2019 Mac Pro DAW Benchmark Test Results

Dewdman42

Senior Member
you are still not understanding

i7/i9 starts from a low cpu speed when the computer is idle and ramps up the CPU clock speed on an as-need basis.

Xeon-W does the opposite. It starts at the highest clock speed its going to ever get to and as more cores are utilitized under load it turns the clock speed down.

This has been observed through independent testing. Xeon-W does NOT accelerate to maximum core speed when all cores are being utilized, it does exactly the opposite...

The reason is explained above in my verbose explanation about overclocking which you didn't read carefully.
 

D Halgren

Senior Member
you are still not understanding

i7/i9 starts from a low cpu speed when the computer is idle and ramps up the CPU clock speed on an as-need basis.

Xeon-W does the opposite. It starts at the highest clock speed its going to ever get to and as more cores are utilitized under load it turns the clock speed down.

This has been observed through independent testing. Xeon-W does NOT accelerate to maximum core speed when all cores are being utilized, it does exactly the opposite...

The reason is explained above in my verbose explanation about overclocking which you didn't read carefully.
That's not what my iMac Pro does. It is at low clock speeds when idle and ramps up with load. It's just the base 8 core. I've seen it go down to 1.8ish GHz, when nothing is happening, to 4 GHz under load. For what it's worth...
 

Technostica

Active Member
you are still not understanding
i7/i9 starts from a low cpu speed when the computer is idle and ramps up the CPU clock speed on an as-need basis.
Xeon-W does the opposite. It starts at the highest clock speed its going to ever get to and as more cores are utilitized under load it turns the clock speed down.
This has been observed through independent testing. Xeon-W does NOT accelerate to maximum core speed when all cores are being utilized, it does exactly the opposite...
The reason is explained above in my verbose explanation about overclocking which you didn't read carefully.
I read that and you can do something similar or possibly the same in Windows by changing the power settings.
It's not ideal and has some potential downsides I think but I do it sometimes if the usual clock speed changes lead to audible glitches in my DAW which can happen. Then I set the clock speed to the maximum which disables any down clocking; my cooling can handle it.

That's just a configuration option and in itself has no bearing on the maximum rated turbo boost speeds.
This is not exactly esoteric stuff.
I'd still like to know what all core boost speeds people are getting with the 28C chip. Anybody?
 

Dewdman42

Senior Member
That's not what my iMac Pro does. It is at low clock speeds when idle and ramps up with load. It's just the base 8 core. I've seen it go down to 1.8ish GHz, when nothing is happening, to 4 GHz under load. For what it's worth...
someone else reported to me their clocks slowing down. let's see a detailed report! I'm not opposed to calling the other person wrong, but I have heard this report from more then one place too. does it not slow down when the core usage comes up? I could also accept an explanation that it idles slow, ramps up with some cpu use, but then backs off as core usage goes up... which is still part of the fundamental problem.
 
Last edited:

Dewdman42

Senior Member
I read that and you can do something similar or possibly the same in Windows by changing the power settings.
It's not ideal and has some potential downsides I think but I do it sometimes if the usual clock speed changes lead to audible glitches in my DAW which can happen. Then I set the clock speed to the maximum which disables any down clocking; my cooling can handle it.
Reports are in that the nMP running windows on bootcamp is able to crunch higher scores in benchkmark testing then the same machine booted into OSX. So its certainly possible that some power related settings are allowing the CPU's run hotter.

Perhaps the power user mode that Catlina is going to release soon will be something similar along those lines, we shall see.
 

D Halgren

Senior Member
someone else reported to me their clocks slowing down. let's see a detailed report! I'm not opposed to calling the other person wrong, but I have heard this report from more then one place too. does it not slow down when the core usage comes up? I coold also accept an explanation that it idles slow, ramps up with some cpu use, but then backs off as core usage goes up... which is still part of the fundamental problem.
I'll do some testing and get back to you.
 

Dewdman42

Senior Member
I will PM you about that, I have a JUCE plugin I made to help with testing that, its not ready for public release though, but will send it to you.
 

Technostica

Active Member
someone else reported to me their clocks slowing down. let's see a detailed report! I'm not opposed to calling the other person wrong, but I have heard this report from more then one place too. does it not slow down when the core usage comes up? I coold also accept an explanation that it idles slow, ramps up with some cpu use, but then backs off as core usage goes up... which is still part of the fundamental problem.
I didn't suggest they are wrong as I can configure my PC to do something similar as I already stated.
It's quite a common thing for DAW users to do as it can reduce the chance of audible glitches due to latency issues as the clock speed jumps around.

Did they say what the maximum speed they noticed?
 

D Halgren

Senior Member
I will PM you about that, I have a JUCE plugin I made to help with testing that, its not ready for public release though, but will send it to you.
I was just going to do the old track duplication + heavy effects load trick, but I could check out your plug.
 

Technostica

Active Member
The cooling looks interesting based on this video and this 12C Xeon does appear to keep the clock speed high:

Note: The clock speeds may well be whilst bench-marking and not at idle; my bad.
 

Dewdman42

Senior Member
I was just going to do the old track duplication + heavy effects load trick, but I could check out your plug.
People have been having problems with Diva which is notoriously high CPU, but some unknowns about why Diva is a problem and much speculation about different things which nobody really knows. I just thought it would be useful to have a consistent plugin that produces CPU load in a predictable way we can all use to compare. The final version will be free for everyone when its done, and will aim to provide a consistent way to measure different systems and DAW's against each other...over time it may improve as people contribute ideas about how it should be pushing DAW's differently. Right now its just spinning the CPU, but I am adding features to emulate memory use more and other things...
 

khollister

Senior Member
Over on one of the 2019 MP threads at GS, Urs from U-he just posted he took delivery of a 16 core MP last week and has been chasing the Diva performance issue noted on the recent Xeon-based Macs. He found the problem and has a RC build on KVR - final release (1.4.4) should be in the next week or 2 according to Urs.

Someone tried the RC - reported something like 25 instances versus 5 with the current release version!
 

khollister

Senior Member
Just reran the original Diva test from GS - here is my post over there:

iMac Pro 10 core, Apollo X6

Running the original "Diva vs Bootcamp" project TNM uploaded when this all started. Using the 1.4.4 RC from KVR.

Original test with Diva 1.4.3 - 6 tracks

With RC 1.4.4 - 30 tracks!! with multicore=OFF and quality=great


Urs fixed the hell out of this!!

BTW, my clock varies a bit between 3.76-3.86 as this runs. Sitting at about 4.12 before I hit play

Going to turn multicore on just to see what happens now

UPDATE: Catalina (10.15.2) and Logic 10.4.8