2006 cMP worth it for my use?

retta283

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Jun 8, 2018
1,139
766
Kingman, AZ
I'm looking at buying a Mac Pro for my main office soon. I'm going to use it to do some light HD and later 4K editing, and will be running a small server on occasion. I don't really need the newest OS, and I'd be using Windows side by side with OS X. I'll need a lot of hard drive space for the video files and all of my server data. (Currently 150GB worth of server stuff on my system, so I want something with easily expandable storage)
[doublepost=1550755139][/doublepost]Just some added detail, I'm looking at the 2006 mainly because the base hardware can be found for cheap. I don't have a lot of spare cash right now, but want a MP soon, mainly due to my storage needs and not wanting to use external drives. I may in the future move up into newer machines and turn the 2006 into a dedicated server.
 

bsbeamer

macrumors 68030
Sep 19, 2012
2,571
1,244
If you want to edit 4K you'll need to know what type of codecs (or proxy files) and what your workflow will be. This is NOT at all the machine for 4K editing without proxy involved.
 

retta283

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Jun 8, 2018
1,139
766
Kingman, AZ
If you want to edit 4K you'll need to know what type of codecs (or proxy files) and what your workflow will be. This is NOT at all the machine for 4K editing without proxy involved.
It is probable that I will only edit 1080p on this machine, 4K will be long enough in the future that I will have switched to a newer system for video editing. The 2006 in the long term will be a server.
 

Kris Kelvin

macrumors regular
Dec 28, 2005
217
127
You don't want a Mac Pro from 2006. It is slow, it consumes 170W at idle (!) and only supports Mac OS X 10.7 Lion out of the box. Your iMac from 2008 is probably faster...

In my opinion, anything below a MacPro4,1 (2009) is not worth it. They can currently be found for low prices since most users don't know how to upgrade the Firmware to support Mojave.

Edit: Even when using a 2006 as a server, it will cost you $150 a year just for electricity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zipgs and bsbeamer

amedias

macrumors regular
Feb 9, 2008
186
156
Devon, UK
I'll need a lot of hard drive space for the video files
How much is a lot? and does it need to be fast storage for your editing needs? You might find yourself constrained by the onboard SATA of the MP, but you might not, depends on your workflow.

and all of my server data. (Currently 150GB worth of server stuff on my system,
Don't worry about 150GB, that is not 'a lot' of data these days, remember you can get USB thumb drives several times bigger than that!
A single 1TB HDD is very cheap now and has 10x what you need and still leaves 3 bays free for bigger drives for the video work.

But I'd echo above, if you genuinely need a video editing powerhouse then the 1,1 isn't it. If you just need a server* you're probably better off with something much smaller and lower power.

*for serving what? and how?
there's a very big difference between a basic file/web/print server that could run of a Raspberry Pi Vs say an ESX environment for lab work, or a computational server for number crunching or compiling code.
 

retta283

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Jun 8, 2018
1,139
766
Kingman, AZ
How much is a lot? and does it need to be fast storage for your editing needs? You might find yourself constrained by the onboard SATA of the MP, but you might not, depends on your workflow.



Don't worry about 150GB, that is not 'a lot' of data these days, remember you can get USB thumb drives several times bigger than that!
A single 1TB HDD is very cheap now and has 10x what you need and still leaves 3 bays free for bigger drives for the video work.

But I'd echo above, if you genuinely need a video editing powerhouse then the 1,1 isn't it. If you just need a server* you're probably better off with something much smaller and lower power.

*for serving what? and how?
there's a very big difference between a basic file/web/print server that could run of a Raspberry Pi Vs say an ESX environment for lab work, or a computational server for number crunching or compiling code.
I'd like at least a TB for the server. I expect to hit 600GB worth of server files by the summer at the current rate. I host a file server that probably could run on something lesser, but I want to get a cMP for driving a 30-inch Cinema display so I can keep track of everything on one machine. I did consider a 2009 Mac Mini, but I'd be afraid of running that thing 24/7, and it looks hard to upgrade storage on.
 

amedias

macrumors regular
Feb 9, 2008
186
156
Devon, UK
I'd like at least a TB for the server. I expect to hit 600GB worth of server files by the summer at the current rate.....but I want to get a cMP for driving a 30-inch Cinema display so I can keep track of everything on one machine
In modern terms your storage requirements are still pretty low, single drives are available with 4TB and 8TB capacity for not a lot in the grand scheme of things and are waaaay in excess of your needs.

Any machine with a sensible GPU can drive a 30in screen, you don't need a MP for that, and you can administer a sever (any server) over the network, you don't need a screen on one and the benefits of splitting out 24x7 server workloads and 'normal use' machines are numerous.

Tell us more about your server needs, how much throughput or IOPs required? concurrent user load? protocols in use etc.

Depending on exactly what and how you're serving you might find there are some very low cost and low power options available to you and with added benefits over serving from the same machine that you use for other tasks.
 

zipgs

macrumors newbie
Oct 21, 2018
26
11
I wouldn't consider a 2006, mostly because getting anything newer than Lion (10.7) requires some strange hacks and at least a video card upgrade (as I recall). You might consider a 2008 if you aren't paying the power bill, you get a newer OS, which would probably give you more options, it runs El Capitan (10.11) easily, I believe running a newer OS is pretty easy, but you'd have to look it up, I don't remember. Upgrading the CPUs is not very easy.

