3.2 Quad vs 3.33 Hex - Your Opinions

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by skiffx, Aug 11, 2010.

  1. skiffx macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2008
    #1
    Hey guys,

    Just want to see which one are you ordering / would like to order and why?
    Yes it will be a much easier decision to make once both benchmarks are out for both CPUs to determine which offers the best bang for the buck, but we dont have that luxury at the moment, so lets work with what we've got.
     
  2. frimple macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2008
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    #2
    What? The price difference is nearly $1k. The 3.2 will overclock itself on single threaded apps. If you're worried about 50% more cores then you should be looking at the 8 core 2.26 for $2800 in the refurb store. 33% more cores (lower clocked albeit by ~30%) and damn near a grand saved that you could invest in other parts of the system.

    Single socket pro's are a sucker's buy IMO. Unless you're getting one dirt cheap and have the 411 on a dual socket daughterboard and some ES processors.
     
  3. skiffx thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2008
    #3
    Well I have no use for 2 CPUs in my system and for my needs. iMacs isnt enough and dual cpu is too much so hence for single socket....

    So for single socket the 'sweetspot' is 3.2 in your opinion? What do you think about 2.8 (besides it being a ripoff:D) ?
     
  4. frimple macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2008
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    #4
    Depends on what you're going to do with it. They're all a rip off if you just want to play steam games :rolleyes:
     
  5. skiffx thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2008
    #5
    Well there are just so many animators/movie makers/photographers in the world ;)

    But none the less, I cant stand windows after switching to osx so I guess its either I pay for my habit or build a hackintosh...
     
  6. Spanky Deluxe macrumors 601

    Spanky Deluxe

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2005
    Location:
    London, UK
    #6
    Many people are saying the 3.33 Hexacore is the sweet spot in terms of value and performance. It's the fastest processor out of the entire 2010 Mac Pro lineup in single threaded apps and it's comparable to the 2.4GHz Mac Pro in multithreaded apps (19.98GHz 'total' vs 19.2GHz) albeit significantly faster in single threaded apps. Personally I'd still rather have the Octo since it should be able to be upgraded to 64GB of RAM and 12 3.2GHz cores a few years down the line but right now, the 'sweet spot' seems to be the 3.33GHz Hex.

    Edit:
    If you'd feel confident enough to build a hackintosh, you could build an equivalent machine to the Hex for (off the top of my head) about half the price.
     
  7. frimple macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2008
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    #7
    Hey, if you need the power you need the power. I had a pro and ended up selling it to build my own dream machine so I respect needing what you need.

    If I had to buy a single socket pro today I'd get the base '10 model for two reasons. You can get the '09 2.93 machine for $50 more, but when you decide to sell it (and don't say "I'm going to keep this machine forever") you'll want the latest "model year" that you can get. Sorry, that's just how mac buyers look at things. The second is the new one's will have the firmware you need so that if you decide you want the 3.33 6 core (or for a single socket the 980x at $1k now from newegg *cough* *cough*) it should be a drop in replacement.
     
  8. dissolve macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2009
    #8
    This is why I'm not pushing my budget to opt for an octo. These processors *most likely* will have a significant price drop over the next year or so, which is when I may opt to upgrade. Just another option.
     
  9. VirtualRain macrumors 603

    VirtualRain

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2008
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    #9
    It really depends what you are doing with it.
     
  10. skiffx thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2008
    #10
    Re Hackintosh, Im confident that I can build it and make it work, but thats as far as Im willing to go :) Dealing with it breaking after some update isnt something Im looking for...Id want a stable machine that's serves as my main work horse.
     
  11. skiffx thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2008
    #11
    Woud it void warranty completely, if you replace a quad cpu with a hexa (some time down the line, lets say 2 years...)
     
  12. thagomizer macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 26, 2005
    Location:
    USA
    #12
    What Spanky said. In addition, the hexa-core has fast access to all memory from all the cores. The dual-cpu boxes are a NUMA architecture, and will have slower memory access any time one CPU wants to access memory that is channeled to the other CPU. Granted, you can have more memory overall with the duallies.
     
  13. Spanky Deluxe macrumors 601

    Spanky Deluxe

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2005
    Location:
    London, UK
    #13
    Yeah you would void the warranty. Well in theory you could pop the old CPU back in if anything went wrong and they probably wouldn't notice (just make sure to at least use the same colour thermal paste :p). Most people would probably wait until their warranty's expired to do it as is the case with several Mac Pro 1,1 owners now upgrading their machines manually to Octo core based ones.
     
