There are many reasons to consider a Mac Pro over an iMac that have nothing to do with performance.
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.
Is the current quad-core Mac Pro even worth buying?
- Thread starter geniusmac
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
There are many reasons to consider a Mac Pro over an iMac that have nothing to do with performance.
That's definitely true, I'm just saying that to buy the lowest end quad core from 2010 isn't a very good value today, that value is brought up by upgrading to 6 core or faster. The only time I'd recommend the quad is if the buyer only needs moderate processing power and is buying for expandability.
Good points.
It's also trivial to upgrade the current quad to a 6 core CPU. If you can score a refurb it's even better!
Exactly.... refurb is the way to go at this point. I wouldn't purchase a quad for upgrade (waste of money) It's better off to pick up a 6 core and use that, OR a 2.4GHz 8 core and upgrade to 3.33GHz or 3.46GHz 12 core (very expensive and not worth it for most users) but just having a Mac Pro regardless of the model is so nice. For overall value a refurb 6 core or higher is best!
sure, if you need one. I could see a scenario where you are a medium sized business that already has some mac pro's and want to expand a little with some matching machines. I am a company of one, my machine has to last a long time, so i'll wait
the current mac pro quad core is fine at the right price.
why
1 ) pull the quad core drop in a hex core cost about 400 after you sell the stock cpu
2) pull the gpu and put in a hd7970 cost about 350 after you sell the stock gpu
3)drop in 4 sticks of 4gb ram = 16gb ram cost about 100 with the 850 spent to a machine at 1750 you would be at 2600 for a good deal
the hex 3680 is a good cpu not much between it and the newer cpu's the worst problem you have is sata 2 not sata 3
So not only do I have to pay a disgusting price for it the first place, I have to self upgrade, hope it all goes well, waste my time selling on ebay and lose my warranty in the process.
Sounds like a great deal
I say look for a good deal on a used current generation MacPro. Apple is known for maximizing profits and minimizing overhead. What better way to do this than letting the MacPro sell for the same cost when their overhead continues to go down. I'm not saying it's the right thing to do, but I think they'll keep this going until they see a real reason to update. To be honest, I'm sure Apple puts more attention to its laptops because it's the biggest (non-iOS) moneymaker for them...which really sucks for those who want the latest and greatest.
hahahhahahahaha
Please.
"Up to 24Gb of ram"
I have 22Gb in a 1,1 and I am running up against it's limits.
So not only do I have to pay a disgusting price for it the first place, I have to self upgrade, hope it all goes well, waste my time selling on ebay and lose my warranty in the process.
Sounds like a great deal
no you won't lose you warranty since you can't buy a mac pro for 1750 with a warranty in the first place.
This is what I needed so I just hackintoshed..
It's even less expensive, And I get to pick and choose
Im not talking about a juiced up mac Pro, I'm talking about Base Quad Cores, with the base amount of memory, hard drives, video card. Total waste of money. two year old 4 core processor? 3gigs of ram? And a single hard drive? What a rip off for a two year old machine that costs 2500 dollars, with retarded cost to have Apple upgrade it
My work machine is running 42gb at this point, and I think it might need some more lol
Last edited:
Yeah but the mac pro is designed to be upgraded. That's what it's for. I might upgrade my quad to a hex xeon sometime, as well as the GPU. Right now I have absolutely no need to. I get 50-60 fps in Skyrim, photoshop opens in 1 to 2 seconds, all other progs almost instantly. Reason hums along. Also i like the build quality of it. The aluminum case is 2 mm thick. Its beautiful.
As far as build quailty goes, I can think of PC makers that do just as well.
Yeah, you can upgrade the Mac pro, which is why its the ONLY option for power users on Apple. But the base Quad is a complete waste of 2500 dollars. Your better off spending money on a higher end model, and upgrading it yourself. Then you get bang for your buck.
Well i bought a refurb in oct 2011 - was in need then and had a offer on my credit card (have just paid it back now) so picked it up as editing pro ress and doing mild graphics in motion become a pain on my mbp.
I spent another £300-£500ish on upgrading it myself to SSD boot from crucial (to me in the uk no customs tax!), 16gb ram, 4tb raid, 2tb green drive for temp storage. So spent £
i just needed to get off the mbp and know it will last several years, touch alluminum - perhaps if im feeling braze, a upgrade to 6 hexacore which is realistically, all i need.
I spent another £300-£500ish on upgrading it myself to SSD boot from crucial (to me in the uk no customs tax!), 16gb ram, 4tb raid, 2tb green drive for temp storage. So spent £
i just needed to get off the mbp and know it will last several years, touch alluminum - perhaps if im feeling braze, a upgrade to 6 hexacore which is realistically, all i need.
I'm very curious what the next generation entry-level Mac Pro will look like.
Probably a 6-core single processor - but I expect it to seriously faster than any iMac or MBP.
And a nice graphics card, running cool and quiet.
Probably a 6-core single processor - but I expect it to seriously faster than any iMac or MBP.
And a nice graphics card, running cool and quiet.
