2008 Mac Pro worth it?

[nigelbb]

The 8 Core 3.2 Ghz one is a tiny bit better then the worst 4.1 CPU Quad 2.66 Ghz

At single stream maybe. With an application like Premiere Pro that uses all 8 cores then the 8 core is much better. I am guessing from your handle & the spec of the Mac Pro in your .sig that your interest is gaming & not professional video editing.

The OP has been asking for opinions about native OS X video editing on a 2008 8-core 3,1 Mac Pro. Gaming performance or ease of use of bootcamp or whatever is irrelevant. Every other owner & user of a 3,1 who has posted in this thread has said what a great machine it is especially for video editing. It's not in dispute that it's possible to upgrade a 4-core 4,1 more but for the money the 8-core 3,1 is a better buy for use TODAY. It looks like all the posters dissing the 8-core 3,1 neither own one nor do video editing so their prejudiced opinions are purely theoretical. I don't own a 4,1 or a 5,1 but I don't need to as I know that the 8-core 3,1 is a great workhorse for video editing.

 

[GameFreak348]

At single stream maybe. With an application like Premiere pro that uses all 8 cores then the 8 core is much better. I am guessing from your handle & the spec of the Mac Pro in your .sig that your interest is gaming & not professional video editing.

The OP has been asking for opinions about native OS X video editing on a 2008 8-core 3,1 Mac Pro. Gaming performance or ease of use of bootcamp or whatever is irrelevant. Every other owner & user of a 3,1 who has posted in this thread has said what a great machine it is especially for video editing. It's not in dispute that it's possible to upgrade a 4-core 4,1 more but for the money the 8-core 3,1 is a better buy for use TODAY. It looks like all the posters dissing the 8-core 3,1 neither own one nor do video editing so their prejudiced opinions are purely theoretical. I don't own a 4,1 or a 5,1 but I don't need to as I know that the 8-core 3,1 is a great workhorse for video editing.

8 Weak cores vs 4 good cores? And the 8 core one will still win?

 

[reco2011]

At single stream maybe. With an application like Premiere pro that uses all 8 cores then the 8 core is much better. I am guessing from your handle & the spec of the Mac Pro in your .sig that your interest is gaming & not professional video editing.

The OP has been asking for opinions about native OS X video editing on a 2008 8-core 3,1 Mac Pro. Gaming performance or ease of use of bootcamp or whatever is irrelevant. Every other owner & user of a 3,1 who has posted in this thread has said what a great machine it is especially for video editing. It's not in dispute that it's possible to upgrade a 4-core 4,1 more but for the money the 8-core 3,1 is a better buy for use TODAY. It looks like all the posters dissing the 8-core 3,1 neither own one nor do video editing so their prejudiced opinions are purely theoretical. I don't own a 4,1 or a 5,1 but I don't need to as I know that the 8-core 3,1 is a great workhorse for video editing.

If the OP doesn't need to stay with OS X he can pick up a much more capable used Windows workstation for equivalent or less money than a 3,1 Mac Pro. I previously mentioned the Z600 I purchased. The processors in this system are the Mac Pro 4,1 and 5,1 equivalents...not the older 3,1 processors.

 

[GameFreak348]

If the OP doesn't need to stay with OS X he can pick up a much more capable used Windows workstation for equivalent or less money than a 3,1 Mac Pro. I previously mentioned the Z600 I purchased. The processors in this system are the Mac Pro 4,1 and 5,1 equivalents...not the older 3,1 processors.

These days every quad i7 will be better then that mac pro 3.1 Cpu so it would be really the best thing to get a windows machine

 

[reco2011]

These days every quad i7 will be better then that mac pro 3.1 Cpu so it would be really the best thing to get a windows machine

Not necessarily. I have a Core i7 quad rMBP (2.7GHz) and my dual dual core Mac Pro 5,1 (2.8GHZ) handily outperform the rMBP in Handbrake transcoding. As always it depends on the task.

 

[CASLondon]

W3680/90 for single socket fella - the X are duals!

I told him the X version so that he can go dual tray if he feels he needs to later. Not that I think he will, but that was the logic

 

[GameFreak348]

Not necessarily. I have a Core i7 quad rMBP (2.7GHz) and my dual dual core Mac Pro 5,1 (2.8GHZ) handily outperform the rMBP in Handbrake transcoding. As always it depends on the task.

