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.
2008 Mac Pro worth it?
- Thread starter jsmith823
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The 2008 MacPro 8-core 2.8 Ghz will work fine with Adobe PP and a Nvidia CUDA card. Watch this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=foLxsL5RU6k to see Premiere Pro at work. The MP used in the video is a 2010 but I downloaded the 30 trial of PP CS5 (2yrs ago) and got the same results! A possible issue for you would be HD speed if you have to edit multicam 4K or H264. In that case you could put a http://www.apricorn.com/products/desktop-ssd-hdd-upgrade-kits/vel-solox2.html in a PCIe slot and add a 6G SSD. The Adobe "Mercury" engine and how FCPX is written are the keys to the "older" system. Without them you would find yourself chasing hardware (nMP) just to edit non HD files.
Avid (the NLE I use) is in the process of getting out of the 20th century. They are giving themselves until 12-31-14 to do so!
Avid (the NLE I use) is in the process of getting out of the 20th century. They are giving themselves until 12-31-14 to do so!
Ive Got a MacPro 3,1 and a very well build i7 4770k over clocked to 4ghz under water cooling on very high end gear, set me back 5.2k, the pro is a twin 3.0ghz dual 4 cores, And Honestly in geek bench and aida 64 extreme bench marking and testing the mac pro is right up there with the 4770k, 800 points off.... When people say they are dated yeah they are old but ferout they still have some bloody power!, They do run a little warm, how i fixed that was turned the fans up a little now its sweet, Mines got an ssd, 5770, 2x 1tb drives and in editing and rendering its nearly quite a bit better then this years i7.
Buying old Mac Pros is a waste of money. Buy an even older PowerMac G5 and turn it into a hackintosh.
I scored 25,000 multi-score on my 5820k hacking @ 4.6 Ghz.
http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/1163983
I scored 25,000 multi-score on my 5820k hacking @ 4.6 Ghz.
http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/1163983
Last edited:
: Eek:
in what sense a waste of money?
and then build a hackintosh is not easy, you must do it right!
----------
hank you very much was what I was hoping to tell me one expert.
----------
: Mela:
thanks to you, in fact I do not expect a MacPro 2008 with the power of the model 2014, which are impossible to achieve, but at least a MacPro which works best in HD with the necessary changes, without spending too much money initially.
The 3.1 early 2008 Mac Pros are still reliable up to today. I've visited video editing shops and design agencies and some of them are still using the 2008 Mac Pros. These have help in meeting deadlines and earn incomes even though they're not the newest hardware. As long as good maintenance and optimizing the HD is sustained helps computers run well.
In the sense that you are spending a lot of money on old obsolete technology.
The 12 core real Mac Pros is the only cMP that can geek bench around 25k multicore like my overlocked 6 core Hackintosh. The catch is I only spent $1500 on my build with a GTX 980 and you'd be lucky to find a 12 core Mac Pro with their obsolete graphics card for that price.
For the cost of a real Mac Pro + upgrades you could just build a i7-5960X rig that would destroy it.
It's not as easy as plugging it in and turning it on to get a Mackintosh running but it's not insanely hard either. 9/10 in terms of PC difficulty. 100% worth it tho. And once you learn to build your first one the next one is much easier.
Last edited:
Geekbench is not very representative of real world use cases. It's fun for forum discussions but shouldn't be used for anything real world.
Not only that but all the upgrades you buy for the 3,1 can be dropped in a later 4-5,1 which is just what I'm going to do with my Solo X2, GTX 680, power extensions, SSD's etc.
If it wasn't for the Intel RST AHCI chipset driver issues with >2.2Tb drives in bootcamp for 7x64 (modded and unsupported by Apple anyway) I would probably keep my maxed out 3,1 as upgraded it is plenty fast enough for my uses. But it's become a problem recovering data off large drives which is a useful income stream for me indeed.
Last edited:
So would one of Tutor's dual socket Xeon render hack rigs with 4 GTX inside it. But it's like comparing an Apple to a Orange.
