Torn with buying a new Mac! Opinions needed

Discussion in 'Buying Tips and Advice' started by EHUnlucky7x9@ao, Mar 25, 2008.

  1. EHUnlucky7x9@ao macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2006
    Location:
    New Jersey
    #1
    I'm trying to think logically here...

    I currently have a 2.16Ghz Macbook.... I can't stand the time i wait encoding video... especially using FFMPegX to convert avi to iPod.... or even having Toast convert the avi to DVD-Video. It feels like its forever!

    Anyways, I'm considering buying a 2.2Ghz Macbook Pro.... how significant would the encoding time lapse be? Faster?

    I'm thinking of purchasing the CURRENT generation 2.0Ghz or the 24" 2.4Ghz iMac... in hopes that the encoding time would be cut down. Would it? Alot?

    I'm also thinking... why not just add a little more cash and purchase a 2.8Ghz Quad-core mac pro....I know that would definitely cut encoding time down into a few mins. Right?

    If anyone can help me make a decision, I'd be very thankful.
     
  2. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #2
    I have a dirty secret. I use Handbrake on my PC to rip DVDs. :eek:

    If you can find a reasonable program to do AVI to DVD with quad core support in Windows a Dell is ~$600 away. A slightly faster Core 2 Duo Mac isn't going to be the bang that you need.
     
  3. squeeks macrumors 68040

    squeeks

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2007
    Location:
    Florida
    #3
    i totally agree, a quad core PC can do it much faster than a mac if thats all you want to do, because a newer macbook isnt going to be much difference at all
     
  4. EHUnlucky7x9@ao thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2006
    Location:
    New Jersey
    #4
    Yeah, but i don't have any incline to play in a Windows environment anymore. To spend 600 on a machine that i can't sit on and use for other things aside from enconding, would be a waste....right? So an iMac or MBP would be a foolish attempt to shorten these hours of encoding at all?
     
  5. flopticalcube macrumors G4

    flopticalcube

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    In the velcro closure of America's Hat
    #5
    And handbrake comes for Linux as well, so no need for Windows.
     
  6. squeeks macrumors 68040

    squeeks

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2007
    Location:
    Florida
    #6
    thats about all my AMD 6000+ system does you wanna upgrade for faster encoding, 600 will get you a nice system for encoding, just keep your current macbook for everyday use
     
  7. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #7
    Keep in mind it's a Q6600 based computer. ;) There are cheaper options but they won't be that much faster then the 2.16 GHz Core 2 Duo.

    Quite true. I haven't played with it though. There's a GUI right? Not that you can't just copy paste the command line command and arguements.
     
  8. EHUnlucky7x9@ao thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2006
    Location:
    New Jersey
    #8
    Would it be cheaper if i bought the Motherboard and CPU from newegg and build my own quad machine? Also, would a mini-ITX computer case suffice for housing a Q6600 CPU? I'm hoping to get a small form factor case so i can keep it on my desktop....something along the square size of the Mac mini...but it can obviously be taller....yet not as tall as the Mac Pro or standard computer desktop you would see in Bestbuy... is it a plausible idea?
     
  9. iMpathetic macrumors 68030

    iMpathetic

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2007
    Location:
    IMBY
    #9
    As far as I know, a Mini-ITX is going to be seriously stressed under a Q6600.
     
  10. flopticalcube macrumors G4

    flopticalcube

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    In the velcro closure of America's Hat
    #10
    Unfortunately no. And this is one of my peeves about Linux (although, personally, I am comfortable with CLI). The Windows version may work under Wine, however.

    You won't get any desktop PC to perform even as well as a mini in the same form factor. Go with standard parts (miniATX, microATX or FlexATX) to get the best bang for your buck but look into getting quiet or fanless power supply/CPU cooling. The micro boards are the size of a standard letter so you could conceivably build quite a small system from it. Just remember to make sure you have adequate cooling for the Q6600 and the GPU.
     
  11. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #11
    You're going to spend much more then US$559 to get a mini-ITX board based computer. Even if you go Micro-ATX you're only going to achieve parity with the Dell. The only small form factor computer that's really close to being worth its price is a refurbished Mac mini. You can an SFF Optiplex 755 but it's not worth it for a smaller volume case.

    On a side note, what's with the desire to make Mac mini sized Windows machines?
     
  12. pastrychef macrumors 601

    pastrychef

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2006
    Location:
    New York City, NY
    #12
  13. cohibadad macrumors 6502a

    cohibadad

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2007
    #13
    switching to any core 2 duo machine isn't going to improve your encoding times very much. quad will essentially halve the time and octo 1/4 the time. Mac Pro is the way to go if you have the cash. I haven't looked recently but aren't the quad core CPUs alone about a grand a piece if you are building?
     
  14. EHUnlucky7x9@ao thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2006
    Location:
    New Jersey
    #14
    No desire to make a Mac Mini windows machine... i'm looking to cut down the time i wait on encoding video. Use to have a 2.66 Mac Pro, but it was so big and I wanted to go mobile...hoping it wasn't too bad...so i sold it to 4JNA. Now i have the Macbook and i'm starting to work with lots of video encoding again after a year's worth of no video work. So I want to have the processing power again...and i was told the Q6600 would be significantly faster than my 2.16 Macbook. BUT, i want to be able to keep the machine ON my desk so i don't have to have it on the floor under my table. So... i was hoping to get a small case... for a custom build of a machine that's a quad-core.... to put on my desk that takes up the same width space of a Mac Mini.... and smaller height than a Mac Pro.... to work on video encoding.
     
  15. dukeblue91 macrumors 65816

    dukeblue91

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Location:
    Raleigh, NC
    #15
    Well if you are thinking of buying a MBP you might as well go and buy the Quad MP.
    The MP will give you pretty much all the power you need and when you feel the need to spend some money again you can add stuff to the MP and it will feel like a new machine again :D
     
  16. EHUnlucky7x9@ao thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2006
    Location:
    New Jersey
    #16
    No, I've seen the Q6600 at $250... which isn't bad... and others are $300. Plus, if i can have the ability to keep it small and simple than the giant case of the Mac Pro... it would be ideal.
     
  17. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #17
    If you're willing to pay for the size then the Optiplex 755 SFF is the best option since it can sport the Q6600/6700. Keep in mind size sacrifices might mean you don't get a full sized 5.25" optical drive as well.

    http://www.dell.com/content/products/productdetails.aspx/optix_755?c=us&cs=555&l=en&s=biz

    http://www.dell.com/downloads/global/products/optix/en/opti_755_techspecs.pdf

    H: 12.45"
    W: 3.65"
    D: 13.40"
     

Share This Page