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

Which Mac Pro & Why wait? ...

R

realizment

macrumors member
Original poster
Oct 22, 2012
35
0
Hey peeps.

So im making the jump in my studio to mac.. Ive been using macbook pros for personal use and some editing/mixing since, 2006. And up until now couldnt really afford to take my studio to the mac realm which ive wished to do for long time..

So now i have been looking online for a well priced 12 core, used or whatever, best ive found, was a 12 core unopened from june this year for $3500 pretty good i guess. still as my studio is not finished i should wait it out a little longer and see what other deals pop up...

Now heres my question, i was debating 8 core or 12 core. And the 12 core won that debate for the future factor.. But now im looking to see what real performance difference lies between the 2.40 Ghz , the 2.66ghz and the 3.06ghz.

Now i know the old if you have to ask blah blah, i dont need that answer lol.

I doing music production, and mixing mostly in this particular studio, also there will be a little recording.. My sessions can get extensive with plugins and instruments, I just dont know how to weigh up these three options.. I mean is there a huge difference between the 3? noticeable in audio or more geared toward video? The price difference is pretty big...

Is the basic 12 core such beast it be hard to make it stress? I just need a little help so i can make the appropriate changes to my budget..

Also another question, some people are telling me, they hear a new mac pro is on the cards, which is always the case anyways, right? But what i need to try figure out what will be so significant about the next gen ones that will make this purchase a regretful one? Thunderbolt maybe one factor? Will apple ever give an option to expand with a pcie card for thunderbolt compatibility with these current systems?

Lastly, do you guys recommend any good site to keep an eye out for good priced machines? Apart from the obvious CL, Amazon, Ebay..


Thanks you!!
 
12 core is dual hex?

Honestly i don't know what you want to do with your machine besides "music production and extensions"... but for many things... ram and a nice big SSD will get you more for your buck than 12 cores... i suppose a gpu isn't as important for you unless you want to multi-screen or do video...

then again i am a bit jaded with the mac pro these days.... cost so much compared to a self pc build for the same performance... or a hackintosh.
 
Last edited:
Well, there's probably someone else on this forum who could better answer your questions about which MP is better for mixing/editing audio, but I can tell you it never hurts to buy a use Mac Pro at a good price, even if you plan on upgrading in a year or so.

There are rumors that a new Pro will be out next year, nobody really knows any specs or anything, but it's expected to be a huge upgrade from the current models. That being said, if you want a Mac Pro now and you can get a great deal on one that suits your needs, do it. You can always sell the one you buy now for a good chunk of change towards the one that comes out next year. Plus the current 12 and 8 core models will still be relevant machines for the next few years if you decide not to upgrade to the new one.

I would keep an eye on macofalltrades.com, they occasionally get some newer model Mac Pros that they sell at decent prices. Though the ones they have now are all 2008 and older. Ebay is honestly probably the best place, though.
 
I agree with the self build, i built all previous pcs and you get serious bang for buck. But in a professional setting a mac pro is needed unfortunately a Hackintosh is not an option..


I will be dual screening, hopefully 2 27 inch displays. Do u need 2 video cards for this in macs? or is the one card got the connections?

----------

Thanks guys,

I understand no one really knows what specs etc, but when you say huge upgrade where exactly can they take it? What are people speculating?

----------

Thanks guys,

I understand no one really knows what specs etc, but when you say huge upgrade where exactly can they take it? What are people speculating? Right now the 12 core is the highest spec of the macs, what can they really hit us with.. and how long u think current models be relevant another 5-6 yrs at least right?
 
realizment said:
I agree with the self build, i built all previous pcs and you get serious bang for buck. But in a professional setting a mac pro is needed unfortunately a Hackintosh is not an option..


I will be dual screening, hopefully 2 27 inch displays. Do u need 2 video cards for this in macs? or is the one card got the connections?

----------

Thanks guys,

I understand no one really knows what specs etc, but when you say huge upgrade where exactly can they take it? What are people speculating?
Click to expand...

