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

3.2Ghz Mac Pro or quad core iMac??

I see; so they are slightly different then?
Click to expand...

Xeons use ECC memory, whereas desktop variants like the i3/i5/17 can't (consumer models). Certain Xeons also allow SMP (in other words, multiple physical CPUs) and the consumer variants are single-CPU only. Xeons undergo more rigorous reliability testing as well, since they're intended for workstaiton and server markets, where downtime is unacceptable.

But other than those differences, Xeons should be virtually identical in performance to their consumer equivalents. Anymore, they all share the same underpinnings.
 
CaptainChunk said:
But other than those differences, Xeons should be virtually identical in performance to their consumer equivalents. Anymore, they all share the same underpinnings.
Click to expand...

But the i7 build into the current iMac Turbo Boosts up to 3.6GHz, a full 400MHz more than the Xeons of the same base speed...?

Edit: ...same +400MHz for the i5-760 as compared to the Xeon 3530...
 
Will10 said:
Excellent advice.

I have a question regarding RAM guys (a potentially daft question so forgive my ignorance again). The MP comes with 3g standard RAM (apple describes this as 3 X 1 GB).

The MP has four slots for RAM. Does this mean that the standard MP model comes with 1 GB in three of the slots with a remaining spare slot? If so I could I buy a 4 GB stick from OWC to fill the empty slot giving me a 7 GB machine?:confused:

If I can do that I think I’m gonna go with

3.2 quad Nehalem with 3GB. = £1972 (-my 15% student discount)
+ £136 4GB stick (from OWC).
+ £200 apple care
+ £200 monitor (roughly)
= a grand total of £2310. :)

3.2 ghz, 7GB machine for the tasks I outlined above? As a good starting point that could be upgraded later (more RAM SSD) What do you think? :eek:

I found this thread regarding monitors. https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/913255/
23 inch NEC MultiSync EA231WMi - £224
22 incc Dell UltraSharp 2209WA 22-inch - £190
24 inch Dell U241 £350 (a bit much)

Any opinons? Thankyou very much for your help with this guys. I really needed to nail something down and I feel I've gotten really close to making a decision. :D
Click to expand...

I dont know if anyone has said this because i couldn't be bothered to read through, but if you are a student, and you are in the UK the applecare will be 75% off, my applecare for my mac pro was £30 through student discount and also ringing instead of buying online, they also gave me a few free goodies for being a student moving to professional like free iwork and a few other things! it seems the more you spend the better it is.

The best i got was in 2007 when i bought a 17" mbp it was near enough £2000 but i got a free case that was £100 and i got iwork and obviously applecare for £30. So its well worth talking to a representative! They like new apple users and will give you stuff to make you want to come back!
 
gabicava83 said:
Only marginally ...

Does the price increase of the whole package justify the performance increase?.....
Click to expand...

For the people on this forum the answer would likely be yes. Go post that question on the imac forum and you'll likely get a different response. How surprising.......................

JohnG
 
so true :)

I prefer the MP personally.

johnnymg said:
For the people on this forum the answer would likely be yes. Go post that question on the imac forum and you'll likely get a different response. How surprising.......................

JohnG
Click to expand...
 
A prebuilt package that is barely upgradable or an open chassis that can be easily upgraded. Additionally does a user want the computer to be subject to downtime/repair due to almost all vulnerabilities or to be repairable through component replacement?
Click to expand...

I very much agree with you on this one and it’s a biggy. If that 27" display goes your in trouble (but you do have apple care).

The iMac has that lovely 27" IPS panel screen. The best IPS monitors at my budget are
  • NEC MultiSync EA231WMi = £260
  • Eizo Flexscan S2243W = £390


So the figures I have are as follows: (Neither price has deducted the student discount).

