BTW, Bare Feats has updated their pro app benchmarks for new Mac Pros (Photshop, After Effects, and Compressor)...
"In the three tests above, the slowest 8-core 2009 Mac Pro (2.26GHz) is faster than the fastest 8-core Mac Pro (3.2GHz). On the other hand, the 2008 is a solid machine and selling at big discounts."
BTW, Bare Feats has updated their pro app benchmarks for new Mac Pros (Photshop, After Effects, and Compressor)...
"In the three tests above, the slowest 8-core 2009 Mac Pro (2.26GHz) is faster than the fastest 8-core Mac Pro (3.2GHz). On the other hand, the 2008 is a solid machine and selling at big discounts."
And what we have to remember is that Adobe is working very hard on getting CS5 not only 64 bits (though that isn't as important as some think), as well as better at using more cores and threads.
The major advantages here for the new machines, which isn't as apparent now for programs like PS which aren't efficiently multithreaded, is that as they become so, the difference in speed between the Nehalem machines and the older models will spread by a remarkable amount. The new cpus scale up much better to multiple cpu's and cores than do the older machines, due to the new memory model. Also, the Hyperthreading can add up to 30% more speed.
I think that a gap of 10% that we see now will grow to 50% or more in the next two years. The old machines really are NOT a good buy unless you're only thinking about the next 6 to 12 months. And even then, it's really questionable.
I agree with melgross. This is very important to realize that these machines haven't reached their full potential yet. When other apps are optimized, cs5 and snow leopard come out, then we'll truly know what these machines are capable of. These machines are receiving a lot of flack for not performing greatly in things like games (see engadget). This is the case where the software simply isn't there yet to take advantage of these powerful machines. It's a chicken / egg thing kind of. But the hardware has to be there before you can start doing real optimizations for it. I'm all about these machines. Mel did you get yours yet?
I agree with melgross. This is very important to realize that these machines haven't reached their full potential yet. When other apps are optimized, cs5 and snow leopard come out, then we'll truly know what these machines are capable of. These machines are receiving a lot of flack for not performing greatly in things like games (see engadget). This is the case where the software simply isn't there yet to take advantage of these powerful machines. It's a chicken / egg thing kind of. But the hardware has to be there before you can start doing real optimizations for it. I'm all about these machines. Mel did you get yours yet?
Yeah, mine came a while ago. For the first time in many years I ordered a new machine the second day after it was announced.
Wow, no comments about your new machine? What's up with that.
I have, much earlier in the thread.
It's the dual 2.66 with the 4870 and WiFi card. I haven't upgraded the RAM as yet, because I still have some questions about that aspect that I'm trying to get answered.
It's very fast, both from testing, and real work. I have no complaints about speed. Geekbench at 64 bits gave a number of 16,652. That's not with all apps off as is recommended.
Safari 3.2.1, which comes with the machine, gave a rating of a bit over 1100. I don't have the number. But the 4 beta #5528.16 gave a number of 1851. A big jump, and very good number. I haven't tested Firefox. I'm waiting for the newest to get stable enough.
FCS is much faster than my old dual 2 GHz G5 machine, even though that has 16 GB RAM, and this only has the standard 6 GB right now. Like several times faster.
It's also quieter than the old G5. When when pushing it with FCS it remains quiet.
The interior design is much superior to before, and is obviously more expensive to manufacture. When people look inside the old vs the new, and they know anything about design and manufacture, they will understand. Apple is moving up in class here, to an industrial design that ups what they did before.
But the interesting thing about this design is that it opens up possibilities that we haven't had in years, before the G5 came out.
It's far easier to replace the cpu's in this machine. I know that a couple of people here have expressed amazement that I would want to do that, given the cost. But they seem to have forgotten, or simply aren't aware of, the flourishing cpu replacement industry that existed before the G5's ended it. It's just a shadow of itself, offering replacements for old machines from the G4 and backwards. But the fact that they can sell processors for up to $500 for machines that are selling on eBay for under $100 is itself amazing!