Didnt I say 3.1 CPU? pretty obvious that a 5.1 cpu outperforms a quad i7 laptop cpu

 

[CASLondon]

I see that we are all enjoying spending Cancaro's money. That CPU upgrade alone will cost about as much as the system that he is proposing to purchase.

If money is tight he should forget about upgrades in the future. His proposed purchase of a 2008 2x2.8GHz 3,1 system with 16GB of 667MHz RAM will outperform a 4-core 2.66MHz 4,1 2009 system & will edit HD video just fine with power to spare TODAY & in the future. In terms of system responsiveness & generally doing real work like video editing on a dual processor system is much much better than a single CPU even if that single CPU might be a bit faster in a single stream workload.

And will get dropped by OSX very soon. And have more limited GPU upgrades available. In general, will date faster unless he gets more involved in the sort of hands on upgrading that gets geeky fast. He still hasn't even identified which NLE he's using, which makes a difference here. If its FSX, its even more important that he stays current with the Mac OS (which a 2008 won't help)

One year from now, on the next OS after Yosemite, is his 2008 going to be qualified?

The point isn't to get a 4 core 2.66, the point is to get a 6 core 3.33-3.47 that will be much more useable for much longer. Much more happens at the single thread level than you appreciate, as well. Processor speed matters

A single x5680 is $250 dollars, so don't overestimate the costs of the upgrades.

 

[CASLondon]

BTW Are you a video editor?

Yes

I have produced for prime time network tv and cable tv. I have edited cable tv documentaries and other non-fiction for years. I've worked for Emmy-winning production companies. I have an Avid suite in my house.

Yes, he can get a 2008 today. But any money he sinks into a 2008 is dead money much faster, whereas if he ponies up not much more, he at least has a base to gradually add capacity as his money allows. Penny-wise, pound-foolish and all.

 

[reco2011]

Didnt I say 3.1 CPU? pretty obvious that a 5.1 cpu outperforms a quad i7 laptop cpu

You did. But the quad core CPU in the rMBP is substantially better than the 4.1 / 5.1 CPUs. The performance of the Mac Pro is substantially better than the CPU in the rMBP (likely due to thermal throttling)

 

[Zorn]

Yes

I have produced for prime time network tv and cable tv. I have edited cable tv documentaries and other non-fiction for years. I've worked for Emmy-winning production companies. I have an Avid suite in my house.

Yes, he can get a 2008 today. But any money he sinks into a 2008 is dead money much faster, whereas if he ponies up not much more, he at least has a base to gradually add capacity as his money allows. Penny-wise, pound-foolish and all.

This is the correct answer. But it seems like OP is less interested in advice and more looking for validation of his already made decision to buy a 3,1

 

[Gav Mack]

And will get dropped by OSX very soon. And have more limited GPU upgrades available. In general, will date faster unless he gets more involved in the sort of hands on upgrading that gets geeky fast. He still hasn't even identified which NLE he's using, which makes a difference here. If its FSX, its even more important that he stays current with the Mac OS (which a 2008 won't help)

One year from now, on the next OS after Yosemite, is his 2008 going to be qualified?

The point isn't to get a 4 core 2.66, the point is to get a 6 core 3.33-3.47 that will be much more useable for much longer. Much more happens at the single thread level than you appreciate, as well. Processor speed matters

A single x5680 is $250 dollars, so don't overestimate the costs of the upgrades.

After doing so many migrations and upgrades to not just mine but clients with enough ram I treat the cMP generations in reality like an engine nowadays; You have the same car, same GPU and upgrade parts and those you buy first on the cheese-grater road and the engine is a one off purchase. Like others have said a two cpu engine is the best way to start on the video cMP path, 8 cores on a 3.2 gtx 680 smokes my mbp 2011 to dust and has beaten a 2013 rmbp 15 on cs6 to my great amusement!

If his budget cant stretch to a 4,1 upgrade path right now waiting a year isn't going to cost a hell of a lot in depreciation. If it's plenty fast enough for what he needs with PCIe Apple SSD, GPU and USB 3 upgrades why lay out all the extra costs while high clock Xeon prices have gone up quite a bit used on eBay recently, particularly 3.46 in Europe? Two x5690's went for £260 and £271 in the UK only earlier and others are asking £400 buy it now each, that's (1.6$ to the £) crazy. More Westmere CPU's will be on the market out of servers and workstations next year, even I am thinking of going dual quad high clock which can be bought for peanuts compared to hex for my upgrade soon.

