MBP vs Mac Pro?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by Lightey, Feb 26, 2011.

  1. Lightey macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2010
    #1
    I have $2500 to spend, and I wanted to know weather to get:

    MacBook Pro 15"
    2.2 Quad Core i7
    8 GB RAM
    720 GB HDD

    or

    Mac Pro
    Nehalm
    3 GB RAM
    1 TB HDD

    I'm big into video editing, and the only reason I'm considering the MBP is because I like laptops a lot better than desktops.
     
  2. MultiMediaWill macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2010
    Location:
    Illinois
    #2
    Macbook pro by far. Actually, the Macbook 15" high end and 17" are beating the Mac Pro in geekbench.
     
  3. lewdvig macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2002
    Location:
    South Pole
    #3
    MP

    I own both, and while my new MBP gets geekbench scores close to my MP (which is slower than the one you are considering), the storage and brute power of a Mac Pro is tough to beat for heavy lifting.

    For example you can put 10 TB of HDD in one for $400.
     
  4. HBOC macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2008
    Location:
    SLC
    #4
    until the new MPs are updated in a matter of weeks..
     
  5. lewdvig macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2002
    Location:
    South Pole
    #5
    Yeah, that too.
     
  6. Airforce macrumors 6502a

    Airforce

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2006
    #6
    Well it sounds like you need to go with a laptop. It won't match a desktop's performance, but you'll be satisfied with the portability.
     
  7. SoCalRich, Feb 26, 2011
    Last edited: Feb 26, 2011

    SoCalRich macrumors 6502

    SoCalRich

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2010
    Location:
    NorCal
    #7
    Look at your own work flow and decide.

    I bought the MBP i7, 500 GBHD 7200 8G Ram last June. I can sit in my easy chair and do whatever I want using CS5 & Lightroom. When I need a bigger monitor I walk into my office and plug in my 30" HP ZR30 using my 17" as a sidekick monitor and hook up 5TB of HD's. It does everything I need it to. I only do photo editing - no video. The next generation of Intel chips are around the corner probably next year I guess. When that happens I will upgrade to another 17" (or maybe a 21" by that time??) who knows.

    I like the portability and power of the MBP and I'm not chained to my desk in the office. It works for me.
     
  8. iPhone1 macrumors 65816

    iPhone1

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2010
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    #8
    Wait until at least after the iPad 2 keynote next week. Maybe they will update Mac Pro's?
     
  9. billgates99, Feb 26, 2011
    Last edited: Feb 26, 2011

    billgates99 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2010
    #9
    if you work in FCP, you might want to hold off a bit until the details of the upcoming FCP update.

    If you work in Premiere CS5, I would suggest to go with the Mac Pro and later on add more RAM and swap out the 5770 for one of these NVIDIA cards
    http://www.indiev.org/?p=317
     
  10. MultiMediaWill macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2010
    Location:
    Illinois
    #10
    What are you talking about? The 2011 MBP's have Sandy Bridge.
     
  11. SoCalRich macrumors 6502

    SoCalRich

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2010
    Location:
    NorCal
    #11
    I stand corrected, thanks. What's the next Intel chip that I'm thinking of? I have brain fade... LOL...
     
  12. Neolithium macrumors 6502a

    Neolithium

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2010
    Location:
    Wherever the army needs me.
    #12
    Ivy Bridge is the die-shrink of Sandy, unless you were thinking Haswell?
     
  13. johnnymg macrumors 65816

    johnnymg

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2008
    #13
    With $2500 the answer is definitely the MBP. You will need to spend a lot more for a MP of equivalent 'power'.

    Also, the next MP update will be in about 12 months.

    cheers
    JohnG
     
  14. SoCalRich macrumors 6502

    SoCalRich

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2010
    Location:
    NorCal
    #14
    Ivy Bridge.... Thanks
     
  15. SoCalRich macrumors 6502

    SoCalRich

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2010
    Location:
    NorCal
    #15
    If you go for the MBP you should seriously consider the 17" ESPECIALLY if you plan to do photo editing on the MBP screen instead of a larger monitor. With the tool bars and side bars (Lightroom) you need the additional real estate. Of course for Adobe RGB 1998 wide spectrum color space you will need to go with an IPS monitor anyway for true color accuracy. $$$$$$$ but worth it.
     
