2011 2.4 GHz 8 cores Mac Pro or wait for 2011/2012 update model?

[Xanix]

Hello to all. I'm a long time lurker and a first time poster.
Currently, I've a 2008 iMac and a 2010 MacBook Air. The Air is working fine and the iMac has GPU heating problems (overheating), so, no games on Windows and applications only, on Mac OS. Because of the iMac´s model limitations and future problems like this one, I've decided, this time, to chose a Mac Pro 2 x 4 cores as my next mac.

I have some doubts and help would be very appreciated:

1) Right now, here in Portugal, the 2011 Mac Pro 2 x 2.4 GHz is 3.500,00€. I know that it is about to be updated, but, will it cost even more (maybe come closer to 4.000,00€), or maintain the same price? Is it better to wait or buy the current model?

2) What could be the specs of the next model? cpus, gpu, ram,…?

3) The 27" display costs 999€. Isn't it overpriced? Does it deserves the asked price or should I go for one 27" 250€ / 350€ Samsung/Asus/...?

As a note: Mac Pro 2.4 # 8 cores + 27" Apple Display + Apple Care is about 5.000,00€

Thank you in advance and best regards,

Filipe

 

[derbothaus]

Pass. Clock speed too low for Westmere to be effective.

 

[alust2013]

I'd consider the 6 core if you want one right now. Much higher clock speed and more useful overall. The 8 core has limited use of its power.

 

[HelmetHead]

Monitor and CPU choices

I agree with the previous post. Get the single 6 core in favor of the dual 4 cores (8 total) with slower speeds.

The monitor for the new box will likely be Thunderbolt as one is now out for the Macbooks.

 

[nanofrog]

What exactly will you be using the system for, what applications used, and how much time spent on each (% of time spent would be ideal)?

Not enough information to really guide you to the right machine at this point...

BTW, I realize you began this thread first, but I do recall the other one you've created as well (here).

 

[anynigma]

Do not buy now. If you wait, the model you could get now (6 core or whatever you chose) will have its price reduced. If you want to go with a faster updated model, its price could be higher, or maybe the same. If you have the luxury of waiting, wait. I've always bought computers right after a refresh. Maybe its more expensive, but I always have the best, and never have buyer's remorse and wish I bought the shiny new one.

 

[blunti]

Do not buy now. If you wait, the model you could get now (6 core or whatever you chose) will have its price reduced. If you want to go with a faster updated model, its price could be higher, or maybe the same. If you have the luxury of waiting, wait. I've always bought computers right after a refresh. Maybe its more expensive, but I always have the best, and never have buyer's remorse and wish I bought the shiny new one.

the question is; can he wait an additional 4-5 months?

 

[Umbongo]

Only one I'd really consider now (for someone not looking at the 12-core models) is a 2009 or 2010 base model and upgrade the CPU to a Xeon W3680.

 

[derbothaus]

^^This. Unless you need it for work or something and need to be able to keep 10.6 working. I'd even suggest a refurb at this point as the parts are so old. 2.8GHz for 2119.00, +W3670 (3.2GHz) or W3680 (3.33GHz). Probably be under 2800.00 and you'd have a hex-core.

 

[FrankHahn]

Do not buy a Mac Pro at this point of time since the Mac Pro line needs to be updated.

If you need NOW the power of a Mac Pro, then buy an updated Mac Mini server (optionally with one or two SSDs) + a 27" Thunderbolt Display. Although the power of a Mac Mini server is not the same as a Mac Pro, it is very close for most ordinary computing jobs.

When the Mac Pro is updated, you can then get a Mac Pro and use it with the 27" Thunderbolt Display. After buying a Mac Pro, you can either sell the Mac Mini or continue to use it.

 

[CaptainChunk]

1) Right now, here in Portugal, the 2011 Mac Pro 2 x 2.4 GHz is 3.500,00€. I know that it is about to be updated, but, will it cost even more (maybe come closer to 4.000,00€), or maintain the same price? Is it better to wait or buy the current model?

Depends on how long you're willing to wait. SB Xeons got delayed to January 2012, which probably means we won't see new Mac Pros till late Q1 2012. You haven't really indicated what type of work you're planning on doing on a Mac Pro, so it's hard for us to make a suggestion without guessing.

You might find the hex-core to be a better value versus the base 8-core. I'm not sure what the price difference is in Euro, but in the US it's $200 more and has significantly better performance in applications that rely on clock speed more than core count.

2) What could be the specs of the next model? cpus, gpu, ram,…?

Nobody knows that yet. Only Apple does and they're pretty good about leaving product development under tight lock and key. The only thing we can do is make guesses. Sandy Bridge E CPUs, (probably) Radeon 6000 series GPUs, perhaps 6GB of RAM as the new standard. Hard to say...

3) The 27" display costs 999€. Isn't it overpriced? Does it deserves the asked price or should I go for one 27" 250€ / 350€ Samsung/Asus/...?

And it costs $999 here. Overpriced? Debatable. 27" IPS panels are not cheap. The U2711 from Dell (same panel, but differences in features) is $1,199 and NEC's PA series model costs $400-500 more than that. The models you see in the 250-300 Euro range are all going to be cheaper TN panels (less color accurate). But whether or not those things would really matter to you really depends on your use. If you're a graphics designer, photographer, video editor, etc., you really want a color-accurate panel. But if what you do doesn't require color accuracy, you may be just fine with a cheaper one.

 

[blunti]

Do not buy a Mac Pro at this point of time since the Mac Pro line needs to be updated.

If you need NOW the power of a Mac Pro, then buy an updated Mac Mini server (optionally with one or two SSDs) + a 27" Thunderbolt Display. Although the power of a Mac Mini server is not the same as a Mac Pro, it is very close for most ordinary computing jobs.
.

