Thanks.
Also that for the same money (using Apple's refurbished store for pricing @ $3299USD), the '08 gets you 3.2GHz rather than 2.26GHz on the '09 (both systems Octads).
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.
Geeky Student's questions about timing and whats coming next
- Thread starter Rafalski24
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Also that for the same money (using Apple's refurbished store for pricing @ $3299USD), the '08 gets you 3.2GHz rather than 2.26GHz on the '09 (both systems Octads).
Yeah that is true, but I can get the 09 starting at 2699 because I am a student developer, thus the problem I can get the Mac Pro I want loaded up with ram and the 4870 for under 3000
I didnt' think it would be near that much of a difference. I figured closer to $200USD is all.
The 3.2GHz '08 will out perform the 2.26GHz '09 though. Discount or not, so see what the developer discount is on the 2.93GHz Octad (closest performance wise of the '09's IIRC, not the 2.66GHz model), and see how that compares cost wise. I think the 3.2GHz '08 will win out.
I also edit HD video. RAID0 is a great assist! Unfortunately only a 2-drive RAID0 is not that much of one. For the apps you named and the file types you mentioned I would want at least one the following systems slash configurations:
- 2008 3.2 GHz octad, 32GB RAM, 4-drive RAID0 occupying Bays 2,3,4, and the ODD under-bay, 1 HDD in Bay1 with windows Vista 64 as bootcamp. Use the drive that comes with it as a backup, emergency boot, or sell it. Make sure all HDDs in the system are at least 1TB in size and of most importance is that the platter size is 500GB per-platter. Put the OS, all apps, all caches, and all data on the single 4-drive RAID0 volume. Any of the fast-ish video cards will do.
- 2009 2.93 GHz quad, 16GB RAM, 4-drive RAID0 occupying Bays 2,3,4, and the ODD under-bay, 1 HDD in Bay1 with windows Vista 64 as bootcamp. Use the drive that comes with it as a backup, emergency boot, or sell it. Make sure all HDDs in the system are at least 1TB in size and of most importance is that the platter size is 500GB per-platter. Put the OS, all apps, all caches, and all data on the single 4-drive RAID0 volume. Any of the fast-ish video cards will do.
- 2009 2.26 GHz quad and upgrade on your own to a 3.33 GHz W3580, 16GB RAM, 4-drive RAID0 occupying Bays 2,3,4, and the ODD under-bay, 1 HDD in Bay1 with windows Vista 64 as bootcamp. Use the drive that comes with it as a backup, emergency boot, or sell it. Make sure all HDDs in the system are at least 1TB in size and of most importance is that the platter size is 500GB per-platter. Put the OS, all apps, all caches, and all data on the single 4-drive RAID0 volume. Any of the fast-ish video cards will do.
You should also get a 2 TB (or larger) external HDD for back-ups with any of these systems.
.
Thats what I figure, if they haven't changed anything by the time I actually have the money (just crunched the numbers if my dad helps a little bit I could get it in November, if not then it will be more like March) I will get the 2.26 mostly because its cheaper. I can just hope that they do a spec bump so I can get a little more power!
IIRC, for singlethreaded processes. Multithreaded gets a boost, but it isn't as significant.
Right, but what's being talked about is single threaded decoding of video...
A 2.26 should cut through a multithreaded decoding engine like QuickTime X like buttah...
I too am a student, and my discount doesn't include refurbs.
otherwise I'd have gone with the 2008 dual Xeon as it would have fit within my budget... Still, the Nehalems are nothing to sneeze at...
Yes I am. I've spent hours on a 2009 2.26 with 12GB RAM trying different video formats and resolutions in several applications. 1080p60 is a no-go in terms of smoothness in every major application available for OS X.
You're probably doing SD or Wide or something. 720p60 is also not smooth. 720p24 is smooth though.
Just to clarify I am not working with raw 1080p60 at best it will be HDV and worst it will be 14mbps HD video. So I am thinking the 2.26 will be plenty.
I wouldn't worry about it. In the future, once stuff like FCP is updated with QuickTime X, and all cores kick in for video editing, you'll be fine with 1080p60, if you ever end up working with it.
I have another question, do you think for my purposes I need to get the 4870? would the 120 be ok. I really don't game, will it be that big of a difference when things use GPU processing (like the new flash )
thanks again
) thanks again
I have another question, do you think for my purposes I need to get the 4870? would the 120 be ok. I really don't game, will it be that big of a difference when things use GPU processing (like the new flash
thanks again
Depends...
My work machine has a 120. It works ok, but definitely some of the real time effects or Motion can pretty easily push the card to it's limit.
At home I have an 8800 and it usually doesn't have the same sort of issues.
Really it entirely depends on how much video work you're doing.
I agree. The difference between cards is mostly the 3D acceleration and the memory size. Memory isn't important to video much and neither is 3D. Except for app like D'Fusion, AE, and Motion in their 3D modes.