Unless you are using a Quo mobo a hack is for those that can and want to maintain one. Most users don't and even I have stopped maintaining ones bar the Quo board models. Too much hassle, too many calls and they are nearly always the ones who dont want to pay for support when something breaks post update.
Last edited:
I just googled Quo Motherboard, that thing is really out of date.
Getting a Mackintosh running isn't really that hard if you have a guide to follow along.
It took me 3 days to do it but that was only because I was trying to install it on a brand new X99 platform. Now that I know what I am doing I can get it up the hackintosh running in less than half an hour.
The only issue I would run into with upgrades is with kernel support until Apple introduces the haswell-ep nMPs and audio driver. Besides that it's really stable and really reliable.
But the Quo is almost like a real Mac, one even a novice can manage and I can do quite easily via remote. Others get progressively harder and for non enthusiasts like you who don't have the time or skill set the savings you make short term are lost over the longer term.
I've done many hacks and custom gaming rigs for Windows; I am very capable to do the latest ones but I choose not to cos I too like my own Macintosh to just work with minimum hassle. Pretty much how I'm like with cars now im older
I would never use a hackentosh for a production machine. Stability trumps performance any day for paying clients.
+1 Billion. Geekbench is good for general CPU testing. Not good for overall system performence, expecially for workstations. I don't think they even test multiple cores effectively. Nor the GPU's.
Ok, looks like they test multicores pretty well.
Last edited:
I think that I said this earlier in the thread but there really is no substitute for a dual CPU system when doing real life demanding applications like video editing. This is just as true of Windows PCs as Macs. It's something the Hackintosh fans seem to ignore.
The comparison made earlier with cars is a good one. When we are young & have lots of time & not much money we can spend our time tuning & tweaking & souping up our cars. However as you get older & just need a car that works you tend to just hand it over to a garage to do any work. It's the same with computers. The computer is just a tool to do the job for you & not the end in itself.
The comparison made earlier with cars is a good one. When we are young & have lots of time & not much money we can spend our time tuning & tweaking & souping up our cars. However as you get older & just need a car that works you tend to just hand it over to a garage to do any work. It's the same with computers. The computer is just a tool to do the job for you & not the end in itself.
Felt the need to chime in due to the terrible misinformation being spread here. Make no mistake there is not one small thing about hackintosh that is remotely easy. I am an IT professional for a living and I have never had any type of success with getting OS X to work on PC hardware. You will bang your head on the desk when you get cryptic errors in command line code like "ACI Bluetooth device error" which in gibberish actually means there's an error happening with the kext for your GPU - which is causing the system to not boot. You would only know this because the wall of command line text has stopped moving with no meaningful feedback to you.
I tried at least 4 times to make a hackintosh work with all kinds of different hardware and different helpless "guides". It's an awful experience and I wouldn't recommend the frustration to anyone.
: Eek:
but a 4-core MacPro 2009 and less like performance at a 2008 8-core MacPro true ????
a 2008 8-core MacPro and much more powerful right?
: Mela:
I'm sorry friends, but I'm confused !!!!!
tell me, better a 2008 8-core 2.8 GHz or a 4-core 2009 2.8 ghz ???
I speak as a power and not as future updates.
I would also like to know the difference in power between the two and minimal or high?
Thanks.
: rolleyes:
----------
this and better than 2.8 ghz but still in 2008?
http://www.ebay.it/itm/APPLE-MAC-PR...mputing_Apple_Desktops_CV&hash=item462ac0a2a3
tell me, better a 2008 8-core 2.8 GHz or a 4-core 2009 2.8 ghz ???
I speak as a power and not as future updates.
I would also like to know the difference in power between the two and minimal or high?
Thanks.
: rolleyes:
----------
this and better than 2.8 ghz but still in 2008?
http://www.ebay.it/itm/APPLE-MAC-PR...mputing_Apple_Desktops_CV&hash=item462ac0a2a3
There is no 4 Core 2.8 Ghz Mac Pro 2009, but if there would be one the 2009 would be better