Thinking about used Mac Pro - how much slower than my PC?

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by FlyPenFly, Jun 27, 2013.

  1. FlyPenFly macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2013
    #1
    I've reached my limit with Windows 8 and my self built PC. Starting a month ago it's been getting more and more unreliable and I'm just done with it.

    Current specs on the PC:
    Core i7 2600k
    16GB DDR3
    GTX470

    I'm thinking about picking up a friends Mac Pro, 2.93ghz Nehalem with Radeon 4870. I'll be moving over my SSDs and drives.

    Questions:

    My main heavy lifting on the PC is Lightroom 4 and 5. How much slower will the Mac Pro compared to my PC?

    Will I be able to move my Corsair XMS3 DDR3 RAM to the Mac Pro?

    What sort of cage will I need for my 2 SSD drives that are 2.5"?

    How much faster will XCode be than my Retina 13 2.5ghz?

    Is the CPU upgradeable?
     
  2. Ozfer macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2013
    Location:
    New England
    #2
    Your i7 will be faster. You may be able to upgrade the cpu but you will have to get another intel server xeon cpu and not an i7. It seems like the ram should work, but I have not upgraded that on many apples. The 4870 wont be extremely fast for today. Also you can get a 3.5 to 2.5 mounting bracket that allows you to install 2 2.5 inch drives from Amazon or Ebay.
     
  3. TheEasterBunny macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2013
    Location:
    Delaware
    #3
  4. FlyPenFly thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2013
    #4
    Would I be better off buying one of the newer iMacs?

    The Mac Pro is about $1300.
     
  5. FlyPenFly thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2013
    #5
  6. violst macrumors 6502

    violst

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2012
    #6
    It all depends on weather its a 4-core or 8-core? The 8-core 2.93ghz Nehalem is still a beast. It has a geekbench score of around 18000. Its the fasted 8 core mac pro apple made.

    If its the 4-core its still a capable system, but just ok as far as performance.
     
  7. Mike Valmike macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2012
    Location:
    Chandler, Arizona
    #7
    If you want to do this, I'd look toward the Haswell Mini refresh that is due any month now, because of the significant GPU improvement. In terms of the rest of the equation I think you're spot-on.
     
  8. GP-SE macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2013
    #8
    the i7 2600k is faster, I would get a new iMac if I was you.
    I have a 2.93Ghz Quad core Nehalem Mac Pro, it scores around 9000 on geek bench, my i7 2600k hackintosh scored around 13000.
     
  9. FlyPenFly thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2013
    #9
    The only two things I do that is really CPU heavy are Lightroom 5 and XCode.

    It's unclear if Lightroom 5 really benefits from quad core vs dual core.
     
  10. Tesselator macrumors 601

    Tesselator

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2008
    Location:
    Japan
    #10
    LR4.x and 5.x do benefit from more cores - up to about 4 cores and almost completely tapering off flat at 8 cores from my testing. LR however, is the slowest dog in the race - also extensively tested. As far as v5.x having any speed improvements over v4.x the answer is no, not much: http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1220376/0
     

Share This Page