I am not getting the new one as the base 8 core config is just too expensive and not worth it, and the quad core config has the same price as the 8 core hapertown base config and there is no way that it is as fast, no matter what apple says. The only way I'd get one would be for the 8 core 2.66 or 2.93, but they are definitely overpriced... so until then, I am staying with my hapertown 8 core 3.2
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Whats keeping you from getting a new Mac Pro?
- Thread starter illegalprelude
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I never believed in hyperthreading. I'll wait for the true 8 core chip when I upgrade. Happy with my 2.8 octo.
Well I'm waiting also for more specs information concerning the 3500 series (aka Quad 2,93) to replacing my Mac Pro Quad 2,66 (first gen).
The 8 GB of ram max is not a problem for me. I'm working on DTP with Indesign CS4 (2 or 3 docs open. 96 pages A4 with a lot of pictures, well a magazine), Photoshop CS4, Acrobat 9, Mail, Safari, iTunes, Pages, Aperture, Font Explorer Pro, Things, Evernote, iCal, etc. and... sometimes WoW without problems at all. All those Apps open without paging to disk.
So again for me 8 GB are not the problem.
What I would like to know for the 3500 series is :
Turbo Boost is On. I can use some power on poor threaded software like Adobe.
QPI is 6,4 GT/s. Faster Access to RAM.
Real world differences (on a Mac) between 2 and 3 RAM channels.
The noise of the 4870 Ati card 🙂
The 8 GB of ram max is not a problem for me. I'm working on DTP with Indesign CS4 (2 or 3 docs open. 96 pages A4 with a lot of pictures, well a magazine), Photoshop CS4, Acrobat 9, Mail, Safari, iTunes, Pages, Aperture, Font Explorer Pro, Things, Evernote, iCal, etc. and... sometimes WoW without problems at all. All those Apps open without paging to disk.
So again for me 8 GB are not the problem.
What I would like to know for the 3500 series is :
Turbo Boost is On. I can use some power on poor threaded software like Adobe.
QPI is 6,4 GT/s. Faster Access to RAM.
Real world differences (on a Mac) between 2 and 3 RAM channels.
The noise of the 4870 Ati card 🙂
Depending on who makes the card it could be loud our quiet. ATI's own boards run fairly hot, but are quiet. Most of the third party vendors have quieter boards with bigger fans and cooler running cards.
miniConvert
macrumors 68040
Well, needing to clear out my home office and find something to do with all the old, crappy hardware in there is a pretty big obstacle. Plus it'd be nice to buy a Mac Pro with Snow Leopard on it rather than having to upgrade... maybe the processors will be faster/cheaper by then, too.
I can see me getting one, but I'm not in any hurry. For anyone who 'needs' a new Mac Pro, and has been waiting for it, I really can't see any reason to wait even longer...
I can see me getting one, but I'm not in any hurry. For anyone who 'needs' a new Mac Pro, and has been waiting for it, I really can't see any reason to wait even longer...
I keep hearing these 'Mac Pros are for business' arguments. And in my case that is rather BS.
The problem is that this update has rather useless configurations for many businesses.
It misses the target audience!
I was ready to buy a high-end Mac Pro, waiting for the upgrade. Since I do 3D work more render threads are always better so Nehalem CPUs are a good choice.
Then Apple introduces new machines with an anemic Nvidia GPU and pretty laughable max RAM.
For 3D work you want at least 1GB VRAM, 1.5GB is better. Anything less is rather hindering. And with a machine that costs $8,000+ you don't want to start out with a bad compromise.
And for 16 threads a max RAM of 32GB never gets you more than 2GB per thread. That's not a lot either.
So that's my problem. I'm hearing all these 'Mac Pros are for business' arguments to justify the current release. Sure, the price is high yet still for a business that's OK. But the new configurations are useless!
The previous generation of Mac Pros was a lot more suitable to my business than this 'update'. At least they had a high-end Nvidia Quadro option. And the thread/RAM ratio was better.
Now one could argue, get a Mac Pro now and a new graphics card later.
But in the past Apple has not sold the Quadro card on its own, it was only available with a Mac Pro. If Apple pulls the same thing again then I'm stuffed.
