Mac Pro 2.0 much slower than 2.66?

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by netdog, Oct 11, 2007.

  1. netdog macrumors 603

    netdog

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2006
    Location:
    London
    #1
    How much slower is the 2.0 Mac Pro? I have been offered one at a very good price. Is this going to wind up being slower than an iMac 2.8 for most everyday tasks? How much faster will it be for video rendering and and Photoshop than an iMac and how much slower than a 2.66?
     
  2. irishgrizzly macrumors 65816

    irishgrizzly

    Joined:
    May 15, 2006
    #2
    I'm using an iMac 2.4GHz I only do light encoding on it but am very impressed so far. How much time do you spend waiting around for tasks to finish now?
     
  3. Cabbit macrumors 68020

    Cabbit

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2006
    Location:
    Scotland
    #3
    get the dual 2.0. you can upgrade it to 3.0 quads later. just make sure its intel and not ppc
     
  4. Pressure macrumors 68040

    Pressure

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Location:
    Denmark
    #4
    Just out of curiosity but what is "a very good price" ?

    It really depends on whether or not the applications you use are multi-threaded. If not, the iMac 2.80Ghz will be much faster.
     
  5. netdog thread starter macrumors 603

    netdog

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2006
    Location:
    London
    #5
    How much would such an upgrade be (to dual quads)? The price I have been offered is about 2/3 of retail price. Was never used. All stock.

    I use FCE and CS3 a Aperture a fair amount. Certainly I spend a lot of time in iWork, Office, Safari, Mail, iTunes, etc.
     
  6. RichP macrumors 68000

    RichP

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2003
    Location:
    Motor City
    #6
    great processor benchmarks for mac here:

    http://www.primatelabs.ca/blog/2007/08/mac-performance-august-2007/

    seems like the quad, for raw processing, will be slightly faster than the 2.8 imac.

    unless the deal is FANTASTIC (like its loaded with RAM, HD, etc) I would pass. The prices for the new machines, between a 2.0 and 2.66 are so close it makes very little sense to get a 2.0. Of course, if you are handy with tools, and this machine is ridiculously cheap, you could consider upgrading the processors in it and make it an octocore 2.66.
     
  7. Multimedia macrumors 603

    Multimedia

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2001
    Location:
    Santa Cruz CA, Silicon Beach
    #7
    $1300?

    Why don't you give us the number? You mean $1300? That would be a good deal.

    Keep in mind the next bottom of the line $2K 8 core will probably run @ 2.5GHz.
     
  8. netdog thread starter macrumors 603

    netdog

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2006
    Location:
    London
    #8
    That's the part that's killing me. I was ready to buy a Mac Pro 2.66 in August, but the thread here convinced me to wait until September, so I have been pushing my MBP 2.33 to run my 30" while I waited until October/November. Now it is looking like January.

    I now wish that I had bought the 2.66 in August to be honest.

    It's £1000 for a machine that is £1500 at the Apple Store. Like I said, 2/3.
     
  9. Multimedia macrumors 603

    Multimedia

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2001
    Location:
    Santa Cruz CA, Silicon Beach
    #9
    $2,038 Is Too Much

    According to the current exchange rate that's more than $2,000. That's more than the US list price of $1999 for old technology. Current 2.66 Quad refurb is $2199 in US.

    In that case I say NO deal. 2/3 of the price in the US would be 600 pounds not 1000.

    It doesn't look like January to me. It still looks like November.
     
  10. oceanzen macrumors regular

    oceanzen

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2006
    Location:
    Madrid, España
    #10

    I think you're misunderstanding, that Apple likes to rip off it's UK customers compared to it's US ones.

    So £1509 is the price of the Quad 2.0 at the UK Apple store, where as it would be £1100 in the US
     

Share This Page