Imac vs mac pro for FCP?

Hello folks,
Well, my G5 apparently needs a new logic board. I could cry, or be happy at the excuse to get a new computer... I chose the latter!
Bottom line, what is the consensus regarding imac vs mac pro.
I will be using FCP a lot, that's what I do for a living. However, I rarely run other applications at the same time. Occassionally LiveType or Photoshop, but that's about it. No Motion, no After Effects, etc.
I feel that an imac will suffice nicely and that the mac pro is overkill in both cost and amount of computer. It's like getting an Indy car and driving 40 MPH!
Thoughts? Thank you.
Eric P

hmmm, interesting. Of course the mac pro would be better, no doubt. But for my purposes I still wonder if it's worth the cost.
As for Kevan D's inquirey for more info, yes I work with FCP for a living, at least 50% of my work week maybe more is editing. However, silly little ol' weddings have become the vast majority of my work and they will continue to be for at least a few more years I believe. In that time I do not see HD being a factor in my area. So for the forseeable future I expect to be working soley with SD. That bit of info may change some of your minds to thinking that an imac will suffice.
I admit, that's my hope because I would have to take out a loan for the mac pro, and again, I'm just not certain it's worth it for my purposes. On the other hand, I didn't ask the question so that I could hear what I "wanted", I do want honest opinions from other professionals like yourselves. If the experience is that an imac just isn't worth it then so be it.
As far as expandability (is that anything like drinkability??), I understand that, but again for my purposes I suspect that by the time I need to expand to HD or to using the full benefits of a mac pro, a new computer (and equipment) will be in the order anyway. Does that make sense?
Thanks again,
Eric

Similar Messages

  • From iMac to Mac Pro for the good of my Pro Tools 10...

    hey guys,
    here's the deal : it seems I'm at a turning point with my iMac (27", 3.1 Ghz i5, 4GB memory, 1TB hard drive, lion, PT10) and I'm thinking of buying a mac pro. Problem is, I'm not sure which model is best for my needs. I do postproduction work for television and I often have to work with pretty heavy projects.
    My pro tools 10 keeps giving me the same 2 errors --
    1- DAE can't get audio from the drive(s) fast enough. Your drive may be too slow, or fragmented, or a firewire drive could be having trouble due to the extra firewire bandwidth or cpu load. (-9073)
    2- A CPU overload error occurred. If this happens often, try increasing the "H/W Buffer Size" in the Playback Engine Dialog, or removing some plug-ins. (-6101)
    I might add, my Playback Engine's maxed out and I'm barely running any plugins (some 5 or 6 EQ3s, maybe 1 or 2 L2 and a Dorrough).
    I have a MOTU Audio Express which is plugged in firewire and I'm running an external drive with my SFX on it, which is also plugged in firewire. The iMac having only one firewire plug (downsizing from the earlier iMac, for some obscure reason), I have a firewire hub.
    I get the first error whenever I get too deep into a project and I start having a lot of SFX and I'm looking to add more and I get the second error whenever I try to run Dolby Media Meter.
    I'm pretty aware I'm overrunning my iMac, so I'm willing to pay big bucks to get a computer that's best fitted to my needs and which I'll be able to upgrade every once in a while. Now, I'm just wondering what I actually need in a computer.
    It's either the 3.2 GHz quad-core intel xeon, 6GB memory, 1TB HD or the two 2.4GHz 6-core intel zeon, 12GB memory, 1TB HD. I gotta say the second one seems kind of a lot... but I don't want to spend so much money and get a tiny upgrade from where I'm at right now.
    So please! All of you mac wizards and other knowledgeable folks, HELP! 

    An i7 3.9GHz would do if you had 32GB RAM, an SSD boot drive, and 2TB hdd.
    The sweet spot today on Mac Pro is $1800 4-core special and DIY to W3690 or W3680 6-core 3.33 or higher with 32-48GB RAM. And lots of SSDs and disk drives.
    http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/specialdeals/mac/mac_pro
    Refurbished 27-inch iMac 3.4GHz quad-core Intel Core i7
    http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/specialdeals/mac/imac/27
    The Mac Pro line is at a - not ready to ship the new 2013 6,1 model / not ready with 10.9 that it will need / and current configuration is really 2010 3 yrs old (but also how well they hold up and mature).
    You do not want to give up GHz for more cores. MHz still rules. Only reason would be if you planned to replace the processors for the fastest expensive (use to be, though changing) 4 or 6-core 3.4GHz for total of 8 or 12-cores, but never the 2.4GHz, no way.
    The 2009 4,1 used is cheaper and can be found for $1000 and upgraded to 6-core and everything else (dual core upgrades are harder and not good to plan for.
    And http://www.barefeats.com has done some tests on iMac and Mac Pro.
    Graphics on Mac Pro, RAM and PCIe and SSD, hdd are easy upgrades.
    This site has some great tips
    http://www.macperformanceguide.com

  • Imac verses mac pro - for Adobe Creative suite

    Reguesting input:  Which is better for operating Adobe Creative Suite 6.0 on a professional level, imac or Mac pro?

