Going to down to Apple Store for a Nehalem Mac Pro, 2.66GHz vs. 2.93GHz??

I have my eye set on the 2.66GHz model 8 core mac pro but I really want that 2.93GHz but its $1400 more on top of $4610 after student discount and taxes!!

I dont want the lower end (2.26GHz) since its a bit crippled on the spec sheets but what do you guys think? Which one?!?

PS. man I cant WAIT to hook it up to my 24" LED ACD!!

 

no need to spend so much, buy a normal one this year, then a i7 then next year and it will have better performance then your $4610 one.

 

If the new motherboards have dual sockets on them, regardless of single processor or dual, I'd get the quad core base model, then throw in some new processors later on when they become cheaper.

All you'll need is a Mac Pro heatsink to complete the job.

If you want to avoid the hassle of upgrades, then just get the low end 8-core.

 

lol,just send me the money and I ll buy you your perfect machine

 

Lol, no way I have my eyes set on a gainstown 2.66GHz Mac Pro... Its too beastly!!

 

I can't imagine what a $4610 PC desktop could do

 

^sorry?you mean cstm built?

 

Id take the 2.66Ghz. Also the 4 core Mac Pros only have 1 socket AFAIK.

 

Yea thats the reason for the 2.66GHz model. Seems just a tad bit slower than the 2.93GHz model for $1400 less while being significantly faster than the 2.26GHz and all the other quad models + the ability to put in 32gb of RAM.

 

Wow JJahshiki32, ever since I saw you post in the different Mac forums you have probably owned a sample in every Mac line in Apple. Its pretty cool in a way and of course its your money but what do you exactly do that justify going through so many Macs?

 

I play around with a lot hd content for bluray movies and such. Yea pretty much I've been through everything in the lineup since 2006 up to now (minus the imacs).

I had the SR 15" 2.5GHz mbp, SR 17" 2.6GHz hi resolution mbp, 15" unibody 2.53GHz mbp, 2.66GHz 4 core first gen Mac Pro, 2.8GHz 8 core Mac Pro 2nd gen Mac Pro. I buy and sell around every 4-6 months and loose probably a couple hundred on the resale (just like a rental fee I guess).

I'm tired of buying and selling so mid last year I sold my 2.8GHz 8 core and have been waiting for the Nehalem. I found out that I'm not a notebook person, just never use it around the house or outside. I always like being on my desk with something powerful.

So far I have a 2.0GHz mac mini for now until I move it to my hdtv as a htpc to play bluray movies but I sure do want a nice powerful Mac Pro that I could use for the next 4-6 years.

 

Wow.. I've check that nehalem mac pro and I don't wanna sound provocative or anything, but what kind of tasks would require more than 6gb of ram or two 2.93ghz quad-core cpus..? I mean yeah it's a beast, but I barely use 3 gb of rams and more than 2 cores on my cpu for everything I do..

 

And I thought my macbook pro was high end!

 

What's with all this "The next CPU will be faster" madness? Just a couple of months ago people were saying, "Wait for Nehalem it will be much faster!" The OP's eyes and wallet must be pretty BIG. Unless you're doing some pro production for a major movie studio do you really need more than the 8 core 2.26? I would get the base model and load it up with as much ram as possible if you're willing to pay $1400 more for 2.93 Ghz.

 

Hmm your comment has made me think more about my purchase. I'm currently waiting from barefeats.com to see what the benchmarks differences are. I've hold off for now but currently using the mac mini connected to the 24" LED ACD.. its good enough but I want a beastly machine!

 

keep in mind that the 2.26 8-core machine will be right on par with the 2.8 8-core machine that came before it. Clock speed really has very little to do with the overall performance of a computer.

2.66 8-core if you can afford it, if not, I wouldn't have any worries about going for the 2.26 model.

And as far as the PC stuff goes, just stop, go price how much it costs to have someone develop and produce a motherboard that is even close to what apple is offering here.

A good computer is not just about the specs. . .you idiots.

 

I doubt a lot of people could even maximize the use of the "low end" quad 2.66 Xeon with a "measly" 8 gigs of RAM.

 

When I had the 2.8GHz 8 core model last year with 16GB of RAM with heavy multitasking and some HD rendering I was able to use up about 15GB of RAM.

Just because you have 4GB of RAM and only using 2-3GB doesnt mean that OSX couldnt use more RAM. If you do the same things you were doing and if you had 8GB of RAM like on the new 17" unibody mbp, I'm pretty sure OSX will easily gobble up 6-7GB of RAM.

More RAM is always good.

 

Shouldn't this be using triple channel memory?

 

I'm considering a refurbished Dell XPS Studio - it has Core i7 for $600-$700 bucks. I just need a coupon. I just want to play around with a few of the new instructions for a little while so I'd be better off renting one. Just can't find a place to do that cheaply.

 

Yes it does have tripple channel memory (on the Nehalem models).

But the 2.8GHz 8 core model was dual channel.

 

Have not seen the tests myself but if the performance difference between the 2,66 and the 2,93 is marginal I would definately recommend you to go for the 2,66 but if its a pretty big difference then why not, if you can get the best and actually use the difference in performance and also got the dough why not. Live the american dream baby.

 

Get the 2.66 unless money really is no object. And while I agree these machines are more powerful than most any of us could ever use, they are REALLY nice. The case design is unbelievable. I wish Apple would make something similar with desktop chips, instead of workstation, in the 1500-2000 range. I would be all over it.

 

sorry but the xeon's in the mac pro are better then i7's

 

Yup, currently no other OEMs are offering the Xeon Gainstown other than Apple.

I'm guessing this is why the Mac Pros are a bit over priced, perhaps the pricing will come down a few months later.

 

I remember someone compared previews mac pro to dell workstation and it(mp) was cheaper...