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

Would I notice the performance drop from 2.66 GHz to 2.0 GHz?

Fuzzy Orange

Fuzzy Orange

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Jul 29, 2006
263
0
I do Photoshop work semi-intensively and would like to do a bit of video editing in the future. I decided to buy a Mac Pro because of their expandibility and knowledge that (hopefully)it will last me a good 3 years. However, I'm trying to save every dime and the 2.0 GHz Mac Pro looks to be a good deal. However, would it be better to save for the 2.66 GHz version? Would it make that much of a difference?
 
Depends on what you do. If you dont use CPU intensive applications all the time, then you wont notice. If you do then you will. In my opinion if it were up to me, i would use the 300 bucks for a better video card OR more RAM.
 
Isn't Photoshop fairly CPU-intensive? As for video editing, I would be using iMovie, and MAYBE into the distant future, FCE would be a possibility.
 
If you go from 2.66 to 2.0, Apple reduces the price by $300. The retail value difference of the processors is $600.
 
According to Apple's benchmarks, there is a big difference in speed. RAM is something that will help a ton so by the time 3rd party companies have started to market RAM for the MacPro, you'll have enough saved up to put in another 1GB.

I'd start with the 2.66 (1GB RAM) and then up the RAM when you have more cash.
 
In that case go for a GPU upgrade. In my opinion for 350 to a x1900xt is not a bad price for an amazing card
 
In my opinion, when buying a system to last several years, it's best to buy the fastest non-replaceable components you can afford and then upgrade the replaceable ones as time goes by.

If you get a 2.0 GHz system, it'll never be a 2.66 GHz system. But you can always upgrade the RAM or video card later on.
 
I don't think I need a better video card than the 7300 GT. I would rather use the money on extra RAM or a better processor. Also, does anyone know why the shipping bounces up to 2-4 weeks when you add an Airport Extreme card? Does it take that long to install?
 
Fuzzy Orange said:
I don't think I need a better video card than the 7300 GT. I would rather use the money on extra RAM or a better processor. Also, does anyone know why the shipping bounces up to 2-4 weeks when you add an Airport Extreme card? Does it take that long to install?
Click to expand...
RAM updates will be cheaper than Apple charges as soon as the 3rd party vendors start shipping (which will be soon if not already).

I think the AE cards might be of a different form factor and aren't yet manufactured. Presumably, that's the cause for delay.
 
I too was looking at dropping from 2.66 to 2Ghz - but as has already been mentioned, the retail diff is a lot more than Apple are giving credit for, which is a shame. Incidentally, they also chanrge more for the upgrade to the 3.00Ghz than the retail increment.

The other factor is that the CPU's may (see front page) be swappable. If this is the case you can just plop in the next great thing when it comes along. Any thoughts?
 
jsw said:
If you get a 2.0 GHz system, it'll never be a 2.66 GHz system. But you can always upgrade the RAM or video card later on.
Click to expand...
If initial reports are to be trusted, this is not true. The CPU are likely socketed and thus you could upgrade to 2.66GHz, 3.0GHz or beyond in the future.

I agree with your premise that you should spend money to get the fastest non-upgradable components but everything should be upgradable in the Mac Pro with the possible exception maybe bluetooth.
 
http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.asp?id=xeon5160&page=7

Get the 2.66 GHz CPU's. They're dirt cheap for what you're paying for. You won't have to upgrade as soon down the road for a little price hit today.

jsw said:
Ah. Good point.

Still, though, I'd recommend the CPU boost over RAM - for the OP - because RAM can be added incrementally and relatively inexpensively, whereas the CPU would be a pricey upgrade. And the GPU doesn't seem to be ann issue.
Click to expand...
I have to agree as well. I sucked it up and I'm going with 2.66 GHz.
 
topgunn said:
If initial reports are to be trusted, this is not true. The CPU are likely socketed and thus you could upgrade to 2.66GHz, 3.0GHz or beyond in the future.
Click to expand...
Ah. Good point.

Still, though, I'd recommend the CPU boost over RAM - for the OP - because RAM can be added incrementally and relatively inexpensively, whereas the CPU would be a pricey upgrade. And the GPU doesn't seem to be ann issue.
 
The Macbook pro is at its second revision.

The Mac Pro is the first version.

Either wait for the next mac pro, or get the macbook.

