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

Mac Pro 2.66 vs. November Penryn Mac Pro

netdog

netdog

macrumors 603
Original poster
Feb 6, 2006
5,760
38
London
I know... Need it? Buy it now! Want it? Wait.

I am in the middle. I am driving a 30" ACD with a MBP 2.33, and using it so much seems to kick the fans on a lot, particularly when viewing/editing video and with these damned flash sites. Anyway, it heats up a lot now and I would like to not push it so hard and let it return to its rightful place as a top end portable.

So if I wait until November to get a Mac Pro, how much better will it be and how much more future proof?

I do some video rendering, and for that I am sure that 8-cores will be great, but I don't do so much that I am left waiting endlessly.

I also use Aperture and CS3 Photoshop a fair amount.

The rest of my work is not really Mac Pro worthy (email, web, iTunes). I am not a gamer.

In either case, I will get Leopard when it comes out, but beyond rendering, how much would waiting for 8 cores benefit me? What about the increased bus speed?

Any and all help appreciated.

FWIW, I'd love to have that Mac Pro now, but I also don't want to buy foolishly if I am so close to a machine that will add a year or two of usable life.
 
We don't know if a new MacPro will come out in November. We are hoping. But don't know. Would be sick for it too as I and 50 others are waiting for it too. Don't know what to say other than Apple better move their a$$. And Leopard and Final Cut Studio 2 utilize all 8-Cores. So that baby would flyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy.
 
If it was me, I wouldn't buy right now, unless you want to buy a refurb. Apple EVENTUALLY has to update the Mac Pro. The fact that we have waited so long suggests that it is waiting on Penryn, and so I hope it will be announced as soon as Penryn ships, but you never know with Apple. My gut tells me that this might be another Apple exclusive intro, at least 2 weeks before Penryn becomes available through other manufacturers.
 
The history of the Mac Pro is filled with hardware design problems at the introduction of major changes in the product line. Why be an early adopter for an expensive machine? Buy now instead of taking a big risk.
 
8 Penryn cores are probably not going to offer you much over 4 Woodcrest cores. Performance wise I would think many current Mac Pro owners wouldn't get much out of an 8 core system. The reason to wait is to "get your moneys worth". Obviously a great many people will get benefit from 8 cores and in the future your computer use might change to take more advantage of 8 cores.
 
Is there a certain amount of RAM that one should have installed per core?
 
Umbongo said:
8 Penryn cores are probably not going to offer you much over 4 Woodcrest cores. Performance wise I would think many current Mac Pro owners wouldn't get much out of an 8 core system. The reason to wait is to "get your moneys worth". Obviously a great many people will get benefit from 8 cores and in the future your computer use might change to take more advantage of 8 cores.
Click to expand...

While I may not need eight cores I figure why not? But also, Maybe Apple will be obliged to still offer a cheaper quad-core system and honestly if the price drop from the eight-core to the quad-core was significant. I think I would go with that option.

Netdog, on RAM, whatever you can throw in. I plan on having 6GB at the moment. Assuming Apple bumps it to 2GB and I would buy 2x2GB.
 
Umbongo said:
8 Penryn cores are probably not going to offer you much over 4 Woodcrest cores. Performance wise I would think many current Mac Pro owners wouldn't get much out of an 8 core system. The reason to wait is to "get your moneys worth". Obviously a great many people will get benefit from 8 cores and in the future your computer use might change to take more advantage of 8 cores.
Click to expand...

8-cores will tremendously increase performance when video editing compared to 4-cores. Nearly a linear performance increase of 100%. Not all tasks but many in the Final Cut Studio 2 suite.
 
Pressure said:
8-cores will tremendously increase performance when video editing compared to 4-cores. Nearly a linear performance increase of 100%. Not all tasks but many in the Final Cut Studio 2 suite.
Click to expand...

Just want it to increase performance in encoding. Plus, I would rather have an 8-Core because I'm sure future programs would do better with it. It would be stupid not to wait, on the editing end.
 
darthraige said:
Just want it to increase performance in encoding. Plus, I would rather have an 8-Core because I'm sure future programs would do better with it. It would be stupid not to wait, on the editing end.
Click to expand...

Encoding performance will be much quicker with 8-cores compared to 4-cores.

But it is granted that the new Mac Pro will be faster than the old one, that's how technology have a way of working.
 
Pressure said:
8-cores will tremendously increase performance when video editing compared to 4-cores. Nearly a linear performance increase of 100%. Not all tasks but many in the Final Cut Studio 2 suite.
Click to expand...

Of course, but without knowing the exact way in someone works and how often and how long they are doing tasks that maximize the processors it is hard to say if 8 cores will offer lifechanging performance for them. In such a case where they aren't taxing the processors for more than a few hours a week and needing a system now, it isn't going to be the end of the world if they buy.

Suneohair mentions he isn't sure if he'd go for 8 or 4 cores if Apple offered a cheaper 4 core system. I'm betting many potential customers would go 4 core as 8 is just overkill (for many) even if it could beneficial used from time to time.
 
Would Apple do something like this for options? Like alternate the options? Or would they just go all Quads?

Two 2.66GHz Dual-Core Intel Penryn

Two 3.16GHz Dual-Core Intel Penryn

Two 2.66GHz Quad-Core Intel Penryn

Two 3.16GHz Quad-Core Intel Penryn
 
Umbongo said:
Of course, but without knowing the exact way in someone works and how often and how long they are doing tasks that maximize the processors it is hard to say if 8 cores will offer lifechanging performance for them. In such a case where they aren't taxing the processors for more than a few hours a week and needing a system now, it isn't going to be the end of the world if they buy.

