Apr 27, 2009, 08:16 AM
|
#1 |
|
What's the better value, 2.66 Quad or the 2.26 Octad?
I've heard that typically the high end models give less bang for the buck. I am trying to decide between the 2.66 Quad or the 2.26 Octad. I don't think I need the processing power of the Octad but like the 8 slots of memory versus 4 in the Quad and also it's "only" $700 more.
 Perhaps the 2.26 is more future proof? If I need the power of the 2.26 in the future would it be better to just buy it now, or sell the 2.66 Quad and buy a new MP which by then would even be better? Anyway, as it stands now which do you think is the better value (bang for buck)?Thanks! |
|
|
0
|
|
Apr 27, 2009, 09:44 AM
|
#2 |
|
Sorry there is no right answer. There are too many variables about what you want the machine to do for you that it can't be cut and dried into which one is 'best'.
__________________
|
|
|
|
0
|
 |
|
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
Linear Mode
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| 2009 2.66 quad vs. 2010 2.8 quad? | Doc69 | Mac Pro | 2 | Sep 20, 2010 07:59 PM |
| 2.66 Quad (2006) vs. 2.4 Octo 2010 | Paradiseapple | Mac Pro | 11 | Aug 19, 2010 03:01 PM |
| Mac Pro: Quad 2.93 GHz or 8-Core 2.26 GHz? | somdowns | Buying Tips and Advice | 13 | Sep 26, 2009 09:17 AM |
| 2.66 quad or 2.26 8 core | rich2k4 | Buying Tips and Advice | 13 | Jul 7, 2009 12:32 PM |
| Choosing between 2008 2.8 8 Core and 2009 2.66 Quad (Priced the same) | phong | Mac Pro | 22 | Mar 13, 2009 05:47 PM |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:05 AM.