The 2008 has the same massive power draw as the 2006 as far as I know. Years ago, I used to have a 2006, but even idle, it was basically like having a space heater running all the time, I couldn't stand it and got something else, I'm probably a little picky, but I like to be comfortable when I work. I had it pretty upgraded, but mine used over 300W idle if I remember right. I think it was consistently over 500W, and I wasn't doing much with it. That RAM alone draws a ton of power! It's dirt cheap to buy, find a few deals, you could probably put together a maxed out 2006 for under $100, but you pay for it every month.

I think if you're on a budget, get a 4-core 2009, upgrade it to an X5680 or similar. Even if the 2006 was nearly free or even free, I think you'll be better off buying a 2009-2012 Mac Pro.
 
Last edited:

retta283

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Jun 8, 2018
1,139
766
Kingman, AZ
I don't know, would a Mac Mini server from 2009 be able to drive the 30" cinema display? I had forgotten how high the power usage is on the 2006. That would be a big problem for me. If I get a dedicated server, the 2009 Mini Server is an appealing option at less than $100 in some cases. How much power does the mini server draw idle?
[doublepost=1550766992][/doublepost]
In modern terms your storage requirements are still pretty low, single drives are available with 4TB and 8TB capacity for not a lot in the grand scheme of things and are waaaay in excess of your needs.

Any machine with a sensible GPU can drive a 30in screen, you don't need a MP for that, and you can administer a sever (any server) over the network, you don't need a screen on one and the benefits of splitting out 24x7 server workloads and 'normal use' machines are numerous.

Tell us more about your server needs, how much throughput or IOPs required? concurrent user load? protocols in use etc.

Depending on exactly what and how you're serving you might find there are some very low cost and low power options available to you and with added benefits over serving from the same machine that you use for other tasks.
It depends, it's not a super active server, but I'd like to be prepared for an increase in daily and concurrent users.
 

amedias

macrumors regular
Feb 9, 2008
186
156
Devon, UK
I don't know, would a Mac Mini server from 2009 be able to drive the 30" cinema display?
The 2009 and later should yes, earlier won't.

How much power does the mini server draw idle?
My 2007 Core 2 Duo draws about 15-20W at idle, my 2012 i7 Quad is about 20-25W, So I'd expect a 2009 to be similar, under load depends on the load, but will still be lower than a MP ;-)

FWIW, my MP 1,1 idles significantly lower than the poster above, 145W Idle, and ~200W when doing 'stuff', and only really hits > 250W when 'busy'
I have two MP 3.1s as well and they draw about the same, but obviously get more done for the same Wattage.

If power usage is a concern then don't forget the draw of the 30in screen isn't small either, modern LED backlit screens are more power efficient than the CCFL Cinema screens. I haven't changed yet because I love these screens but I'm thinking about it.

It depends, it's not a super active server, but I'd like to be prepared for an increase in daily and concurrent users.
Need numbers to help further really, maybe you need to do some checking and auditing of current needs to project future? Is it literally just shunting files around to clients (what protocol? over the LAN or out o the Internet too?) or does it do other stuff as well?

Is your server bound to OS X or could it run under another OS opening up other hardware options?
 
Last edited:

retta283

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Jun 8, 2018
1,139
766
Kingman, AZ
The 2009 and later should yes, earlier won't.



My 2007 Core 2 Duo draws about 15-20W at idle, my 2012 i7 Quad is about 20-25W, So I'd expect a 2009 to be similar, under load depends on the load, but will still be lower than a MP ;-)

FWIW, my MP 1,1 idles significantly lower than the poster above, 145W Idle, and ~200W when doing 'stuff', and only really hits > 250W when 'busy'
I have two MP 3.1s as well and they draw about the same, but obviously get more done for the same Wattage.

If power usage is a concern then don't forget the draw of the 30in screen isn't small either, modern LED backlit screens are more power efficient than the CCFL Cinema screens. I haven't changed yet because I love these screens but I'm thinking about it.



Need numbers to help further really, maybe you need to do some checking and auditing of current needs to project future? Is it literally just shunting files around to clients (what protocol? over the LAN or out o the Internet too?) or does it do other stuff as well?

Is your server bound to OS X or could it run under another OS opening up other hardware options?
It's not OS X bound, it's just my preference. It's an Internet server. I also host a game server for which many of the files belong to, the maps folder alone is 60GB right now.

I may end up going with the 2009 server mini for now, then get a 2009 cMP later on.
 

retta283

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Jun 8, 2018
1,139
766
Kingman, AZ

amedias

macrumors regular
Feb 9, 2008
186
156
Devon, UK
I think you should work out what your requirements really are, and then decide on what hardware would achieve them best within your budget and preferences, rather than as it appears you're doing now which is starting with a pool of 2 or 3 bits of hardware in mind and trying to pick the least worst* option. IMO you're going about it backwards.

*not that there's anything wrong with older Minis or cMPs, (I own both!), but when you're looking to buy hardware to do a job, define the job first, but if you already own the hardware and want to finagle it into doing a job then that's different.
 

ssgbryan

macrumors 65816
Jul 18, 2002
1,027
910
There are things one can do to lower the power draw - the biggest is swapping out the CPUs for a pair of L5335s ($10). That drops the power draw from the CPUs to 100 watts total. A GT740 with 4Gb doesn't draw much power either ($45).