If you don't need obscene amounts of RAM which you probably don't I can't think of a good reason to buy the cMP other than it's prettier.
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.
Still worth it to buy a 5,1 over 6,1?
- Thread starter AreYouAMac
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I run 6 30" cinema displays using one card. Visiontek 7870 with 6 minidisplay pors. Driver supprot is built in. Works with metal. Pretty fast. No flash of the bios so it boots up dark, but otherwise, no issues. In the 5,1.
http://www.amazon.com/VisionTek-Pro...d=1449486741&sr=8-1&keywords=visiontek+7870+6
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
I went through almost the same thing as you and am also a developer. I ended up with the 6,1 - for a variety of reasons. I will tell you though that this thing crunches code like a champion. I'm going to upgrade to the 8core 3.4Ghz Xeon at some point and have no idea how fast it will be, but am pretty excited by the thought 
.
I *think* Xcode compiles one class per thread, so outside of your display requirements it may be worth thinking about compilation speed depending upon the size of your projects.
If you can afford to wait, then wait. I was at a crossroads where I needed to put money into a 4,1 - which given it's age seemed like it wasn't a great value or idea, or buy the new Mac Pro, so I went new. If you go new, i highly suggest a refurb at this point given it's age, that and try to use a credit card with a big cash back reward. The 6,1 is old, so the less you pay for it the better, however, it's a ridiculously fast computer. Also if you go with it try to get min. ram as you can cheaply upgrade it. Also be aware the 512GB SSDs on eBay and higher seem to be more expensive when compared to just buying the Mac with higher storage as a refurb. ( a new 6 core stock is 4k, upgrading to 512GB SSD is going to cost around $500, but you can get a refurb with D700s and 512GB SSD for 4,100).
Obviously if warranty or apple care stuff is a concern, the 6,1 is the only choice.
If it's something you plan on selling when a newer MP comes out the 6,1 will probably hold it's value better on the 2nd hand market.
(On my 4,1 I was looking at putting another 1k into a computer only worth 1k, that fact was just too hard to swallow for myself).
. I *think* Xcode compiles one class per thread, so outside of your display requirements it may be worth thinking about compilation speed depending upon the size of your projects.
If you can afford to wait, then wait. I was at a crossroads where I needed to put money into a 4,1 - which given it's age seemed like it wasn't a great value or idea, or buy the new Mac Pro, so I went new. If you go new, i highly suggest a refurb at this point given it's age, that and try to use a credit card with a big cash back reward. The 6,1 is old, so the less you pay for it the better, however, it's a ridiculously fast computer. Also if you go with it try to get min. ram as you can cheaply upgrade it. Also be aware the 512GB SSDs on eBay and higher seem to be more expensive when compared to just buying the Mac with higher storage as a refurb. ( a new 6 core stock is 4k, upgrading to 512GB SSD is going to cost around $500, but you can get a refurb with D700s and 512GB SSD for 4,100).
Obviously if warranty or apple care stuff is a concern, the 6,1 is the only choice.
If it's something you plan on selling when a newer MP comes out the 6,1 will probably hold it's value better on the 2nd hand market.
(On my 4,1 I was looking at putting another 1k into a computer only worth 1k, that fact was just too hard to swallow for myself).
@shaunp - Reason why monitors is because I need to make sure the 5,1 can handle 6 monitors and not have any issues.
- CPU: I was going to max it out dual core because it seems to be pretty cheap now
- RAM: 32GB Min
- Storage: 4 SSDs 128GB
* This computer is for development: Atom, Chrome, Github, Illustrator, Photoshop and Xcode
- Max RAM would probably be 32, so you are right. the 6,1 would be a better buy due to warranty and support
That was the card I was looking at. Are you running El Capitan? If driver support is built in, I assume that means you did not need to flash the card? I see multiple threads of screens not showing while booting - not sure if this card falls in that category? Else, is it really a big deal for you to see the bootscreen? Troubleshooting perhaps?
I would like to get the base (D300) and it having the ability to run 6 monitors with no lag / hiccups with all the Apps being open on each window.
I am literally coding on a Late 13' MBP with 8GB Ram running 2 24" screens with Atom, Github, 50 Chrome Tabs and Photoshop. It does not lag much unless I view Expose.
I am feeling towards the 6,1 - since the 5,1 is a few years old. Even with not having the machine already - I will most spend $1K on upgrades (RAM, GPU, CPUs) - and no warranty directly supported by Apple. Difference between what I will send and the new 6,1 wouldn't be that much apart.
