Mac Pro scam? Craigslist..

[WhiteIphone5]

So I want to buy a 2006 Mac Pro. This guy says it comes with apple Cinema Display that has a bad power supply. Now I could care less as I have my own monitor but then he says this when I ask him " how do I know the Mac Pro is working"?
He replies: "Well, good question. I'm going to try to hook up an old PC monitor to it tomorrow bypassing the Apple power supply. I think that'll work. I know it works but want to make sure you're happy with it. I'll email you when I've got this thing working."


As far as I know it doesn't matter what monitor you have, right? As long as the graphics card has a VGA output or DVI? Correct me if im wrong, but there should be no bypassing to connect to monitor.. Thanks!

[jtara]

Sounds simply like he means "bypassing the power supply problem".

Just throw your own monitor in the car, doesn't seem like a big deal.

Take Joe Biden's double-barreled shotgun as insurance. Personally, I woudn't buy anything off of Craigslist, though. Too much hassle, to many flakey people, ripoff artists, and out and out theives.

Like any used product, don't buy unless you know enough about the product to evaluate it's condition.

I wouldn't buy a 2006 Mac Pro at any price. There are better choices that will perform better at lower cost. Look at the Mac Mini. Only stopper is if you need a PCIe video card or standalone PCIe GPU card, or need >16GB RAM. Expanding storage with no speed penalty is no problem, now, with the Lightning connector.

I looked into this for a friend of mine who wants to replace his G5 for video editing. Started a thread here, and got talked out of it. He would be better off with either a Mini or a run-of-the-mill new PC for much less money.

I briefly considered it for myself (I'm a software developer). I just got a 2012 Mini to replace my 2008 Macbook. Only other choice that would make much sense would be a 12-core 2012 Pro, and that's 3 times the cost (for double the performance), before upgrades (the Mini has a Fusion Drive).

[MacFan23]

Yeah, I'd tend to agree with Jtara, I got the same impression.

[WhiteIphone5]

Originally Posted by jtara

Sounds simply like he means "bypassing the power supply problem".

Just throw your own monitor in the car, doesn't seem like a big deal.

Take Joe Biden's double-barreled shotgun as insurance. Personally, I woudn't buy anything off of Craigslist, though. Too much hassle, to many flakey people, ripoff artists, and out and out theives.

Like any used product, don't buy unless you know enough about the product to evaluate it's condition.

I wouldn't buy a 2006 Mac Pro at any price. There are better choices that will perform better at lower cost. Look at the Mac Mini. Only stopper is if you need a PCIe video card or standalone PCIe GPU card, or need >16GB RAM.

I looked into this for a friend of mine who wants to replace his G5 for video editing. Started a thread here, and got talked out of it. He would be better off with either a Mini or a run-of-the-mill new PC for much less money.

I briefly considered it for myself (I'm a software developer). I just got a 2012 Mini to replace my 2008 Macbook. Only other choice that would make much sense would be a 12-core 2012 Pro, and that's 3 times the cost (for double the performance), before upgrades (the Mini has a Fusion Drive).

I'm trading an ipad 4th 32Gb for it. Worth it?

[SDAVE]

Originally Posted by WhiteIphone5

I'm trading an ipad 4th 32Gb for it. Worth it?

No. Sell it and get a Mini. Takes less space and is faster too.

[jtara]

Are you replacing a previous Mac? If so, what are you replacing?

Much of the cost of a Pro is the Xeon chips. Intel gets a hefty price for them, and they depreciate in value rapidly. It's the price you pay if you want the very fastest available right now. The premium for the higher clock rates is insane.

But two generations later, they are only as good as a commodity chip one generation back, and can't keep up with a current commodidy chip.

Look at the GeekBench scores:

http://browser.primatelabs.com/mac-benchmarks

My 2.6gHz i7 Mini tests out better than shown in that chart, at 13,250. Note the official Geekbench online figure is 11,646 - I got 12,750 as delivered, and 13,250 after an upgrade to 16GB CL9 RAM.)

That brings it neck-and-neck with the 6-core 2010 Mac Pro at 2.4gHz. Can't find a 2006 Pro specifically in the chart, but, for example, a mac Pro early 2008 2.8 gHz 8-core tests at 9572.

2006 was the first year of production for Mac Pro. The top-of-the-line 8-core, 3gHz model tests at 9846. Drop it to 4 cores (just one chip) still at 3gHz and you're at 5925. What model is for sale?

[wallysb01]

Originally Posted by jtara

Are you replacing a previous Mac? If so, what are you replacing?

Much of the cost of a Pro is the Xeon chips. Intel gets a hefty price for them, and they depreciate in value rapidly. It's the price you pay if you want the very fastest available right now. The premium for the higher clock rates is insane.

The price hick comes from the dual sockets more than just the xeons. Single socket xeons aren't much more than an equivalent consumer grade chip. For example the E5-1620 a quad core 3.4-3.8 GHz chip retails for $294, while the i7-2700 goes for ~$300.