I've replaced the cpus on the older Mac Pros, and doing so is a doozy! But it works!
It's even possible, though I don't know how likely it will be, to replace the entire cpu/memory board for a new one!
If the cost could be restrained to about half the cost of a new machine, this could be a viable upgrade route to cpus that require a new socket, such as we will see later in 2010 and beyond
It's even possible, though I don't know how likely it will be, to replace the entire cpu/memory board for a new one!
If the cost could be restrained to about half the cost of a new machine, this could be a viable upgrade route to cpus that require a new socket, such as we will see later in 2010 and beyond
I'm very optimistic here.
I work at a large all-Mac creative company. Our Mac tech/IT guys were talking about this before the new Mac Pros were announced. They had no inside information, but they, along with other IT guys have been giving Apple that feedback for the past couple of years--give us a very sturdy industrial strength box, and offer us the option of replacing a plug-in cpu/memory board for half the cost, and we will upgrade the plug-in board much more frequently than we replace entire computers. They were thrilled to see what could be the start of such an upgrade philosophy from Apple. All the pieces are now in place.
Apple could offer more discounts with the exchange of the old CPU board and kick up a flourishing refurb business.
I work at a large all-Mac creative company. Our Mac tech/IT guys were talking about this before the new Mac Pros were announced. They had no inside information, but they, along with other IT guys have been giving Apple that feedback for the past couple of years--give us a very sturdy industrial strength box, and offer us the option of replacing a plug-in cpu/memory board for half the cost, and we will upgrade the plug-in board much more frequently than we replace entire computers. They were thrilled to see what could be the start of such an upgrade philosophy from Apple. All the pieces are now in place.
Apple could offer more discounts with the exchange of the old CPU board and kick up a flourishing refurb business.
I don't see Apple doing it, unless they have changed their philosophy.
I could see Newer, or OWC through their PowerLogix brand, or Sonnet, etc., doing this..
I agree with melgross. This is very important to realize that these machines haven't reached their full potential yet. When other apps are optimized, cs5 and snow leopard come out, then we'll truly know what these machines are capable of. These machines are receiving a lot of flack for not performing greatly in things like games (see engadget). This is the case where the software simply isn't there yet to take advantage of these powerful machines. It's a chicken / egg thing kind of. But the hardware has to be there before you can start doing real optimizations for it. I'm all about these machines. Mel did you get yours yet?
Yeah as for gaming the Core i7 benchmarks are absolutely shocking. But it's got to do with game makers starting to come round to understanding and optimising for the architecture.
That would be totally cool if the aftermarket CPU industry like for the G4 had a renaissance with the Nehalem Mac Pros and further on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
I have, much earlier in the thread.
It's the dual 2.66 with the 4870 and WiFi card. I haven't upgraded the RAM as yet, because I still have some questions about that aspect that I'm trying to get answered.
It's very fast, both from testing, and real work. I have no complaints about speed. Geekbench at 64 bits gave a number of 16,652. That's not with all apps off as is recommended.
Safari 3.2.1, which comes with the machine, gave a rating of a bit over 1100. I don't have the number. But the 4 beta #5528.16 gave a number of 1851. A big jump, and very good number. I haven't tested Firefox. I'm waiting for the newest to get stable enough.
FCS is much faster than my old dual 2 GHz G5 machine, even though that has 16 GB RAM, and this only has the standard 6 GB right now. Like several times faster.
It's also quieter than the old G5. When when pushing it with FCS it remains quiet.
The interior design is much superior to before, and is obviously more expensive to manufacture. When people look inside the old vs the new, and they know anything about design and manufacture, they will understand. Apple is moving up in class here, to an industrial design that ups what they did before.
But the interesting thing about this design is that it opens up possibilities that we haven't had in years, before the G5 came out.
