Thats what i was eluding to above... I will upgrade ram elsewhere... but if I get the 1 gig sticks I will have to ebay them or something as they will be useless when I go to upgrade.
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 - Which one for me?
- Thread starter MaddieBrad
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Thats what i was eluding to above... I will upgrade ram elsewhere... but if I get the 1 gig sticks I will have to ebay them or something as they will be useless when I go to upgrade.
thekev
macrumors 604
OWC does a rebate on the 1GB sticks, and Apple will charge you a much higher markup on getting to 8GB. Rendering speed is pretty damn cpu dependent. In some applications, the gpu can help mitigate times as well, but it varies. The reason the six core is more popular than the eight core is really clock speed. On applications or processes that scale less efficiently with more cores, the difference in clock speed there is pretty significant. Based on what you're using overall I'd probably go with the six core unless you really need more ram. On the six core 16GB is relatively cheap, 32 is doable (prices have been falling on 8GB dimms). The eight core would double your ram capacity.
Below those models, the imac is actually faster in raw cpu power. This applies to both quad core mac pros. The suggestions on what to buy are really based more around things like rendering times. 5DII files with a few layers are really nothing. I could make those run smoothly on a G5, so if you build for the other mentioned functions, you will have more than enough power for actions within photoshop.
Thanks again,
I am not really worried about the photo stuff... I am more wanting to get the best performance out of rendering in final cut, compressor, motion, after effects etc.
B
thekev
macrumors 604
http://barefeats.com/macs11_01.html
http://diglloyd.com/articles/ask/computers-MacProMemory.html
That's a fairly unbiased chart. They have some others on that site. I think digilloyd has a few, but I can't find them at the moment. OWC had some that I referenced once. One showed how the more ram you installed, the less an SSD would really add once documents are open (assuming 64 bit programs). I do think we've been a bit stuck in a 32 bit ram paradigm. Just by running 64 bit binaries you need somewhat more ram merely to retain equivalent performance. I just added one of the digilloyd links, but I can't find the OWC one 🙁
gglockner
macrumors 6502
Sorry, I'm an expert in scientific apps, not video processing. Hopefully someone else can comment here.
Ok...
So last question.
If you guys had the choice between a 12core 2.93, or a 6core 3.33 what would you do? The refurb shop has gotten a few of these 12 cores in and the discount is quite good at this price point.
From all my research it seems that the main benefit is the ability to add even more Ram. And the future is also positive with the 12core as the future seems to hold much more usability for more cores.
???
B
FCP 7 is single-threaded. Compressor and AE will use whatever you throw at them. photo apps typically don't scale past four cores. basically, 6 cores is still the sweet spot - clock speed for photo and FCP7, and extra cores for Compressor and AE - but a 12 core is still justifiable.
don't bother thinking that you're future proofing somehow by getting 12 cores. by the time software catches up, cheaper and faster CPUs will be available. at the same time, there is no replacement for clock speed. not all tasks can be multi-threaded.
So your saying... regardless... get the hex and call it a day? I am assuming that you meant "but a 12 core is still not justifiable." ???
So after 2 (almost 3) pages on this thread I have the feeling that I should get the fastest single CPU system I can get. And that being a 6Core with as much ram as I can afford. Now... Do i just get the ones available now or wait a couple of weeks / months for the possible refresh? Will the new hardware on the possible refresh be new Mobo or CPU, or just faster of the same chips?
B
It's been a week! That tells me you didn't need it critically.....
I still like my idea - tide yourself over with a mini until the Pro is updated.
I still like my idea - tide yourself over with a mini until the Pro is updated.
johnnymg
macrumors 65816
Final Cut Pro (7) isn't optimized for multi-core use. It's an OLD program and won't ever see updates again. FCPx is optimized for multicore though.
Regardless, I'd still recommend the single hex due to the clock speed advantage.
MP updates won't be released for quite some time and even then will only be marginally-modestly faster the current gen.
cheers
JohnG
I'm saying 12 is justifiable, at least if you use AE/Compressor often enough, but six will get you more for your money.
refresh should be early next year, new socket and everything. wait if you can afford to lose the productivity until then, otherwise just buy now.
derbothaus
macrumors 601
And the 3.33GHz boosts to 3.6GHz. All of them are slower than i7-2600 on single threads as it boosts to 3.7GHz. That's why iMac beats Mac Pro at iTunes.
Stay somewhat competitive and get the hex.
upgrade?
If you're feeling handy with the screwdrivers you could get a 2nd hand base model (2009/2010) and stick the 6 core processor in it for much less bucks.
There's threads about it on here somwhere.
That's what I'm thinking of doing if the new MPs don't arrive soon or aren't compelling when they do.
If you're feeling handy with the screwdrivers you could get a 2nd hand base model (2009/2010) and stick the 6 core processor in it for much less bucks.
There's threads about it on here somwhere.
That's what I'm thinking of doing if the new MPs don't arrive soon or aren't compelling when they do.
khollister
macrumors 6502a
Motion, Compressor and Handbrake will definitely be quicker on the 12-core. Photoshop and FCP 7 will probably be just as quick or quicker on the 6 core.
Large amounts of RAM is cheaper on the 12 core due to being able to use 4GB DIMMS with double the number of slots. Although the 8GB DIMMs are getting pretty reasonable, so that alone is poor rationale to get a DP.
If I recall correctly, the Geekbench scores between the hex and the 12 are something like 15000 to 22000 for things that really scale well over cores (video/3D rendering/certain music SW). The 12 core is probably not economically sensible for most other common uses.
That said, many of the 3rd party filters I run in CS5 peg all 12 cores (6+6 HT) in my hex. CS5 itself is pretty poor at using them all.
Large amounts of RAM is cheaper on the 12 core due to being able to use 4GB DIMMS with double the number of slots. Although the 8GB DIMMs are getting pretty reasonable, so that alone is poor rationale to get a DP.
If I recall correctly, the Geekbench scores between the hex and the 12 are something like 15000 to 22000 for things that really scale well over cores (video/3D rendering/certain music SW). The 12 core is probably not economically sensible for most other common uses.
That said, many of the 3rd party filters I run in CS5 peg all 12 cores (6+6 HT) in my hex. CS5 itself is pretty poor at using them all.