrison

 
Member Since: Mar 11, 2011
Posts: 161
iHarrison can only hope to improve

iHarrison is offline
...only go up to 2.93GHz (6-core), when the single-processor version has an option for a 3.33GHz (6-core) CPU?

Is it some form of technical limitation - where the logic board and/or OS can't handle more than 35.16GHz combined processing speed - or is it simply that there's never been enough call for 39.96GHz total, even in a server, to make it worth offering the option?

Doesn't really matter, obviously - as a poor student it'll be the better part of a decade before I could afford something as beastly as even the lowest-end single quad-core processor Mac Pro! - I'm just curious...
QUOTE Thanks
MacDude121

 
MacDude121's Avatar
 
Member Since: Sep 22, 2010
Posts: 1,416
MacDude121 is a glorious beacon of lightMacDude121 is a glorious beacon of lightMacDude121 is a glorious beacon of lightMacDude121 is a glorious beacon of lightMacDude121 is a glorious beacon of lightMacDude121 is a glorious beacon of light
Mac Specs: Black MacBook 2.2GHz C2D, 4GB Ram - iMac G4 700MHz, 512MB Ram

MacDude121 is offline
I think you're confused as to what a "core" is and what "processor" speed is. For example, having two 2.0GHz processors doesn't mean you have a total of 4.0GHz of processing speed. Neither does a core. I even don't really understand all of it myself, but I know the Mac Pro doesn't have a total of 39.96GHz!
QUOTE Thanks
iHarrison

 
Member Since: Mar 11, 2011
Posts: 161
iHarrison can only hope to improve

iHarrison is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacDude121 View Post
I think you're confused as to what a "core" is and what "processor" speed is. For example, having two 2.0GHz processors doesn't mean you have a total of 4.0GHz of processing speed. Neither does a core. I even don't really understand all of it myself, but I know the Mac Pro doesn't have a total of 39.96GHz!
Oh, I know those cores run in parallel, not in series, meaning that the actual clock rate within the chip never exceeds the basic quoted figure.

But - to use an analogy I've seen quoted elsewhere - just as two trucks travelling at 60 mph will be able to move twice as much stuff a mile down a highway in a minute as a single truck could do in the same time, similarly a 2GHz dual-core processor will be able to crunch twice as many numbers per second as a 2GHz single-core processor.

Thus, the simple formula of "clock speed times number of cores" does give a good sense of the effective speed of multi-core processors.

And, regardless of the actual relationship between numbers of cores and/or number of processors versus overall speed; it is still obviously the case that the faster and/or greater number of processors one has, the faster one's computer will be.

So, my question remains; if you can get a dual-processor Mac Pro with two 6-core 2.93GHz processors (i.e. one capable of handling & making full use of 12 cores, regardless of their speed), why can't you get the same machine but with two 6-core 3.33GHz processors?

Granted it would "only" be around 14% faster, but that still could be worth it for some very processor-intensive tasks (in media studio render farms or grid-based supercomputing applications, etc.)...
QUOTE Thanks
MikeM

 
MikeM's Avatar
 
Member Since: Oct 06, 2007
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 199
MikeM has a spectacular aura about
Mac Specs: 13" MBP - Mid 2012 - i7 / iPad Air / iPhone 5s / ATV3

MikeM is offline
There is more to it than just clock speed. Cache size, die size, QPI link speed, they all contribute to the overall performance of the processor.

As far as cores are concerned, the software needs to be able to take advantage of multi core. There are plenty of programs that can use 2 cores, but not 4 so in that case, the extra 2 cores don't contribute to overall performance.

Since, multi-threaded applications are still not as mainstream as you would think, it's benefitial to Apple to offer fewer cores at higher speeds for cost benefit reasons.

Also,the higher clock speed produces more heat and may not be capable of running in the config you want simply due to excess temp.

-MikeM
QUOTE Thanks
iHarrison

 
Member Since: Mar 11, 2011
Posts: 161
iHarrison can only hope to improve

iHarrison is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeM View Post
There is more to it than just clock speed. Cache size, die size, QPI link speed, they all contribute to the overall performance of the processor.
Well, like I said, clock-times-cores gives a "sense of the effective speed"; more specifically when comparing various versions of the same type of processor, as is the case here...

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeM View Post
Also,the higher clock speed produces more heat and may not be capable of running in the config you want simply due to excess temp.
I'm thinking this is the most likely technical explanation for my original question.

Thank you
QUOTE Thanks
bobtomay

 
bobtomay's Avatar
 
Member Since: Dec 22, 2006
Location: Texas, where else?
Posts: 25,021
bobtomay has a reputation beyond reputebobtomay has a reputation beyond reputebobtomay has a reputation beyond reputebobtomay has a reputation beyond reputebobtomay has a reputation beyond reputebobtomay has a reputation beyond reputebobtomay has a reputation beyond reputebobtomay has a reputation beyond reputebobtomay has a reputation beyond reputebobtomay has a reputation beyond reputebobtomay has a reputation beyond repute
Mac Specs: 15" MBP 2.33 C2D 256 4GB, MBA 13" i7 1.8, MB 2.0 2GB, Nano 4th, 3GS, iPad 1

bobtomay is offline
The technical reason is that the W3680 (that 3.33Ghz chip) can only be used in a single CPU configuration. It's also only $1000 per 1,000 in price.

The X5670 (the 2.93 Ghz chip) can be used in a 2 CPU configuration. It is a $1,440 per 1,000 piece of silicon. It runs almost 10 degrees hotter than the above 3.33 chip.

The W3680 is not a competitor of the X5670.


This is an example of the faiiling of most folks (just due to a lack of knowledge) only comparing speed and not comparing the part number and the specs of the chips they're purchasing in their computers. Apple typically is not using the best chips available. But they are quite often using higher end chips than other manufacturers, even when you have matching speeds.

Comparing the 2 above chips against each other would be almost like comparing a Celeron against a P4.


(The other reason, no manufacturer can afford to offer/stock every single chip Intel makes in every series. The tough choice has to be made at some point and Apple typically seems to narrow the available chices down to only 2 or 3 chips max per machine. They're not interested in being the next Dell, where you can configure the same machine in $5 increments all the way from $500 to $3000.)

I cannot be held responsible for the things that come out of my mouth.
In the Windows world, most everything folks don't understand is called a virus.
QUOTE Thanks
iHarrison

 
Member Since: Mar 11, 2011
Posts: 161
iHarrison can only hope to improve

iHarrison is offline
So, that's the technical reason...

Fair enough, I was just asking...
QUOTE Thanks

Post Reply New Thread Subscribe


« iMac27 Dilema | memory »
Thread Tools

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Converting 1 of my macbook pros into dual monitor ninx Apple Notebooks 2 07-30-2010 09:23 AM
Dual CPU or Dual Core pab_gm Schweb's Lounge 4 11-25-2008 02:29 AM
Dual G5 no HD no FW, what now? plz help!!! Yang1815 Apple Desktops 15 04-02-2008 11:42 PM
New Powerbooks and Powermacs after all? prodikal Apple Rumors and Reports 36 10-19-2005 02:55 AM
dual 1.8G or 2G? digisam Apple Desktops 4 02-19-2005 09:46 AM

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:26 AM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
X

Welcome to Mac-Forums.com

Create your username to jump into the discussion!

New members like you have made this community the ultimate source for your Mac since 2003!


(4 digit year)

Already a member?