  16. rmitchell248, Feb 27, 2011
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2011

    rmitchell248 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2010
    Location:
    Liebsthal, Germany
    #16
    This is considering that the OP is "big into video editing"

    The simple thought that even a 17" 2.3 sandy bridge MBP could be a heavy work horse like the low end 2.8 quad mac pro is just plain ignorant. If you truly will use the computer and need the Mac Pro a MBP will not cut it. If you do not need what the Mac Pro offers then the MBP will be fine

    what the lowest processor 2.8 Mac Pro offers that the Top of the line MBP does not

    Superior graphics including multi monitor support- up to 3 out of the box
    Superior heat management
    Longevity due to heat management
    The ability to run 24 7 without concern- see above two notes
    The ability to support 12 terabytes or more internally (MBP can have hope here if TB externals ever get released but at that point TB PCI cards should not be far behind for the Mac Pro)
    Upgradeability in terms of processor
    RAM capacity of 32GB

    This machine makes 5-10% less on Geekbench.. and I promise you that a machine that can process with 5% less power for 24 hours a day will be a better work system than that machine that can process 5% more for only 20 minutes before heat concerns arise.

    If you are not running the MBP to the point where it is getting too hot then you are not using the full capacity of the processor and you are now negating your geekbench score that you are chasing after and the whole argument is now void.

    I could go on but I am tired
     
  17. Mackilroy macrumors 68040

    Mackilroy

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2006
    #17
    Not going to happen. LGA 1356 and 2011 won't be released until Q4 of this year.
     
  18. Chupa Chupa macrumors G5

    Chupa Chupa

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    #18
    MP is the only way to go for true professional video editing, i.e., not hobbists knocking around w/ FCP, but people that have to punch out quality video fast and on time and use fancy PCI cards. There are some filmmakers that use a MBP to edit on-site but then they take it back to the studio and upload to the MP for final processing.

    That said Apple has pretty much shouted off the mountain top that if you buy a MP now you are a moron b/c there will be no PCI Thunderbold cards, at least any time soon. That means we have to wait for the '11 MP update, which I'm pretty sure will drop w/ the new FCP sometime around NAB in late March or early April.
     
  19. Evil Spoonman macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2011
    Location:
    California
    #19
    Actually, you're going to find that the Mac Pro will be consistently faster than the MacBook Pro. Geekbench doesn't tell the whole story.
     
  20. smetvid macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2009
    #20
    One thing to consider however is the thunderbolt port. Sure it isnt like having a couple of pci-express slots but it will allow video editors to add capture cards in the near future. Aja and Blackmagic are already working on thunderbolt capture cards.

    MP are nice but they are pretty much locked into one location. If you travel around a lot you are not going to be satisfied with just a MP. It all really depends how you plan on using your machine. If you like to just sit at the same desk all day then a MP is great. Overall it will be a much better machine like everybody above has said.

    Benchmarks scores do not tell everything but when it comes to raw cpu performance i do expect the 17" to be pretty darn close to the base MP. Sandybridge is really that much faster. Desktop and mobile cpus have really caught up to the workstation class cpus.
     
  21. jbg232 macrumors 65816

    jbg232

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2007
    #21
    With all those upgrades the cost will be >$2500. Obviously the BEST is the mac pro, but price to performace with a budget of $2500, you really can't beat the new macbook pros right now.
     
  22. ozred macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2011
    #22
    Only you know the value & usefulness of portability. My primary machine is a fully loaded MBP. With a MacPro as secondary for those times when I'm home and don't need to move around. It's also got one dedicated HD to allow me to use it as a server. That versatility is truly handy.
     
  23. Evil Spoonman macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2011
    Location:
    California
    #23
    Workstation class CPUs were never really any/much faster than desktop CPUs. At least not for the last few generations. Mostly they were just binned versions with more features enabled (X5550 is sort of just an i7-920 at 95W with more aggressive turbos and a few more features).

    What is questionable about the 2720QM vs W3530 object is how synthetic these tests really are. How does the notebook hold up to sustained load, how well can it sustain those turbo frequencies, etc... we don't know all the facts yet. It will be interesting to see.
     
  24. rmitchell248 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2010
    Location:
    Liebsthal, Germany
    #24

    Actually its not because all of the HDD upgrades that would go into the mac pro would go into the MBP VIA a TB HDD stack. The RAM would need upgrading in both machines as well.
     
  25. brentsg macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2008
    #25
    My Mac Pro encodes video for literally days no end, full bore. I would never want to do that on a Macbook Pro. The poor little fans would cause it to go into orbit and it'd still be sizzling hot.
     

Share This Page