Coming from an iMac with those parts in a 2008 I don't think he will disappointed though if he bites the upgrade bug maybe a 4-5,1 sooner than he thinks right now

.

 

[OS6-OSX]

The answer that will put all this into perspective is how much is the 3,1 going to cost? Say he gets it for $450.00, adds a Apricorn Velocity 2 for $100.00, and a 120GB SSD for $130.00. The unknown factors are which card will be in the machine and how much ram. He could be south of $1000.00 and have the ability to edit 4K on this machine with the correct NLE's!
If he is a hobbyist he can hone his skills on this machine. See if this industry is for him. If a Pro/Simi-Pro the money made can be used to buy the machine for the "future"!
I will admit the 3.1 is a little long in the tooth to invest lots of $ into it at this point. But the "lots" must be a specific number to seem doable or not.
Some may remember the guy who posted here that had a client with "deep" pockets. The client wanted a nMP and external RAID to edit 4K in Avid. At the time and still to this day Avid only does HD. 4K due in Dec? I requested the poster to share the editing results with this forum. That had to be 2-3 months ago. I think the total cost for that system was north of $10,000! I will post the results of 4K editing in Avid when/if it is available this Dec.
I am getting these speeds with my RAID 0

 

[ToroidalZeus]

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

Thats BS. As long as the mobo works with clover or chameleon the only difference is the bootflags and kext (drivers).

Installing OS X on my series 9 X99 board is the exact same process as on that series 7 quo board.

I+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.

It doesn't test GPU that is completely accurate. But it does test CPU very well. My 6 core OC 5820k is benching exactly where it should be.

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.

I'm not an IT professional but I did take 2 years of cisco computer networking back in high school.

I personally think its crazy how fast I was able to get OS X Yosemite running on my X99 5820k. I mean this CPU and motherboard was released only a few months. Likewise the same with my GTX 980 gfx card. And Yosemite (gm) only came out a few weeks ago. Yet the hackintosh community has got it up and running within a few days after Yosemite's release.

 

[reco2011]

It doesn't test GPU that is completely accurate. But it does test CPU very well. My 6 core OC 5820k is benching exactly where it should be.

Does it? Then how come a dual dual core 2010 2.8 GHz Mac Pro dramatically outperforms a quad core 2.7GHz i7 rMBP in Handbrake?

 

[ToroidalZeus]

Does it? Then how come a dual dual core 2010 2.8 GHz Mac Pro dramatically outperforms a quad core 2.7GHz i7 rMBP in Handbrake?

If i had to guess the mobile cpu probably has more strict settings and is getting throttled because of heat or voltage or something like that.

Regardless that isn't going to be an issue when using desktop cores.

 

[Gav Mack]

Thats BS. As long as the mobo works with clover or chameleon the only difference is the bootflags and kext (drivers).

Installing OS X on my series 9 X99 board is the exact same process as on that series 7 quo board.



It doesn't test GPU that is completely accurate. But it does test CPU very well. My 6 core OC 5820k is benching exactly where it should be.

That open firmware mobo with a community flashed eFI bios mimics a Mac with only the sound driver to add. Texas FireWire, thunderbolt and in terms of staying working consistently its out of the park compared to the rest of the hacks. I know because I only get the occasional call, they just work and closest to a real one yet. Most people want a Mac that just works, not a hack enthusiast like you and I who used to be a fan who can pretty much fix it on the spot.

Hence outside your world and skill set it's an apple and an orange, and I would rather steadily upgrade to a 12 core 3.46 5,1 with PCIe apple blade than have the hassle of a hack.

I could never say never though - if an open firmware Xeon board, with a user eFI like the Quo, ideally DP if the 7,1 has a dual option with a larger can was available I would consider changing my mind.

In fact if a board with a processor riser card system to fit a certain chassis we are familiar with came out I would almost certainly be laying my money down on Kickstarter to buy one of the first!

 

[ToroidalZeus]

That open firmware mobo with a community flashed eFI bios mimics a Mac with only the sound driver to add. Texas FireWire, thunderbolt and in terms of staying working consistently its out of the park compared to the rest of the hacks. I know because I only get the occasional call, they just work and closest to a real one yet. Most people want a Mac that just works, not a hack enthusiast like you and I who used to be a fan who can pretty much fix it on the spot.

Hence outside your world and skill set it's an apple and an orange, and I would rather steadily upgrade to a 12 core 3.46 5,1 with PCIe apple blade than have the hassle of a hack.