It's far easier to replace the cpu's in this machine. I know that a couple of people here have expressed amazement that I would want to do that, given the cost. But they seem to have forgotten, or simply aren't aware of, the flourishing cpu replacement industry that existed before the G5's ended it. It's just a shadow of itself, offering replacements for old machines from the G4 and backwards. But the fact that they can sell processors for up to $500 for machines that are selling on eBay for under $100 is itself amazing!
I've replaced the cpus on the older Mac Pros, and doing so is a doozy! But it works!
It's even possible, though I don't know how likely it will be, to replace the entire cpu/memory board for a new one!
If the cost could be restrained to about half the cost of a new machine, this could be a viable upgrade route to cpus that require a new socket, such as we will see later in 2010 and beyond
That would be totally cool if the aftermarket CPU industry like for the G4 had a renaissance with the Nehalem Mac Pros and further on.
There doesn't need to be an aftermarket CPU industry like there was for the G4. Intel will sell you a pair of processors. They'll be making CPUs for this particular socket for several years at least, so in two or three years you'll be able to buy a pair of eight-core processors and swap them in in an hour yourself.
There doesn't need to be an aftermarket CPU industry like there was for the G4. Intel will sell you a pair of processors. They'll be making CPUs for this particular socket for several years at least, so in two or three years you'll be able to buy a pair of eight-core processors and swap them in in an hour yourself.
There will only be one iteration of the 1366 socket after this new crop of processors. After that it's a new socket. and new processors. We wont be able to use them without new sockets, and architectural changes in the memory and such. All this is on the slide out board. A new board, and you have, essentially, a new machine. You would still be stuck with SATA 3, but that's not such a big problem.
For everyone concerned about the 4 memory socket limitation of the single cpu Mac Pro, as far as OWC is concerned, their testing has shown 16 GB of RAM using 4 Gb modules works fine.
For everyone concerned about the 4 memory socket limitation of the single cpu Mac Pro, as far as OWC is concerned, their testing has shown 16 GB of RAM using 4 Gb modules works fine.
They are selling a 4 x 4 kit for $979.99
See, I said to wait and not get upset.
Well that is awesome.. except if you get 4x4 with the quad it costs as much as the Octo with 12GB.
Well that is awesome.. except if you get 4x4 with the quad it costs as much as the Octo with 12GB.
It's not a big deal. Memory is sometimes more important than cores.
I'll make a bet that the price will drop more. When they first put up the 16 GB with 8 2 GB chips for the dual core, it was $489.99. Now it's dropped to $289.99.
The first 16 GB x 4 GB RAM they have listed cost $2,500. Now it's $1,949, and this new memory is just $979.99.
Finally I bought the single CPU quad core nehalem 2,66 ghz. I also take the 4870 card, and 3 *2 GB or Ram.
I only use my Mac for Aperture, DxO and CS2. I truly expect a nice speedbump over my quad G5, and I especially expect, something less noisy than my quad (it's so loud, that my wife refuse it in our bedroom : I can understand that)
For people interested between difference in term of performance between a 4 and 8 cores, you should see this review.
Remember, that very few software are really taking advantage of more than 4 cores, and that Nehalem architecture support HT.
Finally I bought the single CPU quad core nehalem 2,66 ghz. I also take the 4870 card, and 3 *2 GB or Ram.
I only use my Mac for Aperture, DxO and CS2. I truly expect a nice speedbump over my quad G5, and I especially expect, something less noisy than my quad (it's so loud, that my wife refuse it in our bedroom : I can understand that)
For people interested between difference in term of performance between a 4 and 8 cores, you should see this review.
Remember, that very few software are really taking advantage of more than 4 cores, and that Nehalem architecture support HT.
My dual 2.66 is surely quiet! When the machine first comes on, for a few seconds, the fans swoosh up to full speed in a system check, but then quiet down remarkably. Mine is under my desk just to the left of me. I can hear nothing.
The only noisy thing is the DVD unit. for some reason, that's noisy.