BUT be warned, the mac pro is a real workstation (just look at these drive bays! Geek pr0n! wooot! ), whereas the MacBook Pro is a (very) high-end laptop, with a laptop disk, and a very small cooling system.

Why not a refurbished quad, THEN a mac pro 1 year later?
 
Palad1 said:
The Macbook pro is at its second revision.

The Mac Pro is the first version.

Either wait for the next mac pro, or get the macbook.

BUT be warned, the mac pro is a real workstation (just look at these drive bays! Geek pr0n! wooot! ), whereas the MacBook Pro is a (very) high-end laptop, with a laptop disk, and a very small cooling system.

Why not a refurbished quad, THEN a mac pro 1 year later?
Click to expand...

Umm... I don't get your point. A little clarification for the simple minded? :eek:
 
the 2.66 is definintely the sweet spot. $300 gets you 660 mhz, then the next $800 only gets you another 340 mhz. I'd definitely go 2.66.
 
I'll try to squeeze the 2.66 GHz processor into my budget. If I can't, would the 2 GHz processor still be adequate for my needs?
 
Fuzzy Orange said:
I'll try to squeeze the 2.66 GHz processor into my budget. If I can't, would the 2 GHz processor still be adequate for my needs?
Click to expand...
Yeah, you won't be as happy down the road though. Even though the CPU's are socketed and replaceable, you might not want touch them anyways.
 
I was thinking of dropping the 2.66Ghz to 2Ghz Xeon and adding more ram and a better video card. But it's kind of hard to make a decision without seeing the Mac Pro in action, personally I'm thinking of putting the impulse buy off for a little while and seeing the Mac Pro in it's full glory in an Apple store. Then I will buy :cool:
 
I was planning on getting a 20'' ACD, too. Do you think it would be better getting a refurbished display instead of a new one? I would be pretty nervous getting a refurb Mac, but I wouldn't be if I got a refurb display. Plus, it would save me $50.
 
Fuzzy Orange said:
I do Photoshop work semi-intensively and would like to do a bit of video editing in the future.
Click to expand...
Get the 2.0Ghz model and use the money to buy RAM upgrades. With Photoshop, processor power is more than adequate, but Photoshop loves RAM.

Since video editing is a future thing, even quad 2.0 GHz is more than adequate for real-time editing of DV footage. I am using a dual G5 1.8Ghz and it's still a very capable machine. If you're planning on working with HDV, or other high def formats, then I would splurge on a 3GHz with 4-8 GB RAM. :D

My advice? Go 2.0 Ghz and put the rest towards RAM. A X1900 XT card is not necessary for what you need, although if you play the occasional Quake 4 or 3D modeling, or working in Motion, it's definitely something you'll need.
 
Palad1 said:
The Macbook pro is at its second revision.

The Mac Pro is the first version.

Either wait for the next mac pro, or get the macbook.

BUT be warned, the mac pro is a real workstation (just look at these drive bays! Geek pr0n! wooot! ), whereas the MacBook Pro is a (very) high-end laptop, with a laptop disk, and a very small cooling system.

Why not a refurbished quad, THEN a mac pro 1 year later?
Click to expand...

Will people stop with the Rev A myth...it's so old and ridiculous. That's idiotic reasoning. "Buy a slower laptop because it's revision B whereas the true professional grade workstation, which smokes the laptop in every sense of the word, is revision A." Want a workstation? Buy a workstation! You run no more a risk buying a Rev A product than a Rev B (regardless of screen defects, battery issues, etc. these are potentially inherent of all revision products)
 
Fuzzy Orange said:
I was planning on getting a 20'' ACD, too. Do you think it would be better getting a refurbished display instead of a new one? I would be pretty nervous getting a refurb Mac, but I wouldn't be if I got a refurb display. Plus, it would save me $50.
Click to expand...

Why would you be nervous getting a refurb Mac from Apple? They are checked and have the same warranty. Plus, you could get some free goodies.
But you would have to wait a bit for the Mac Pro.
 
Sorry, I still subscribe to the Rev.B philosophy, especially whenever Apple releases a completely re-engineered product. Rev.B always makes improvements to the Rev.A after customer feedback and price/value ratio is always better too, and not due to just technology progress. Once a certain component becomes in demand, the price drops quite a bit by the time the second revision is released.
 
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