Nervous about the Mac Pro...

[SRSound]

Hey all, so sorry to stretch things out even more, but...

I have an impending Mac Pro purchase for the heart of my studio, but I'm afraid that as soon as I buy it, it will be updated with Clovertown. Now I know people always fret about impending upgrades and it's not a huge deal, but I was hoping someone might have some insight as to if there are upgrades, what are the chances of a faster processor speed per core at a similar price or just more cores for a similar price. I know my recording software won't utilize all 8 cores (maybe two), but if I can get 8 2.66GHz cores in a month for the same price as 4 2.66GHz cores now, I would like to wait. Thoughts?

 

[Chaszmyr]

8 2.66ghz cores would cost more than 4 2.66ghz cores. Clovertown will be clocked lower overall than the existing processors, so if the Mac Pro is updated to quad cores soon, octo 2.66ghz will probably be priced in line with the current quad 3ghz (+$800). The quad Mac Pro is really tremendously powerful.

I have a Mac Pro, and I have to say I'm in love with it. I was worried about Rosetta apps in particular, but they barely run slower than they did on my old dual G5.

 

[twoodcc]

yeah, i say go ahead and get it now

 

[SRSound]

Thanks for the quick replies! So is it fair to say that I could experience a faster user experience with 4 2.66GHz cores then with 8 2.33GHz cores (for example) assuming I never max out all of the cores? If so, I suppose you're right and I should just get it - I have no doubt it will be an absolute pleasure to use either way

 

[FFTT]

While the idea of quad cores may sound attractive in a super-workstation,
the current MacPro is nearly dead silent which is perfect for an audio environment.

It's also going to be quite a while before developers catch up to these additional multi cores in their software and it's a safe bet that you're going to need even more FB ECC RAM to push an 8 core machine.

I understand that this is a major upgrade for even the best of studios when you add in the cost and availability of new UB software, audio cards and other related gear.

If your workflow has reached a point where you need a new machine now, then
I see no reason to wait, but if you are comfortable waiting until the Rev "B"
Mac Pro specs are released, then you'll have that extra peace of mind knowing
all of your alternatives.

 

[macman2790]

wait for the 80 core processor intel will release in 5 years

jk, thought i'd do a "mulitimedia" style reply where the important message is in the title.


No hard feelings multimedia, its just a joke

 

[THX1139]

Having extra processors isn't going to speed up your computer unless the software can split the tasks to the cores. As it is, the current MacPro under-utilizes the processors for everyday tasks. It's not until you get into rendering or multiprocessor operations that multiple cores will come into play. That's why the core duo at a faster processor cycle and better memory latency is faster than a Woodcrest in single threaded tasks. Gamers? So, you could hold out for the next generation, but unless your work processes and software take advantage of the additional processors, it's a waste of time and money. Besides, if you find a need for extra processing power (not speed) in the future, you can always swap out for the new processors. In the meantime, think about all the work you won't be able to do while you wait for something that may cost too much or might not be what you need.

Finally... what makes you think that Apple is going to update to Clovertown right away? They certainly didn't jump on the new Coreduo 2 chips, so I doubt they will bump the MacPros before the beginning of next year. Don't worry, your investment will be safe for a long time.

 

[SRSound]

It's funny that in the recording industry, half of us (on the production end) are drooling over the next best technology (be it a computer, software or specific audio processing tools) while the other half of us search to the ends of the earth for the oldest "pure" analog equipment and despise the constantly evolving digital-realm technologies. I've been trying to draw comprimise between the two, but as you can see I'm still a sucker for the next best thing. In terms of noise levels, the computer will be housed in a custom isolation box so that isnt a huge concern - but I always have to laugh when I hear a demo with fan or hard drive noise in the background. In terms of practicallity, however, I have reached a point in my workflow where I need a more powerful machine to complete projects in a reasonable time frame, yet I dont want to cut myself short of a better machine by jumping the gun. Also, I have no idea if Apple will even introduce a clovertown option, but that's why I belong to macRUMORS I trust the "more-informed" on this forum to bring me up to speed!

The continued support and advice I get here is invaluable, thank you all!

 

[Umbongo]

what are the chances of a faster processor speed per core at a similar price or just more cores for a similar price.

Zero chance, while the 2.66Ghz woodcrests could go down in price from Intel and in turn component resellers, it wouldn't be enough for Apple to change pricing.

 

[Chundles]

You Have To Capitalise Every Word In The Title.

jk, thought i'd do a "mulitimedia" style reply where the important message is in the title.


No hard feelings multimedia, its just a joke

You Have To Capitalise Every Word In The Title. And copy the title into the body of the message to fully imitate Mm.

 

[gammamonk]

Despite what most people on this forum say, I prefer to get a machine near the end of it's revision cycle. They seem to get the bugs worked out a bit better. Whenever a new product is released, these forums fill up with people complaining how hosed their new $3000 computer is.

I want a Mac Pro, and if I had the spending money, I would get one right now. This revision has been out long enough that the kinks should be ironed out. (not that I've heard of any on the Mac Pro to begin with)

 

[SRSound]

Despite what most people on this forum say, I prefer to get a machine near the end of it's revision cycle. They seem to get the bugs worked out a bit better. Whenever a new product is released, these forums fill up with people complaining how hosed their new $3000 computer is.

Good Point. It really seems like there will always be a new technology coming out that screws up all the old stuff, but we just have to deal with it