  • Mac Pro:
  • 3.2 Ghz, 3 GB RAM = £2319.00
  • Extra 4 GB stick = £136 (from OWC)
  • Monitor = (roughly) £260
  • Total = £2715

  • iMac
  • 2.937 Ghz, 4 GB RAM =£1808.99
  • Extra 4GB stick = £94.99
  • Total = £1903.98


The Mac Pros coming in at roughly £811 more than the iMac. :(

It's a tough one, I feel that the MP is the one I should go for, a slightly quicker machine and can be easily upgraded in the future. But thats a lot more money:confused:

I can only hope that taking a long term view, the ability to upgrade relatively cheaply will give the Mac Pro a longer shelf-life. So (long term) it maybe a closer price match?

but if you are a student, and you are in the UK the applecare will be 75% off
Click to expand...

Thanks for the pointer tomscott :)
 
I've been through all these contortions too

Settled on the Mac pro. If I'd gone for the iMac with SSD preinstalled, it would have come to around £2600. And the options for cheapish performance gains like internal software RAID + SSD for boot are limited (though theoretically doable I think). iMacs are moddable through OWC but I'm not sure what the UK options are, a third party mod means sending it away and losing warranty, and I don't fancy DIY.

Adding ram, hdd, ssd, graphics card, and even new processor chip seem easy for the Mac pro.
 
I love the MP and indeed own 1 2009 version and the iMac i7 27"

It really is a tough call. Expandability of the MP I feel is overrated. You are not really future proofing yourself against future: Memory technologies, USB technologies, Processor Technologies.

I say that in that Processor upgrades for example are a nightmare for the MP changing from last years processors to this years is nigh on impossible unless you throw a lot of money at it.

Graphics card upgrades are in the hands of Apple and the drivers for them.

If you take the new imac you have can have the SSD and HD in there and you can upgrade it if you so care with relative ease. And a Firewire800 for your drobo etc. So you have 4 drivebay's instead of 2 internal on the MP. But a 500gb SSD and 2TB internal and drobo on the firewire 800 port - The imac is not that far behind.

It really is a hard call between the i7 imac and the MP.
 
dekka007 said:
I love the MP and indeed own 1 2009 version and the iMac i7 27"

It really is a tough call. Expandability of the MP I feel is overrated. You are not really future proofing yourself against future: Memory technologies, USB technologies, Processor Technologies.

I say that in that Processor upgrades for example are a nightmare for the MP changing from last years processors to this years is nigh on impossible unless you throw a lot of money at it.

Graphics card upgrades are in the hands of Apple and the drivers for them.

If you take the new imac you have can have the SSD and HD in there and you can upgrade it if you so care with relative ease. And a Firewire800 for your drobo etc. So you have 4 drivebay's instead of 2 internal on the MP. But a 500gb SSD and 2TB internal and drobo on the firewire 800 port - The imac is not that far behind.

It really is a hard call between the i7 imac and the MP.
Click to expand...

Im sorry but you cant compare a firewire 800 drobo to a 4 drive SATA configuration in a mac pro its like a 1/4 the speed! firewire 800 is slow!!!!!!! especially for a professional environment. For back up only.

I dont know why Everyone is pushing you to the 3.2 upgrade it is a waste of money for the speed upgrade you will literally see no benefit from it! the extra £400 you would save could buy you the kick ass monitor you are after! (plus the £400 you are already saving) you arnt future proofing anything by buying the 3.2, its just an ever so slightly faster processor. The only worthwhile processor upgrade in this iteration is the 6 core.

Just look at it this way.. the imac is a consumer machine hence its price. The mac pro is not. Most mac pros outlive their imac equivalents twice over in a professional environment. They will be used until they are literally unusable, and they are designed for this, people get carried away with benchmarks and clock speeds but it is a machine. You will buy it for your need and from what i have read yours is the base machine, put 10gbs ram in it and a decent amount of storage and the thing will keep you going for the long forceable future.

Whereas the imac will be looking very tired in 2-3 years time your pro will still look good. My mac pro the 2008 is still running extremely fast and does all of my professional needs with ease. You need to look at what you need rather than want to make sure it is a sensible monetary decision!

50% of people in these forums buy these machines for bragging rights and thats about it.
 
4 drive SATA configuration
Click to expand...

