Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

2009 refurbs price is lowered !

it looks to me that buying the 2009 8 core 2.93 at 3649 vs a 2010 8 core 2.4 at 3499

would be easy choice grab the 2.93 they were selling a 2009 2.93 8 core at 4999 a few days ago. it had a 1tb hdd and a second superdrive. does not the 2009 2.93 use the same ram 1066 as the 2010 2.4?
 
philipma1957 said:
would be easy choice grab the 2.93 they were selling a 2009 2.93 8 core at 4999 a few days ago. it had a 1tb hdd and a second superdrive. does not the 2009 2.93 use the same ram 1066 as the 2010 2.4?
Click to expand...

$3600 is a steal for the 2.93GHz machine! A few weeks ago a new 2.26GHz machine wasn't much less than that.

All 2009 machines use 1066MHz RAM. Although some could use 1333MHz, Apple limited the speed via firmware.

The 2010 Octad also uses 1066MHz RAM. The CPUs limit the memory speed in this case.
 
God that's tempting. It's too bad they didn't adjust the exchange rate on the '09 models for Canada.

The 2010 Octo and 2009 2.66 are only $100 CAD more than the US price.

The refurb 2.93 Octo on the other hand is $320 more. 😡


I could really use some benchmark numbers on the 2010s. I really need to see real-world Westmere benefits.
 
Both the 2.66 and the 2.93 8-cores are better than the initial 2010 8-core offering.

Both excellent deals.
 
I'm not convinced the 2.66 is better.

I'm guessing the Westmere's better cache and instruction set will overcome the clock difference. And of course there's the GPU, HDD and Wi-Fi upgrades to consider....hmmmm.

Could really use a benchmark score or two to compare. 😀
 
They've taken the only refurb off the uk site now so waiting to see what the prices will be, I have a feeling they will still be pricey
 
2.93 eight core is lookin' like the spot...

crappy video card, but solves the ram slot issue

eight 2.93 cores should be able to fend off the six 3.33 cores to all but the most discerning eye
 
eponym said:
I'm not convinced the 2.66 is better.

I'm guessing the Westmere's better cache and instruction set will overcome the clock difference.
Click to expand...

It is for sure.
4MB more cache won't make up for 266MHz more speed per core. Besides some new instructions and the plus on the cache side the architecture of Westmere and Gainstown is identical, and don't expect too much from the cache.
 
snouter said:
2.93 eight core is lookin' like the spot...

crappy video card, but solves the ram slot issue

eight 2.93 cores should be able to fend off the six 3.33 cores to all but the most discerning eye
Click to expand...

Yeah, in the long run you may be right.... but if I hawked my 2.93 Quad for one of these 2.93 Octo's it would make absolutely zero difference in everything I do. So it's not a no brainer for everyone. I'd still rather have a 3.33GHz machine right now... even if it had only 4 cores.

Anyway, it's good to see the 2009 refurbs coming down to realistic prices. More choice is always good. 🙂
 
Those are some nice price drops...

700$ off the previous 2.66 8 core refurb price, and 1350$ off the previous 2.93 8 core refurb price.


I never thought I'd be deciding between the two.
 
snouter said:
It's just so hard to get excited about 2.26GHz.
Click to expand...
The ghz speed seems low, but it is rated as the third fastest Mac from the last generation on Primatelabs.ca.

edit: of course, geekbench is multihthreaded, so for programs that are single threaded, it's probably is not nearly as impressive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back