If they were forthcoming and telling its customers that they will release a new Pro Quadro option once Snow Leopard ships and that this card will be available separately, then I might be tempted.
But Apple never gives its business customers any information. Which is just killing their business (at least in my case).
Until then for my business the new Mac Pro is a massive step backwards and I'm very disappointed.
Now I'm struggling between getting the previous high-end model vs. getting an HP - which means bye-bye Apple for good...
the only two things that are keeping me from getting the new one are:
1. i have a 2008 mac pro with dual 2.8 quads, 12gb, 3.25tb hd, a 3870 and a 2600. i'm happy with it and it is plenty fast.
2. i'll wait until the 6 core chips are added, or better. skip a generation. i don't need a 1-20% speed increase in what i do because i'm not really in a hurry and a couple of seconds to a couple of minutes really isn't that big of a deal.
i used to be a big time pc gamer that upgraded every little thing when there was something new, and now in my prime i know what i have is plenty fast and handles all my needs.
although, the gamer in me wouldn't mind a 4870 or two.
1. i have a 2008 mac pro with dual 2.8 quads, 12gb, 3.25tb hd, a 3870 and a 2600. i'm happy with it and it is plenty fast.
2. i'll wait until the 6 core chips are added, or better. skip a generation. i don't need a 1-20% speed increase in what i do because i'm not really in a hurry and a couple of seconds to a couple of minutes really isn't that big of a deal.
i used to be a big time pc gamer that upgraded every little thing when there was something new, and now in my prime i know what i have is plenty fast and handles all my needs.
although, the gamer in me wouldn't mind a 4870 or two.
My First Gen MacPro is more than enough so far. So I cannot justify getting one since I will not notice a performance increase since I do not even tax the 2006 model.
Plus 4500 bucks for a dual 2.66Ghz seems like a steep price increase. I though we were undergoing an economic deflationary period.
Plus 4500 bucks for a dual 2.66Ghz seems like a steep price increase. I though we were undergoing an economic deflationary period.
Q: Whats keeping you from geting a new Mac Pro?
A: The horrible selection of Video Cards I am forced to choose from 🙁
A: The horrible selection of Video Cards I am forced to choose from 🙁
Nothing. I've been running a Dell quad Q6600 for over a year now. I owe Apple a few bucks. Should be here next week.
The main reason I'm holding off is because a few weeks ago I could spec out the top of the line mac pro 3.2 octo for around $5000, whereas today the top of the line 2.93 octo is around $6400..... That's a huge increase. I'll wait for now and see what happens down the road...
I'd say I'm waiting for a good GPU to be put in a mac, but apparently that's never going to happen...
I'd say I'm waiting for a good GPU to be put in a mac, but apparently that's never going to happen...
Nice thing about the 1st gen mac pro's is you can upgrade from a quad to an octo pretty reasonable from ebay. Not hard to do. Getting ready to do my 2ghz quad to a 2.33 octo. Others here have already done it. From what I have read, a 1st gen upgraded to 3ghz octo comes close to the 2008 2.8 octo. But those are still to pricey for me now. The lower ones are cheaper.
marbles
macrumors 68000
freecycle it!! (see sig) or you could give it to a kids or old folks home maybe ?
Doc69
macrumors 6502a
20% increase in price gives us how much increase in speed?
I'm also waiting for the real world benchmarks before taking the plunge. I'm wondering if the nearly 20% increase in price, of the basic 2.26 octo model over the old 2.8 octo, can be justified.
With the 2nd generation Mac Pros, price went from $2499 to $2799 but they gave us a slightly higher clock speeds, faster bus, faster memory and eight cores instead of four. That was a great deal. But this time, the price has increased 20% and the clock speed is down 20%. I know that the Nehalem architecture has many great advantages and that it's like comparing apples to oranges, I'm just skeptical that it can be that much faster.
I would be very disappointed if we only see a noticeable speed increase in multi-core tasks, like video encoding, as I'm skeptical that the 2.26 can be considerable faster than the old 2.8 in single threaded apps. $3000 should be able to buy you a killer Mac Pro that is considerably faster than last years model. I guess we'll find out next week. I'll keep my fingers crossed.
