hey guys I'm wondering which configuration would be more beneficial. I've found a 2.8 ghz early 2008 model with 8gb or ram and a crappy gpu that I would upgrade ifapple releases a new card with the new mac pros next year. The other option would be the current base mac pro new and replace the gpu later as well. Thanks in advance
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.
Early 2008 2.8 quad or current base model
- Thread starter Tony5787
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That is a question of price and what software you use. The 2008 is easier and much cheaper to uograde if you want to go to an Octad.
The 2009 model has massiv bandwidth advantage if you want to run multicore apps at the highest performance. But then you would probably be better there with a 2008 octad upgrade again if you would spend that money.
In terms of graphic cards they are both basically fit for all newer cards.
The 2009 model has massiv bandwidth advantage if you want to run multicore apps at the highest performance. But then you would probably be better there with a 2008 octad upgrade again if you would spend that money.
In terms of graphic cards they are both basically fit for all newer cards.
The 2008 quad can be easily upgraded by just adding another 2,8 GHz Xeon E5462 CPU and the second heat sink. There are good step by step instructions available. Just google or search here.
@gugucom
i was thinking of getting a 3.2 octad 08 on he refurb store .. kinda expensive at 3299 .. or is it better just to hold out for a 12 core ? mainly going to be using fc studio .. but nothing super intensive as currently im a film student but i would like to start doing side projects
i was thinking of getting a 3.2 octad 08 on he refurb store .. kinda expensive at 3299 .. or is it better just to hold out for a 12 core ? mainly going to be using fc studio .. but nothing super intensive as currently im a film student but i would like to start doing side projects
If your time is important for you and you have the funds for a 2010 MP it will certainly set new benchmarks in rendering and video editing. That machine will have almost 50% more multi core power and the memory bandwidth to cope with that. The only risk is Apple screwing up the 1600 MHz memory by setting the multiplier lower as they did with the 2009 Nehalems.
If you are a typical student and have more time than budget the 3,2 GHz MP3,1 will certainly be the better deal. But if your side projects pay your machine a 3 GHz dual socket Xeon 5600 machine would give me a hard on.
This URL shows an explosion chart of a 2008 Mac Pro with all parts numbers.
http://www.applepalace.com/apple-mac/apple-parts/mac-pro-parts/mac-pro-early-2008/index.asp
Google "076-1303 Apple" for suppliers. The heat sink should be something between 150-200$. It is ridiculous but thats the way it is. Perhaps you get the part cheaper from your AASP.
Given the fact you're a student, the '08 3.2GHz would make better sense IMO, and you can get it now. It'll be cheaper too, and the savings can be used towards upgrades, as you'd want to add memory, and possibly a RAID of some sort in order to address the bottlenecks that exist in any of the systems in base configurations (and most CTO's too).
These machines are actually much easier to use a 3rd party RAID card with the internal HDD bays (no specialty adapters needed, as is with the '09 systems, and will almost certainly follow in the 2010 models, possibly longer).
It's no slouch, and you can always sell it off in a couple of years and go with the latest model (assuming there is one
). But the upgrades can work wonders for your throughputs.Think of it this way: No matter how many cores you have, you still have to feed them with data. That means an adequate amount of RAM, and HDD/SDD system to feed that.
I am also a hardware junkie .. so in the pc world i always had the latest and greatest .. because you can upgrade ram, cpu, mobo .. this is my first time buying a complete system besides my laptop ..
im just worried the rumor'd update to fcp will come out shortly after the new mac pros and they will use all the cores .. also .. will the 08s be able to use the latest gfx cards like the 2010 will ?? if the 2010s come with bluray .. will it be able to put on the 08s ?
im just worried the rumor'd update to fcp will come out shortly after the new mac pros and they will use all the cores .. also .. will the 08s be able to use the latest gfx cards like the 2010 will ?? if the 2010s come with bluray .. will it be able to put on the 08s ?
You can sometimes do better if you don't mind buying from eBay and have a bit of patience. I got a new one for $80 shipped.
While the '08 may be easier (and admittedly more pleasant) to work with, Apple has shown in the past their almost nonexistent interest to support even slightly aged hardware. Just look at what we had to go through to get them to crank out a legacy 8800 GT.
It contains EFI64 though, and wouldn't be subject to the same issues. Assuming Apple doesn't find a way to futz with the firmware (i.e. locate and use another standard to proprietarize), EFI64 will be around awhile. So will K64.
So hardware, such as graphics cards will be able to work properly. Perhaps changes to the power specifications could create difficulties (i.e. all cards go to 8 pin PCIe power connectors, and the boards can't handle the current). But there would still be options to get around it, such as a separate PSU used for graphics cards. Other items set for Mac, particularly EFI boot capable, would work (BIOS too, if used via drivers in OS X or to boot in Windows). OS X will continue to be updatable for a few years I'd think (longer than has recently been supported). I don't see an immediate need to go 128 bit just yet, particularly for a workstation system (client edition).
Servers are another story, especially in the direction Intel wants to go with enterprise chips (i.e. 80 core Proof of Concept chip called Tera-Scale, and Bangalore, a 48 core chip design just unveiled). Think clusters/cloud computing, which would need a massive amount of RAM for that many cores.
But not likely for home use. Unless they've money to burn, and are rather nutz.