I think the single core model is a good buy for now. But when Photoshop CS5 comes out, and it can access all cores and threads, just a bit of that can be done now, the situation will change.
With FCS, I often find all 16 threads active. Multitasking also seems to use more cores and threads. So it does depend on what you will need a year or two down the road.
My dual 2.66 is surely quiet! When the machine first comes on, for a few seconds, the fans swoosh up to full speed in a system check, but then quiet down remarkably. Mine is under my desk just to the left of me. I can hear nothing.
The only noisy thing is the DVD unit. for some reason, that's noisy.
I think the single core model is a good buy for now. But when Photoshop CS5 comes out, and it can access all cores and threads, just a bit of that can be done now, the situation will change.
With FCS, I often find all 16 threads active. Multitasking also seems to use more cores and threads. So it does depend on what you will need a year or two down the road.
Thanks for your input Melgross
I am very happy to hear that it's quiet even with the radeon ( I was efraid of that, because it's a big card).
You are right, in the future, software will take advantage of more cores.
That's not really a big deal for me. My plan is to change one Mac in my office every year. I always kept my best mac for home, and I replace the slowest mac at my office with my previous home mac.
I do not really need raw power at my office, and even my PW G5 1,6 ghz, is still doing a great job
I am very happy to hear that it's quiet even with the radeon ( I was efraid of that, because it's a big card).
You really have to have a silent room before you can hear it. Otherwise, you have to bend down to the machine. Even when all 16 threads are rendering, it's quieter than any other machine i've used. Still don't get why the DVD is noisy. hopefully, it's just that model they use now. I might replace it anyway.
Quote:
You are right, in the future, software will take advantage of more cores.
That's not really a big deal for me. My plan is to change one Mac in my office every year. I always kept my best mac for home, and I replace the slowest mac at my office with my previous home mac.
I do not really need raw power at my office, and even my PW G5 1,6 ghz, is still doing a great job
I used to replace a third of my machines every year when I had my lab. Now that I'm retired, I wanted to buy a machine that would last longer. I do intend to replace the chips late next year with dual 6 core versions running at a higher speed just before they obsolete the current 1366 B socket.
Comments
BTW, Bare Feats has updated their pro app benchmarks for new Mac Pros (Photshop, After Effects, and Compressor)...
"In the three tests above, the slowest 8-core 2009 Mac Pro (2.26GHz) is faster than the fastest 8-core Mac Pro (3.2GHz). On the other hand, the 2008 is a solid machine and selling at big discounts."
http://www.barefeats.com/nehal04.html
Thanks for the information!
BTW, Bare Feats has updated their pro app benchmarks for new Mac Pros (Photshop, After Effects, and Compressor)...
"In the three tests above, the slowest 8-core 2009 Mac Pro (2.26GHz) is faster than the fastest 8-core Mac Pro (3.2GHz). On the other hand, the 2008 is a solid machine and selling at big discounts."
http://www.barefeats.com/nehal04.html
And what we have to remember is that Adobe is working very hard on getting CS5 not only 64 bits (though that isn't as important as some think), as well as better at using more cores and threads.
The major advantages here for the new machines, which isn't as apparent now for programs like PS which aren't efficiently multithreaded, is that as they become so, the difference in speed between the Nehalem machines and the older models will spread by a remarkable amount. The new cpus scale up much better to multiple cpu's and cores than do the older machines, due to the new memory model. Also, the Hyperthreading can add up to 30% more speed.
I think that a gap of 10% that we see now will grow to 50% or more in the next two years. The old machines really are NOT a good buy unless you're only thinking about the next 6 to 12 months. And even then, it's really questionable.
I agree with melgross. This is very important to realize that these machines haven't reached their full potential yet. When other apps are optimized, cs5 and snow leopard come out, then we'll truly know what these machines are capable of. These machines are receiving a lot of flack for not performing greatly in things like games (see engadget). This is the case where the software simply isn't there yet to take advantage of these powerful machines. It's a chicken / egg thing kind of. But the hardware has to be there before you can start doing real optimizations for it. I'm all about these machines. Mel did you get yours yet?