I could never say never though - if an open firmware Xeon board, with a user eFI like the Quo, ideally DP if the 7,1 has a dual option with a larger can was available I would consider changing my mind.

In fact if a board with a processor riser card system to fit a certain chassis we are familiar with I would almost certainly be laying my money down on Kickstarter to buy one of the first!

First: it's a series 7 board; we are on series 9 boards right now: so it's obsolete and out of date. There is absolutely no point even mentioning it today.

Second: If you read the description you'll see that the Quo motherboard isn't flashed with an Apple BIOS. It's running the Ozmosis boot loader which they claim can let it run any OS... ya okay.

So it'll never be as easy or simple as installing OS X on true Apple hardware.

Third: There increased compability with OS X is because it's a modified Gigabyte motherboard.
Fun Fact: I am using a Gigabyte motherboard in my Hackintosh for that exact same reason.

Forth: Trying to change the settings in that boot loader like Mac Pro version or to get iMessage running is the basically the same hassle all hackintosh boot loaders require.

Linky: http://www.hackintoshosx.com/topic/20657-ozmosis/

If anything it looks harder then using Clover and since it's less popular it'll have less support as well.

Fifth: And unless they updated the audio kext then you'll still most likely end up using the typical community fix once on Yosemite.

In short stop mentioning that motherboard. It's not much different (if any) from the regular hackintosh installs. If anything it's worse because it comes with 1 specific boot loader whereas I'm free to chose what boot loader I want.

 

[Zorn]

You can beat the hackintosh dead horse all you want here, but the fact is for the vast majority of people, it's a HUGE headache regardless of experience, and all it takes is a random OS X update to completely break it and require a nice trip into the command line and troubleshooting the boot loader to fix things. That is NOT simple stuff and many don't want to deal with the frustration.

I'm glad you magically had an easy time with it; most others have not. OSX86 boards are full of people posting with "this doesn't work for me, help!"

 

[Gav Mack]

First: it's a series 7 board; we are on series 9 boards right now: so it's obsolete and out of date. There is absolutely no point even mentioning it today.

Second: If you read the description you'll see that the Quo motherboard isn't flashed with an Apple BIOS. It's running the Ozmosis boot loader which they claim can let it run any OS... ya okay.

So it'll never be as easy or simple as installing OS X on true Apple hardware.

Third: There increased compability with OS X is because it's a modified Gigabyte motherboard.
Fun Fact: I am using a Gigabyte motherboard in my Hackintosh for that exact same reason.

Forth: Trying to change the settings in that boot loader like Mac Pro version or to get iMessage running is the basically the same hassle all hackintosh boot loaders require.

Linky: http://www.hackintoshosx.com/topic/20657-ozmosis/

If anything it looks harder then using Clover and since it's less popular it'll have less support as well.

Fifth: And unless they updated the audio kext then you'll still most likely end up using the typical community fix once on Yosemite.

In short stop mentioning that motherboard. It's not much different (if any) from the regular hackintosh installs. If anything it's worse because it comes with 1 specific boot loader whereas I'm free to chose what boot loader I want.

Why on earth would I stop mentioning a hack that just works? Like I said before feeling very much like a parrot now - it's not for YOU and YOUR uses, mine neither but for lesser mortals who turn a Mac on and expect it to work, even after an OS X update. Pretty much like an original Macintosh. An original Mac like a five year old twin hex core tower type we will upgrade and upgrade with better and better bits because it's still a really pain free experience compared to a hack.

So once again - take a deep breath, think of the lesser mere mortals who don't have a skill set plus older types who can't be bothered to and want a Mac that just works. That's an Apple not an orange!

 

[ToroidalZeus]

Why on earth would I stop mentioning a hack that just works? Like I said before feeling very much like a parrot now - it's not for YOU and YOUR uses, mine neither but for lesser mortals who turn a Mac on and expect it to work, even after an OS X update. Pretty much like an original Macintosh. An original Mac like a five year old twin hex core tower type we will upgrade and upgrade with better and better bits because it's still a really pain free experience compared to a hack.

So once again - take a deep breath, think of the lesser mere mortals who don't have a skill set plus older types who can't be bothered to and want a Mac that just works. That's an Apple not an orange!

IT DOESNT JUST WORK. IT STILL REQUIRES THE SAME TINKERING THAT ALL HACKINTOSHES REQUIRE FOR iMESSAGE AND AUDIO TO WORK.

and it's old obsolete technology.

