Results: Early 2009 Dual Quad 2.26 Mac Pro vs. i7 930 Hack

[john2in3]

I did some video editing benchmarks comparing my Mac Pro with the latest Hackintosh build. Here are the systems and results.

Early 2009 Mac Pro
Dual Xeon 2.26 Quad Cores (8 cores; 16 threads)
nVidia GeForce GT 120 (512 MB RAM)
24 GB triple channel memory 4 GB x 6 sticks. That's right.

Hackintosh (System 2 in my footer)
Single Intel i7 930 2.8 GHz (not overclocked) (4 cores, 8 threads)
Nvidia GTS-250 Video Card (1GB RAM)
6 GB triple channel memory.

I put 4 project files (including source files) on a USB stick and plugged the stick into the Mac Pro and Hackintosh, and ran the following tests.

Test #1- Time to create a RAM Preview in Apple Motion of 640 Frames at 1080p
(project uses particles and some complex processing, and uses <6 GB memory)
Mac Pro- 43 Seconds
i7 930 Hackintosh - 34 Seconds (winner)

Test #2- Time to Export the file from Test #1 to the desktop in ProRes444 format.
Mac Pro- 51 seconds
i7 930 Hackintosh- 42 seconds (winner)

Test #3- Time to "Render All" in Apple Final Cut Pro for Scene 2 (1:01 long at 1080p).
(includes chroma keyer and some complex processing)
Mac Pro- 6:13 (winner)
i7 930 Hackintosh- 7:30

Test #4- Time to Encode DVD file from #3 file on desktop at "fastest encode" settings using Final Cut Pro - Send to Compressor (so using Compressor)
Mac Pro- 3:22 (winner)
i7 930 Hackintosh- 4:17

Test #5- Time to Render a menu animation (3712 frames, 1080p) in Adobe After Effects on desktop (H.264 "best" settings)
Mac Pro- 6:32 (winner)
i7 930 Hackintosh- 6:53

Test #6 - Time to "Render effects in work area" in Adobe Premiere Pro for Scene 6 (5011 frames, 1080p)
Mac Pro- 6:57 (winner)
i7 930 Hackintosh- 7:13

Test #7- Time to export file from #6 to desktop in H.264 using NTSC DV HQ settings
Mac Pro- 6:53 (try #1) and 6:24 (try 2)
i7 930 Hackintosh- 2:51 (try 1) and 2:52 (try 2) (winner)

These are real world tests using real video from my last movie.

You see that for video editing, we need a lot of power, sitting around for 6 minutes for something to render is a pain.

 

[john2in3]

Re: Results: Early 2009 Dual 2.26 Mac Pro vs. i7 920 Hackintosh

Before doing these tests I expected the Mac Pro to win the Adobe tests and lose the Apple Motion and Final Cut tests, because Adobe software programmers had written their code to take advantage of the multiple threads available in the Mac Pro; whereas Apple's programmers had not. If you look at the CPU charts you will see tiny blips here and there on the Apple Motion/Final Cut applications and you will see almost constant 100% usage on the Adobe apps for all threads, impressive when there are 16 of them up there.

Most of the tests are very close with the Hackintosh keeping up with the expensive Mac Pro and its massive amount of memory. I was shocked at the last test and how the Mac Pro was much slower- this test maxed out all cores on both machines, an Adobe Application that uses all available resources. I am not sure I can explain it, I expected the opposite result.

Oh, and I had all settings, caches etc... set up in similar fashion on both machines.

These tests really don't use the video card for much of anything- in fact none of the tests actually showed video during the test. So I think we can rule out video cards as impacting the results.

 

[tonymacx86]

Re: Results: Early 2009 Dual 2.26 Mac Pro vs. i7 920 Hackintosh

 

[john2in3]

I was going to add that the cost of the mac pro memory upgrade at the time I got it (24 GB = $700++) was MORE than the entire i7 930 computer (bought it just recently). But I just checked OWC and now that memory is only $384. :*(. Still, love the Hackintosh.

In the era when computers drop half their value a year later, you are better off dropping from $2000 to $1000 vs. from $4000 to $2000. But that is beyond this topic.

 

[tonymacx86]

I was going to add that the cost of the mac pro memory upgrade at the time I got it (24 GB = $700++) was MORE than the entire i7 930 computer (bought it just recently). But I just checked OWC and now that memory is only $384. :*(. Still, love the Hackintosh.

In the era when computers drop half their value a year later, you are better off dropping from $2000 to $1000 vs. from $4000 to $2000. But that is beyond this topic.

Actually- this is a good one for the Mac Pro section- I'm moving it there

 

[akhilv1]

those results are totally unexpected.

 

[john2in3]

those results are totally unexpected.

Yeah, to me as well. Has anyone else compared a Mac Pro to a Hackintosh in real world applications?

 

[akhilv1]

has anyone compared a Mac Pro and a Hackintosh with identical or similar specs for example the same number of cores and threads with the same processor clock speed and identical amounts and speed of RAM?

 

[john2in3]

Good question. You would need an older core2duo mac pro or else a Xeon workstation like HP/Dell to make a straight up comparison. I see a few posts occassionally about hackintoshing a xeon workstation but its probably pretty rare compared to the core2 and i7 processors most people use.

 

[akhilv1]

Is there a MB that uses Dual Xeon Processors other than a Mac Pro's?