Yeah, mine came a while ago. For the first time in many years I ordered a new machine the second day after it was announced.
Wow, no comments about your new machine? What's up with that.
I have, much earlier in the thread.
It's the dual 2.66 with the 4870 and WiFi card. I haven't upgraded the RAM as yet, because I still have some questions about that aspect that I'm trying to get answered.
It's very fast, both from testing, and real work. I have no complaints about speed. Geekbench at 64 bits gave a number of 16,652. That's not with all apps off as is recommended.
Safari 3.2.1, which comes with the machine, gave a rating of a bit over 1100. I don't have the number. But the 4 beta #5528.16 gave a number of 1851. A big jump, and very good number. I haven't tested Firefox. I'm waiting for the newest to get stable enough.
FCS is much faster than my old dual 2 GHz G5 machine, even though that has 16 GB RAM, and this only has the standard 6 GB right now. Like several times faster.
It's also quieter than the old G5. When when pushing it with FCS it remains quiet.
The interior design is much superior to before, and is obviously more expensive to manufacture. When people look inside the old vs the new, and they know anything about design and manufacture, they will understand. Apple is moving up in class here, to an industrial design that ups what they did before.
But the interesting thing about this design is that it opens up possibilities that we haven't had in years, before the G5 came out.
It's far easier to replace the cpu's in this machine. I know that a couple of people here have expressed amazement that I would want to do that, given the cost. But they seem to have forgotten, or simply aren't aware of, the flourishing cpu replacement industry that existed before the G5's ended it. It's just a shadow of itself, offering replacements for old machines from the G4 and backwards. But the fact that they can sell processors for up to $500 for machines that are selling on eBay for under $100 is itself amazing!
I've replaced the cpus on the older Mac Pros, and doing so is a doozy! But it works!
It's even possible, though I don't know how likely it will be, to replace the entire cpu/memory board for a new one!
If the cost could be restrained to about half the cost of a new machine, this could be a viable upgrade route to cpus that require a new socket, such as we will see later in 2010 and beyond
I'm very optimistic here.
It's even possible, though I don't know how likely it will be, to replace the entire cpu/memory board for a new one!
If the cost could be restrained to about half the cost of a new machine, this could be a viable upgrade route to cpus that require a new socket, such as we will see later in 2010 and beyond
I'm very optimistic here.
I work at a large all-Mac creative company. Our Mac tech/IT guys were talking about this before the new Mac Pros were announced. They had no inside information, but they, along with other IT guys have been giving Apple that feedback for the past couple of years--give us a very sturdy industrial strength box, and offer us the option of replacing a plug-in cpu/memory board for half the cost, and we will upgrade the plug-in board much more frequently than we replace entire computers. They were thrilled to see what could be the start of such an upgrade philosophy from Apple. All the pieces are now in place.
Apple could offer more discounts with the exchange of the old CPU board and kick up a flourishing refurb business.
I work at a large all-Mac creative company. Our Mac tech/IT guys were talking about this before the new Mac Pros were announced. They had no inside information, but they, along with other IT guys have been giving Apple that feedback for the past couple of years--give us a very sturdy industrial strength box, and offer us the option of replacing a plug-in cpu/memory board for half the cost, and we will upgrade the plug-in board much more frequently than we replace entire computers. They were thrilled to see what could be the start of such an upgrade philosophy from Apple. All the pieces are now in place.
Apple could offer more discounts with the exchange of the old CPU board and kick up a flourishing refurb business.
I don't see Apple doing it, unless they have changed their philosophy.
I could see Newer, or OWC through their PowerLogix brand, or Sonnet, etc., doing this..