  14. skiffx thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2008
    #14
    As far as memory, I think 16GBs will last me 4-5 years without a problem, if not the whole 32 in case we discover that single hex will be able to support it.
     
  15. Demigod Mac macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2008
    #15
    Keep in mind that the 3.2 Quad is a Nehalem and the 3.33 Hex is a Westmere. There's other factors at work besides clock speed. You also get 1333 mhz memory instead of 1066 mhz.
     
  16. MythicFrost macrumors 68040

    MythicFrost

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2009
    Location:
    Australia
    #16
    A suckers buy? I'm grabbing one and I'm not a sucker lol... If you're using apps that support all cores then the 8-core is better (if it's cheaper), otherwise the 3.33GHz six-core would be better.

    I'd definitely go the six-core instead of the quad though... an extra 2 cores and it's just that little bit faster, and you get 1333MHz RAM instead of 1066MHz.
     
  17. philipma1957 macrumors 603

    philipma1957

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2010
    Location:
    Howell, New Jersey
    #17
    so some of you will get the 2.8 base model, and add upgrades down the road? so With education discount it is 2300 plus tax.

    I can wait 6 months and add full ram..
    wait 11 months add applecare.

    any time after that add the better video gpu.

    then add a six core near the end of apple care.
    for my needs this is a good plan. the 2.8 quad is far ahead of the 3.06 dual in my imac. and I have a natural upgrade path to follow for 3 plus years. the biggest hit is to lay out my 2300 to start. I have all the hdds and ssd i need. I can sell my 2.53 mini maxed with 8gb and an intel hdd for a good price so the hit wont be 2.3k. I have a plan.
     
  18. frimple macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2008
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    #18
    8 cores is cheaper, about $1100 cheaper. Look at the "refurb" aka "we can't sell this anymore so take it at a lower price" store.

    People often forget that the nehalem processors support native overclocking, that 2.26 will go up to 2.66 (if I'm not mistaken) across 2 cores and up to 2.93 on a single core provided nothing else is going on with the processors.

    The memory bus is a product of the processor. If you're looking at a single socket machine and really think you need the extra 266 mhz of memory bus then you are mistaken.


    :apple: Marketing != Need

    I H8 people loosing their senses when a new version of the same dog food comes out
     
  19. frimple macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2008
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    #19
    Well this might be true... kind of. Of course everyone knows that the memory clock is a product of the processor right? :p:D

    However, if the quads that have the 1066 memory don't have the firmware to support the CPU's that ALLOW the 1333 memory (which is ridiculous because nehalem processors have supported this speed since fracking launch!!!!!) then you'd be SOL. But my money is on consistent firmware across all '10 mac pro's. So you can drop in your 980x i7 in 2 years for $500 and *ONLY* have had to suffer 4(8 if you count hyperthreading)x2.8GHz for a few years.
     
  20. MythicFrost macrumors 68040

    MythicFrost

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2009
    Location:
    Australia
    #20
    3.33GHz up to 3.6GHz is better than 2.26GHz up to 2.66GHz. I don't think you need an extra 266MHz memory bus(?), I was merely mentioning it as a difference between the 3.2GHz and the 3.33GHz.
     
  21. frimple macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2008
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    #21
    I think if you fart loud enough you void your warranty :rolleyes:

    Seriously though, if you put OWC memory in there you "void" your warranty. :apple:'s policy is draconian.
     
  22. frimple macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2008
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    #22
    Well if I'm going to save $1100 that could be spent on a real bottleneck like I/O I'll take the hit :p

    I think people forget how far ahead of other components CPU's have come. It's light years, I work in enterprise IT services and CPU power is seriously the least of most peoples worries. People worry about how fast you'll be able to rip your *cough cough* non-netflix DVD's but don't seem to realize the slowest part is your damn DVD DRIVE! :mad:
     
  23. johnnymg macrumors 65816

    johnnymg

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2008
    #23
    Is this really the case?

    thanks
    JohnG
     
  24. jhmirage macrumors newbie

    jhmirage

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2010
    Location:
    Minneapolis, MN
    #24
    No, not really. Only if you manage to damage your MP while doing so. And even then they only refuse to cover whatever damage you caused... it doesn't invalidate the entire warranty.

    From the warranty itself, this is the only real reference to this:
    This warranty does not apply: [...] (f) to damage caused by service (including upgrades and expansions) performed by anyone who is not a representative of Apple or an Apple Authorized Service Provider (“AASP”);​


    That's pretty standard language for any major manufacturer.
     
  25. rajbonham macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2010
    #25
    No, I don't think so. That guy just insists on arguing with everyone. Watch, I bet you he'll start something with me next post.
     

Share This Page