Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

2.66 vs 3.0 ghz quad core mac pros

fairnymph

fairnymph

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Mar 12, 2007
295
0
Chapel Hill, NC
Is it 'worth' the extra $700 (or so, I will be getting this comp via ADC student discount and shipped to NH so no tax) to get the 3.0 chips?

My current computer is an 8 year old 400 mhz G4. I would like to do video editing and photoshop on the new comp (neither of which are possible on my current steup, as I'm sure you can imagine).

I'm pretty set on the 3.0 ghz and planning to start the purchase process next week, but I want to check and make sure it isn't a total waste of money. The 3.0 system as I want to configure it will be $2860 with discount, including every last little fee, but not including the extra RAM I'll be buying elsewhere.
 
fairnymph

fairnymph

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Mar 12, 2007
295
0
Chapel Hill, NC
So the difference in speed/performance is not very significant?

When you say more RAM, do you mean more than 2 gigs (what I plan on getting).
 
QCassidy352

QCassidy352

macrumors G5
Mar 20, 2003
12,028
6,036
Bay Area
well, for the most part, I think that the 3 Ghz is not a good value compared to the 2.66. But if you're going to keep this computer even half as long as you kept the G4, then I say go for the best. When you only upgrade once every 8 years you can afford to spend a little more and get the best, rather than the best value. Over 8 years of use, the difference is about a quarter a day.
 
fairnymph

fairnymph

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Mar 12, 2007
295
0
Chapel Hill, NC
4 GB -- really? That benchmark makes me nervous, bc yes, while I see there is not a huge difference in most areas between 2.66 and 3.0, it is pretty significant for photoshop, which I plan on using heavily.

I am also as QCassidy mentions inclined to go with the best since I buy so rarely and this ADC student discount option + NH residence will not likely be available to me again anytime soon.

The only mac I didn't keep for at least 3 years was my ibook which was stolen. :(
 
K

Keebler

macrumors 68030
Jun 20, 2005
2,960
207
Canada
i'm about to do the same, but i'm just getting the 2.66. crazy that i said 'just getting' - that machine will rock and the money saved is 4GB of RAM's worth :)

not even an issue :)
 
xfiftyfour

xfiftyfour

macrumors 68030
Apr 14, 2006
2,573
0
Clemson, SC
I'd be inclined to suggest going with the 2.66 MP and upping the RAM instead, too. I think you'll see a much bigger performance jump with 4 gb of RAM than you would with the 3.0 processor. Also remember that the benchmark was with CS2, and that with CS3, both systems will be significantly faster in Photoshop since it's a UB.

But, as others have pointed out, if you upgrade so infrequently, then why not buy the best instead of the best value. I guess it's also important to note that upgrading the RAM in the future will be a lot easier than upgrading the processor... so considering those two things, go for the 3.0. :) Both machines will be a HUGE boost, needless to say!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom