MacPro Octo, do i need it?

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by zoran, Jan 17, 2008.

  1. zoran macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2005
    #1
    Im a Graphic Designer using the Adobe CS2 pack as well as Quark Xpress and Macromedia apps for web design professionally.
    On the other hand, as a hobbyist, im doing my DV stuff using Premiere and Aftereffects!
    Do i really need to get a MPro Octo or should i just get a Quad? Will the Quad suit my needs?
    Im puzzled cause i was told that the 8cores of the Octo are not utilized by those apps (Adobe CS2). Perhaps After Effects and Premiere can put 8cores to work easier but then again i will only be using those apps for my hobbyist leisure time!
    What should i do?
     
  2. killmoms macrumors 68040

    killmoms

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    #2
    Go for the Quad. It's more than enough for what you're doing. I would suggest upgrading to the CS3 apps though, since they're universal binaries and will perform much better (and use much less RAM) than your CS2 versions, which are running through OS X's "Rosetta" PowerPC emulation engine.

    If you're not able to upgrade, use the money you save on going down to the Quad to buy some extra RAM.
     
  3. psychofreak Retired

    psychofreak

    Joined:
    May 16, 2006
    Location:
    London
    #3
    CS3 on a Quad will be as fast as CS2 on an Octo, so I recommend that. While it will run great on a Quad, the Octo will be more future proof, so take that into consideration...
     
  4. Toups macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2007
    #4
    I personally would go with the 8-core, as price/performance you get double the processing power for 25% increase in price. Also, the 8-core is the mainstream model, so you will have a higher residual when you go to sell it later.
     
  5. Firefly2002 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2008
    #5
    Kinda funny.. 2008 and people are worrying about a *quad-core* or an *octo-core* machine. Technology is nuts.

    Anyway, as said, Quad should be fine (Dual would be fine!)

    Also as pointed out.... get Photoshop CS3. Universal Binary is going to be wayyyyy faster than CS2 running via Rosetta, which bogs down your machine unnecessarily. If you were using a G5, you could stick with CS2, but Intel machines need UB to run at full speed.
     
  6. netdog macrumors 603

    netdog

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2006
    Location:
    London
    #6
    Nonsense. Get the Octo. CS3 (or CS4) will get wise to multicores and any video work will certainly utilize the 8 cores quite well. $500 very well spent if you plan on holding onto the MP for 4-5 years.
     
  7. killmoms macrumors 68040

    killmoms

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    #7
    ...He's doing DV video. I was doing DV video with no sweat on a PowerBook G4 4 years ago. You don't need 8 cores for Photoshop and DV. Hell, you don't even need 8 cores for HDV. It's overkill. Why not use the money you'd spend on that extraneous 4 cores and get some extra RAM? Much more useful.
     
  8. bigbird macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Location:
    Canada
    #8
    Don't plan for today, think about 2-3 years down the road. Most of today's apps can't take advantage of 4 cores, let alone 8. But as the apps progress and multi cores become more prevalent, developers will re-write them to take advantage of multi cores if it will help their processing. By getting dual quad now, you will essentially be future-proofing your purchase for many years to come. I was in the same quandary as you. I initially ordered a single quad. On reflection and common sense, I decided the initial $500 hit for the extra quad was worth it. I cancelled my initial order and re-ordered the 2.8 dual with 8800 and wi-fi. You can't upgrade a single quad to a dual. $500 spread out over a few years is worth it to me. Get the dual quad!
     
  9. zoran thread starter macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2005
    #9
    What the heck is the use of 8cores then and why are they making them standard?
    What apps arenot considered overkill for the octo?
     
  10. bigbird macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Location:
    Canada
    #10

    My condolences.
     
  11. killmoms macrumors 68040

    killmoms

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    #11
    Higher-end video tasks, like HDV, ProRes HD (and uncompressed, if you have the drives for it) capturing, rendering and encoding, high-end 3D tasks like Maya, high-computation apps like Mathematica, and audio sequencing/editing apps like Logic Pro. All of these benefit from 8 cores much more than design-type apps and low-end video (standard def DV).
     
  12. Toups macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2007
    #12
    I personally run VMWare fusion with 1 or 2 VMs running simultaneously for work, plus general usage and handbrake and some home video editing so at times I can max out an 8-core for extended periods.

    My personal view is to go for 8-core based on future needs and higher residual resale values.
     
  13. zoran thread starter macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2005
    #13
    But why make the 8core standard, when most people using MacPros are people of my kind, Graphic Designers who are using apps that will not take full advantage of the 8cores! Those other apps you mentioned are not so common, at least not as much as Adobe apps... right?
     
  14. netdog macrumors 603

    netdog

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2006
    Location:
    London
    #14
    For goodness sakes, he will probably be using HDV soon enough. OS X and applications are all going to get smarter about cores. Apple says you can't pop in a 2nd processor, so this is your chance. Don't shortchange yourself down the road for $500 now unless you only plan to keep this machine for a year or two.
     
  15. irishgrizzly macrumors 65816

    irishgrizzly

    Joined:
    May 15, 2006
    #15
    It's a tough one to call if you are mainly using CS. I want 8 core because I figured that even though I can't use this much computer now, in 3 years when the entry level iMac is coming with 4 cores I may be kicking myself.
     
  16. aaronw1986 macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2006
    #16
    I bet iMac's will have quad core a lot sooner than 3 years.
     
  17. bigbossbmb macrumors 68000

    bigbossbmb

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2004
    Location:
    Pasadena/Hollywood
    #17
    because right now, it's "top of the line" and there's a lot of people that will pay for just for that title. Apple's essentially delivering the best processor available to them. Just because software hasn't caught up doesn't mean they shouldn't offer it.


    And for people that say "look 2-3years down the line", that is a total waste of money. You pay such a premium for top of the line that it makes no sense, unless you NEED all of that power right away. Buy for what you need right now. When your needs change, use the money you saved to upgrade your setup.
     
  18. Toups macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2007
    #18
    I would estimate in the next 18 months based on Moore's Law and Intels latest indications of work towards 4-core mobile processors.
     
  19. mograph187 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2006
    #19
    AE User

    I bought a dual dual core last February and I have been using AE CS3 since launch and i can tell you with 100% certainty that you should get the dual quad core model.

    I am running 8 GB RAM and have the 2.66 Dual Dual core Mac Pro 10.4.11. I use a widget called iStat Pro to monitor my system performance and I can attest to the fact that AE uses close to 100% of the processing power of my machine and during renders AE CS3 pegs all four cores at 100%. If i had 8 cores I am certain everything would run considerably faster and rendering would be able to peg all eight cores.

    Moral of the story... Buy the 8-core model.

    PEACE
     
  20. faumble macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2008
    #20
    Leopard uses both processors (and various task already use all 8 cores ). Also if you have multiple applications opened 2 processors help a lot!
     
  21. lindyhopfan macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2008
    #21
    Best Option if you only need 4 cores now, but may need 8 later

    Hi. If you decide you don't need 8 cores yet, buy the 8 core machine anyway. Keep the massive heat sink apple ships with the second processor, but sell the processor itself on ebay now for $700+ You will not have a problem getting back more than the $500 you spent, the computer will work great with only 4 cores for now, and you still have the massive heat sink for later. When you decide to upgrade back to 8 cores, the price for the same processor will have dropped significantly. There you have it, the best solution.
     
  22. zoran thread starter macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2005
    #22
    Ha, nice one, but theres one glich... im buying a Mac so i get rid f the PC moding and having to fiddle with hardware. I wanna buy and use, nothing else, so although its a good idea i think ill pass! Thanx though!
     
  23. Reach macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    Norway
    #23
    Quad will be fine. However, if you see yourself moving into HD-video in the machines lifetime, get 8 cores, that's when the waiting hits..
     

Share This Page