6,1 is my best buy ATM. I want to believe that the 5,1 will still be added to the compatibility lists for the next few OSXs that will be released (6 years down the line?) - but that none of us knows.
Thanks team.
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
When recently faced with the same dilemma, I decided neither. I just had trouble with laying out $3-5k for a system that was 2-5yrs old, and was about as powerful as a system costing half that, on the dark side. So, I went to the dark side.
Time will tell of I made the right decision? The jury is still out, on my end, but the fact that people are debating over whether to lay down a huge chunk of cash on a 2-5yr old system is indicative of Apple's focus on the Pro and Prosumer segments.
Sorry, and I hope this post isn't taken as trolling, but am I the only one bugged by the fact that we're still shelling out so much cash for systems that would be considered antiquated, on the PC side?
Having said that, I will sell my PC and whip out my credit-cards in a New York minute, should Apple release a new Mac Pro that has a current architecture and is extensible.
Time will tell of I made the right decision? The jury is still out, on my end, but the fact that people are debating over whether to lay down a huge chunk of cash on a 2-5yr old system is indicative of Apple's focus on the Pro and Prosumer segments.
Sorry, and I hope this post isn't taken as trolling, but am I the only one bugged by the fact that we're still shelling out so much cash for systems that would be considered antiquated, on the PC side?
Having said that, I will sell my PC and whip out my credit-cards in a New York minute, should Apple release a new Mac Pro that has a current architecture and is extensible.
I'd go for an 8 or 12 core 5,1 with 64GB, dual R9 280X flashed for Mac, a PCI-E SSD card and PCI-E USB 3.0 card. You'd be maxed out on PCI-E slots, so no further expansion would be possible.
Find a baseline 8 Core 4,1 (2.26Ghz) and upgrade the firmware or a 5,1 (2.4Ghz) then upgrade it with CPU's and RAM from Ebay.
Find a baseline 8 Core 4,1 (2.26Ghz) and upgrade the firmware or a 5,1 (2.4Ghz) then upgrade it with CPU's and RAM from Ebay.
Yes, and No. Further expand may not may possible. However, upgrade is possible. e.g. Dual R9 4xx, USB4.x... (of course, not now, but when those card avail) the card can be swapped out, it's the main point.
On the PC side it would be worth one third for what I paid for it and still does not run Mac OSX. Since I'm still in the Mac ecosystem I'm more concerned with how much faster it is then my current Mac system. My 2013 Mac Pro is about 50% faster then my 2009 model.
Last edited:
Not trolling - I know you feel the same way, it's running a system that you love (in terms of OS wise). I would gladly pay a premium for 5,1 if I know it will do that job of the current 6,1 if it is half the price ($1500 for a spec'd 5,1 I would like to run).
2009 Model - I assume this is a 4,1 that you haven't yet updated?
This is what I think the 5,1 vs 6,1 boils down to. What is the speed difference (CPU and GPU) of 5,1s spec'd higher than to the base 6,1. Price wise - spending $1500 for a 5,1 to $3000 for a 6,1.
Thanks for the suggestion. This is what base line I had been trying to find to start with. This is what I am/should base my budget off of. This I am for sure going to look into.
I updated the GPU and storage already. Its starting to give me problems. I don't want to buy a used computer without a warrantee that I also have to still sink money into it.
In poking around a while back, I stumbled upon these guys...
http://www.macs4u.com/mac-pro-2-93-ghz-12-core-westmere-desktop-w-amd-radeon-hd5870/
I had no idea they were out there. Kind of strange to buy 6+ yr old systems with config options and warranties? But I did find it odd that they had no GPU options.
http://www.macs4u.com/mac-pro-2-93-ghz-12-core-westmere-desktop-w-amd-radeon-hd5870/
I had no idea they were out there. Kind of strange to buy 6+ yr old systems with config options and warranties? But I did find it odd that they had no GPU options.
Yep, on latest el cap. I didn't flash the card. No screens while booting. It's a total non-issue for my use. You Turn it on, it boots super fast (SSD drive) so the screen is black for 5-10 seconds, and then boom, I see the login screen.
Also, I haven't tested it, but I think this card might support 6 4k screens. It certainly supports my 30" cinema displays with no trouble.
