Mac Pro 2.66Ghz vs. 3.0Ghz?

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by lac2, Aug 14, 2006.

  1. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2006
    #1
    Guys, this is my first post here.
    I'm seriously considering buying one of these machines in the next week or so.
    I've seen a lot of comparisons between the 2.66 Mac Pro against other machines like the G5 etc., but I haven't seen any benchmarks between the new Mac Pro with 2.66Ghz vs. the 3.0Ghz version. Does anybody know of benchies between these CPUs. Or possibly some experience between the two?

    Thx
     
  2. macrumors 6502a

    CANEHDN

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Location:
    Eagle Mountain, UT
    #2
    If you're considering between these 2 you just need to figure out what you will be doing with the machine. If it's a lot of video and image editing or rendering then I would say 3GHz. If it's just a family computer that will be mainly for internet, email, word processing, and some games, I would go with the 2.66Ghz and save yourself some cash. Both computers are so fast it would be really hard to determine whether you are seeing any difference in most applications.

    But on either one, I recommend getting at least 2GB of RAM.
     
  3. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2006
    Location:
    IGH, MN
    #3
    I'll second that... I couldn't wait, so I got mine ASAP.. but I can REALLY tell that this needs at LEAST 2gb Ram... The only time I have issues is when I am starting to run out of memory to play with.....
     
  4. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2006
    #4
    if i had a fixed budget i would get the slower procs but with more RAM
     
  5. macrumors 6502a

    CANEHDN

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Location:
    Eagle Mountain, UT
    #5
    AMEN. You would notice a much bigger increase in speed with more RAM over 400MHz per processor.
     
  6. macrumors 6502a

    ricgnzlzcr

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2005
    #6
    Yea, I agree about the ram and some products, but I think that the mac pro pricing is very reasonable for the stock model that maybe they decided to make a bit more profit for the 3.0 ghz model. Maybe there is also a shortage of those chips, but that is the biggest assumption I've made.
     
  7. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2006
    #7
    Yeah, the 3.00 is terribly overpriced and the downgrade to 2.00 is terribly underpriced. The 2.66 is the best speed in the lineup.
     
  8. macrumors 6502

    kered22

    Joined:
    May 26, 2006
    Location:
    Torrance, CA
    #8
  9. thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2006
    #9
    From the site
    "Overall, the 3.0GHz Mac Pro is 35% faster than the Quad Power Mac G5 (and 28% faster than the 2.66GHz Mac Pro);"

    How could there be a 28% improvement over the 2.66 when it's a 10% faster cpu?
     
  10. macrumors 68030

    FF_productions

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2005
    Location:
    Mt. Prospect, Illinois
    #10
    I agree, for 800 dollars, that is way too much $$ for a performance boost.

    On the other hand,
    I can tell you though, the G5 Quad is no slouch, it's still holds up against the standard config Mac Pro.
     
  11. macrumors 68040

    MovieCutter

    Joined:
    May 3, 2005
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    #11
    barefeats.com got their 3.0 Ghz today...we'll see how it compares later tonight apparently.
     

Share This Page