2009 Mac Pro vs 2012 non retina Macbook Pro

Discussion in 'Buying Tips and Advice' started by comatory, Jul 17, 2012.

  1. comatory macrumors 6502a

    comatory

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2012
    #1
    I am looking for a new machine to be my main workhorse. I do a lot of video editing and I need somethig that would handle large HD files with no problem, I will not do any 4K editing or sth like that though. I leave usually computer turned on to do rendering over night at least two or three days a week.

    Now I dont need portability as I have that covered but on the other hand I used to have Macbook that I used as a desktop. I am intrigued by expandability of Mac Pro. I do not need great GPU as I deal with 2D video mostly, for example having a RAID solution for backup purposes is more important to me.

    The only thing Im worried is the value. I think I could get a used Mac Pro 2009 model with 4G RAM and 1TB RAM for less than 1000 USD (maybe 800), the version with two CPUs on 2.6GHz. I'd like to put in at least 16Gb RAM,128GB SSD for OS and another 1TB drive to RAID it with the one already present.

    On the other hand I could get 15" non retina MBP base model that I'd upgrade to 16Gb RAM after purchase and eventually get SSD for OS (and put HDD instead of ODD in it). I'd get i7 processor that is probably as fast as the one in MP,Thunderbolt and USB3. It would be attached to external display and keyboard 99% of time though.

    I cant decide,can someone please offer their view on the value of used MP?

    I was also thinking about getting Mac Mini server and maxing RAM on that thing (which is 16GB but I'd like to utilize 32GB one day which I think is possible on 2009 Mac Pro).
     
  2. JasonK macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2008
    Location:
    Eugene, OR
    #2
    I would go with the MacBook Pro. Speed wise the MacPro will be a little faster, but not much with the upgrades you are talking about. The price on the MacPro would allow you to really upgrade the machine, but it is really hard to take your machine with you when it weighs a half ton, if you are remotely thinking about that.
    The current non-retina MacBook Pro has to be the most under appreciated in their line up. It's no slouch, plus in 3 years it won't be 6 years old :/
    If you are on the fence, go with the MBP.
     
  3. comatory thread starter macrumors 6502a

    comatory

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2012
    #3
    I don't need portAbility at all. Thanks for input,thats what I thought
     
  4. will waters macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2011
    Location:
    Great Britain
    #4
    iMac

    I know it is not on your list however if I were you I would consider the iMac...

    However if not go with the Mac Pro, a laptop is not designed for what you need, it is not set up as a desktop, eg where the fans are placed,

    Perso Haley I would get a Mac Pro or iMac

    Will
     
  5. bf2008 macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2008
    #5
    Is it possible to upgrade the CPU in the future in the Mac Pro? If so, then it sounds like the Mac Pro is better suited for you. In 3 years time you could upgrade the CPU and have a fast computer again, whereas with the MBP you'll be stuck again.
     
  6. comatory thread starter macrumors 6502a

    comatory

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2012
    #6
    But I already have a 24" display, keyboard and mouse so I don't need an iMac... plus I don't really like that I can't change HDD in it because of the stupid sensor.

    @Will: Yes it is possible. I remember reading about 2009 Mac Pro's on which you can flash EFI that turns it into 2010(2012) Mac Pro and you can use more powerful processor. This upgrade however breaks any warranty.

    Remember though - the 12-core Xeon still costs a lot of money so that upgrade is feasible once the prices drop down (probably with introduction of new Xeons)
     
  7. thekev macrumors 604

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #7
    It can be upgraded, but your statement makes no sense. If he's going to upgrade something, might as well do it today. The price won't go much lower unless you're willing to count on ebay deals which aren't a reliable plan. The upgrade options still came out in 2010. No future cpu will work, and in a few years both will be dated if you're looking for the maximum possible performance. You will also potentially run into Apple's end of support life too. Apple states their vintage policy on their site.
     
  8. oklaonion macrumors member

    oklaonion

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2011
    #8
    The Mac Pro is certainly a better value proposition for video editing specifically. Especially if portability is no issue. You really are paying a premium for portability with the MBP. Hell, you may be better off with an iMac if you aren't taking it anywhere - similar upgrade-ability as a MBP, less price.
     
  9. jjhoekstra macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2009
    #9
    The MacPro is in my opinion the better option for you. A MacBook is not build for overnight rendering, and the MacPro is very suitable for exactly tasks like that. Just compare the cooling-fans and the quality of the HDDs. Speedwise there is no relevant difference.
     
  10. CmdrLaForge macrumors 68040

    CmdrLaForge

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2003
    Location:
    around the world
    #10
    in your case I would totally go with the iMac.
     
  11. bf2008 macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2008
    #11
    I meant upgrade the CPU to current or future ones. He could get the 2009 Mac pro, and in the future upgrade it when it becomes necessary. That's why I was asking about it. That's the logic behind upgradeable machines, to update the CPU every now and then...
     
  12. comatory thread starter macrumors 6502a

    comatory

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2012
    #12
    I agree that it wouldn't make much sense to upgrade CPU now but once new Xeons roll out the prices for older Xeons such as Westmere E5645 might drop dramatically (let's assume around $400-600) and then it might make sense.

    Or wait even longer and buy a used one for dirt cheap but I'd be a bit worried buying used processor.

    But after reading up today's post on http://www.facebook.com/MacProsPlease I'm beginning to lean toward Quad Core i7 in Mac Mini Server, perhaps utilizing Thunderbolt or USB3 for storage once the new models come out.

    That would probably get me on similar level as 2008-2009 2x2.66 Mac Pros while having all the new features, especially if I remove the HDD and put SSD in it and max out RAM. It'd also be cheaper. Just worried about a heat little bit,
     
  13. thekev macrumors 604

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #13
    Do you see how pointless this is? The "upgrades" are still older cpus. Nothing came out for this chipset after 2010, and as for the high core count machines, you only buy one if you know your software will use it effectively.

    You don't seem to get that :p. Intel already dropped their pricing, and new Xeons have come out. They've been out since March. Apple just passed on them. The W3680 which was the popular upgrade option fell from $1000 when it was released to $550-600 online. Apple dropped the 6 core to a standard configuration from a cto and priced it at $3000 down from $3800 in this recent revision. The prices have already mostly bottomed out. Maybe it goes slightly lower. This is still pointless. Any released after that point need an entirely different chipset meaning they will never work. The E5645 is for dual package machines. If you're buying an 8 core machine from 2009, you could go to that, but it's pointless anyway. The gains are very low, and it will never be worth it. The 2010 8 core (E5645) wasn't a very good configuration at all. I think the problem is that you haven't done your research:p.
     
  14. comatory thread starter macrumors 6502a

    comatory

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2012
    #14
    Yes you're right I haven't done much research. I am inexperienced with Xeons and computer towers generally. I used to build PCs but then moved to laptops for my work and later to Apple, so I haven't been watching what's up in the hardware world that much.

    I was thinking of going the dual CPU route for video encoding (Adobe Media Encoder CS5 - I assumed that these applications would gain a boost from multi-core CPUs. Also I thought it would help with After Effects rendering and stuff.

     

Share This Page