iMac early 2008 v.s. Mac Pro early 2006

Discussion in 'iMac' started by woeiskevin, Jun 26, 2012.

  1. woeiskevin macrumors member

    woeiskevin

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2011
    Location:
    Maryland
    #1
    Hi everyone

    I am looking in to getting a desktop mac and so far i see two thats catching my eye's

    One is a iMac 20-inch 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo Early 2008 with 500GB HDD and a HD 2400 XT with 128MB

    Or

    A Mac Pro 2x 2.66GHz Dual-Core (4 Cores) Xeon 5150 Early 2006 with 250GB HDD and a 7300 GT with 256MB

    Which one should i choose???
     
  2. tears2040 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2010
    #2
    Neither, get a newest version of each one if you want it. No point in going back to such old technology UNLESS, you are getting it for very very cheap.
     
  3. woeiskevin thread starter macrumors member

    woeiskevin

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2011
    Location:
    Maryland
    #3
    Both are $650.00
     
  4. utahman130 macrumors 6502a

    utahman130

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2012
    #4

    Go with the Mac Pro for sure! More power, and buy a great display to g along with it, and you have got a fantastic computer!
     
  5. woeiskevin thread starter macrumors member

    woeiskevin

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2011
    Location:
    Maryland
    #5
    I been really thinking bout the mac pro just wasn't fully sure.And it'll be going on my 32 inch sony tv ;)
     
  6. utahman130 macrumors 6502a

    utahman130

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2012
    #6
    Nice! Now that's a good monitor!
     
  7. woeiskevin thread starter macrumors member

    woeiskevin

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2011
    Location:
    Maryland
    #7
    Yea defiantly!. But do you know what graphic card would be good to upgrade too?
     
  8. utahman130 macrumors 6502a

    utahman130

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2012
    #8
    The Mac Pro comes with the ATI Radeon HD 5770 with 1GB of GDDR5 memory standard, which is great, but if you must upgrade, you can upgrade to the ATI Radeon HD 5870 with 1GB of GDDR5 memory, which is 70% faster, but unless you are doing heavy stuff, stick with the base.

    From Mac Pro product page
     
  9. Buffsteria macrumors regular

    Buffsteria

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2012
    #9
    This is the fifth time in two days I see someone typing "defiantly" when they mean "definitely". We might be witnessing a quiet change in language, much like English changed when it came to America.
     
  10. woeiskevin thread starter macrumors member

    woeiskevin

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2011
    Location:
    Maryland
    #10
    Ok cool i may just stick with the ATI Radeon HD 5770 since i've heard good things about it

    ----------

    Ok one typo big whop!:confused:
     
  11. Buffsteria macrumors regular

    Buffsteria

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2012
    #11
    I didn't say it just because you made a typo, I said it because I'm seeing that same mistake a lot. Did your spellchecker change what you originally typed, or was that really how you thought it was meant to be?

    And it's "whoop".
     
  12. woeiskevin thread starter macrumors member

    woeiskevin

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2011
    Location:
    Maryland
    #12
    Spellchecker said it
     
  13. AcesHigh87 macrumors 6502a

    AcesHigh87

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2009
    Location:
    New Brunswick, Canada
    #13
    Could you be more specific about what you want the computer to do? Both computers are rather old and will have a tough time handling a heavy workload but if you just want it for everyday web browsing they will both be fine.

    With the said the Mac Pro is a more powerful machine in basically all regards and you can upgrade whatever you want in it (RAM, HDD, etc) with ease compared to the iMac. With that said, however, even older the Mac Pro probably costs more and you'd likely want to pop at least a new HDD in it adding more to the cost.

    If all you want it for is web browsing and stuff the iMac will be more than enough. It's basically the same as my macbook but better GPU and bigger HDD. My macbook runs perfectly fine for everyday use and only really stalls up when I try to run something more intensive.

    Just keep in mind that both of these are older computers and will not be as fast as new macs by any stretch of the imagination. As I stated, it all depends what you expect out of it.
     
  14. Bug-Creator macrumors 6502

    Bug-Creator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Location:
    Germany
    #14
    For that price (or little more) I would expect a 2009 or even 2010 model (or if it's 2008 something more than the base model).

    The MacPro might sound good but you might be left behind when Apple releases Mountain-Lion next month (which should work on a 2008 iMac).
     
  15. Neodym macrumors 65816

    Neodym

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2002
    #15
    Speed: The 2006 Mac Pro 2.66 is about as fast as a 2011 MacBook Air. With an inexpensive CPU upgrade (e.g. x5355) you can transform it into an 8-core machine roughly comparable to the performance of a 2011 iMac (provided the software is multi-core aware).

    OSX 10.8 Mountain Lion: While not officially supported on a 2006 MP by Apple anymore, ML is actually running flawlessly on a 1,1 if booted in "Legacy Mode" (Chameleon-type bootloader). Kind of using it as the most compatible Hackintosh you could ever get. Will probably run ML much smoother than an old 2008 iMac... Apart from that SnowLeopard is a well refined alternative on the MP and for people wanting iCloud support Lion is officially supported as well.

    Graphic Card: While the 5770 is running fine in the 1,1 (despite Apple officially only claiming compatibility for later Mac Pro revisions), the Apple variant is a bit expensive and a PC 6870 is a good (and cheaper) alternative and supported natively with OSX 10.6.8 or later (without flashing). Performance is close to the 5870, power consumption and heat dissipation a fair amount lower.
    Issues on a 1,1: No boot screen (mitigated by a second compatible card) and neither original Apple DVD player nor Steam games are working (mitigation: ATY_Init.kext).

    Price: No way a 2009/2010 Mac Pro would currently be available under $1000!

    iMac vs MacPro:
    • Mac Pro allows easy upgrading of all major components, the iMac does not.
    • Mac Pro does still handle most of today's tasks (except for very demanding video or photo work and scientific calculations) very fine, the iMac not so well (and if so, it probably runs hotter and thus louder).
    • MacPro needs more space (under the desk) than the iMac.
    • MacPro allows for bigger and multiple external monitors.
    • Under idle or low load conditions the iMac is nearly inaudible, where the MacPro has a quiet, but noticeable ambient noise. Under high(er) load that is reversed and the MP stays much quieter than the iMac.
    • Ram is more expensive for the Mac Pro than for the iMac. How much Ram would come with the MacPro in question? 4-8 GB Ram is recommended (especially with Mountain Lion). The early 2008 iMac is limited to 6GB Ram (officially only 4GB).

    Conclusion: When asked to choose between the two computers mentioned, i would take the MacPro without thinking twice - especially as both cost the same and the OP having a 32" TV as monitor would take the additional expense for a monitor on the MacPro out of the equation.
     
  16. jdavtz macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2005
    Location:
    Kenya
    #16
    Up until now, have you tried using the TV as a monitor?

    I imagine that a resolution of 1080x1920 on 32" will be quite uncomfortable for viewing at less than about 6 feet. It's only 69ppi. And at 6ft you may not be able to read the text well.

    ----------

    What makes you say that?
     
  17. thekev macrumors 604

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #17
    I don't think either is a great idea if a lot will be spent on upgrades. Much of the time once you're done with upgrades, you hit a point where you could have just purchased a newer model. It's also important to remember that you don't have any kind of warranty for things like logic board issues. In the case of the imac, that just seems way overpriced. You can sometimes find a 2009 mac pro for around $1200. If you looked hard enough you might find a 2008 8 core for $1000.
     

Share This Page