Is this a good deal on Mac Pro

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by HyperX13, Sep 18, 2009.

  1. HyperX13 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2009
    #1
    So I found, what I think, is a good deal on a 2008 Mac Pro (new). I specifically do not want the 2009 Mac Pro because of the issues outlined on this board, and do not want to wait till the 2010 model. So here are the specs:

    Two Quad-Core 3.2GHz Intel Xeon processors, 4GB RAM, ATI Radeon HD 2600 XT with 256MB memory, 500GB HD, 16x double-layer SuperDrive, OS X 10.5 Leopard

    Out the door price is $3900.

    Does this seems reasonable? Would you do this? I will be giving my 2006 Mac Pro to my wife, and I already have the ATI 4870 video card as well as a SSD drive that will be going in there.
     
  2. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #2
  3. HyperX13 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2009
    #3
    Do you think refurbished is as good as new? Pretty much the same thing right? Thanks for the link!
     
  4. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #4
    Refurbs are almost better than new ones. They have been individually tested and has full one year warranty as new ones. Definitely get the refurb, it's basically new, someone has just booted it few times
     
  5. Akitakoi macrumors regular

    Akitakoi

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2008
    #5
    So whats wrong with the 2009 Models? I just bought an Octo.:confused:
     
  6. HyperX13 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2009
    #6
    The consensus on the board (and I quote a member (nanofrog) here)

    You may be more fortunate than you realize.

    * Does well with hardware based RAID (no adapters needed to use the HDD bays)

    * Doesn't have the ICH10R bottleneck that's in the '09's, that's particularly applicable to SSD's in RAID, or even 6x fast HDD's. Limit = 660MB/s from the information out there, and is acknowledged by Intel.

    * Additional SATA ports available ('09's have no PATA interface for optical drives, so one of them <6 total> gets used for the Superdrive)

    * Uses EFI64 firmware, so you can still opt for future upgrades for graphics cards & will allow you to continue to use future versions of OS X in full 64bit

    * Upgrades are cheap, even 800MHz FB-DIMM ATM
     
  7. Bartman01 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2008
    #7
    Price to value compared to previous years. The hardware feature set was better on the 2008 models and the cost of the machine compared to the cost of the processors inside was lower. The differential between raw processor cost and machine cost almost doubled compared with prior years.

    Personally, the base 8 core should have the 2.66 and the 2.66 quad core should be $500 (or more) cheaper. I need a new machine and have the money together, but I just can't get myself to spend it on a 2009 Mac Pro when looking at how much more I can get for the same $$ for a quality PC or when looking at how much more for the money the 2008 Mac Pros were.
     
  8. Umbongo macrumors 601

    Umbongo

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Location:
    England
    #8
    Right, the refurb 3.2GHz systems are probably not even customer returns. They are the old 3.2GHz $5,000 systems that were sold in stores. Though I doubt they sold many of them, hence being on refurb stores around the world 6 months after being replaced.
     
  9. bearcatrp macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Location:
    Boon Docks USA
    #9
    I just built a 8 core pc for around 1400 bucks. Heck of allot cheaper than what apple charges. Only use it for crunching. If apple keeps jacking the mac pro prices up, my current mac pro will be my last. I love the OS but getting to expensive staying on a mac. If I could video edit under Linux as easy as I could with apple, I would switch in a heart beat. If you don't need the OS and apps under apple, build your own and save some cash.
     
  10. alphaod macrumors Core

    alphaod

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2008
    Location:
    NYC
    #10
    I'm curious to know what parts you used to build said 8-core machine for $1400 because I'd love to build the same.
     
  11. yanquis macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2009
    #11
    im waiting for an '10 model as well, should i decide to spend the extra $$ on a mac. right now i think their entire lineup should be avoided. -way- behind PCs in terms of power -- laptops & mac pro's are just an inexcusable ripoff right now. hopefully that will change with the next rollouts because i would like to switch to mac but it has to be at least somewhat rational to do so.
     
  12. alphaod macrumors Core

    alphaod

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2008
    Location:
    NYC
    #12
    How is the Mac Pro behind other computers in terms of power?
     
