it has room for 8 if you take out the opticals and use an aftermarket hard drive mount... there are only 6 SATA ports though so 2 would have to be IDE. There are no terabyte drives that use IDE.
You're right my bad. My math isn't what it used to be. It's only 8. 4 in the sleds, 2 PATA where the opticals would go plus 2 more SATA in the same optical bay area. That assumes you remove the optical DVD±RW drive and put it in a FW or USB 2 case outside.
Not sure what I was thinking when I wrote 10. Excuse me.
The proaudio point is very valid. Currently, Intel is no worth the trouble; however, give it few years and the things look very different. At that point the Quads have had +3 years of good use. The best studios do not depend on the host power but most of the audio is processed in hardware DSP chips anyway, so as long as the host is stable and the operator does not fear about it dying, there's usually no reason to upgrade.
it has room for 8 if you take out the opticals and use an aftermarket hard drive mount... there are only 6 SATA ports though so 2 would have to be IDE. There are no terabyte drives that use IDE.
You're right my bad. My math isn't what it used to be. It's only 8. 4 in the sleds, 2 PATA where the opticals would go plus 2 more SATA in the same optical bay area. That assumes you remove the optical DVD±RW drive and put it in a FW or USB 2 case outside.
Not sure what I was thinking when I wrote 10. Excuse me.
With that, you can cram 6 1TB SATA drives, and 2 750GB PATA drives, giving you 7.5 TB of data inside of the tower itself. Or 3.75TB if you RAID 1 or use Time Machine to back them up. (I'd highly recommend that, because man, backing up all that data could be a pain in the ass.)
If you can get the Quad for much cheaper than the mac pro, go for it. If its close or the same in price, go with the MP.