Ok... so you have to have a mac pro. Must keep it legit so as to avoid business issues i guess? best way to save is to go with a single hex, or go with a dual quad. Frankly i think the dual quad is a good way to go. Programs are barely taking advantage of hex from what i have heard... but this isn't my expertise.

As for models, avoid the 2008. 2009 is more current. 2010 would be optimal in terms of pricing. You have to look at how much ram costs for each model for example, or the fact that my 2008 use IDE on the optical drive. So where as i got 12 gigs of ram for about 100 bucks a year ago (maybe 1.5 years...) it now costs close to 250-300 dollars for the same ram bundle because the 2008 ram is not produced as much.

Also in terms of compiling and what not... a ramdisk can produce orgasmic performance.

if you are doing a dual screen.. you will want a better gpu.. .and apple charges way to much for that. I would suggest you go with a amd readon radeon for best price per performance... but there are issues with the second port working i think... so you may want to have a chat with "Macvidcards" who is a vendor on this site... he sells flashed cards basicly. if you can flash yourself even better. And yea nvidea is generally better on the dual screen but i found using AMD for my purposes easier.
 
Ok thanks for the info, as for the graphics it doesnt have to be crazy as long the screens both run together, i use it mostly to view 2 different windows from the same program.
 
What DAW are you using?

This is the Logic Pro benchmarks over at gearslutz, you can compare apple to Oranges...

LogicBenchmarkChart.jpg
 
Nice thank you! I use Cubase and Pro tools. Some logic, not much...

It seems as though there is a huge difference between the 12 core 2.66 and 2.9 yet a very small difference between the 12 core 2.6 and 8 core 2.4

Thats kind of strange... Truth is i dont really know what im looking at, im guessing the longest ones are the best performers?

Thank you!
 
realizment said:
Nice thank you! I use Cubase and Pro tools. Some logic, not much...

It seems as though there is a huge difference between the 12 core 2.66 and 2.9 yet a very small difference between the 12 core 2.6 and 8 core 2.4

Thats kind of strange... Truth is i dont really know what im looking at, im guessing the longest ones are the best performers?

Thank you!
Click to expand...

Those are benchmark tests for Apple's Logic Pro on multiple systems. You're right that the longest bars are the fastest performers in that particular program.

Check out macperformanceguide.com, it's more geared towards pro photographers but he does a ton of benchmarks with different Mac Pros and even sells custom Pro setups.
 
darkcoupon said:
Those are benchmark tests for Apple's Logic Pro on multiple systems. You're right that the longest bars are the fastest performers in that particular program.

Check out macperformanceguide.com, it's more geared towards pro photographers but he does a ton of benchmarks with different Mac Pros and even sells custom Pro setups.
Click to expand...

Thank you!
 
basically, logic can spread virtual tracs to physical CPU cores.
if you've got 12 cores and mixing 12 tracks, each one gets a core

if you're mixing 12 tracks but have 8 cores, well the load gets spread.
so really, for future proofing, you want to get as many cores as possible. This is for audio mixing. not the same for photography.

i'm running a 2008 8 core 2.8 with logic 8 i think.
never really had too much problems with it :)

you'll probably be happy with anything new ;)

i recommend SSD and ram to keep things smooth too!
 
My purchase

If it's of any interest I just spent $3,000 on this system for my Pro Tools 9 project studio this week. Will also do Final Cut Pro X editing with it:

Mac Pro 8 core 2.66GHz (2009) $1,400
24GB RAM $145
ATI 5870 Graphics $330
(2) OCZ Deneva 400GB SSD's bay 1 and 2 in RAID 0 $325 each
(2) WD Caviar Black 2TB HDD's bay 3 and 4 $125 each
(1) Hitachi Deskstar 4TB HDD $250 optical drive bay
(2) 2.5" to 3.5" sleds for SSD's $26 each
(1) 5.25" to 3.5" bracket for HDD in Optical bay $30
 
heved said:
If it's of any interest I just spent $3,000 on this system for my Pro Tools 9 project studio this week. Will also do Final Cut Pro X editing with it:

Mac Pro 8 core 2.66GHz (2009) $1,400
24GB RAM $145
ATI 5870 Graphics $330
(2) OCZ Deneva 400GB SSD's bay 1 and 2 in RAID 0 $325 each
(2) WD Caviar Black 2TB HDD's bay 3 and 4 $125 each
(1) Hitachi Deskstar 4TB HDD $250 optical drive bay
(2) 2.5" to 3.5" sleds for SSD's $26 each
(1) 5.25" to 3.5" bracket for HDD in Optical bay $30
Click to expand...