But two generations later, they are only as good as a commodity chip one generation back, and can't keep up with a current commodidy chip.

Look at the GeekBench scores:

http://browser.primatelabs.com/mac-benchmarks

That's not exactly true. They pretty easily keep up with current choices, depending on what kind of chip you're talking about. Look at the hex core 3.3 from 2010, it still keeps up with (32 bit) or beats (64 bit) the top of the line commodity chip 2 generations later. And that's just in terms of CPU speed. It also has the ability to access more RAM in a computer with greater graphical processing power possibilities.

My 2.6gHz i7 Mini tests out better than shown in that chart, at 13,250. Note the official Geekbench online figure is 11,646 - I got 12,750 as delivered, and 13,250 after an upgrade to 16GB CL9 RAM.)

That brings it neck-and-neck with the 6-core 2010 Mac Pro at 2.4gHz. Can't find a 2006 Pro specifically in the chart, but, for example, a mac Pro early 2008 2.8 gHz 8-core tests at 9572.

Is that difference because you're testing it in 64 bit mode but looking at the 32 bit mode scores on geekbench? Because the 2010 Hex core geeks 15522 in 64 bit...

The other thing geekbench doesn't test well is prolonged use under load. Try sending that mini through a workflow that maxes all of its cores for long periods of time and compare the finishing speed to something like a hex core mac pro. I think you'll find the Mac Mini throttles down due to heat build up, while the Mac Pro keeps chugging along at full tilt.

Now, if this user doesn't need that kind of continuous use, or 4 drive bays, extra RAM and what not, by all means, get the mini. And certainly, a machine from 2006 on Craigslist is highly suspect. I wouldn't buy a computer that old without at least some warranty and return policy...

[sOwL]

Originally Posted by SDAVE

No. Sell it and get a Mini. Takes less space and is faster too.

Sorry to hijack this thread, but how in the world is the mini faster??

edit: Also, how much do you think he will make for the iPod? He won't be able to buy even a mini with that money. The deal is great, given that the MP is in good condition.

[SDAVE]

Originally Posted by sOwL

Sorry to hijack this thread, but how in the world is the mini faster??

edit: Also, how much do you think he will make for the iPod? He won't be able to buy even a mini with that money. The deal is great, given that the MP is in good condition.

OP can get $450~+ for his iPad. Add a few hundred and get a Mac Mini Quad or a Dual Core Mac Mini for $599.

The 2006 Mac Pro uses really old architecture and the RAM is pretty expensive too.

If the OP got a working display with it, then maybe it would be a good deal to trade it.

The only upside the 2006 purchase will have over the Mac Mini is the graphics card, but even then you're getting speeds of PCIe 1.0. Also of course you get more internal HDD space.

You will also have issues with 32bit/64bit EFI, as well as the inability to install Mountain Lion on the 2006 without workarounds.

[cyber16]

Sorry, the ipad mini has a A5 cpu vs the 4th gen ipad's A6X
The mini is not even close, now the Mac mini, indeed that is the way to go
Agreed, sell the iPad for around $495+ or more if it has mobile data option as it is only a few months old.
That is if it does not fill your needs and then take some advise given within this thread and buy a more current machine.

Originally Posted by SDAVE

No. Sell it and get a Mini. Takes less space and is faster too.

[GermanyChris]

Originally Posted by cyber16

Sorry, the ipad mini has a A5 cpu vs the 4th gen ipad's A6X
The mini is not even close, now the Mac mini, indeed that is the way to go
Agreed, sell the iPad for around $495+ or more if it has mobile data option as it is only a few months old.
That is if it does not fill your needs and then take some advise given within this thread and buy a more current machine.

He was talking about a Mac Mini..

@OP I'll be the dissenter, that is a trade that would have already been made in my world.

[MacPoulet]

I bought my 2006 Mac pro from a uni surplus in November for $350. It was used as a glorified desktop and is in great shape (work there, knew its story). A 4th gen iPad seems like a bad trade.

A lot of places run on three or five year lifecycles, especially schools. You might find a hidden gem.

Also, benchmarks don't tell the whole story. I love my 2006 pro, more so after I upgraded it to an 8-core system.

[OS6-OSX]

The trade is an iPad not iPod. What's missing is what apps will be used on the computer. That will narrow it down to what Mac is actually "usable"!



MacPro 2008 3.1 | 14GB Ram | Quadro 4000 | MC6.0 | OS 10.6.8 | MOTU HDX-SDI | ATTO R644| LaCie 324

[thekev]

Originally Posted by jtara

Are you replacing a previous Mac? If so, what are you replacing?

Much of the cost of a Pro is the Xeon chips. Intel gets a hefty price for them, and they depreciate in value rapidly. It's the price you pay if you want the very fastest available right now. The premium for the higher clock rates is insane.

Actually on the newer ones they've been using cheap Xeons. The cheapest mac pro has used a $300 cpu since 2009. It costs less than the chip used in the quad mini. That doesn't have the cost of the gpu, but even at Apple pricing the 5770 is only $249 retail. The argument of expensive Xeon chips is only a real factor when you move to dual cpu packages. Apple just charges a lot for the lower end of the mac pro line. The 1,1 through 3,1 used more expensive chips, but that's hardly meaningful today.