I can see if you do a lot of IT work that requires you to reboot and get into recovery modes etc. it might be a problem. But for my use, works great.
And if there is any trouble shooting, I keep an old video card handy just in case I need it, to plug in for something weird. But even for most trouble shooting, I have an external drive with recovery tools. I just go into system prefs, make that the boot drive, and boot into it to tinker. Really, it's an issue only if it's not mere troubleshooting but disaster strikes. Like your boot drive won't kick, and now you need to get into some boot screen options. Then yea, you slap in some old video card and deal with that. Pretty easy, and at that point, it's the least of my troubles.
As always, YMMV.
Just an update...
How does this cMP compare to the base 6,1?: http://www.ebay.com/itm/361283965167
Specs for this 5,1 is:
RAM: Seems to be base 16 GB RAM
HDD: Base 1TB
GPU: 1 5770
I will have to add another 5770 to run 6 screens.
Although running two 5770s is the base and outdate - will they should still be good for my needs?
The price for this is the same as the base 6,1. So what do you think will be the best buy?
Of course, I will still have to buy another 5770.
Thanks,
Mac.
How does this cMP compare to the base 6,1?: http://www.ebay.com/itm/361283965167
Specs for this 5,1 is:
- Two 3.46 GHz Six-Core Intel Xeon X5690 “Westmere” (12 cores)
- 16GB 1333 MHz DDR3 ECC SDRAM
- 1TB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s hard drive (Western Digital Black OEM)
- ATI Radeon 5770 1GB
RAM: Seems to be base 16 GB RAM
HDD: Base 1TB
GPU: 1 5770
I will have to add another 5770 to run 6 screens.
Although running two 5770s is the base and outdate - will they should still be good for my needs?
The price for this is the same as the base 6,1. So what do you think will be the best buy?
Of course, I will still have to buy another 5770.
Thanks,
Mac.
If your workflow is largely benefit from the multi thread performance, the 5,1 will win, otherwise, 6,1 may be better.
If you don't need any extra GPU power, but just power 6 traditional non-4k screens, dual 5770 should be good enough.
However, this 5,1 is lack of SSD, which may make you feel that the system is very very slow. So, it's highly recommend you add a SSD (A cheap small size SATA SSD plug into any SATA 2 port for OS and applications only will make a huge difference). Otherwise, you may feel the 6,1 is 10x faster than the 5,1. Because it is 10x faster (or even more) to load data from the SSD.
If you don't need any extra GPU power, but just power 6 traditional non-4k screens, dual 5770 should be good enough.
However, this 5,1 is lack of SSD, which may make you feel that the system is very very slow. So, it's highly recommend you add a SSD (A cheap small size SATA SSD plug into any SATA 2 port for OS and applications only will make a huge difference). Otherwise, you may feel the 6,1 is 10x faster than the 5,1. Because it is 10x faster (or even more) to load data from the SSD.
Last edited:
Per beginning of thread:
6 1920x1200 monitors. I have this already set up, just waiting for the right computer.
What I will be using: Atom, Github, Photoshop, Illustrator, Chrome (3 Windows ~ 50 tabs - I tend not to close my windows and tabs), xCode. This will be a Developer computer.
Why would you say the 6,1 would be better? Atom, Github, Chrome aren't intense Apps like FCP, video editing etc.
I do have a $300 Gift Card from Best Buy - so the cost of the 6,1 will drop down to $2700.
6 1920x1200 monitors. I have this already set up, just waiting for the right computer.
What I will be using: Atom, Github, Photoshop, Illustrator, Chrome (3 Windows ~ 50 tabs - I tend not to close my windows and tabs), xCode. This will be a Developer computer.
Why would you say the 6,1 would be better? Atom, Github, Chrome aren't intense Apps like FCP, video editing etc.
I do have a $300 Gift Card from Best Buy - so the cost of the 6,1 will drop down to $2700.
I am not familiar with those software, but if as you said, they aren't intensive, then why you want a 12 cores 24 threads computer? You may benefit more on the 6,1 because of its much better single thread performance, and much faster storage, etc.
And TBH, if that 5,1 is same price as the 6,1. IMO, the 5,1 is over price. The X5690 is cheap now, RAM is not that expensive, 5770 and 1T HDD worth almost nothing, I just can't see why it sell at the same price as the 6,1. For this price, most likely I will go for the 6,1. At least it's a new machine, has some newer tech (since you don't need new GPU, so the 5,1 won't serve you better in this aspect), and have warranty, etc.
