Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
8 cores? are you kidding?
- Thread starter neverownedapc
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You can never have too much power when it comes to computers...
You can never have too much power!
Eek! Norton gives me kernel panics! That's one of the two kernel panics I've ever had! (The other one was from a USB 3G modem... I unplugged it while it's disconnecting. Just a tad bit too soon.
)What are you a communist? I can afford a Mac Pro, I do not need to justify my purchase to you.
Learn a valuable skill set, invest your money wisely, live a life with positive cashflow,a net positive worth and you can get yourself a Mac Pro guilt free and without breaking a sweat.
Lets keep the forums a communist free zone
What are you a communist? I can afford a Mac Pro, I do not need to justify my purchase to you.
Learn a valuable skill set, invest your money wisely, live a life with positive cashflow,a net positive worth and you can get yourself a Mac Pro guilt free and without breaking a sweat.
Lets keep the forums a communist free zone
I'm not a communist either, that's why I have the freedom to make fun of people that buy into the marketing hype.
I can see how an octo-core Mac Pro can be useful in the movie business--- try making a video in iMovie with a bunch of effects and what not on a Mac Mini Core Solo and then try on a C2D iMac - huge difference in the encoding speed.
For your average Joe, the difference between the two machines won't be noticed, but with certain apps and certain users, the demand for such machines is clearly there.
Apple is innovating and with Grand Central next year on Snow Leopard, the cores will be better utilized.
Truthfully, it's hard for you to imagine how it could be useful because you don't need it. There are tons of technologies that we couldn't even imagine being useful or existing - but then companies like Apple released them - and suddenly a need is created. Take the cell phone for example - how did we live before cell phones? Just fine. But once it was created (by I forget who...), a need was created.
For your average Joe, the difference between the two machines won't be noticed, but with certain apps and certain users, the demand for such machines is clearly there.
Apple is innovating and with Grand Central next year on Snow Leopard, the cores will be better utilized.
Truthfully, it's hard for you to imagine how it could be useful because you don't need it. There are tons of technologies that we couldn't even imagine being useful or existing - but then companies like Apple released them - and suddenly a need is created. Take the cell phone for example - how did we live before cell phones? Just fine. But once it was created (by I forget who...), a need was created.
Its also quite encouraging that people buy top end products, regardless of what their needs - it tends to fund an encourange new reasearch towards new product development. One of the issues with the EEE pc movement a relax in the push for technological advancement.
Personally a mac pro would be usefull for CAD and rendering.
Personally a mac pro would be usefull for CAD and rendering.
Wanted to point that out but it wouldn't let me edit the post. Since when does the hard drive bottleneck the system? That's ridiculous. 95%+ of apps don't rely on serious HDD speed.... what you're talking about does, but once you get your head above water (adding more HDDs in RAID 0), it's a total non-issue.
And people complaining about bus speed... it's the memory bandwidth that gets in the way first and foremost.... ECC FBDIMMs are not helping matters. . . quad channel or not.. =/
Ha. You obviously have never had a bad harddrive before. I've seen systems that wont get past POST because of a toasted disk. They are your worst enemy when they go bad. In terms of it being a generic bottleneck, its about app and data load times. Moving from a 5400 rpm disk to a 7200 rpm disk you can often FEEL the difference, same with going from ide to sata.
I'm not a communist either, that's why I have the freedom to make fun of people that buy into the marketing hype.
Then I guess your computer processor is the 8088 and you run on DOS 3.3; since you never fell under the spell of advert hype.
did i mention i am using an 8 year old g4 that has a 1.4g single processor by sonnet? and the internet doesn't have any obstacle that i can't overcome. i even run some very large recording/audio software on it as well. 3 hard drives, only a 1g of ram, blah, blah, blah. if you own a very expensive machine, congrats, just remember i could of AFFORDED one, but i chose not to.
with that aside, the only reason i just picked up a mbp is for new interests and "NEWER" programs which require it.
and to that guy that drives an accent yet owns a very expensive mac, and to everyone else,...................the price of gas is to be blamed on all these people with the need for oversized vehicles who excessively used and wasted gasoline. you my friend, will not be blamed for that. but, will the same sorta pc/mac trends ever effect the internet due to such massive data being transfered? will it one day cost $150 a month for a basic connection to the internet?
with that aside, the only reason i just picked up a mbp is for new interests and "NEWER" programs which require it.
and to that guy that drives an accent yet owns a very expensive mac, and to everyone else,...................the price of gas is to be blamed on all these people with the need for oversized vehicles who excessively used and wasted gasoline. you my friend, will not be blamed for that. but, will the same sorta pc/mac trends ever effect the internet due to such massive data being transfered? will it one day cost $150 a month for a basic connection to the internet?
It already has, back when 9800 baud was as fast as it got.
Even if the telecoms get their way and all websites are subscription-based, we won't hit $150 for dial-up again.
And about subscription-based Internet... they can go stuff it.
Lol.. you're right, I haven't specifically had a bad hard drive (other than one that came in a system that was already dying from eBay, but that was in a Mac, not a PC, so no POSTing)
I have had misjumpered drives, though, which can cause the same problem. However, that's kind of not related at all. You could say the same exact thing about a misseated (or bad) video card.. or actually, really any part. Misseated RAM would cause the sad mac.
And yes, I'm well aware that moving from a 5400 RPM to a 7200 RPM drive can make a big difference... particularly when coupled with a higher areal density. Of course, I'm also aware there's no tangible performance difference between ATA/133 and SATA (or SATA II) just yet. Yes, there are drives that saturate the ATA/133 interface (barely, and that's only because of ATA overhead), and almost the SATA I, but only just, you'd never notice.