Well how about 3 drive SATA configuration in the imac i7. Just make the superdrive external:

2TB 7200RPM
480GB OWC SSD
480GB OWC SSD

so you can get 3 Sata drives internally if you really want to in the new iMac. As opposed to 4 in the MP.

I didn't actually state performance wise firewire 800 was anywhere near Sata speeds. Iam talking capacity is available externally.

Actually i believe there is a company offering a eSATA for the new mac's. (OWC)

However 3 internal Sata bays is pretty competitive with 4 don't you think?

As I stated before the MP / iMac i7 argument is really really a close call.
 
dekka007 said:
Well how about 3 drive SATA configuration in the imac i7. Just make the superdrive external:

2TB 7200RPM
480GB OWC SSD
480GB OWC SSD

so you can get 3 Sata drives internally if you really want to in the new iMac. As opposed to 4 in the MP.

I didn't actually state performance wise firewire 800 was anywhere near Sata speeds. Iam talking capacity is available externally.

Actually i believe there is a company offering a eSATA for the new mac's. (OWC)

However 3 internal Sata bays is pretty competitive with 4 don't you think?

As I stated before the MP / iMac i7 argument is really really a close call.
Click to expand...

It is quite a close call for many. And if it is the iMac might be the better option.

Properly configured the MacPro does offer much better performance at tasks that require much performance.

For some, the limitations of the iMac are too much. And having OWC mod the iMac does cost some money as well.

And with the iMac you're spending at least a couple of hundred on a display, if you already have a nice display and don't need a second that's unnecessary.
 
The processor speed difference is actually around 14% according to mac performance, in the real world, I am not quite sure how much that would actually increase your efficiency by.

The Hex does seem the best option, but there is a huge price increase, specially if you need more than 6gig of ram and extra HD's.

Some people might opt out for the 2.93 from the 2009 batch, seems like a nice one.

One thing that I did notice is how substationally cheaper the RAM is, for the Octo compared the Quad.




tomscott1988 said:
Im sorry but you cant compare a firewire 800 drobo to a 4 drive SATA configuration in a mac pro its like a 1/4 the speed! firewire 800 is slow!!!!!!! especially for a professional environment. For back up only.

I dont know why Everyone is pushing you to the 3.2 upgrade it is a waste of money for the speed upgrade you will literally see no benefit from it! the extra £400 you would save could buy you the kick ass monitor you are after! (plus the £400 you are already saving) you arnt future proofing anything by buying the 3.2, its just an ever so slightly faster processor. The only worthwhile processor upgrade in this iteration is the 6 core.

Just look at it this way.. the imac is a consumer machine hence its price. The mac pro is not. Most mac pros outlive their imac equivalents twice over in a professional environment. They will be used until they are literally unusable, and they are designed for this, people get carried away with benchmarks and clock speeds but it is a machine. You will buy it for your need and from what i have read yours is the base machine, put 10gbs ram in it and a decent amount of storage and the thing will keep you going for the long forceable future.

Whereas the imac will be looking very tired in 2-3 years time your pro will still look good. My mac pro the 2008 is still running extremely fast and does all of my professional needs with ease. You need to look at what you need rather than want to make sure it is a sensible monetary decision!

50% of people in these forums buy these machines for bragging rights and thats about it.
Click to expand...
 
gabicava83 said:
The processor speed difference is actually around 14% according to mac performance, in the real world, I am not quite sure how much that would actually increase your efficiency by.

The Hex does seem the best option, but there is a huge price increase, specially if you need more than 6gig of ram and extra HD's.

Some people might opt out for the 2.93 from the 2009 batch, seems like a nice one.

One thing that I did notice is how substationally cheaper the RAM is, for the Octo compared the Quad.
Click to expand...

That 14% is usable in multithreaded applications and 90% are not optimized for this anyway, so under calculation/benchmark maybe but in use there will be no noticeable difference. Also is the 14% worth paying the £320 premium for? you have to think of it in a monetary situation.

