Mac Pro 8 core, which CPU?

[Roberto Lequeux]

I know, I know... this has been discussed a million times, as have been so many other subjects that keep popping up, but sometimes the search doesn't pull anything up... might be me. Either way:

For working with a long post production schedule where I won't be in much of a rush, a feature, would you say it is worth the overpriced increase from 2.8Ghz to 3.0Ghz of $800 or to 3.2Ghz for $1,600?

Any easy way to quantify the difference for editing and color correction?

 

[Colin Sheldon]

I know, I know... this has been discussed a million times, as have been so many other subjects that keep popping up, but sometimes the search doesn't pull anything up... might be me. Either way:

For working with a long post production schedule where I won't be in much of a rush, a feature, would you say it is worth the overpriced increase from 2.8Ghz to 3.0Ghz of $800 or to 3.2Ghz for $1,600?

Any easy way to quantify the difference for editing and color correction?

I'm still holding out hope that any day now they'll announce the new Xeon lineup... Even if you don't want the new chips, it'll make the old ones cheaper...

 

[Kaku Ito]

Rather than spending all of your money to the extra cost of faster CPU, you need to spend money on RAID and video hardware, too.

But I have 3.2, 3.0 and 2.87 running in my studio and I do see some differences in rendering time.

 

[Dave Blackham]

Id buy a 2.8Ghz and invest in a better GPU as its the GPU that does the CC and Graphics work. If you were using an application like compressor then go for the additional processor speed.

 

[Kaku Ito]

The thing is recommended GPU for Color is the ATI and it doesn't cost extra (because Nvida doesn't process 10-bit color which Color requires).

 

[Alex.Mitchell]

The thing is recommended GPU for Color is the ATI and it doesn't cost extra (because Nvida doesn't process 10-bit color which Color requires).

Whoa whoa whoa. What?

 

[JD Marlow]

I've read a number of articles online describing the render speeds between 2.8 Dual-Quad core and 3.0 or 3.2. Turns out there is only a 7% increase in processing speed going from 2.8 to 3.0. Not really worth the money to me when you can upgrade to 8 GB of ram for 1/4 of the price at OWC...

 

[michael zaletel]

All I can say is install an Intel SSD 160GB for your startup and applications disk. This will give you a more noticeable speed boost than extra ram (above 4GB) or a faster processor.

-shooter

 

[Curran Giddens]

All I can say is install an Intel SSD 160GB for your startup and applications disk. This will give you a more noticeable speed boost than extra ram (above 4GB) or a faster processor.

-shooter

Unless you are like me and want to be able to use Bootcamp. The Intel SSD's don't work with Bootcamp.

I'm thinking about using one of these Trans Intl. Pro Drive 2.5" enclosures when the new SanDisk G3 SSD's come out.

 

[Uli Plank]

AThis will give you a more noticeable speed boost than extra ram (above 4GB) or a faster processor.

Sory, but I dare to contradict: more RAM will give you a massive boost when transcoding with REDrushes or Clipfinder. Get 2 GB per CPU instead of paying the exorbitant price for a moderately faster CPU clock.

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Unless you are like me and want to be able to use Bootcamp. The Intel SSD's don't work with Bootcamp.

??? Sure they do. They connect and operate just as any SATA HDD would. Works fine with bootcamp as long as you install it in one of the internal bays connected to the primary SATA header / ipass port.

I've also put a 160GB SSD in a Macbook and it runs bootcamp just fine too.

Trying to run bootcamp off an external drive is always touch and go and often doesn't work.

 

[Curran Giddens]

I've also put a 160GB SSD in a Macbook and it runs bootcamp just fine too.

If you have an Intel 160GB SSD in a Macbook that works with Bootcamp, please post a reply to either Macrumors or the Apple discussions. Everyone keeps posting that it doesn't work.

http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?messageID=8604100&#8604100

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=6950377#post6950377

 

[Roberto Lequeux]

Well I am certainly going to fill up those DIMMs with RAM... just not Apple's.

So rendering is CPU intensive and Grading in Color is GPU intensive? What is the best video card hands down, anything goes?

About .R3D storage, yes, I am certainly aware of the need for an external enclosure using hardware RAID controllers that can provide massive sustained speeds with RAID-5.

About internal HDDs, I guess getting the internal Raid card is a bit pricey at $800, but maybe there are 3-party cards that will make it a better option since you would be able to create multiple large capacity RAID-0s with cheap 7200.10 HDDs and at least make two, one for the OS and software and an other for the rendering target drive...




An internal RAID-0 might also be nice for transporting footage to a second and third sets of drives in the same enclosure without having to buy a second enclosure... Or how do you guys make new copies?

 

[Curran Giddens]

So rendering is CPU intensive and Grading in Color is GPU intensive? What is the best video card hands down, anything goes?

If possible, I would wait for the Mac version of the nVidia FX 5800 to come out before making a purchase.

 

[Roberto Lequeux]

I will actually be making a purchase in a much better market, probably some time in the 4th quarter of this year! I hope developments will keep on pace. But I do need to make sure I understand how things work in the FC world, so I don't end up with migraines from procrastination.

I doubt we'll be investing in a Quadro, sorry I should have made that distinction.


[speculation rant]I wonder if we'll be talking 2TB 7200.10 drives by then? Ram should be a bit better price wise... enclosures also keep dropping in price not that hardware Raid is catching on a bit more, thanks to our industry I guess, and it would also be nice if there were new CPUs out by then...[/speculation rant]

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

If you have an Intel 160GB SSD in a Macbook that works with Bootcamp, please post a reply to either Macrumors or the Apple discussions. Everyone keeps posting that it doesn't work.

Interesting... Was not aware of this. Wonder if it's an AHCI issue, but if so, Vista SP1 should load and run fine... And yet people are reporting that doesn't work. Makes me want to pick one up and see what the deal is. But at $800 I don't think I want to.

I'll have to see what SSD was used in the macbook. It wasn't the new Intel X25 model... I installed it for a friend a few weeks ago, he bought it and I helped him clone his old drive and put everything onto the SSD. Bootcamp runs just fine on his system.

 

[Roberto Lequeux]

Makes me want to pick one up and see what the deal is. But at $800 I don't think I want to.

The $800 would cover Apples Raid card, or a 3rd party raid card for internal RAID-0 and now you are free to upgrade the drives with inexpensive 7,200rpm perpendiculars. Perhaps there might be a RAID card for even less than the cost of Apples + two drives...?

 

[Curran Giddens]

But at $800 I don't think I want to.

I'll have to see what SSD was used in the macbook. It wasn't the new Intel X25 model...

I think it is only a problem with the Intel X25's. I am going to try holding out for the SanDisk G3's. 240GB 2.5" SSD for $499. not too bad.

 

[N_Villers]

I will actually be making a purchase in a much better market, probably some time in the 4th quarter of this year!

Going to be a whole different world out there by then.

We hope!!

Crossing my fingers and hoping Apple will get it together with the new Mac Pros after a very disappointing MacBookPro upgrade cycle. To mirror others suggestions though, in general, the CPU clock speed is much lower of an upgrade priority than fast storage, more ram, faster gpu or OS startup disk speed.

 

[Loren White]

I'd wait for the osx supported nvidia fx... and sometime in March or possibly June is the expected update for the new mac pro and xeon cpu's... at least a 20% speed increase.