Mac Pro 2010 vs. Mac >2013

Come on - You searched and couldn't find anything on this subject? It's been discussed in many many threads. The consensus here is mixed. I'm one of the folks who like the expandability of the cMP and would not own a nMP because of it's lack of expandability and the fact that is uses proprietary parts (ex. GPU). Do a search there's much written here.

Lou

 

Keep it and buy more storage
With nMP (2013) you have more limitations regarding storage than with your cMP 2010.
So, I would invest in storage (if you need speed, get PCIe SSDs) and external USB 3.0 drives or docks that can handle 4TB, 6TB etc.

If you need more processing speed, upgrade to 12 Cores and double the RAM.

This is my advice I hope this helps.

 

If you need a nMP, but you can wait a while, I certainly wouldn't get the 2013. The 2013 is 2 years old right now and an update should be coming in the next few months. Because Apple doesn't lower their price over time for aging models, if you bought a nMP today you'd be buying a 2-year old computer at brand new pricing just like people did on day 1. If you wait for an updated nMP, you'll pay the same price but get a much better, updated computer.

The nMP's drive does not have sufficient capacity to match your existing storage. If you switch to a nMP you'll need to change from internal storage to external storage. So you'll need to invest in Thunderbolt or USB 3.0 drive enclosures, or get a NAS to plop the drives into.

 

Don't think, see here:
http://www.everymac.com/systems/app...ro-six-core-3.33-mid-2010-westmere-specs.html

 

If you upgrade the CPUs you can go here:
http://www.everymac.com/systems/app...twelve-core-3.06-mid-2012-westmere-specs.html

128GB of RAM I think is enough for music

 

I seem to read it again and again, people using their Macs to make music. Is "making music" really that intensive that you need a powerhouse system? I mean, seems like a Mac Mini (quad core previous gen would be nice) and a thunderbolt drive enclosure to house the data and (in this case a bunch of HD movies and music) would suffice.

What is gained by a using a new Mac Pro in this case for making music?

 

All the plugins, virtual instruments, VST effects are both ram and cpu demanding and only people in this field understanding how efficient Mac Pro can do in this profession.

Also, having only ONE Mac Pro is never enough to host large orchestral templates for composers.

 

A year ago i set up a Composer with 4x 12-core 3.33ghz 64gb ram Mac Pro's - 1 for the main workstation and 3 Nodes to process there Orchestra samples.... So Adobe isn't the only pro apps to munch through cpu and ram

 

But you have a single cpu tray you need a dual cpu tray to go to 12 cores

 

With a single CPU tray the max RAM you can go is 64GB and with a dual CPU tray you can go with 128 GB RAM using 16GB bars. If you're okay with staying with the single CPU footprint, the 3.33GHz 6-core processor you already have is a good processor.

You can grab a few kits with 16GB bars from eBay... here's an example: http://www.ebay.com/itm/32GB-2x16GB...768408?hash=item5b1b2a1bd8:g:-dIAAOSwbqpTuYH8

 

I believe OWC offer the turnkey upgrade for cMP, from one cpu to dual cpu, but it's quite expensive.

With the money, you might wanna consider buying a 2013 Mac Pro as master and your current cMP as slave, connecting via Ethernet using Vienna Ensemble Pro.

 

Buy the whole dual CPU 5,1 (or 4,1) and then sell your current one may be a cheaper way to upgrade from single to dual.

 

After all that talk, the OP decides to wait for new model. LOL>

 

A 2010 Mac Pro with a single CPU has a practical limit of 48 GB of RAM. (The RAM slots can take 64 GB, but the processor can't address all of it. Interestingly, the dual processor models can handle all 128 GB.) Would 48 GB would be a sufficient improvement in RAM for you? Or do you need more? If that's enough, a 3x16 GB kit would be much cheaper than a new computer or processor tray.

 

Not really, with X56xx, a single 5,1 can boot with 64G RAM. With a W36xx, can boot up to 56G RAM (3x16 + 8). 48 was assuming not using the X56xx AND only use same size RAM stick.

 

Why are people still demanding internal spots for hard drives? Actually, the new Mac Pro offers better expansion. Thunderbolt makes internal spinning HDD pointless since you should get close to the same speeds.

 

Because it's the cheapest way to get large + cheap + reliable storage.

 

close? or faster? I thought it would be faster.