Besides, Apple will gives longer support on the software side. e.g. OSX 10.14 may only avail for 6,1 but not 5,1. This may be a concern for developer.
For 6,1, you pay a lot for small form factor, and an extra D300 which may be useless to you now. But if you pay the same price for a 5,1, IMO, you are paying too much for a used computer, and may be most of the CPU cores are useless for you.
Last edited:
The reason the 5,1 is still "expensive" is, that contrary to Apple propaganda, the 5,1 is the better machine in most of the use cases, namely audio and video production.
It's advisable you get the classic Mac Pro 5,1 or even a 4,1. A 6 core model or a 12 core dual CPU will be adequate. I sometimes do front end developing work. Additionally, I have also experienced using a 6,1 new Mac Pro, the 3.5ghz 6 core and the 3.0ghz 8 core cylinder. There is not much noticeable speed different between the cMac Pro and new Mac Pro. I use CODA editor, Dreamweaver, occasionally Github and have about 20+ browser tabs open plus Adobe graphic apps also in use. I am only on a 2 monitor setup. I think the softwares for a developer computer is still dominantly CPU based and not much of graphic card based. With the 6,1 new Mac Pro the second GPU will just be idle and not made to use for developing work and comes out more expensive from a business standpoint. And once the AppleCare expires on the new Mac Pro. you'll also count the cost of repairs in case the GPU or other parts need replacements.
There are classic Mac Pros for sale with already upgraded CPUs the are low in price like this listing HERE though it has ended
I have zero experience with six monitors, much less six 4k monitors, so I'll stay away from recommending anything.
That being said, if you decide on a 6,1, I'd actually wait for the 6,2 or whatever's coming next. The 6,1 is over two years old now, Apple's charging the same price as day one (making it a ripoff), and in my opinion it's likely a new model is coming out in a few months.
If you decide on a 5,1 you could go ahead and get started today. These are priced according to supply and demand on the used market, and there's no point in waiting.
That being said, if you decide on a 6,1, I'd actually wait for the 6,2 or whatever's coming next. The 6,1 is over two years old now, Apple's charging the same price as day one (making it a ripoff), and in my opinion it's likely a new model is coming out in a few months.
If you decide on a 5,1 you could go ahead and get started today. These are priced according to supply and demand on the used market, and there's no point in waiting.
Why so many screens? Is your choice of six 1920x1200 screens driven by the fact that you already have the monitors? A 30" 2560x1600 has almost double the pixels of a 1920x1200. Why not go for even more screen real estate with 4 x 30" screens? A couple of 4K monitors would give you even more pixels?
I take it, both of you are not programmers.
1. You save so much time in viewing the web browser, the html, the css and the javascript codes all at the same time without swapping windows.
2. You can view comps and compare how they look in real browsers.
3. I can view the same page in Chrome, Safari and Firefox all with them scrolling at the same time.
4. New ways to develop websites auto refreshes the web pages, so it is nice to see real time updates.
5. Multiple monitors is easier to make windows full screen without taking up two screens. I can run 6 apps, all of which full screen on their own window.
I already have all 6 monitors up.
It's not about having fewer big monitors. It's about the convenience of having multiple apps available at the same time separate from one another.
It's not an obsession - it's a necessity to build things as fast as you can.
What's the point of having a garage when you can park your car in the living room?
1. You save so much time in viewing the web browser, the html, the css and the javascript codes all at the same time without swapping windows.
2. You can view comps and compare how they look in real browsers.
3. I can view the same page in Chrome, Safari and Firefox all with them scrolling at the same time.
4. New ways to develop websites auto refreshes the web pages, so it is nice to see real time updates.
5. Multiple monitors is easier to make windows full screen without taking up two screens. I can run 6 apps, all of which full screen on their own window.
I already have all 6 monitors up.
It's not about having fewer big monitors. It's about the convenience of having multiple apps available at the same time separate from one another.
It's not an obsession - it's a necessity to build things as fast as you can.
What's the point of having a garage when you can park your car in the living room?
I'm defintiely not a programer.
Honestly, I do see people posting their home office pictures in MR site....with multiple screens..and in a way i could see how it works.
I agree with your point 5. I guess if i have 2 screens...maybe i wouldn't have to minimize screens for logic pro.
bolded point: I agree with you...and it makes sense...i guess i didn't see in that perspective.