I completely agree, apple is screwing everyone over with the quads, they are expensive and the memory configuration is ridiculous. But it is there business model you will have to fork out for expensive memory modules to get the same capability of the 8 core version. Also i agree about the 2009 mac pro if you can get hold of one then get one for the price to performance increase the new iteration is not worth it unless you are getting a serious model like a 6-12 core. A small upgrade for a 18 month wait but also the tech is not available so i think the 2010 is the white elephant (in terms of buying one) in the last 4 years of mac pro development and the next one will be better but just my opinion and sorry if anyone disagrees. But i already have a pro but if i was looking to buy my first pro or was upgrading from the 2006 model i would still buy a 2.93 2009 model best bang for buck.

Seen as tho these projects (from what i have read) are personal and not professional (making money from them) the money situation is a big question its easier if your making 50k a year as a designer. So the 1k more than an imac with a poor screen is a hard one. If i was in that situation i would buy the 2.8 base model with the only upgrade being the 5870. The buy 10gbs ram and with the money saved from not upgrading the processor i would get a high quality 24-27" screen.

Also if we are talking sense even the 2.8s scream, its hard to put into perspective because we are spoilt in terms of processor speed and benchmarks with the new apple hardware. But lets be honest it is not the processors that are the bottleneck in todays computing and these processors at full efficiency can move more than 2gb/s so your better off buying an ssd to deal with the speed of moving data and buy 2 or 3 2tb black drives to deal with storage and you would have a pretty slick system!

Dont get me wrong, i am advising this guy for his situation and he needs to think about money, but in my industry as a graphic designer i would go for a 6 or 12 core but the work and money earned from the machines makes this possible. But also as i said i dont think this is a good iteration to buy into if you already own a mac pro (unless it is a 2006)
 
Student Apple Log In University Of Leeds

Also if you are a student in the uk do you not have a login? my cusin is still a uni student and sent me this link the the Leeds University apple store -

http://store.apple.com/uk_edu_5000709

You can buy the base model pro the 2.8 for £1679

the 3.2 for £1948

I did think when you said about your student discount why it was so expensive! these prices make the pros a very tempting buy. The base model is cheaper than the imac!

you can spec a base 2.8 with the 5870 for £1822

I really hope this helps as it would save you a good £1000 than what you were quoting earlier. Also the parts for upgrade are cheaper. you could get a 6 core for £2485!!!!
 
Hi guys; I stepped away from the vehicle for a few days to gather my thoughts; it was literally causing me sleepless nights. There’s been fantastically helpful and considered advice on this thread, so much so that the better informed I became the harder it was to come down on either side of the argument. :eek:

So THIS IS THE WEEK!!. In terms of my requirements.

Seen as tho these projects (from what i have read) are personal and not professional (making money from them) the money situation is a big question its easier if your making 50k a year as a designer. So the 1k more than an imac with a poor screen is a hard one. If i was in that situation i would buy the 2.8 base model with the only upgrade being the 5870. The buy 10gbs ram and with the money saved from not upgrading the processor i would get a high quality 24-27" screen.
Click to expand...


Just to illuminate you more about what I need from my new machine. Though I will be using this machine for personal projects these projects are intended to further my professional career/life. I’m self employed and My PC is (I’m afraid to say) my life. It’s the first thing I switch on in the morning and it’s on all day, everyday, I’m constantly at my workstation.

Also if we are talking sense even the 2.8s scream, its hard to put into perspective because we are spoilt in terms of processor speed and benchmarks with the new apple hardware
Click to expand...

I dont know why Everyone is pushing you to the 3.2 upgrade it is a waste of money for the speed upgrade you will literally see no benefit from it! the extra £400 you would save could buy you the kick ass monitor you are after! (plus the £400 you are already saving) you arnt future proofing anything by buying the 3.2, its just an ever so slightly faster processor. The only worthwhile processor upgrade in this iteration is the 6 core.
Click to expand...

Just look at it this way.. the imac is a consumer machine hence its price. The mac pro is not. Most mac pros outlive their imac equivalents twice over in a professional environment. They will be used until they are literally unusable, and they are designed for this, people get carried away with benchmarks and clock speeds but it is a machine.
Click to expand...

