Yes but they are all getting spanked by the Mini and iMac today.
There are also still plenty of people that are running G4's too but that doesn't mean they are high performer's anymore and not antiquated by todays standards.
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.
Mac Pro, Quad or Oct?
- Thread starter SeanEE89
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yes but they are all getting spanked by the Mini and iMac today.
There are also still plenty of people that are running G4's too but that doesn't mean they are high performer's anymore and not antiquated by todays standards.
Are they? even heavy work in apps that are memory hungry? The last I checked a Mini was a entry level Mac. Even still, of course new machines will be faster. It's called technology progressing. What is new today is old tomorrow.
I'm sure the last thing they are thinking is, how "mine is bigger than yours". Your comment sounds a bit like buying for the sake of the latest on the market so you can flash to your friends, than buying a machine as an investment and making good money from it. Buy and be happy, don't buy so you can wave it.
I'm still on a Dual G5. It's how I use it that its getting good use.
As you already said. Which was quite off putting with your last comment.
I hate to put it this way, but you have no idea what you are talking about. There is absolutely no correlation to the amount of core processors and 3d performance. The graphics card does most of the work. This is especially true for current games.
Take a look at these results from the Photoshop Benchmark - Speed Test thread:
That G5 (not even the fastest G5) is only 18 seconds slower than the MBP, which has the same chip as the iMac. For a 4.5 year old machine, the dual G5 is pretty fast. That makes me feel like my 2.8 octo will last me at least 5 years. There's no way a single CPU system will get as much life as a dual CPU system.
IMO, if you plan to get a MP, you should get the octo if you want to get much of a life span out of it. Otherwise you might as well get an iMac. With the money you save, you could get a second one once it's too slow in three years.
Might as well get an Imac? But what if you don't want a TN-panel, don't want a mid-range videocard and want to use more memory? There are more things to consider than just raw processor power. I don't really get you guys that are buying the extra cpu _just_ for use later. The 500$ will be worth more spent in a new computer a few years from now, than a processor now that you will use later.
I agree, if it is for "lifespan", one processor is enough. The money you invest wont help you, most programs don't use all the cores or even dont use both processors. If you have software that uses both then go octo, if not those $500 can be invested in a future computer that will have a single processor with eight cores or even more!
I can't believe some of you guys either.
If you have $500 to spend... a superfast HDD, more RAM, and a better video card will get you 5X the machine than a stock 2.8 Octopus.
To those comparing a single G5 vs a dual G5 to the Mac Pro are completely off base.
You are comparing a SINGLE vs DUAL CPU SYSTEM... we're comparing a 4 CPU vs 8 CPU system (they just happen to be housed on either 1 or 2 actual units)...
To say you'll be obsolete with ONLY 4 CPUS in 3 or 4 years when 2 CPUS lasted you 5 years with the G5... is ludicrous.
Plus... by the time you NEED to get a new CPU if you only get the QUAD vs the OCTO, the resale value of macs is so high it'd make more sense to sell it and get the *FUTURE* base model with only 16 Cores instead of 32!!!!
Stop wigging out about 4 ADDITIONAL CPUS when 99.99999% of all software and all users won't ever need it.
OMG!
If you have $500 to spend... a superfast HDD, more RAM, and a better video card will get you 5X the machine than a stock 2.8 Octopus.
To those comparing a single G5 vs a dual G5 to the Mac Pro are completely off base.
You are comparing a SINGLE vs DUAL CPU SYSTEM... we're comparing a 4 CPU vs 8 CPU system (they just happen to be housed on either 1 or 2 actual units)...
To say you'll be obsolete with ONLY 4 CPUS in 3 or 4 years when 2 CPUS lasted you 5 years with the G5... is ludicrous.
Plus... by the time you NEED to get a new CPU if you only get the QUAD vs the OCTO, the resale value of macs is so high it'd make more sense to sell it and get the *FUTURE* base model with only 16 Cores instead of 32!!!!
Stop wigging out about 4 ADDITIONAL CPUS when 99.99999% of all software and all users won't ever need it.
OMG!
I realize this. Sorry if it wasn't clear. My point was that the card in the iMac isn't up to gaming at 1680x1050 or 1920x1200 with rendering options turned up in the latest games where as the 8800GT should cope. Quite a few games these days can uses two cores and I know of one OS X game (X-Plane) that can use a third for minor tasks. The thing is with the extra cores you could game whilst for example exporting a video in EyeTV - something that uses most of the processing power available on my Dual G5 for hours at a time a prevents me from doing anything other than light tasks during this time.
I think you should have read my first post and you would have noticed that I was saying just the opposite to what you think I'm saying.Are they? even heavy work in apps that are memory hungry? The last I checked a Mini was a entry level Mac. Even still, of course new machines will be faster. It's called technology progressing. What is new today is old tomorrow.
I'm sure the last thing they are thinking is, how "mine is bigger than yours". Your comment sounds a bit like buying for the sake of the latest on the market so you can flash to your friends, than buying a machine as an investment and making good money from it. Buy and be happy, don't buy so you can wave it.
I'm still on a Dual G5. It's how I use it that its getting good use.
As you already said. Which was quite off putting with your last comment.
The whole debate was weather to get the 4 or 8 core and not about what should I flash to my friends.
The next time please read everything before you jump in on it
I can't believe some of you guys either.
If you have $500 to spend... a superfast HDD, more RAM, and a better video card will get you 5X the machine than a stock 2.8 Octopus.
To those comparing a single G5 vs a dual G5 to the Mac Pro are completely off base.
You are comparing a SINGLE vs DUAL CPU SYSTEM... we're comparing a 4 CPU vs 8 CPU system (they just happen to be housed on either 1 or 2 actual units)...
To say you'll be obsolete with ONLY 4 CPUS in 3 or 4 years when 2 CPUS lasted you 5 years with the G5... is ludicrous.
Plus... by the time you NEED to get a new CPU if you only get the QUAD vs the OCTO, the resale value of macs is so high it'd make more sense to sell it and get the *FUTURE* base model with only 16 Cores instead of 32!!!!
Stop wigging out about 4 ADDITIONAL CPUS when 99.99999% of all software and all users won't ever need it.
OMG!
Thank you!
At least somebody gets it
Just because a program doesn't use 8 cores now, doesn't mean it won't in the future. I primarily use Photoshop, but I went for the 8 core because I'm sure that CS4 (in another year or so) will utilize them all. It seems to me that any major program for video/photo/graphics/recording will use all 8 cores within the next year or two. If you aren't buying a machine for any of those uses, why get a Mac Pro at all? Save a grand and get an iMac.
WTF??? Really... What is it with the Elitist attitude of some of you guys "if you don't want 8 cores why not buy an iMac"...
How about...
We'd actually like to play a GAME on them?
We'd like to choose our own monitor / size. IMac panels arent the end all be all of monitors.
We'd like 4 cores, not 2, but don't need /want 8.
We'd like to have 3 or 4 hard drives that are tidy inside the machine, not stacked outside?
We'd like easily servicable HDD and DVD drives.
We'd like the ability and flexability to add PCI cards if we ever found we needed / wanted to.
We'd like to upgrade the video card for Windows Gaming in the future by adding a second faster dedicated card for Windows only Gaming.
We'd like to have a FAST DVD reader / burner, not the slow crippled one in the iMac that is compromised by having to utilize the slower thin form factor drives?
We'd like to not be forced into a glossy screen if we don't want one.
We'd like to keep from having to replace the WHOLE MACHINE just incase the monitor pushes up the daisies one day.
We'd like QUAD bandwidth memory channels.
We'd like to be able to upgrade / add a CPU if we chose to in the future.
We'd like an internal RAID setup.
We'd like an internal Time Machine drive, not more cables and power plugs on the desk.
We'd like the ability to have a ton of Ram.
We'd like super fast ram / front side busses.
We'd like multiple internal DVD burners.
We don't need 8 cores, so let's lose all the above and save some $$$.
Wow.
WTF??? Really... What is it with the Elitist attitude of some of you guys "if you don't want 8 cores why not buy an iMac"...
How about...
We'd actually like to play a GAME on them?
We'd like to choose our own monitor / size. IMac panels arent the end all be all of monitors.
We'd like 4 cores, not 2, but don't need /want 8.
We'd like to have 3 or 4 hard drives that are tidy inside the machine, not stacked outside?
We'd like easily servicable HDD and DVD drives.
We'd like the ability and flexability to add PCI cards if we ever found we needed / wanted to.
We'd like to upgrade the video card for Windows Gaming in the future by adding a second faster dedicated card for Windows only Gaming.
We'd like to have a FAST DVD reader / burner, not the slow crippled one in the iMac that is compromised by having to utilize the slower thin form factor drives?
We'd like to not be forced into a glossy screen if we don't want one.
We'd like to keep from having to replace the WHOLE MACHINE just incase the monitor pushes up the daisies one day.
We'd like QUAD bandwidth memory channels.
We'd like to be able to upgrade / add a CPU if we chose to in the future.
We'd like an internal RAID setup.
We'd like an internal Time Machine drive, not more cables and power plugs on the desk.
We'd like the ability to have a ton of Ram.
We'd like super fast ram / front side busses.
We'd like multiple internal DVD burners.
We don't need 8 cores, so let's lose all the above and save some $$$.
Wow.
It's not elitist. Just speaking from my personal experience, if I didn't have to do editing work on my machine, I would've gotten an iMac. I could've gotten an iMac for the editing work that I do and it would've been fine, I just figured a MP would last me few years longer. What would you need 4 internal drives and RAID for if you're not doing hardcore video/audio stuff? Again, personally, if I just wanted a machine for primarily gaming, I'd build my own PC for the ultimate upgradeability (plus saving some serious money).
Anyways, I think I got a little off track and offended some people. I guess my theory on buying a new machine is to get as much as I can afford so it will last me as long as possible. I concede that people will use it for things that they don't need 8 cores.
WTF??? Really... What is it with the Elitist attitude of some of you guys "if you don't want 8 cores why not buy an iMac"...
How about...
We'd actually like to play a GAME on them?
We'd like to choose our own monitor / size. IMac panels arent the end all be all of monitors.
We'd like 4 cores, not 2, but don't need /want 8.
We'd like to have 3 or 4 hard drives that are tidy inside the machine, not stacked outside?
We'd like easily servicable HDD and DVD drives.
We'd like the ability and flexability to add PCI cards if we ever found we needed / wanted to.
We'd like to upgrade the video card for Windows Gaming in the future by adding a second faster dedicated card for Windows only Gaming.
We'd like to have a FAST DVD reader / burner, not the slow crippled one in the iMac that is compromised by having to utilize the slower thin form factor drives?
We'd like to not be forced into a glossy screen if we don't want one.
We'd like to keep from having to replace the WHOLE MACHINE just incase the monitor pushes up the daisies one day.
We'd like QUAD bandwidth memory channels.
We'd like to be able to upgrade / add a CPU if we chose to in the future.
We'd like an internal RAID setup.
We'd like an internal Time Machine drive, not more cables and power plugs on the desk.
We'd like the ability to have a ton of Ram.
We'd like super fast ram / front side busses.
We'd like multiple internal DVD burners.
We don't need 8 cores, so let's lose all the above and save some $$$.
Wow.
WOW! RichardHunter! I think you've convinced me to buy a quad rather than an octo. The $500 is not the issue. In my case, the $500 extra would sit idle probably for 99.9 percent of the time I would ever use the computer. And I don't want an IMac for many of the reasons you stated above. I think I'll copy and paste your response above into a document and save it on my desktop so that every time I think I'll go ahead and spend the extra $500 for an octo, I'll look at your response. I'm waiting on new ACD's or my computer to die or start giving me trouble, which ever comes first, before I buy a Mac Pro. I'm 86 months into a G4, running 10.4.11, that just keeps running and running with no troubles.
Please show me the upgrade part number on the Apple store. What? There isn't one? Then how do you consider it upgradeable?
This is what Apple in an IChat just told me:
.
I've never seen where Apple said that the CPU was upgradeable.