Originally Posted by OS6-OSX

The trade is an iPad not iPod. What's missing is what apps will be used on the computer. That will narrow it down to what Mac is actually "usable"!

Judging by the number of errors in the post you replied to, I think he's just trolling with moderate subtlety. As for the OP, there are very few edge cases at the ivy bridge point where the mac pro 1,1 would be a better buy assuming pricing is similar between the two. I'm sure many are still in daily use, but there's a difference between extending the life of a machine where you have all necessary cables, software, storage and everything required set up and working when compared to setting up a new solution today based on hardware that debuted more than six years ago. At this point I'm not sure if those machines even qualify for hardware service.

[michael_aos]

I recently went from a 2006 Mac Pro 1,1 (2x dual-core 2.66Ghz Xeon, 16GB, 256GB OWC SSD, ATI Radeon 5770) to a Late 2012 Mac Mini (quad-core 2.6Ghz Core i7,16GB, 1.1TB Fusion, Intel 4000).

Only rarely do I notice the Mini is any faster. In fact, I definitely notice sometimes the Mini is a lot slower, due to the Fusion drive -vs- the OWC SSD I had on the Mac Pro. In retrospect, i probably should have chosen the 256GB SSD option instead of the Fusion drive for the Mini.

I do like Thunderbolt & USB3 though.

The Mini was ~$1160 w/tax, plus another ~$100 for 16GB of RAM.

[tabsaid]

Get it and drop a pair of x5355's in it. 80-90$ on eBay for a pair. Get Slaeg model. Better stepping lower power. My geek bench is 10300 with 4x2gb ram and a 5770. Still cranks pretty well for a 2006. Worth it

[WhiteIphone5]

Originally Posted by tabsaid

Get it and drop a pair of x5355's in it. 80-90$ on eBay for a pair. Get Slaeg model. Better stepping lower power. My geek bench is 10300 with 4x2gb ram and a 5770. Still cranks pretty well for a 2006. Worth it

Yes that's what I had in mind plus I'm going to have SSDs on it, it's gonna be speedy!

[tjlazer]

Apple Cinema Displays have a Power Supply issue so be aware of that.

[Garamond]

2006? Just stay clear. Too old and doesn't support the newest OS.

[michael_aos]

Originally Posted by Garamond

doesn't support the newest OS.

That's true -- Apple doesn't "support" the latest OS running on the 2006 Mac Pro 1,1.

It works just fine on it though.
--

[michael_aos]

I guess I never really worked my 2006 Mac Pro 1,1 that hard. I don't ever recall the fan's getting loud.

This Late 2012 Mac Mini (2.6Ghz Quad-Core Core i7) starts screaming every time it has to work. Just like my wife's 2011 Macbook Air (1.8Ghz Dual-Core Core i7).

[jtara]

Originally Posted by michael_aos

I guess I never really worked my 2006 Mac Pro 1,1 that hard. I don't ever recall the fan's getting loud.

This Late 2012 Mac Mini (2.6Ghz Quad-Core Core i7) starts screaming every time it has to work. Just like my wife's 2011 Macbook Air (1.8Ghz Dual-Core Core i7).

That's what keeps it from burning down the house.

It runs much cooler than my 2008 13" Aluminum Macbook. Like consistently 20F cooler.

BTW, I've named it: c3po.

(Linux server colossus, old shut-down Windows box, guardian, Macbook emerac, Windows VM hal-9000. If I ever get a Mac Pro, I suppose it will be wopr.)

[alphaod]

I wouldn't buy anything from people who have no idea what they're selling.

Too many uncertainties.

[tjlazer]

Originally Posted by hwojtek

Unless you switch to Final Cut Pro X, you won't notice the added horsepower of the Mac Pro (iMovie doesn't exploit the multiprocessor nature of a Mac as good as Final Cut Pro does), so technically you're better off with a brand new Mini - it is less powerful*, however more futureproof.

* - as it has been mentioned before: you can leave a Mac Pro working 400% CPU usage for a week and it won't skip a beat, something that wouldn't be possible with a Mini.



1. Not necessarily. I got one, flashed it by myself and I do have the boot logo. Depends on the model of the card you are using, how close to a reference design it is, if it is flashed with a full or reduced EFI ROM (which in turn depends on what size ROM has been used in production...) Read the Golden Flashing Guide if you are interested in flashing.
2. Is it THAT important?

You have boot screen on DVI? What model card you got and how was it flashed?! Thanks

[hwojtek]

Originally Posted by tjlazer

You have boot screen on DVI? What model card you got and how was it flashed?! Thanks

I honestly have no idea, it's an Asus 5870, however full disclosure is due - I run Mountain Lion on this computer using Chameleon. My former 4870 did display boot-time logo using DVI on Lion, but a couple of days after I switched to ML I also swapped the GPU, so I don't think my boot logo experience is relevant here.