Because of this I think the Mac Pro option is the safer choice than the quad iMac because it is designed to be a professional machine and the CPU are Intel’s server/commercial chip? As opposed to the i7?

In light of what says TomScott says I was thinking of just going for the base 2.8ghz Quad and instead of spending the extra £300 on the 3.2ghz, spending it on more RAM going to 10GB.

  • I was going to go for the 5870 as well based purely on your advice but if I’m honest I’m ignorant as to the advantages of the 5870? I thought that the 5770 was an upgrade from the 2009 MP?

I want the machine to last me up to 4 years. I feel the iMac will need replacing sooner but thats my feeling as apposed to my knowledge. I understand the desire to get the daddy machine, I’m with it, but stepping away for a few days and thinking about real world application the 2.8ghz quad is still a quick machine (but not as quick as last years 2.9ghz?) and should be good for four years?

So
MP 2.8 ghz, 3GB, + 5780 = £1880
+
NEC Monitor £250
= £2300

iMac 2.93 4GB = £1600

So what do you think chaps? Theres still nearly a grand difference same situation as I was in before but in light of what I’ve written above? you tell me what to do guys and I’ll do it. I WANT THIS OVER!!!!! :confused:

Many many thanks :D
Will

p.s

I have one final question (possibly my most ignorant question as well). The one thing as a PC user I find fantastic is that when ever I need a piece of software like a screengrabber, fonts, file converter, youtube file grabber etc etc I can just type my needs into Google and a number of freeware software downloads pop up. Is it the same for Mac?
 
Will10 said:
I have one final question (possibly my most ignorant question as well). The one thing as a PC user I find fantastic is that when ever I need a piece of software like a screengrabber, fonts, file converter, youtube file grabber etc etc I can just type my needs into Google and a number of freeware software downloads pop up. Is it the same for Mac?
Click to expand...

Versiontracker
 
I just got a Mac pro, after facing the same dilemma as you. It's the first time I've added multiple HDDs and a SSD to any computer - easy peasy, with the SDD cheaper than the one offered for the iMac. You can improve expandability with the iMac, but it's so much hassle compared to the Mac pro that it's not worth it to me.

I paid around £1800 for the Mac pro with trackpad, around £800 for the 27in cinema display (no yellow screen, dead pixels or backlight prob) and around£400 for 2tb drive, 120gb ssd and 4gb extra ram (single stick). The best iMac with apple SSD and 2tb hard drive, but no extra RAM goes for over £2500. So the iMac would have been an inferior system but slightly cheaper.

As a bonus, the HDD in an external enclosure that died 2 years ago worked in the Mac pro. I don't think I'd have bothered doing anything with that HDD if I'd got the iMac. Lazy me I guess
 
Will10 said:
Hi guys; I stepped away from the vehicle for a few days to gather my thoughts; it was literally causing me sleepless nights. There’s been fantastically helpful and considered advice on this thread, so much so that the better informed I became the harder it was to come down on either side of the argument. :eek:

So THIS IS THE WEEK!!. In terms of my requirements.

Just to illuminate you more about what I need from my new machine. Though I will be using this machine for personal projects these projects are intended to further my professional career/life. I’m self employed and My PC is (I’m afraid to say) my life. It’s the first thing I switch on in the morning and it’s on all day, everyday, I’m constantly at my workstation.

snip.....................
Click to expand...

You're now getting a LOT of differing opinions on what to do. My suggestion is to indeed step back and think about what you'll be doing with this machine.

JMO, but none of your intended uses screams out for anything more than either the base or upgraded Quad. Either machine will be more than adequate and the only reason to go for the upgrade is if you want a bit more speed. If you want to be conservative with your funds get the base model with the assumption that you could upgrade the processor in 1-2 years, thereby minimizing your initial investment. The sad fact remains that MOST current SW doesn't take advantage of multicore systems so why pay upfront for HW that will just sit idle ................... for the most part.

Also: Look in your local country refurb store for great deals on these MP's.

regards
JohnG
 
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