So, i'm a video editor and have a mac mini. Now, the Mini really isnt doing it for me anymore. So my question is, should i buy a Mac pro from 2007 or 2008 for around $1300 refurbished from some website, or get a 21.5 inch imac for $1200 that's only dual core but has faster clock speed, turbo boost, and hyper threading? Im buying in summer so new imacs will probably be out by then, but what should i go for for video editing?? BTW the mac pro would have a clock speed of 2.66 ghz.
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.
New iMac or old Mac Pro?
- Thread starter Squicken
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Well, im working with HD footage and the computer has to last me at least 5 years. The upgrade options on the imac are very slim.
They're the same on a near 5 year old Pro. You're not going to be able to upgrade the GPU and even though you can fit more RAM in that than an iMac, it won't help.
The answer is the iMac in either case. The only other answer is to up your budget.
No Pro
Don't get the Pro because it uses the intel core 2 duo. It's still good, but it's fading away rapidly and getting old. The clock speed is also lower than the iMacs. and the 07 or 08 mac pro would have been running leopard, which means when Lion comes out this summer, it would be originally 2 OPERATING SYSTEMS BEHIND.. Not good. Lol. When the new iMacs come out, they will be even faster. iMac al around.
Don't get the Pro because it uses the intel core 2 duo. It's still good, but it's fading away rapidly and getting old. The clock speed is also lower than the iMacs. and the 07 or 08 mac pro would have been running leopard, which means when Lion comes out this summer, it would be originally 2 OPERATING SYSTEMS BEHIND.. Not good. Lol. When the new iMacs come out, they will be even faster. iMac al around.
Last edited by a moderator:
The Mac Pro uses a Xeon chip, not the Core 2 Duo. You're mixing it up with the iMacs and MB/Ps.
Being two OSes behind is meaningless if it still works fine. Though no one knows whether Lion will require a 64-bit Mac or not.
Clock speed isn't everything. A quad-core will thrash that 3.6 GHz processor on video editing or anything else that uses more than two cores.
That very XEON chip the 2006-2008 Mac Pro's use is, however, based on the same architecture as the desktop or mobile Core 2 Duo/Quad chips. The architecture is in fact called Core, respectively Core 2 for the 2008 models.
So except for the "duo" cootersgarage6 was perfectly right with his statement.
I'd go with the iMac. It will get you better CPU/GPU performance, and you can use your existing monitor as a second screen.
There are some drawbacks of course. Your maximum memory will be more limited. Your GPU won't be upgradeable. Instead of internal SATA drives, you are going to have external hard drive enclosures with wires and AC/DC adapters all over the place, and they'll be limited to FW800 speeds.
If you have a lot of drives or use software that will take advantage of four cores, or lots of memory, it becomes more of a toss-up.
But heck, if you're using a Mac Mini now, either way will be a big boost.
There are some drawbacks of course. Your maximum memory will be more limited. Your GPU won't be upgradeable. Instead of internal SATA drives, you are going to have external hard drive enclosures with wires and AC/DC adapters all over the place, and they'll be limited to FW800 speeds.
If you have a lot of drives or use software that will take advantage of four cores, or lots of memory, it becomes more of a toss-up.
But heck, if you're using a Mac Mini now, either way will be a big boost.
Op did not ask about quad cores. he asked about a 2007 or 2008 with a 2.66ghz clock speed for 1300 bucks as a refurb.
that is really a mid 2006 model at his price. see link
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_Pro
a 2010 iMac should be better if he buys it from the refurb store it will be close to his budget.
What processor configuration do you think the Mac Pro has?
ALL Mac Pro's have (ever) had at least 4 cores, either on one chip or in case of the 2006 models, on two.
However, given that FCP is mostly single threaded (as of yet) the iMac will be faster, no doubt about that.
Rendering wise, the Mac Pro will be faster, though.
Tough decision.
Eh perhaps, but that doesn't change that the Mac Pros far outstripped their counterpart Macs of the time.
I know, I had one of those machines the very exact model that he's looking to buy. It had two dual-core processors as Transporteur said, by definition four cores.