    The raw compute power of today's iMac is more that the reasonably-priced Mac Pro models. But that is not the complete story.
    The Mac Pro has:
    • replaceable graphics cards and additional PCIe slots
    • Error-Correcting Code memory, large memory sizes are attainable and will not be a headache.
    • Four internal drive bays as opposed to one internal laptop bay. (except, the Fusion drive option in the iMac is fast and large-capacity)

  • IMac or Mac Pro for iPhoto albums and home movie editing?

    I have a Mac Pro OS X 10.6.8 with iPhoto 7.1.5. This system is now obsolete for ordering iPhoto albums. I need to upgrade to iPhoto 9.5.1 to buy a Mac produced photo album. To upgrade iPhoto I need to buy a new Mac as my 2004 Mac Pro with 2008 Snow Leopard can't be upgraded. I will use the new Mac for email, web surfing, iPhoto, and weekend video editing. I use Final Cut Express on my current Mac Pro. I will also need to transfer videos and about 20,000 photos from my current Mac to a new one.
    So, here's the question: For my needs (listed above) which is better,
    (1) iMac 27" or (2) new Mac Pro? Then, with the one chosen, how should it be configured to do my basic video editing? I have 100 hours of family video on Hi8 and VCR tapes and will edit these on Final Cut and burn them to DVD's. (I understand both iMac or Mac Pro now require an external DVD set-up.) So, which computer and how should it be configured. Looking to pay between $2500-$3500. Thanks for your help!

    What video formats are you talking about? DV, HDV, etc?
    Mac Pro is a better solution, regardless. Here's why: Simply upgrading an iMac HD is not enough. You do not want to capture your video to the boot drive. It's too much to ask the drive to manage the OS, your editing software, AND your media. This scenario might work - but is certainly prone to dropping frames. Ideally, you want one drive for OS + editing software & a separate drive to capture media to.
    Now, since you can only have a single HD in the iMac, you're demoted to using external capture drives. So let's say you get yourself a FW800 drive for capture and then hook up your camera/deck to an available FW400 port. You'd think you're safe - and again, you may be. But the problem now is that the iMac has ONE and only ONE FireWire bus. So in theory these 2 devices: HD & Camera are battling for the same bandwidth. So you've still got a bottleneck happening.
    So DV only would probably work. But it may have issues that the expandability of the Mac Pro can conquer. Hope this helps.

  • IMac vs Mac Pro for Graphic Design Studio

    We are upgrading the macs in our in-house graphics department (3 mac users) and wanted to see if anyone had advice on weather to choose a high end iMac or the new 2014 Mac Pro. To help here is what we do on our macs (currently 20inch iMacs).
    Photoshop - Photo retouching, Editing, Compositing sometimes many layers
    InDesign - Layout from posters to banners to 100 pg books.
    Dreamweaver - Internal and external websites design and maintenance
    Illustrator - graphics simple and complicated (large and small illustrator files)
    Flash - Some animation
    (Video Editing)  Final Cut - Conversion from Windows Media Files and editing of short videos
    We often have many of these programs open at once in addition to MS Office (outlook word power point).
    For a maxed out iMac 27 to a mid range mac Pro there is roughly $2000 difference or so (once you buy the monitor you need for the Mac Pro). Do you think the applications we use above would greatly benefit from the MacPro vs the iMac? We don’t really do any 3D work or rendering. But we do want the computers to last several years and need them to be very reliable. I have to submit proposal and any advice would be helpful!
    Thanks,
    J

    I wish there was a sticky for this as "iMac vs nMP" is common daily question and very much the same basic specs and needs.
    https://discussions.apple.com/thread/5772339?tstart=0
    As in past, 6 (or maybe 8) cores, base memory so you can save and upgrade from 3rd party.
    Monitors vary too much in cost range, and you can do better outside Apple, but are one time cost.
    A Mac Pro only needs to be replaced half as often, can be upgraded (cpu, RAM, flash SSD storage, even GPU). Hard to other than Apple stopping support in 5-6 years or software by then catching up or putting more demands on computers.
    An iMac is not going to run as cool and quiet and because of its shape has to be allowed to run hotter it seems. You can stress and pound on those Xeon systems all day max it out and it is quiet beast.
    See what a graphic and tech professional has in recommendations:
    www.macperformanceguide.com
    Also, www.barefeats.com has done some app testing and FCP-X is one place where the dual GPU pays off.
    the "nMP" is actually called "Late 2013" but I agree, other than a few 10s of t housands sold would better easier to be called an Early 2014 (there could be a Late 2014 as well).
    Reliable = Mac Pro - mine is going to be 8 yrs old and is better today than it ever was only if I found the need to run Mountain Lion or above or App Store's newest version of say iPhoto is that an issue (security updates though would be nice to see).

