2009 8 core or 2010 4 core?

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by kingugly, Dec 7, 2010.

  1. kingugly, Dec 7, 2010
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2010

    kingugly macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    #1
    I need to decide between these two models. I could upgrade the 2010 4 core to a 6 core later, so that is tempting. I do a lot of audio work. Video wise, I need to dual output to a monitor as well as an HDMI to an large LCD, so a decent video card is required as well. Not sure about the GT120. I have read about upgrading to the 5770 or 5780, but maybe it's worth it to just start with a 2010 4 core. I will also put at least 8 gb of ram in the machine. Advice appreciated! Thanks!
     
  2. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #2
    What 8-core is it? That makes a huge difference because the clock speed is very important.
     
  3. kingugly, Dec 7, 2010
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2010

    kingugly thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    #3
    The 8 core is:

    Two 2.26GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon "Nehalem" processor
    6GB (six 1GB) 1066MHz DDR3 ECC SDRAM memory
    640GB Serial ATA (3Gb/s); 7200 rpm
    18x double-layer SuperDrive
    NVIDIA GeForce GT 120 with 512MB of GDDR3 memory, PCI Express 2.0, one Mini DisplayPort, and one dual-link DVI port

    The 4 core is:

    One 2.8GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon "Nehalem" processor
    3GB (three 1GB) memory
    1TB hard drive
    18x double-layer SuperDrive
    ATI Radeon HD 5770 with 1GB GDDR5

    Keep in mind these are basically the same price new in box.
     
  4. Transporteur macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2008
    Location:
    UK
    #4
    IIRC audio software like logic can utilise all available cores, so the 8-core would be the much better choice.
     
  5. nanofrog macrumors G4

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    #5
    What audio software do you use, and how exactly do you use it (i.e. instrument layers, file sizes, ...)?
     
  6. kingugly thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    #6
    Pro Tools and Logic with several VIs and lots of plugins.
     
  7. nanofrog macrumors G4

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    #7
    Octad and SSD's will do nicely (instrument libraries for example benefit from SSD's, as it's random access reads).
     
  8. kingugly thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    #8
    Thanks! Do you think it's a good idea to keep the OS and programs on a standard hdd and go ssd for the additional drives with instruments?
     
  9. nanofrog macrumors G4

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    #9
    Placing the OS/applications on it's own drive is a good idea, and ideally, an SSD (more for application use, not OS in terms of increasing the random access performance for this area). But an HDD will work as well (you're dividing up the bandwidth, so performance will improve, as the system will be able to read from both disks at the same time; load the application from one, and the instrument library from the other).
     
  10. kingugly thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    #10
    So you are saying ssd all the way, on each drive in the machine relating to music?

    I just bought the 8 core, so thanks again for the advice.
     
  11. nanofrog macrumors G4

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    #11
    Not quite.

    Just for loading the application and libraries. Mechanical is fine for final output storage.
     

Share This Page