Resale value of a 1-CPU Pro?

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by bigwig, Mar 25, 2008.

  1. bigwig macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2005
    #1
    I'm thinking about saving a few bucks and getting the 1-CPU (4-core) Mac Pro. Adjusting for the difference in base price, does the 1-CPU Pro have significantly worse resale value than the 2-CPU model?
     
  2. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #2
    Get the dual processor model. The money you save one the single one isn't worth it.
     
  3. pbkiller macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Location:
    Puerto Rico
    #3
    Well the 8-core is a whole different machine than the 4-core, although they share the same case. Some people need a little bit more power than the iMac, but an 8-core is total overkill, and the $500 difference for 4 more cores is just enough. I have a 2.66 quad, plenty of power for me, but an octo would be too much, and I don't want a laptop processor on my desktop (that's why the iMac is a no-go for me)

    Although we agree that the octo is a far better spec'd machine for the money, look at the difference between the 2.8 iMac and the 1cpu quad pro. For the same price he gets a true desktop with far more power.
    With those $500 he "saves", he can expand storage and upgrade ram, and if he manages those $500 well, maybe throw in a decent monitor. I think it will hold its value pretty good.
     
  4. FF_productions macrumors 68030

    FF_productions

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2005
    Location:
    Mt. Prospect, Illinois
    #4
    While he saves $500 and spends it towards other hardware, he can never expand it to 8-Cores without voiding the warranty or tinkering with the machine.

    When instead, he should future proof himself with the fastest possible config and worry about upgrades later.

    5 years from now won't you wish you had twice the cores?
     
  5. bigwig thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2005
    #5
    It hasn't escaped my notice that the retail price of that second Xeon is more than $500, so it's certainly cheaper to pay for it up front. But as the previous poster said, 8-cores would be overkill. In 5 years whatever is available will be so much better than what I have now, not to mention the fact that I probably can't install any of it in my machine (by then we'll have new CPUs, DDR4, SATA III, etc), that I don't really believe in upgrading. Sell the old machine and buy a new one. Which is why I'm asking about resale value. If the single-cpu machines don't hold their value I didn't save anything by buying one.
     
  6. Nordichund macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2007
    Location:
    Oslo, Norway
    #6
    The way technology is going, and what is around the corner, 5 years from now an 8 core machine will be like a Commodore 64 in today's market value. Well maybe not that bad, but I guarantee it will certainly be very outdated.
     
  7. MIDI_EVIL macrumors 65816

    MIDI_EVIL

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2006
    Location:
    UK
    #7
    Go with the Quad and save your money for upgrades or a nice monitor.

    8 Cores is overkill for many people, including me, a video artist/photographer working with enormous film scans.

    Go Quad now, and get a new Mac Pro in 2/3 years, that sounds like more fun to me.
     
  8. bigwig thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2005
    #8
    That's kind of what I'm thinking. Get a quad, sell in 2 years, buy a 1-CPU octo-core Nehalem, sell in 2 years, buy a 16-core Sandy Bridge, etc. One of the less obvious reasons I want a Pro is that it has ECC memory. Memory configurations are getting so large now that without ECC silent corruption becomes a statistical certainty. As a FileVault user I'm a huge fan of end-to-end data integrity (I can't wait for read-write ZFS).
     
  9. krye macrumors 68000

    krye

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2007
    Location:
    USA
    #9
    Invest the money now on dual procs. The machine will be less obsolete for longer.
     
  10. pbkiller macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Location:
    Puerto Rico
    #10
    In 5 years my 2.66 quad will be like today's mac mini. While the 8 cores will keep him updated a bit longer, its value will be different. Remember the G5 quad? When it came out it was like $3500 in price, now a quad is $2200, maybe in a year could be like $1800. The quad's will become the next dual cores in a year or so. At that time the octo's will get "mainstream" and the 12 cores or whatever will be the "next big thing".

    The best way for him to get the best of both worlds would be with an octo core refurb. Of course if money is no issue, get the octo from scratch...
     
  11. StumpJumper macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2008
    #11
    bigwig, I'm in exactly the same boat. All being well I should be placing an order for a Single Processor 2.8 Mac Pro in the next couple of weeks, simply because I can't justify/afford the extra money that the 8-core costs (£320 more, here in the UK!).

    For that extra cash I can buy a decent amount of RAM and one or two extra hard disks.

    I currently use a Dual 2.5Ghz G5 that I bought when they were first released 3 and a half years ago. It really put things in perspective when I recently saw my dads new iMac export video files twice as quickly as my Power Mac!!

    With technology moving this quickly, anyone thinking that a computer they buy now will still be considered quick in 5 years is absolutely dreaming! I intend to spend the least amount of money now, then sell it and upgrade to something better in a couple of years. The single processor Mac Pro will still be a huge improvement over my current Power Mac :D
     
  12. nick9191 macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2008
    Location:
    Britain
    #12
    Get the old woodcrest model which is cheaper than a single cpu harper, then upgrade the hell out of it.
     
  13. pbkiller macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Location:
    Puerto Rico
    #13
    True.....:rolleyes:
     

Share This Page