Suneohair mentions he isn't sure if he'd go for 8 or 4 cores if Apple offered a cheaper 4 core system. I'm betting many potential customers would go 4 core as 8 is just overkill (for many) even if it could beneficial used from time to time.
Click to expand...

It is about value for money. The current Mac Pro is no longer a value. Everything in it is outdated. Penryn will take that further. Buying the current Mac Pro right now IMO is ripping yourself off. Regardless of whether or not you need what the update will bring.

I understand why you used my comment. But I think you took it out of context. If Apple offered only eight-core machines at the same price points. I would buy eight-core.

If they had a quad-core option for say... $500 less. I may entertain it. I think I would still buy the eight-core at that point though. That machine would last a very long time. And if it is at the same price, why not?
 
Penryn is due to be released in 2 months. I think seaburg/stoakley platform improvements are more significant than harpertown chips. I think penryn cpus would be significantly cooler than clovertown. 3ghz harpertown at 80W TDP is awesome. Plus they might use lower latency FBDIMMs.

Plus 1600MHZ FSB versions for HPC platform would also release sometime soon. They might be a better fit for Mac pro with regular harpertowns in xserve.
 
Hi,

I plan to wait for the update, then purchase a current model refurb for a substantial discount.

Best Wishes,

Mithc
 
suneohair said:
It is about value for money. The current Mac Pro is no longer a value. Everything in it is outdated. Penryn will take that further. Buying the current Mac Pro right now IMO is ripping yourself off. Regardless of whether or not you need what the update will bring.

I understand why you used my comment. But I think you took it out of context. If Apple offered only eight-core machines at the same price points. I would buy eight-core.

If they had a quad-core option for say... $500 less. I may entertain it. I think I would still buy the eight-core at that point though. That machine would last a very long time. And if it is at the same price, why not?
Click to expand...
I knew where you were comming from, so sorry if it seems like I was misquoting you . I was really trying to relate back to netdog's original question on whether there will be real regret on not getting an 8 core machine, aside from the whole value for money thing.

darthraige said:
Would Apple do something like this for options? Like alternate the options? Or would they just go all Quads?

Two 2.66GHz Dual-Core Intel Penryn

Two 3.16GHz Dual-Core Intel Penryn

Two 2.66GHz Quad-Core Intel Penryn

Two 3.16GHz Quad-Core Intel Penryn
Click to expand...

The only dual core xeon penryns announced are 3.33GHz and 1.86Ghz @ 1333MHz FSB and a 3.4GHz @ 1600MHz FSB. Which would muddy the line in a way Apple seemed to avoid previously (not offering 8 core that would run slower than 4 core systems).

I would think any Quad core system would be a new item in the Mac range. Making it less likely that there will be any quad core machines for a long while.
 
Buying The Current MP After The New Ones Ship Is The Wrong Move

MitchJi said:
I plan to wait for the update, then purchase a current model refurb for a substantial discount.
Click to expand...
I would say that is a very flawed plan. I have the 2.66 Quad MP now and it is easily hosed just like the Quad G5 is. It will NOT BE WORTH buying once the all 45nm dual quad 8 core line is out with far superior graphics cards and an SS motherboard. You would be very foolish to buy the very old model after the new line ships. I mean you would be - well forget about disparaging words. Better way of putting it is you would REGRET it in about a day of use.
 
I've got a feeling that Multi is right here.

Multi, do you expect that all MPs will be SS motherboards with 8-core Penryns as of November? Given the price points that they new processors are planned to be introduced, should there be a Mac Pro 8-core Penryn at about the price of the current 2.66 quad-core?
 
netdog said:
I've got a feeling that Multi is right here.

Multi, do you expect that all MPs will be SS motherboards with 8-core Penryns as of November? Given the price points that they new processors are planned to be introduced, should there be a Mac Pro 8-core Penryn at about the price of the current 2.66 quad-core?
Click to expand...

There is no reason to think there won't be.

Based on what is currently offered I'd expect either 2.33GHz, 2.83GHz and 3.16GHz @ 1333MHz FSB or 2.8GHz and 3.2GHz @ 1600MHz FSB. Those processors would work in a similar pricing structure to Apple's current one.
 
Mac Pro basically flawless since it's introduction

Actually to the contrary, the Mac Pro has been basically flawless since it's introduction. Sure there might be features that some feel should have been included and Apple should up the minimum RAM that the Mac Pro ships with but overall there have been minimal issues with the Mac Pro since it's introduction.

MK2007 said:
The history of the Mac Pro is filled with hardware design problems at the introduction of major changes in the product line. Why be an early adopter for an expensive machine? Buy now instead of taking a big risk.
Click to expand...
 
Yes. Intel Prices For Quad Harpertown Is Same As For Dual Woodcrest

netdog said:
I've got a feeling that Multi is right here.

Multi, do you expect that all MPs will be SS motherboards with 8-core Penryns as of November? Given the price points that they new processors are planned to be introduced, should there be a Mac Pro 8-core Penryn at about the price of the current 2.66 quad-core?
Click to expand...
Yes. Intel is pricing the opening round of Quad Harpertowns the same as the current price of the Dual Woodcrests. Yes all SS motherboards for certain. Prices stay same - power radically goes UP. Biggest power leap in the line in years. :)
 
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