I agree with melgross. This is very important to realize that these machines haven't reached their full potential yet. When other apps are optimized, cs5 and snow leopard come out, then we'll truly know what these machines are capable of. These machines are receiving a lot of flack for not performing greatly in things like games (see engadget). This is the case where the software simply isn't there yet to take advantage of these powerful machines. It's a chicken / egg thing kind of. But the hardware has to be there before you can start doing real optimizations for it. I'm all about these machines. Mel did you get yours yet?
Yeah as for gaming the Core i7 benchmarks are absolutely shocking. But it's got to do with game makers starting to come round to understanding and optimising for the architecture.
I have, much earlier in the thread.
It's the dual 2.66 with the 4870 and WiFi card. I haven't upgraded the RAM as yet, because I still have some questions about that aspect that I'm trying to get answered.
It's very fast, both from testing, and real work. I have no complaints about speed. Geekbench at 64 bits gave a number of 16,652. That's not with all apps off as is recommended.
Safari 3.2.1, which comes with the machine, gave a rating of a bit over 1100. I don't have the number. But the 4 beta #5528.16 gave a number of 1851. A big jump, and very good number. I haven't tested Firefox. I'm waiting for the newest to get stable enough.
FCS is much faster than my old dual 2 GHz G5 machine, even though that has 16 GB RAM, and this only has the standard 6 GB right now. Like several times faster.
It's also quieter than the old G5. When when pushing it with FCS it remains quiet.
The interior design is much superior to before, and is obviously more expensive to manufacture. When people look inside the old vs the new, and they know anything about design and manufacture, they will understand. Apple is moving up in class here, to an industrial design that ups what they did before.
But the interesting thing about this design is that it opens up possibilities that we haven't had in years, before the G5 came out.
It's far easier to replace the cpu's in this machine. I know that a couple of people here have expressed amazement that I would want to do that, given the cost. But they seem to have forgotten, or simply aren't aware of, the flourishing cpu replacement industry that existed before the G5's ended it. It's just a shadow of itself, offering replacements for old machines from the G4 and backwards. But the fact that they can sell processors for up to $500 for machines that are selling on eBay for under $100 is itself amazing!
I've replaced the cpus on the older Mac Pros, and doing so is a doozy! But it works!
It's even possible, though I don't know how likely it will be, to replace the entire cpu/memory board for a new one!
If the cost could be restrained to about half the cost of a new machine, this could be a viable upgrade route to cpus that require a new socket, such as we will see later in 2010 and beyond
I'm very optimistic here.
That would be totally cool if the aftermarket CPU industry like for the G4 had a renaissance with the Nehalem Mac Pros and further on.
There doesn't need to be an aftermarket CPU industry like there was for the G4. Intel will sell you a pair of processors. They'll be making CPUs for this particular socket for several years at least, so in two or three years you'll be able to buy a pair of eight-core processors and swap them in in an hour yourself.
There doesn't need to be an aftermarket CPU industry like there was for the G4. Intel will sell you a pair of processors. They'll be making CPUs for this particular socket for several years at least, so in two or three years you'll be able to buy a pair of eight-core processors and swap them in in an hour yourself.
There will only be one iteration of the 1366 socket after this new crop of processors. After that it's a new socket. and new processors. We wont be able to use them without new sockets, and architectural changes in the memory and such. All this is on the slide out board. A new board, and you have, essentially, a new machine. You would still be stuck with SATA 3, but that's not such a big problem.
They are selling a 4 x 4 kit for $979.99
See, I said to wait and not get upset.
For everyone concerned about the 4 memory socket limitation of the single cpu Mac Pro, as far as OWC is concerned, their testing has shown 16 GB of RAM using 4 Gb modules works fine.
They are selling a 4 x 4 kit for $979.99
See, I said to wait and not get upset.
Well that is awesome.. except if you get 4x4 with the quad it costs as much as the Octo with 12GB.
Well that is awesome.. except if you get 4x4 with the quad it costs as much as the Octo with 12GB.
It's not a big deal. Memory is sometimes more important than cores.
I'll make a bet that the price will drop more. When they first put up the 16 GB with 8 2 GB chips for the dual core, it was $489.99. Now it's dropped to $289.99.