Really?! I'd like to see the mini compete against my 12c 2.93 in after effects/smoke & cinema 4d.

 

[digitalhen]

Really?! I'd like to see the mini compete against my 12c 2.93 in after effects/smoke & cinema 4d.

Emphasis on the *ordinary*, blunti. Getting the Mac Mini as an interim solution sounds like a good bet.

I'd wager that most users with Mac Pros barely use their CPUs day-to-day, only using it for individual tasks (video import / render etc etc). I'm one of them. So for now, a Mac Mini would be great.

 

[d-m-a-x]

Depends on how long you're willing to wait. SB Xeons got delayed to January 2012, which probably means we won't see new Mac Pros till late Q1 2012. You haven't really indicated what type of work you're planning on doing on a Mac Pro, so it's hard for us to make a suggestion without guessing.

You might find the hex-core to be a better value versus the base 8-core. I'm not sure what the price difference is in Euro, but in the US it's $200 more and has significantly better performance in applications that rely on clock speed more than core count.






And it costs $999 here. Overpriced? Debatable. 27" IPS panels are not cheap. The U2711 from Dell (same panel, but differences in features) is $1,199 and NEC's PA series model costs $400-500 more than that. The models you see in the 250-300 Euro range are all going to be cheaper TN panels (less color accurate). But whether or not those things would really matter to you really depends on your use. If you're a graphics designer, photographer, video editor, etc., you really want a color-accurate panel. But if what you do doesn't require color accuracy, you may be just fine with a cheaper one.

the HP ZR24 is an IPS monitor and goes for around 375

 

[Huginnmuninn]

If you need to buy RIGHT NOW buy something used which you can always resell for close to the price you bought. For example in the US powermax.com (not sure if they ship to Europe) has a couple of dozen Mac Pros in various configurations starting at $1100 (€800) for a basic 4-core 'Woodcrest' model, up to 3x that for various Woodcrest, Clovertown and Harpertown-equipped models.

Otherwise wait. Based on news reports Apple's next refresh will most likely be the Macbook Pros, but I'd think that they would want to come out with Mac Pro refreshes before the end of the year. Why? To catch sales to IT departments that need to use up their budgets (or lose the funds) before the calendar year-end. Last-minute splurges are fairly common on large corporations at the end of the year for this reason: if departments actually come in under budget those budgets are often scrutinized for reduction when cost-cutting measures are implemented, so IT departments usually try to spend every dollar of their quarterly and yearly budgets. And computer manufacturers have been quite aware of this for a loong time.

 

[CaptainChunk]

the HP ZR24 is an IPS monitor and goes for around 375

Indeed. Almost forgot about that one...

The ZR24 uses an S-IPS panel. It's not quite the beast the LP2475w (H-IPS) is, but it's still pretty good. H-IPS has better contrast and viewing angles than S-IPS.

But, I was going along the OP's mention of the 27" size class. In that category, nothing with an IPS panel is cheap.

 

[thekev]

Indeed. Almost forgot about that one...


The ZR24 uses an S-IPS panel. It's not quite the beast the LP2475w (H-IPS) is, but it's still pretty good. H-IPS has better contrast and viewing angles than S-IPS.

But, I was going along the OP's mention of the 27" size class. In that category, nothing with an IPS panel is cheap.

Edit: I forgot to mention don't bother with Apple displays. Desktop displays are quite possibly the thing they do worst out their entire product line.


We really need to get away from the concept that the panel is the only defining element in a display. Quite often displays can vary drastically in the quality of their output even using similar panels. The difference isn't as great as it was a few years ago, but it is still there, so the display model and if you get a good unit is important.

Yeah 27" is always expensive right now. Before 24" panels were where the price went way up. Around five or six years ago it was the 21" 1600x1200 panels that were the first big price jump from smaller models. From what I can tell the screen real estate escalation seems to be slowing down. It's mostly a matter of how much people can take in from a certain viewing distance. I'd like to see panel resolution at equivalent sizes start to increase again but we'll see what happens.

 

[CaptainChunk]

Edit: I forgot to mention don't bother with Apple displays. Desktop displays are quite possibly the thing they do worst out their entire product line.

Yeah, I'm not a huge fan of Apple displays, either. The glossy finish drives me nuts and they offer very little in the way of settings. There's no menu to go into to adjust R/G/B levels, contrast, etc. Even the prior 23"/30" ACDs had this problem, but at least they were matte.

We really need to get away from the concept that the panel is the only defining element in a display. Quite often displays can vary drastically in the quality of their output even using similar panels. The difference isn't as great as it was a few years ago, but it is still there, so the display model and if you get a good unit is important.

I'm in agreement there. But I think it would also be a fair assessment to say that IPS and PVA panels are ALWAYS better than TN panels by principle.

My main point is that often, users ask why an Apple, Dell UltraSharp or NEC PA series display costs so much more than the cheap Samsung at Best Buy. They simply use better panels and better panels cost more. How well the manufacturer implements the panel in their display is an entirely different story...

 

[nanofrog]

I'm in agreement there. But I think it would also be a fair assessment to say that IPS and PVA panels are ALWAYS better than TN panels by principle.

My main point is that often, users ask why an Apple, Dell UltraSharp or NEC PA series display costs so much more than the cheap Samsung at Best Buy. They simply use better panels and better panels cost more. How well the manufacturer implements the panel in their display is an entirely different story...

In the case of NEC and Eizo, they also use much better electronics to drive the panels (everything from driver circuits to larger LUT's), and that increases the costs significantly (higher R&D combined with higher margins). Especially on their high-end products (why Eizo's can use the same H-IPS panel as other makes, but the MSRP is $5k; expensive, but users can also see the difference by looking at them side-by-side).