Quad-Core "Nehalem" vs. Jan. '08 Mac Pro

[c073186]

I currently have the 8-core version of Apple's January 2008 Mac Pros and I am looking at the new Mac Pros released in July. And I was wondering... how would the quad-core Nehalem model compare to the eight-core Mac Pro that was released in January '08? I don't recall the processor names of that Mac Pro... but I was just wondering if it would be a worthwhile upgrade or if I'm actually better off with my old, eight-core, instead of the new, quad-core. Can someone offer any advice on this? Would the newer quad-cores be faster than the older eight-cores?

Thanks.

 

[Wild-Bill]

You're better off with what you have now. I have the same and I am more than happy with it. I expect to get about 5 years out of it before upgrading.

The way processor tech is evolving, software is still trying to catch up to utilize all those cores. The 08 Mac Pro was the best price/performance Mac Pro Apple produced. Everything after is woefully overpriced.

 

[ryan0402]

yes they would be faster but what do you use the computer for? Many programs do not use all eight cores even the high end programs. You could also just upgrade the graphics card and hardrive but that all depends on your line of work

 

[sboerup]

I had the 2008 MP, upgraded to the hexacore when it was first announced, very glad I did.

 

[alphaod]

I had the 2008 MP, upgraded to the hexacore when it was first announced, very glad I did.

But that's not the quad core Nehalem from 2009

 

[Yukon Joe]

I currently have the 8-core version of Apple's January 2008 Mac Pros and I am looking at the new Mac Pros released in July. And I was wondering... how would the quad-core Nehalem model compare to the eight-core Mac Pro that was released in January '08? I don't recall the processor names of that Mac Pro... but I was just wondering if it would be a worthwhile upgrade or if I'm actually better off with my old, eight-core, instead of the new, quad-core. Can someone offer any advice on this? Would the newer quad-cores be faster than the older eight-cores?

Thanks.

I doubt it, but what are you running on your MP?

I have the quad-core '08, and I know I never come close to maxing out all 4 processors...

 

[Techhie]

I have both sitting here: the 2009 Quad 2.66 and 2008 Octad 2.8.

Really, they are virtually on the same level, with the 8-core slightly edging out the quad in terms of render times. Unless you do a lot of work dependent on RAM clock, go with whichever is cheaper.

Of course, a new 6-core would beat them both, but that wasn't the question I was asked

 

[Honumaui]

what speed is your 8 core ? and how much memory ?
what is the one you are looking at in speed ?
what do you do with your computer ? PS or video or music or ?
is it tied in with your living in anyway ?

I have a 2008 8 core 2.8 also a new 4 core 3.2 have not had to much time to test them against eachother but the new one is quicker ? how much
in the PS test from retouch artist about 2 seconds so 13 vs 15 ?
more in digilloyds test and going to do some LR tests this week


depending on what you do ? I would say hold your machine our 3.2 is replacing a 1,1 machine and our 3,1 like yours is staying but it got a new face lift of storage
basically I skip one generation of macs and then that middle year I put money in storage instead

so depending on what you do ? their might be ways to make it quicker but I think first you need to give what speed how much memory and current discs ?