Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Which is Mac Pro is faster/Better?!

S

sddjqp

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Apr 5, 2012
1
0
Before you respond to my use of the word Better, understand that I am simply looking for a "simple answer".

Two 2.8GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon Processors MAX RAM =32GB

Two 3.0 GHz Quad Core Intel Xeon Processors MAX RAM=16GB

The faster processor has a bottle neck @ 16 GB while the slower has double the potential flow.

If both machines are maxed out, which is faster/Better (if there are additional considerations to make for "Better" to sit well with you (like stability), then please elaborate.

It seems to me that the 3rd party cost of RAM may be the major component...however if the 3.0 has nowhere near the potential as the 2.8 due to the bottleneck effect of only 16GB of RAM, yet the price is greater, the 3.0 would be a bad choice for pretty much anyone.

(FYI my technical knowledge is VERY limited... I began using macs in late 2011...if i have made a technical error, please just ignore it and answer.thanks)

Also, please keep opinions to a minimum as they confuse facts. (ie: this is simply marketing by mac to sell more machines.) (if you work for mac/apple marketing and know this to be true...cool, do share :))

Thanks for your input.:)

my machines: mac pro 2.8 16GB, 17"macbook pro maxed RAM, 15" macbook pro stock RAM

My major programs are iMovie, Adobe Suite, Pro Tools 10, Serato SL3
 
Does it really matter? The newer model is ever so slightly faster regardless of memory allotment in real world tests. So what for 60 geekbench point loss.
 
the 2007 Mac Pro won't be able to run next OSX, releasing this summer.

even if you won't be using next OSX, that still burns several hundreds of $$$ when it comes to resale value.

the 2007 also has PCIe 1.1, when the 2008 has PCIe 2.0, that offers double the bandwitdh for graphic cards etc.

Forget about CPU speed and ram, the two facts above is much more important imo.

speed wise, they are eqvivalent.

but the 2008 is worth many 100$ more.
 
Cindori said:
the 2007 Mac Pro won't be able to run next OSX, releasing this summer.
Click to expand...
This will only be known when the next OS X will eventually be released. As of today it does it pretty well afaik.

Cindori said:
the 2007 also has PCIe 1.1, when the 2008 has PCIe 2.0, that offers double the bandwitdh for graphic cards etc.
Click to expand...
German computer magazine c't found in its latest issue (8/2012, p. 149) that even PCIe 1.1 is able to fully saturate TWO crossfired HD 7970 (provided each card has its own x16-slot)! The speed difference to using that combo in a PCIe 3.0 system is said to be within 1-2%...

Cindori said:
Forget about CPU speed and ram, the two facts above is much more important imo.

speed wise, they are eqvivalent.

but the 2008 is worth many 100$ more.
Click to expand...
Arguable imo...
 
derbothaus said:
Not really.
Click to expand...
"worth many 100$ more" - really? What for? Slightly faster Ram/FSB? 64bit EFI? Slightly faster CPU options? Sure - may be worth some $ more, but if we are talking of "many 100$" the choice should be 2009/2010, not 2008...
 
"Not Really" in it IS worth more. I did not take into account actually how much more. But more. That isn't arguable. The how much more is personal. The question is simple. Which is worth more? Answer: the newer one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back