If they were going to do an interim refresh, they could have taken advantage of some of the price cuts. The last AMD generation wasn't that great compared to the 5870. The issue is that continuing to pay launch prices for some of this stuff really sucks
. You see it a bit in PC workstations. They won't go down as much as consumer models, but they fluctuate a bit more. The levels of irritation are high simply because parts of that line have gone a very long time without changing. The base configuration is barely over what was available at the same price in 2009, which in turn was a moderate upgrade on cpu power from 2008 due to dropping the stock model from an 8 core to a quad (you had to cto downgrade for a quad in 2008).It was a huge shift in starting system configuration. I'm not sure what caused Apple to go that route. Initially it was somewhat lacking in featured compared to a PC workstation, but it was quite good in raw power.
Damn it.... now I want to use photoshop to give the Dos Equis guy an ipad.
It's still not an amazing option this far in at its price point. It's common to keep a workstation for several years, so I prefer not to buy one this late in a cycle. I tend to worry that Apple will EOL support on the nehalem boards sooner rather than later. Obviously they'll see mountain lion. Perhaps one past that. I guess it depends on release cycles.
Assuming they stick to the current cpu price point used in the base model, you'd see another quad. They definitely could do better.
I don't think this is possible. There will always be those who are not happy with the refresh.
Well yeah I'm doing all my upgrades myself. Ok look, we disagree. I love my mac. If I want a loud, hot, kilowatt sucking 16 core pc for rendering I'll build it. I wanted to try having an unlimited OSX experience. They are not the same thing.
I still wouldn't even buy a 2 x 6-core at this point. We are talking August 2010 released machines here, and it's May 2012. We've advanced two major chip releases since then, added Thunderbolt technology (released) and SATA III/6G (released) and none of that is implemented on the 2010 models they are STILL selling. It's old tech, I would have said buy one in late 2010 or early 2011, and go with the 6-core if you get one...but now, I would say DON'T buy a Mac Pro right now at all...The current 27" i7 iMac even packs newer technology than the 4-core Mac Pro. What the iMac is lacking is Internal expansion (drive bays) and PCIe card slots/Graphics card slot -- which the Mac Pro is the only machine Apple offers with this expandability. The need for an expandable Mac is the only real driving reason you should want a Mac Pro at this point, not to have a "power" machine with the latest tech.
pretty much right on spot. I sold my quad to hex upgraded pro after having it for 14 months. I have a few minis and I built a few pc's. What annoys me is the pro is what I need if I go all mac. I use a 46 inch sony led and I now have a pc with a hd6870 and a 2500k cpu. it easily beats my quad core mac pro out and is almost but not quite as good as my upgrade to hex was.
I spent 850 to build the pc. what I spent on the mac pro quad was triple the hex was 4x that. So blending the minis and the pc get my work load done for a lot less.
The Minis are actually great machines and can be full-fledged workhorses. Again, unless your work absolutely requires you need a PCIe-card accepting Mac machine, or if you need to run high end video cards for hi-end 3D rendering applications, there is really no reason to buy a Mac Pro right now.
The new ones -- if they do (finally) come out, will absolutely blow the current ones away and will be worth it, if you are bent on getting a Mac Pro. I can't see any reason to get one at this time given the product cycle and the current level of "old tech" (2010) hardware the Mac Pro has right now.
Me: Well, I am an enthusiast, I love the Mac Pro, and I am one of those guys who digs having a "power" machine -- that's really why I have a Mac Pro. No compromise, it can tackle any job I throw at it.
The new ones -- if they do (finally) come out, will absolutely blow the current ones away and will be worth it, if you are bent on getting a Mac Pro. I can't see any reason to get one at this time given the product cycle and the current level of "old tech" (2010) hardware the Mac Pro has right now.
Me: Well, I am an enthusiast, I love the Mac Pro, and I am one of those guys who digs having a "power" machine -- that's really why I have a Mac Pro. No compromise, it can tackle any job I throw at it.
Point being?
Windows 8 consumer preview was released over 2 months ago, that doesn't mean we're rolling it out to users yet.
And an imac being able to take 32gb of ram is entirely irrelevant. 32gb for a pro user is a pittance these days anyway. It can't take PCI cards, which means no second or third ethernet port, it can't take ECC memory, it can't take a RAID array internally and it can't connect to a fibre channel storage array - plus plenty of other restrictions.
For pro users these are important deficiencies - and the CPU performance is often largely a side benefit.
Well, this depends on the definition of "us".
I mean those who would like a decently performing machine that's not overtaken by next iMac refresh - which is what happened with the "lame duck" Quad.
I just wonder if it would be possible to get a dual quad as the entry level machine, and then go up with dual 6-core as the medium model, and a high end model with the top 6-core chips.
More and more software is being written for multi-core processors, and a little bit of future proofing, that's what I'd like to see in a reliable and expandable workstation like the Mac Pro.
dual quad as the entry level? Please not!
A single high clocked 6-core will outperform a low clocked dual quad. http://macperformanceguide.com/Reviews-MacProWestmere.html
I would love to see an ivy i7 3770K as an entry model for those who don't need ECC. Above that a single xeon 6-core either E5-1650 or even E5-1660.
http://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Tech-Primer-Intel-E5-Xeon-CPUs-Sandy-Bridge-EP-130
A single high clocked 6-core will outperform a low clocked dual quad. http://macperformanceguide.com/Reviews-MacProWestmere.html
I would love to see an ivy i7 3770K as an entry model for those who don't need ECC. Above that a single xeon 6-core either E5-1650 or even E5-1660.
http://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Tech-Primer-Intel-E5-Xeon-CPUs-Sandy-Bridge-EP-130