Hello all!
After much back and forth, as seen in my earlier thread, I got my Mac Pro 1,1 up and running with 10.9.5 and a Radeon 7850 via HDMI and ditched the superdrive for a Blu-Ray burner. The next two logical steps are, of course, a Crucial MX100 128GB system drive ($70), and two Xeon X5355 ($60). Already have 6TB of mass storage (3x2TB HDD internal). Main usage is film editing (Final Cut Pro 7 for me, FCPX for my wife - different tastes) and compression of said films for variety of distribution. I would also like a USB 3.0 card, but that's more of a wish than a need. With the 7850 I have been known to do some light gaming (Civ V, etc)
Now here's where it gets interesting: I have the opportunity to pick up a Mac Pro 2,1 for $400. It's a 8 core 2.8Ghz, 10GB of RAM (I have 12Gb in my 1,1), 8800GT. Were I to buy this, I would obviously just move my mass storage over to the new comp, as well as my GPU. I would have native support for Yosemite (probably the last OS the 2008 will support, I'm willing to bet). I could also, if I wanted to for some bizarre reason, bootcamp it far easier than the 1,1 - which required SOFFT to run at all.
I've looked up Geekbench scores, and it seems the difference between an upgraded 1,1 and a native 8-core 2,1 when all else is apples-to-apples is about 20% faster in favor of of the 2,1. The real debate I'm having with myself - is 20% faster in multithreaded tasks and more native support for more things worth the extra $400? It may sound like chump change, but for us poor independent guns-for-hire in the film world, it's a lot of money. And honestly, I've always told my clients they can have quick speed, high quality, and small file sizes when it comes to the final product (it seems no one wants a Blu-Ray anymore they rip themselves, they all want just the YouTube version on a USB stick), but they can only pick two - and they always go for the latter two. Go figure.
So the former - 20% speed increase for an extra $400? Not worth it from a mathematical standpoint, even when I calculate labor and my time. The native support, a bit more flexibility, two PCIe x16 slots for a much better 2nd add-on card - all very attractive, but somewhat abstract.
So let the argument begin, as I would love to hear from both sides on this one.
After much back and forth, as seen in my earlier thread, I got my Mac Pro 1,1 up and running with 10.9.5 and a Radeon 7850 via HDMI and ditched the superdrive for a Blu-Ray burner. The next two logical steps are, of course, a Crucial MX100 128GB system drive ($70), and two Xeon X5355 ($60). Already have 6TB of mass storage (3x2TB HDD internal). Main usage is film editing (Final Cut Pro 7 for me, FCPX for my wife - different tastes) and compression of said films for variety of distribution. I would also like a USB 3.0 card, but that's more of a wish than a need. With the 7850 I have been known to do some light gaming (Civ V, etc)
Now here's where it gets interesting: I have the opportunity to pick up a Mac Pro 2,1 for $400. It's a 8 core 2.8Ghz, 10GB of RAM (I have 12Gb in my 1,1), 8800GT. Were I to buy this, I would obviously just move my mass storage over to the new comp, as well as my GPU. I would have native support for Yosemite (probably the last OS the 2008 will support, I'm willing to bet). I could also, if I wanted to for some bizarre reason, bootcamp it far easier than the 1,1 - which required SOFFT to run at all.
I've looked up Geekbench scores, and it seems the difference between an upgraded 1,1 and a native 8-core 2,1 when all else is apples-to-apples is about 20% faster in favor of of the 2,1. The real debate I'm having with myself - is 20% faster in multithreaded tasks and more native support for more things worth the extra $400? It may sound like chump change, but for us poor independent guns-for-hire in the film world, it's a lot of money. And honestly, I've always told my clients they can have quick speed, high quality, and small file sizes when it comes to the final product (it seems no one wants a Blu-Ray anymore they rip themselves, they all want just the YouTube version on a USB stick), but they can only pick two - and they always go for the latter two. Go figure.
So the former - 20% speed increase for an extra $400? Not worth it from a mathematical standpoint, even when I calculate labor and my time. The native support, a bit more flexibility, two PCIe x16 slots for a much better 2nd add-on card - all very attractive, but somewhat abstract.
So let the argument begin, as I would love to hear from both sides on this one.
