Which refurbished Mac Pro is equivalent or better than the i7 iMac?

[G4er?]

Good info, thanks guys.
...and what's wrong with still using Quark? Is there something better out there that's come along? We mainly do graphic design for print material.

I was in the printing industry for 18 years until 2003. I demoed InDesign shortly before I left. I much prefered QuarkXPress. Quark seemed written for those that know printing and had a history in the print industry. Adobe seemed to make InDesign for people that knew computers.

 

[ActionableMango]

I'd be careful following this advice. From Apple's own site, it does not appear that B&H Photo Video is an authorized reseller.

I went to the Apple's "Where to Buy" site, typed in B&H's zip code (10001) in the reseller field, and B&H is right there at the top of the list. Others on this forum and elsewhere on the web also state that B&H is an authorized reseller.

I've run into issues like this before. Cost Central is also an authorized reseller which shows up on Apple's reseller search, but not on their list. When I bought a Pioneer TV, the dealer I bought it from wasn't listed on Pioneer's authorized dealers website, but I was able to confirm they were an authorized dealer by calling Pioneer and asking.

Furthermore, this link is to last year's Mac Pro model, not this year's.

This is not fair criticism at all. "This link" was to the exact same model that OP was asking about.

The issue with Amazon is that not all sellers are Apple authorized and there is no way to tell from the site itself whether or not the seller is Apple authorized.

I agree some care needs to be taken with Amazon.

 

[Mactrillionaire]

@ActionableMango
I am not saying that B&H is not an authorized reseller of Apple products. It is just from the Apple website, I didn't find an easy way of verifying that. For instance, I searched New York, NY where they are located and found no match. I also searched Internet Resellers and they are not listed. Perhaps you can guide me to the apple.com link where it is listed. Is B&H doing business under another name?

Edit: It would appear that B&H is an Apple authorized reseller; however, the information didn't show up when searching for New York, NY as it should have according to the mailing address on their website. It only showed up in the Apple database when searching for the exact zip code. B&H should be notified to have Apple correct this information so that they don't lose sales from customers who are unsure.

 

[JustSomeDude]

You can find the 8 core 2009 Mac Pro for $2349 at MacMall

 

[ZilogZ80]

... the mentionned applications aren´t suited for multiprocessor machines - they aren´t really multithreaded. So the machine with the highest CPU frequency would be the winner here.

Can someone explain this to me please? I have been considering swapping my i7 for a Mac Pro; I also mainly do Illustrator work. Looking at my Illustrator process in Activity Monitor right now it is using 39 "Threads". Does this have any relevance to using multiple processors?

 

[chrismacguy]

Can someone explain this to me please? I have been considering swapping my i7 for a Mac Pro; I also mainly do Illustrator work. Looking at my Illustrator process in Activity Monitor right now it is using 39 "Threads". Does this have any relevance to using multiple processors?

Yes. Multiple CPUs means you can run multiple threads at the same time (8 on a Quad-Core MP). The more "threads" a Program creates that are doing something useful, the faster things get done. (Hence why everyone moans about Final Cut, as its rendering system isnt multithreaded particularly well)

 

[ZilogZ80]

Yes. Multiple CPUs means you can run multiple threads at the same time (8 on a Quad-Core MP). The more "threads" a Program creates that are doing something useful, the faster things get done. (Hence why everyone moans about Final Cut, as its rendering system isnt multithreaded particularly well)

So does this mean that having a multiple processor Mac Pro would specifically benefit me running Illustrator? I have read many times on this forum that I would see no benefit because apps have to be written with supporting multiple processors in mind.

 

[snberk103]

Not a professional here... take my comments with grain of salt.

My understanding is that most applications run multiple threads. However, the threads may only worked on one at a time with CPU going round-robin through all open threads. This would be the case of an application not taking advantage of multiple cores.

In an application that takes advantage of multi cored CPUs, then more of the threads can be worked on simultaneously. So, in your example, a single core machine will work through each of the 39 threads one at a time. In an 8 core machine, in a perfect world, the machine would be able to work on 8 threads simultaneously. All 39 threads would be distributed (more or less) evenly across 8 cores. I forget if the Mac Pro CPUs support hyperthreading, which enables each core to operate on 2 threads - effectively making an 8 core machine into 16, and a 12 core machine into 24. Wow! Of course managing all of those threads takes it toll with overhead management.

A year or so ago Apple introduced a new technology called Grand Central Dispatch that promised to make it easier for developers to make their applications multi-core, multi-processor aware. I don't think we've seen much develop on that front, however.

My take is that sometime this year (I'm optimist) this Grand Central Dispatch will start being leveraged more and more, making my 2008 octo-core get relatively faster as more of it cores are utilized. So far there aren't a lot of applications that max out all 8 cores, but I have a couple. I think Lightroom may be one - for some operations. Hmm, I know I got really excited once seeing all 8 cores 100% once - but I can't remember what I was doing..... anyway.... What it means for me is that I can run several applications (that individually don't use 8 cores) but when run at the same time OS X will distribute the work evenly.

all of this is ymmv, and imho, and afaik, and iirc - - of course

 

[ActionableMango]

Yes, it seems more cores is hyped far more than they are really useful. There are noticeable differences moving from 1 core to 2 and from 2 to 4 (less so), but beyond that it seems to require specialized applications. Rather disappointingly, it seems that those applications you'd hope or expect would be optimized for 8 or a dozen cores, aren't.

Hyperthreading seems to be a joke, especially on a dual or quad core machine. It might have made some difference back in the day on a single proc machine.

The only application I've personally used that pegged all cores at max for the duration of the work is Visualhub. Unfortunately that application is not a major part of my typical workflow.

 

[you39]

Graphic design applications are not well suited for multi-threading and apparently will not be in the foreseeable future. Also just having many applications open doesn't mean you benefit from many cores - if the former sit idle. How many lengthy tasks do you simultaneously send away on a regular basis using Quark, PS & AI? GHz wins. Speaking of GHz the i7 does turboboost and higher so than it's xeon counterparts. So for your applications none of the 3 options will actually catch up to the iMac - in terms of processor performance. The biggest benefit of the mac pro in terms of speed is that you have many options to widen the data storage bottleneck.