Anyone Ordered a 3.2 Ghz yet?

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by macpants, Jan 16, 2008.

  1. macpants macrumors member

    Jan 16, 2008
    Just wondered if anyone has ordered a 3.2 GHz MacPro yet? I am reading a lot of posts regarding the benefits of a 3.0 over a 2.8 and vice versa.

    I have found nothing on the subject of the 3.2. This is a bit worrying as I have just ordered a 3.2 with an Nvidia 8800GT video card. Now this is a huge amount of money for me but I love Macs (I already have a G5 Dual 2.0 and a 2.4Ghz MacBook Pro!). I also want a machine that will be good for some years to come.

    Can anyone tell me if I made the right decision or, apart from the cost, is there a valid reason to choose the slightly slower processors?

    I still have plenty of time to change my order if one or other of the available models is going to be better.

    I will mainly be using Aperture, Photoshop and Final Cut for HD editing.

    Thanks for any advice.
  2. junior77 macrumors regular

    Jun 29, 2007
    The 3.2GHz is faster, but it does cost substatianally more. Other than potentially wasting money, there's no reason not to get the 3.2GHz...
  3. newtech macrumors 6502

    Jun 2, 2007
    3.2 would make sense if you dedicated it for rendering, Folding@home or SETI@home. All applications that are highly processor intensive, other than that the extra 7% speed is of little benefit.
  4. Madhawk macrumors regular


    Mar 7, 2007
    It's hard to say now how much 0.2 Ghz will make a difference. We will have to wait for the reviews to find out.

    Since you will be using Final Cut for HD editing, I am sure the extra 0.2 Ghz will help in the long run, especially when rendering. :apple:

    If I had the money I would also buy the 3.2 Ghz, instead I will go for the 3.0 Ghz and the 8800GT upgrade. :)
  5. Graphis macrumors member

    Nov 23, 2007
    Yeah, I went for the 3.2GHz, with the 8800 too. And a 30" ACD, and a new printer:) Ordered today.

    I asked in another thread about the difference between the 3.0 and 3.2. The general feeling was that the 3.0 was good value for money, while the 3.2 wasn't worth the extra cost for the 0.2, UNLESS you were doing something like 3D rendering (which I am), or some other intensive and time-consuming task, and even then the time gains wouldn't amount to much.

    I was swayed to getting the 3.0, but then my wife offered to chip in the extra, so I went for it. I think it's the right decision. If we had got the 3.0, even if we were perfectly happy with it, we'd still be wondering for the next 3-4 years (or longer) if that 0.2 extra would have made a difference to our work:D

    I think the reason little is being written about the 3.2 yet is simply because for most people it's out of their price range as well as their needs range.
  6. big dainjerus macrumors regular

    Nov 9, 2007
    Funny I speculate saying the same thing if I get the 2.8 as opposed to the 3.0...what if....
  7. macpants thread starter macrumors member

    Jan 16, 2008
    Yes, I agree with most of these posts. I decided to go the extra bit because I too would always be wondering whether the extra tiny bit is worth it. Oh well, it's kinda done now.

    Thanks for all your responses:apple:
  8. kittiyut macrumors regular


    Oct 28, 2007
    Ordered the 8 core 3.2, RAID, FX5600 - which pushed the ship date out to
    the 20th of Feb :mad:
  9. Outsiderdude26 macrumors regular

    Jul 29, 2005
    New England
    I ordered the 3.2GHz. It'll be here on friday. I'll order the 8800 when they are in stock.

Share This Page