Either way, I was talking about application performance when it was up and running, which is what takes up most of our time, is it not? It doesn't take four hours to open Final Cut Pro, but doing a huge project on a single-core might.
Have you reached the corner or are you actually serious? If you have no valid arguments back then I would understand what you said above but if you are serious then I have to say that you chose the wrong forum. Yes, most people don't need the power of MP but they buy it because they know that the computer won't need an update for a LONG time. It's the value they'll get for their money. Not to mention, that others DO NEED it and that is the reason why they buy it. It is not CALLED "PRO" for nothing. Also, Apple has been supported by "pros" for a long time and if it wasn't for them then maybe there would be no Apple as those people held Apple above the water when in crisis. Let's just not get into the discussion of "what if" but lets just stay on the topic.
Let me ask you simple question?
When you created this topic, what was your intention? Were you hoping that people would join you and say how ridiculous it is to have 8 cores or were you just seeking attention no matter if positive or negative? We all know that the future is in cores and not GHz so that also undermines your argument. The fact that you chose not to buy a powerful machine again makes no sense as there is a lot of people who do need it. Coming to MR that is mostly filled up with people that actually use computer more than average joe also suggests that you will not succeed with your "8 cores? are you kidding?" thread.
So, what were you trying to get out of this?
Real world SATA transfer rate = ~60 MB/s
60 MB/s * 60 sec/min * 2 min = 7.2 GB
Most smartly compressed (read: H.264) 1080p movies top out around 9 GB at most.
Right now, converting a movie using all the 'good stuff' of H.264 takes about 8-10x as long as the length of the actual movies (10-15 hours if I'm lucky) on a 2.16 ghz MBP. By the time we can do 1080p in a couple minutes, I'm sure we'll have faster drive interfaces.
By the time we can do 1080p in a couple of minutes, we'll be lamenting how it takes 10 hours to encode a 4320p movie at high-quality settings with HandBrake XII version 80.3 and how much faster it would be if solid state holographic nanostorage wasn't so damned expensive.
I spent $1699+17" Studio Display in 2001 so I would be able to keep the same computer without having to upgrade. Contrast that to friends who bought iMacs who have had to upgrade every 2 or 3 years to keep doing basic things, which also get more processor intensive as the years go on.
$2800 and 8 years of heavy use vs $1500 every 2-3? The iMac user spends $4500, I'm $1700 ahead of him because I bought the more expensive machine up front.
Did I need the full power of the G4 then? No. Do I need it now to keep up with minimum spec? Yes.
$2800 and 8 years of heavy use vs $1500 every 2-3? The iMac user spends $4500, I'm $1700 ahead of him because I bought the more expensive machine up front.
Did I need the full power of the G4 then? No. Do I need it now to keep up with minimum spec? Yes.
Yeah, but you could also do the same thing with a Mac mini every two years for $599 and still come out ahead of spending $2500 up front.
By all means do that, and have fun playing games in bootcamp with that X3100 - If it ever updates to that! Also have fun ripping and encoding songs and movies. You do that during your work week, I'll do it overnight.
Sure wish I'd been cheap and spent $600 on a mini! Silly me!
Sure wish I'd been cheap and spent $600 on a mini! Silly me!
By all means do that, and have fun playing games in bootcamp with that X3100 - If it ever updates to that! Also have fun ripping and encoding songs and movies. You do that during your work week, I'll do it overnight.
Sure wish I'd been cheap and spent $600 on a mini! Silly me!
Ya, I spent 700 on my g5. Hands down better solution then any mini.
I'll stick with the quad core that I built for awhile.
Laptops haven't progressed enough to entice me to get a new one.
Laptops haven't progressed enough to entice me to get a new one.
By all means do that, and have fun playing games in bootcamp with that X3100 - If it ever updates to that! Also have fun ripping and encoding songs and movies. You do that during your work week, I'll do it overnight.
Sure wish I'd been cheap and spent $600 on a mini! Silly me!
Before I got my Mac Pro, I had spent two weeks ripping the first four seasons of the X-Files boxsets. Today, I spent the day, barely three hours of it anyways, ripping season five.
This time saved in ripping DVDs is the biggest reason I got my Mac Pro which is a good enough reason to begin with since, that is the purpose of a 8 core, to save time doing things quicker.
Now, I gotta go do the remaining four box sets. I can get them done by tomorrow.
Oh and it wasn't till I got my first dual core HP laptop in December of 06 that I realized the benefit of multi cores. I had been using a P4 3.0GHZ laptop converting YouTube videos to MPG. It would take minutes on the P4 depending upon the size. When I bought the dual core HP, it took litterally seconds. The first time, it converted so fast that I thought something made my program not convert the video at all but there it was.
Yes multi core is the future and soon dual core will be replaced by quad and octo cores as the norm in future computers. It's all about speed and getting things done quickly no matter what that might be.
just making sure i'm not at another mac site that has a whole bunch that are here just because they bought one and spent as much as possible in doing that.
i'm glad things are speeding up. i'm glad to see macs stomp the **** out of the pc platform. i'm glad that my school system from growing up was, and still is an apple supporter. i'm glad i made a good decision when i bought my first one. i'm just not glad that people are out to rob people and make things out of date within a year, that's my only problem. yea, i know it's business, but this is treason against every man, woman and child.
i'm glad things are speeding up. i'm glad to see macs stomp the **** out of the pc platform. i'm glad that my school system from growing up was, and still is an apple supporter. i'm glad i made a good decision when i bought my first one. i'm just not glad that people are out to rob people and make things out of date within a year, that's my only problem. yea, i know it's business, but this is treason against every man, woman and child.
At WWDC I always made sure to grab an 8 core box in the labs for a reason... compiles way faster.
Measured by "time xcodebuild", not by error-prone human eyes
Measured by "time xcodebuild", not by error-prone human eyes