The first 16 GB x 4 GB RAM they have listed cost $2,500. Now it's $1,949, and this new memory is just $979.99.
This is all within 3 weeks.
I only use my Mac for Aperture, DxO and CS2. I truly expect a nice speedbump over my quad G5, and I especially expect, something less noisy than my quad (it's so loud, that my wife refuse it in our bedroom : I can understand that)
For people interested between difference in term of performance between a 4 and 8 cores, you should see this review.
Remember, that very few software are really taking advantage of more than 4 cores, and that Nehalem architecture support HT.
http://www.macworld.com/article/1395...acpro2009.html
Finally I bought the single CPU quad core nehalem 2,66 ghz. I also take the 4870 card, and 3 *2 GB or Ram.
I only use my Mac for Aperture, DxO and CS2. I truly expect a nice speedbump over my quad G5, and I especially expect, something less noisy than my quad (it's so loud, that my wife refuse it in our bedroom : I can understand that)
For people interested between difference in term of performance between a 4 and 8 cores, you should see this review.
Remember, that very few software are really taking advantage of more than 4 cores, and that Nehalem architecture support HT.
http://www.macworld.com/article/1395...acpro2009.html
Congrats!
My dual 2.66 is surely quiet! When the machine first comes on, for a few seconds, the fans swoosh up to full speed in a system check, but then quiet down remarkably. Mine is under my desk just to the left of me. I can hear nothing.
The only noisy thing is the DVD unit. for some reason, that's noisy.
I think the single core model is a good buy for now. But when Photoshop CS5 comes out, and it can access all cores and threads, just a bit of that can be done now, the situation will change.
With FCS, I often find all 16 threads active. Multitasking also seems to use more cores and threads. So it does depend on what you will need a year or two down the road.
Congrats!
My dual 2.66 is surely quiet! When the machine first comes on, for a few seconds, the fans swoosh up to full speed in a system check, but then quiet down remarkably. Mine is under my desk just to the left of me. I can hear nothing.
The only noisy thing is the DVD unit. for some reason, that's noisy.
I think the single core model is a good buy for now. But when Photoshop CS5 comes out, and it can access all cores and threads, just a bit of that can be done now, the situation will change.
With FCS, I often find all 16 threads active. Multitasking also seems to use more cores and threads. So it does depend on what you will need a year or two down the road.
Thanks for your input Melgross
I am very happy to hear that it's quiet even with the radeon ( I was efraid of that, because it's a big card).
You are right, in the future, software will take advantage of more cores.
That's not really a big deal for me. My plan is to change one Mac in my office every year. I always kept my best mac for home, and I replace the slowest mac at my office with my previous home mac.
I do not really need raw power at my office, and even my PW G5 1,6 ghz, is still doing a great job
Thanks for your input Melgross
I am very happy to hear that it's quiet even with the radeon ( I was efraid of that, because it's a big card).
You really have to have a silent room before you can hear it. Otherwise, you have to bend down to the machine. Even when all 16 threads are rendering, it's quieter than any other machine i've used. Still don't get why the DVD is noisy. hopefully, it's just that model they use now. I might replace it anyway.
You are right, in the future, software will take advantage of more cores.
That's not really a big deal for me. My plan is to change one Mac in my office every year. I always kept my best mac for home, and I replace the slowest mac at my office with my previous home mac.
I do not really need raw power at my office, and even my PW G5 1,6 ghz, is still doing a great job
I used to replace a third of my machines every year when I had my lab. Now that I'm retired, I wanted to buy a machine that would last longer. I do intend to replace the chips late next year with dual 6 core versions running at a higher speed just before they obsolete the current 1366 B socket.
Those are the 5000-series dual socket machines, the same class as the 8-core. Price the Precision T3400.
Dell is "ripping you off" also - the T3500 is $1800 when you spec it like the Mac Pro. Looks like you and Lemon Bon Bon were WAY wrong.