Ok appreciate that.. so would best option be order the ma with just the processor u want then get everything else from somewhere else?
 
realizment said:
Ok appreciate that.. so would best option be order the ma with just the processor u want then get everything else from somewhere else?
Click to expand...

That's definitely the cheapest option! I spent 50% less doing it that way as opposed to having Apple install everything. Would have been $6,000 for similar system from Apple. I'm happy to tell you where I bought various components as well :)

And that's the beauty of the Mac Pro. It's so simple to upgrade yourself. Simpler than any other Mac
 
heved said:
That's definitely the cheapest option! I spent 50% less doing it that way as opposed to having Apple install everything. Would have been $6,000 for similar system from Apple. I'm happy to tell you where I bought various components as well :)

And that's the beauty of the Mac Pro. It's so simple to upgrade yourself. Simpler than any other Mac
Click to expand...

That sounds like a plan.. Yea please share with me where you bought them.. Thank you!
 
MetzoPaino said:
Is that graph by someone who is likely to update it when the new Mac Mini's/iMacs are out?
Click to expand...

According to something i read a benchmark test has showed the mac minis are out performing some of the mac pros.... :-/

Its on this forum somwhere apple are going sideways right now!
 
realizment said:
According to something i read a benchmark test has showed the mac minis are out performing some of the mac pros.... :-/

Its on this forum somwhere apple are going sideways right now!
Click to expand...

Comments like these while accurate are also misleading in some ways.

I mean... first off we got to remember Moore's law here.
Second off, it depends on the mac pro. Again... with moore's law. it only makes sense that my MP 3.1 from early 2008 would get smashed on geekbench by a late 2012 mini.
third off, stuff like geekbench and whatnot seem to place the largest emphasis on the processing power of the cpu cores, except programs are not keeping up with the multi-core processors being released.
Lastly, stuff like motherboards are actually pretty important, whereas stuff like GPUs are not that big from what i can tell (geekbench wise).


These are just my observations... but its not like you can really fit a baller GPU in a mac mini and play planet side on 3 monitors or w.e like you could on a tower with a upgraded gpu. Alternatively... All this stuff is available for self builds on PCs... and no one seems to be comparing what you can do with a self built pc vs a mac pro currently with the same annoyance they do when comparing MPs to mac minis...

Seems to me like a good hackintosh workstation could crush a mac mini on geekbench for the same cost. Also seems like one of these days Apple should just allow OS-X to be used on self builds with recommended parts from 3rd party... but i digress into dream land.
 
realizment said:
According to something i read a benchmark test has showed the mac minis are out performing some of the mac pros.... :-/

Its on this forum somwhere apple are going sideways right now!
Click to expand...

Only in raw benchmark tests against the base Mac Pro. But that graph shows a huge difference between the Mac mini to the iMac, and then the iMac to the Mac Pro, so there are other factors in regards to Logic.

My budget can't really afford a Mac Pro with all the 3rd party upgrades it would need, (plus it is due a big overhaul next year), so I would love to see that graph include the new Mac mini's and iMacs.
 
Hi.

My only experience is E08 at home 16gb DDR fbdimm
I'm running a few vms via fusion
Suits me well

But I can tell go 09 plus for never ram.
 
All indications are that the Mac Pro will indeed get a major update next year, but what form it will take is a mystery. Given Apple's recent model releases I'm a little less confident that it will be an improvement, but who knows? I'm itching to get another Mac Pro, and I'll probably wait and see if Apple takes the opportunity to make a big statement, showing that they can still crank out some serious hardware.
 
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