Remember the price of top end quad-core G5?
Or the cheapest MP (2GHz model 1,1 , which I still have and use...)?
Meaning: there were expensive G5's and inexpensive MP's. Now we have only expensive ones, although RAM has gotten pretty cheap...
I remember the BTO 2Ghz Mac Pro being approximately the same price as the entry level 2Ghz G5 it replaced (£1399) but these days you're looking at £2000+ for the entry level Mac Pro and that was the point I'm making, they've steadily increased the pricing until they're out of reach for a lot of people unless they resort to buying older models used. Given the CPU power of the 2.6Ghz BTO Mac Mini is higher than the current entry level Mac Pro for almost a 3rd of the price, RAM is cheaper, it handles full speed 6Gb/s drives and a lot of options are catered for with Thunderbolt to PCIe solutions, unless you're a gamer or doing GPU intensive graphics work, the Mac Pro at present looks overpriced to say the least.
That's why I opted for the Mac Mini as my first jump to an Intel Mac after years too long with G4.
I'm not a gamer, I don't use any GPU bound graphics software but I do run software synths and fx plug-ins so it's all down to CPU power and Geekbench scores on my Mac Mini are 3563 vs 3714 on the 2Ghz Mac Pro 1,1.
This suggests to me that given it has twice the number of dual CPUs as my system, it wasn't worth entertaining the idea of paying for a used model when for single threaded tasks, the Mac Mini is faster anyway.
Add the fact 8Gb RAM is peanuts for the Mac Mini, it consumes 110 watts vs 950 for the Mac Pro and when I'm in the market for whatever Mac Pro model I end up getting at some stage, I have a tiny, silent little system that easily fits in with my LCD TV setup as a media centre, the decision was simple.
Those early Mac Pro's are looking like giant, power hungry relics these days when even an entry level system like the 2012 Mac Mini or Macbook Air offer twice the raw CPU power of the 2006 models even if you include the 3Ghz version.
Last edited: