Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Mac Pro specs

D

doox00

macrumors regular
Original poster
May 10, 2006
130
0
If I were to get a first gen mac pro, or whatever they are called.. first intel mac pros are you able to use any video card you want? like an nvidia gtx 260-285 or something? Or do they need to be a specific model?

Is there a huge performance increase from a couple year old mac pro compared to newer ones?
 
Don't get a first gen mac pro unless it's really cheap. I would say either get the 2008 MP, or the 2009 MP--that gives you the most options for video cards, and a good amount of power that will last you for a reasonable amount of time.
 
-js- said:
Don't get a first gen mac pro unless it's really cheap. I would say either get the 2008 MP, or the 2009 MP--that gives you the most options for video cards, and a good amount of power that will last you for a reasonable amount of time.
Click to expand...

Which Mac Pros are 2008 models? Which processors are in those?

thanks!
 
thank you,

What is a good price to pay for an 08 model on average?

lets say a 2.8ghz 2gb ram and 8800gt?

Ram can be upgraded for cheap.
 
doox00 said:
thank you,

What is a good price to pay for an 08 model on average?

lets say a 2.8ghz 2gb ram and 8800gt?

Ram can be upgraded for cheap.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't pay over $2,200. You can find them for under $2,000 without the 8800GT.
 
It would be helpfull if you could use a more meaningfull thread title. This whole forum is about the Mac Pro. So nobody can figure out what this thread is about until he has read it. A nice informative title can save people some klicks.
 
-js- said:
Don't get a first gen mac pro unless it's really cheap. I would say either get the 2008 MP, or the 2009 MP--that gives you the most options for video cards, and a good amount of power that will last you for a reasonable amount of time.
Click to expand...

While I agree with what you say, should we assume that buying a 2009 MP today our video card options will be very limited three years from now? :(
 
LOL! They are EXTREMELY limited right now. There's like what, three or four cards the 2009 models can officially use? That's it? Out of the 100 or 150 that are available in PCIe.

Through a mild form of thievery, flashing and voiding your warrantee, we can increase that number to 10 or maybe 15 which is still EXTREMELY limited relatively speaking.

If there is only one place Apple has failed it's in support for ALL 3rd party PCIe products and the whole EFI thing. MAJOR FAIL!
 
I'm also considering a 'lower-end' Mac-Pro.
Spec-wise, does anyone know in general what the difference in power of a
Quad-Core 2.66 Nehalem to a PC Quad Q6600 chip?
 
macjiro said:
I'm also considering a 'lower-end' Mac-Pro.
Spec-wise, does anyone know in general what the difference in power of a
Quad-Core 2.66 Nehalem to a PC Quad Q6600 chip?
Click to expand...

http://download.intel.com/design/processor/datashts/31559205.pdf <-- Q6600 Series.
http://www.intel.com/Assets/PDF/datasheet/321332.pdf <-- W3500 Series.

From a user's stand point they look VERY similar to me. I guess at similar clocks they're going to give you similar rides. Technically and in benchmarks it looks like the xeon models are going to be faster.

Here's one benchmark:

http://db.xbench.com/search.xhtml?text=Q6600
http://db.xbench.com/search.xhtml?text=Nehalem

Too bad there's no (very) good benchmarking utilities on the OS X platform. :(
 
Tess or anyone....

Is the current Mac Quad-core 2.66 Nehalem the same chip as the Nehalem I7
or is it a Nehalem Xeon? I'm not sure if its the same just with different naming convention?
 
macjiro said:
Tess or anyone....

Is the current Mac Quad-core 2.66 Nehalem the same chip as the Nehalem I7
or is it a Nehalem Xeon? I'm not sure if its the same just with different naming convention?
Click to expand...

i7=Nehalem (AFAIK)

The current Quad 2.66 uses a Xeon processor of the Nehalem variety... There is no performance difference between the two processors IMO.
 
macjiro said:
Tess or anyone....

Is the current Mac Quad-core 2.66 Nehalem the same chip as the Nehalem I7
or is it a Nehalem Xeon? I'm not sure if its the same just with different naming convention?
Click to expand...

Nehalem is the Intel codename for the latest generation microarchitecture that includes the following product lines:
- Core i7 enthusiast desktop CPU's (quad cores with tri-channel DDR3)
- Xeon server CPU's (quad cores with tri-channel DDR3 and ECC support)
- Core i5 mainstream desktop CPU's (quad cores, dual-channel DDR3, coming soon)

The current Mac Pro's use the Nehalem Xeon CPU's which are identical in all respects to a Core i7 except for the added ECC memory support.
 
but isn't it that the 8-core systems use the xeon processor and the 4 core systems... don't? Something like that? I was sure that was discussed shortly after their release.
 
bozz2006 said:
but isn't it that the 8-core systems use the xeon processor and the 4 core systems... don't? Something like that? I was sure that was discussed shortly after their release.
Click to expand...

They all use Xeons, but the 8 core systems use a better class of Xeon.
 
peskaa said:
They all use Xeons, but the 8 core systems use a better class of Xeon.
Click to expand...

The only difference between the 3500 series (in the quad) and the 5500 series (in the Octo) is the necessary addition of an additional QPI link on the dual-socket part. The added QPI link is necessary for CPU-to-CPU communications. They are otherwise functionally identical.
 
VirtualRain said:
The only difference between the 3500 series (in the quad) and the 5500 series (in the Octo) is the necessary addition of an additional QPI link on the dual-socket part. The added QPI link is necessary for CPU-to-CPU communications. They are otherwise functionally identical.
Click to expand...

They have a lower TDP. They are effectively a "better" processor.
 
Umbongo said:
They have a lower TDP. They are effectively a "better" processor.
Click to expand...
In servers, certainly. :) But for workstations (particularly SP models BTW), meh... more of "In the eye of the beholder". :D :p TDP is less of a consideration than performance for most. ;)

Let me put it this way... I've never seen an engineer or scientist come to the conclusion, "Well system A is faster and would help me get done quicker, but B uses less power, so I'll order B". :D :p If anything, budgets are the most limiting factor. ;)
 
I'd venture to guess that it has more to do with Apple not wanting people to have a DIY upgrade path. but that's just my opinion.
 
bozz2006 said:
I'd venture to guess that it has more to do with Apple not wanting people to have a DIY upgrade path. but that's just my opinion.
Click to expand...
I tend to see it more as a means to keep the Quad core versions from damaging sales of the other models (iMac or Octads). Priced higher than the iMac, and limited enough (particularly on DIMM slots) it wouldn't hurt, or actually help push the Octad sales numbers. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back