If you don't work on hackintoshes and don't understand how they function then you should do some more research. The only thing special about that board is it comes with a bootloader built into the BIOS which may or may not be a pro depending on how you look at it.

 

[Gav Mack]

IT DOESNT JUST WORK. IT STILL REQUIRES THE SAME TINKERING THAT ALL HACKINTOSHES REQUIRE FOR iMESSAGE AND AUDIO TO WORK.

and it's old obsolete technology.

If you don't work on hackintoshes and don't understand how they function then you should do some more research. The only thing special about that board is it comes with a bootloader built into the BIOS which may or may not be a pro depending on how you look at it.

Please read what I said earlier and more carefully will ya? I was building hacks pretty much from the start of Intel just like I've been fixing Macs and Windows boxes for 20 years. A board with a built in bootloader installed into the hardware as root is far more compatible than one without is it not, particularly one with carefully chosen components such as the Texas FW and Cirrus audio? A Yes/No answer regardless of platform will suffice!

Old technology works fine for me - as every Mac Pro owner and enthusiast can testify to that on here.

 

[nigelbb]

8 Weak cores vs 4 good cores? And the 8 core one will still win?

Yes! The single stream CPU performance of the 2.66GHz 4-core is only about 25% greater than that of the 2.8GHz 8-core which means that the 8-core has about 60% greater throughput in a multi-stream application like rendering video.

 

[ToroidalZeus]

Please read what I said earlier and more carefully will ya?

That open firmware mobo with a community flashed eFI bios mimics a Mac with only the sound driver to add.

WHICH ISN'T TRUE. It runs a bootloader called Osmosis.

Half (or maybe 1/3rd) the work in getting Mac OS X to run right on off-the-shelf parts is directly because you have to use a homebrew boot loader. Unless you can run an Apple boot loader, which you can't unless you have a genuine mac, you are in hackintoshland plain and simple.

A board with a built in bootloader installed into the hardware as root is far more compatible than one without is it not,

Not true at all. What I alluded to before is it might be good if you are trying to run the old software it was designed to run. BUT if you are trying to install the latest OS then having a popular boot loader that is being updated is much more convenient.

particularly one with carefully chosen components such as the Texas FW and Cirrus audio?

No one cares about firewire.
Thunderbolt works on other motherboards
Audio, it says it uses the Realtek ALC892

Off topic: but getting audio to work was the absolute hardest part of the hackintosh install. Much more difficult then getting the OS to run. Unless the original designers are supporting the latest OS you will just end up using one of the popular community ALC fixes.

Old technology works fine for me - as every Mac Pro owner and enthusiast can testify to that on here.

Well the rest of the world has moved on and not using old technology is the exact reason to not buy a 2008 Mac Pro.

 

[Gav Mack]

WHICH ISN'T TRUE. It runs a bootloader called Osmosis.

Half (or maybe 1/3rd) the work in getting Mac OS X to run right on off-the-shelf parts is directly because you have to use a homebrew boot loader. Unless you can run an Apple boot loader, which you can't unless you have a genuine mac, you are in hackintoshland plain and simple.


Not true at all. What I alluded to before is it might be good if you are trying to run the old software it was designed to run. BUT if you are trying to install the latest OS then having a popular boot loader that is being updated is much more convenient.


No one cares about firewire.
Thunderbolt works on other motherboards
Audio, it says it uses the Realtek ALC892

Off topic: but getting audio to work was the absolute hardest part of the hackintosh install. Much more difficult then getting the OS to run. Unless the original designers are supporting the latest OS you will just end up using one of the popular community ALC fixes.



Well the rest of the world has moved on and not using old technology is the exact reason to not buy a 2008 Mac Pro.

No one cares about firewire? - pmsl you don't care about it more like!
I give up cos it's like talking to a brick wall - just like I did with clients who had a hack and wanted support maintaining it for free when they hadn't the skill set or patience to manage one. I have tried to explain to you that in the REAL WORLD with REAL LIFE usage for an unskilled user - a Quo based system isn't far off as easy as an original Macintosh and the only one I still manage because of it. It is my PROFESSION to fix and maintain Mac systems for nearly 20 years whereas only a hobby for you and you're undoubted enthusiasm for a hack.

The rest of the world, particularly in this forum have not moved on else you would not have 8 core 3,1's which are perfectly capable of decent work with all 8 cores on Premiere, buying upgrade parts to fit in less older technology at a later date such as a Westmere single or dual CPU Xeon workstation with an Apple logo stamped on the outside.