I'm also waiting for the real world benchmarks before taking the plunge. I'm wondering if the nearly 20% increase in price, of the basic 2.26 octo model over the old 2.8 octo, can be justified.
With the 2nd generation Mac Pros, price went from $2499 to $2799 but they gave us a slightly higher clock speeds, faster bus, faster memory and eight cores instead of four. That was a great deal. But this time, the price has increased 20% and the clock speed is down 20%. I know that the Nehalem architecture has many great advantages and that it's like comparing apples to oranges, I'm just skeptical that it can be that much faster.
I would be very disappointed if we only see a noticeable speed increase in multi-core tasks, like video encoding, as I'm skeptical that the 2.26 can be considerable faster than the old 2.8 in single threaded apps. $3000 should be able to buy you a killer Mac Pro that is considerably faster than last years model. I guess we'll find out next week. I'll keep my fingers crossed.
Only thing keeping me from getting one is snow leopard. I'm ready to upgrade into an intel processor so I can run windows. I need it for some apps that aren't on mac. IF they run as good as the reviews are saying, its worth the money to me. Guess we'll find out when more people start getting them.
Bubba Satori
Suspended
Here's what a customer told me about why he didn't get a MacPro. He had just bought a Nikon D300 and Lightroom. He was replacing his old 3.4Ghz P4 XP box with 1GB memory, 64 MB video card and 120GB HD.
I showed him the last gen MacPro single quad for $2,399. He said his daughter had one and was using Aperture.
He asked what a similar PC would cost. I showed him a new Gateway i7, 8GB memory, 750GB HD and 1GB Nvidia 210 video card. Faster CPU, four times as much memory, twice as much HD and a much better standard video card. $800.
I showed him the last gen MacPro single quad for $2,399. He said his daughter had one and was using Aperture.
He asked what a similar PC would cost. I showed him a new Gateway i7, 8GB memory, 750GB HD and 1GB Nvidia 210 video card. Faster CPU, four times as much memory, twice as much HD and a much better standard video card. $800.
Value or lack there of, is what is keeping me.
I really wanted to move up to the mac pro this year, don't have the funds yet, but am working on it. I don't see any way I could go with the crippled quad core, costs $300 more than 2008 quad core and lost a lot of expandability(second cpu slot and 8gb ram limit).
The new octo core would end up costing me probably $1000CAD more than I was expecting with 2008's prices, and with video editing/rendering the new architecture is not a huge performance boost, especially not large enough to warrant the inflated price.
I will get a mac pro if I can find a decently priced 2008 model when I have the funds or apple restructures the pricing/tiers to match last years machines.
Video card options don't really phase me, I would be getting the 4870 either way which I think is more than enough for my needs(if I want a gaming machine I'd build one for half the price, not that I wouldn't game with the mac pro a bit 😉 ).
I really wanted to move up to the mac pro this year, don't have the funds yet, but am working on it. I don't see any way I could go with the crippled quad core, costs $300 more than 2008 quad core and lost a lot of expandability(second cpu slot and 8gb ram limit).
The new octo core would end up costing me probably $1000CAD more than I was expecting with 2008's prices, and with video editing/rendering the new architecture is not a huge performance boost, especially not large enough to warrant the inflated price.
I will get a mac pro if I can find a decently priced 2008 model when I have the funds or apple restructures the pricing/tiers to match last years machines.
Video card options don't really phase me, I would be getting the 4870 either way which I think is more than enough for my needs(if I want a gaming machine I'd build one for half the price, not that I wouldn't game with the mac pro a bit 😉 ).
bozz2006
macrumors 68030
Mac gets a lot of "switchers", but if the proposed switch is into a mac pro, that's gonna be a hard sell.
Epic Fail. Some of the biggest POS computers out there. Beyond the fact that its a windows unit, Gateway uses the bottom of the barrel parts. Plus, there is a lot more to a Mac Pro then just spec for spec, aka expandability but thats another topic that will just go round and round 🙂
money
for the type of mac pro I'd want (not the single quad core), I can't afford it/it's outside of my budget. I will be getting a octo-2.8Ghz previous gen
for the type of mac pro I'd want (not the single quad core), I can't afford it/it's outside of my budget. I will be getting a octo-2.8Ghz previous gen