  13. yanquis macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2009
    #13
    afaik the best graphics card you can get for it is a GTX 285. which is plenty, of course, but its not much better than what i currently have on my PC (stock model from HP bought in the spring). and based on what ive read here its apparently got some kinks to go wtih it as apple doesnt really support it. the stock graphics cards are pathetic imo, if youre into gaming, & thats ridiculous, as a mac pro should be able to handle anything you throw at it full tilt. thats sort of its entire reason for being. you shouldnt need a separate dedicated PC, or have to tangle with installing a new graphics card yourself & dealing with the problems doing that on a mac can cause.

    the processing is nice but not elite now (or even at the time of release, possibly). 8 cores @ 2.93 ghz is blazingly fast, but with a PC you can get 2xw5590s @ 3.33 ghz. thats basically equivalent to an extra core+ on the elite model mac pro's. i would guess that you can get this PC built for you for about the same as youd pay for a top level octa mac w/ gtx 285 upgrade.

    hopefully the next iteration will resolve this, if they upgrade to nehalem EX and/or gulftown, & do a significant upgrade on the graphics cards (ie instead of 'just enough', maybe even at least give the consumer the option to go so far as...'more than enough'? or is that too revolutionary?) then mac pro will be my machine of choice...assuming it doesnt cost 10K or something, which of course is the issue.
     
  14. HyperX13 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2009
    #14
    My windows machine is a dual boot and I use Ubuntu quite a bit. I like Linux, but it's still not polished like OSX. Installing a simple app requires way too many steps (I am talking apps that are not part of the Ubuntu Installer). Also, I find Linux inconsistent. One day it boots in 25 seconds, the next in 45 seconds. Also, when I update my Ubuntu, it seems to break all the apps that were installed manually.

    I think Apple will be forced to cut prices of Mac Pros. At least I hope.
     
  15. bobpensik macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2003
    Location:
    Calgary, AB
    #15
    I completely agree

    I bought my Mac Prop as a refurb and the only difference from a brand new machine (as I could tell) was that it came in a non-branded brown box, it was pristine as new could be.
     
  16. bearcatrp macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Location:
    Boon Docks USA
    #16
    ASUS DSBV-DX Dual LGA 771 Intel 5000V SSI CEB 1.1 Dual Intel Xeon Server Motherboard - Retail 239.00
    Dynatron H6EG 60mm 2 Ball CPU Cooler - Retail 39.99
    FSP Group FSP600-80GHN 600W Single Server Power Supply - OEM 85.99
    Thermaltake Xaser VI VG4000BNSB Black Aluminum ATX Full
    Tower Computer Case - Retail $164.00
    2 Xeon E5420 2.5ghz (used from ebay) $450.00
    4GB ram I think 150.00
    OS win7 (RC1) Free beta

    Using the built in graphics since I just crunch with this.
     
  17. frimple macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2008
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    #17
    With the 1366 mobos in the spot light old 2x771's are running out the door. I haven't done any searching on flea-bay but I suspect that 54xx xeon's are also plentiful.
     
  18. Nadav35 macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    #18
    3.0ghz 2008 mac pro

    Hi, I wanted to know what the actual speed difference/performance difference would be between the 3.0ghz 2008 mac pro which I have, compared to the 3.2 on Apple's website?





     
  19. UltraNEO* macrumors 601

    UltraNEO*

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2007
    Location:
    近畿日本
    #19
    I bet it's not dual, Quad Core Xeon 5500's. Those chips are fairly expensive, actually buying them from Apple is only $10 cheaper!
     
  20. nanofrog macrumors G4

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    #20
    The cores alone, get a 10.67% speed increase.

    Unfortunately, it won't be that in the real world, unless the process is CPU bound only, as bottlenecks in the system will slow you down (memory and drive throuputs for example).

    So it ends up boiling down to your usage pattern. :eek: Sorry I can't give you more here, but it's just so varied.

    He's looking at LGA771 parts, not LGA1366 parts. :eek: :p
     
  21. Nadav35 macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    #21
    Ok..

    Ok, so what you are telling me is that the 3.2 is only 5-10 percent faster than the 3.0ghz mac pro?? Should i fee threatened by the difference? Is not the 2008 Harpertown 3ghz mac pro just as fast as the 3.2? I mean, 3.0 to 3.2 doesn't seem like a lot.


     
  22. nanofrog macrumors G4

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    #22
    It's not a big difference for most things, and there's no need to concern yourself with it IMO. It's not like we're speaking in terms of a GHz range difference here, and it's on the same architecture. ;) So it truly is an apples-to-apples comparison. :)

    The only time you need to consider it, is if the usage consists by far of applications that are strictly CPU bound (not drive, memory, PCIe bus,... dependant at all). If this is the case, then it can save you time, and make the time you spend working more productive. This usually isn't the case though.

    Most software doesn't fall into this usage category, so such a small clock difference isn't going to make a lot of difference. Especially so, when the application depends on the idiot.... err.... "organic component"... on the other end of the keyboard for input. :eek: :p
     

Share This Page