Which refurb?

Discussion in 'Buying Tips and Advice' started by Fogtripper, Apr 19, 2008.

  1. Fogtripper macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2008
    #1
    Looking to replace my recently deceased PM tower. Rather long in the tooth, the motherboard finally took a poo.

    Apple has a few refurbs, and I am stuck trying to decide between these 2:
    [​IMG]

    The 2.8GHz is $100 cheaper, and has a slightly larger drive and 1G more RAM (2x1G). It also has the ATI 2600 XT.

    However, I am thinking the better processor of the 3GHz trumps the overpriced RAM and HD in the former.

    The pre-installed RAM is not much of a concern, as either way I would be upping it with additional (and much cheaper) 3rd party chips. Most all of my "important" client files are currently residing on an external drive, so the internal is not a huge factor. Both setups are easily expandable.

    So, is the 3GHz a better choice for $100 more?
     
  2. techound1 macrumors 68000

    techound1

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2006
    #2
    IMHO the 3 is the better deal, especially since you're loading up on after-market RAM. If it helps you to think about it this way, you're adding far less than 1% to the cost of the machine for a faster processor.
     
  3. digitalnicotine macrumors 65816

    digitalnicotine

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2008
    Location:
    USA
    #3
    I agree, go for the faster processor. When it's time to upgrade, all the other options that differ between these systems will allow 3rd party suppliers at lower costs, that will continue to get lower over time, and can easily be swapped out yourself. The processors/heatsinks are harder to find, harder to upgrade (depending on geekiness factor).

    The difference may seem minimal on a single or dual proc., but on a quad, I think it will be noticeable, and may potentially extend your use of the system. Good luck to you. :)
     
  4. windowpain macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2008
    Location:
    Japan
    #4
    Another vote for the 3 gigHz. The difference in hard disk size is pretty small, and not big enough that it should influence your decision.

    like you (and others) have already said, everything else is expandable, the processor isn't.

    In a years time you wont look back and feel you could have saved money on a slower processor, thats for sure. Get the faster one! :cool:
     
  5. zainjetha macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2007
    #5
    Definitely 3.0ghz... processor cant be upgraded like RAM or HDD...
     
  6. nick9191 macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2008
    Location:
    Britain
    #6
    I'm going to vote for the 2.8, its much newer technology than the old one which is from 2006! and although lower in clock speed, it is likely the same speed.
     
  7. Fogtripper thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2008
    #7
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    Really? They are both dual quad-core.


    Went with the 3GHz.

    Should be looking for space to set the gargantuan tower thursday or friday. :)
     
  8. NewbieNerd macrumors 6502a

    NewbieNerd

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    #8
    http://www.barefeats.com/harper.html

    Current 2.8 beats last gen 3.0 in all but one test. Even if the 2.8 is better than the 3.0 only marginally, you still opted to pay more for older technology, less hard drive, worse video card, mostly lower specs (other than the proc speed). I'm sure you will be plenty happy with your 3.0, but I would have gone with the 2.8 myself.
     
  9. Fogtripper thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2008
    #9
    OK, I am left scratching my head here now.
    Why is the 3.0 being sold as between the 2.8 and the 3.2?

    (Is the 3.0 not a Harpertown?)

    Edit:
    Spoke with Apple. The 3.0 I was looking at is indeed last years Clover Processor. I switched the order to the (confirmed) Harpertown one:
    [​IMG]
     
  10. nick9191 macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2008
    Location:
    Britain
    #10
    No its the previous generation Woodcrest. Hence the less RAM, rubbish video card, small hard drive.
     

Share This Page