  • IMac vs mac pro for photoshop cs 6

    I am considering upgrading my computer because I am working with very large photoshop files (panoramas).  Would you suggest a new iMac or the new mac pro tower?  I have an NEC calibrated screen already, and an older intel-based macbook pro (13").

    Well,
    I use a late 2009, 27 inch screen iMac and consistently work with files that are 1-2 GBs in size.
    My iMac is only a 3.06 Ghz i3 Core2Duo with 16 GBs of RAM and my files save quicker than an hour.
    My Mac can save these size files anywhere between 8-15 Minutes!
    Are these PSD files the working layered files or finished Flattned versions?
    My working, layered PSD files are large format images that are 1-2 GBs in size and about 300-500 MBs flattened.
    Tthe working file launches for me in about 3-5 minutes.
    Maybe there is a problem with your MBP's hard drive? Is it too full? Do you use external drives as a scratch drive?
    Do you store your finished projects onto an external drive?
    iMacs have the faster 7200 RPM drives versus MBP's 5400 RPM notebook drives.
    This can have an affect on write/saving speed and times.
    Photoshop really needs, at least, a decent speed CPU, lots of RAM and extra, external hard drives for working scratch disc space.

  • New Mac Pro for FCP - should I do 8 cores or faster clock?

    I'm setting up a FCP station to replace a 2.3 GHz dial G5 and I'm wondering which would be better - an 8-core 2.26 GHz or a 4-core 2.93 GHz Mac Pro.
    Right now the G5 is most likely to choke up when rendering/auto rendering within FCP.
    Based on price and the trends in parallel processing, I'm guessing I should go with the 8-core, but that old-school MHz addict in me keeps second guessing. I'd appreciate any advice/insights!

    American Flannel wrote:
    I heard the new four core mac pro dusts my 2.8ghz 8 core in benchmarking
    That's not exactly true. I've been doing some research in the past 24 hours and it seems that the benchmarks (like Geekbench) in which the new 4-core "dusts" the previous 8-core are those which include memory tests. Memory tests will run much faster on the new Nehelems because they use faster RAM.
    But the early 2008 8-cores are scoring higher on some benchmarks which score single and multi threaded tasks and don't get hung up in cumbersome RAM tests.
    As for the current 4-cores versus the current 8-cores, it seems that the 2.96 GHz 4-cores are beating the more expensive 2.26 8-core procs in single-threaded operations. In FCP, only Compressor is optimized for multithreading, so I'm guessing the real benefits of the extra cores won't be visible until both snow leopard and a new version of FCP.
    Why a new version of FCP? Because from what I've gleaned, Grand Central will not make single-threaded operations run better, but will give developers tools to more easily utilize parallel processing. So it would seem FCP will need a significant upgrade to take advantage of what 10.6 has to offer. Don't know if it'll be a .5 or a full version upgrade, but I'm betting on one of them.
    Please don't take this as gospel... if I'm wrong about any of this, I'd love to hear a contrary opinion.
    Message was edited by: Rey Mo

  • IMac or Mac Pro for video editing?

    Should I invest in a Mac Pro or an IMAC for my video editing needs?
    I am using Final Cut Pro x (latest version) on my late 2009 model MacBook Pro (with upgrades)
    the rendering is obviously slow and lags.
    wondering if I should wait for the new Mac Pro (black cylinder) late 2013
    Or will a IMAC top of the line (i7 chip, 16-32 ram 1tb HD) due???
    Any advice ??

    2-3 days a week.
    4-5 hrs a day.
    Future plans: 4-5 days
    5-8 hrs a day
    Budget $2,599-3,000

  • From iMac to Mac Pro for video work.. suggestions please!

    Hello all! Soon I'll be upgrading from my 2.66 GHz quad core iMac with 4gb of RAM to a new Mac Pro. The idea is to increase my productivity with applications such as After Effects & Final Cut Pro by hopefully decreasing time spent rendering/buffering/burning. The iMac has been working really well all this time, but a bit faster would be better!
    I have about $4,000 to work with for a new machine. I welcome your thoughts on the best bang for my buck, be that a new/refurbished from Apple or used from eBay. Thanks everyone!

    The Hatter has provided his insights as well as some excellent links.
    The performance of the 2009 and later models is nearly twice that of the previous models with the same specs due to architectural changes including Hyper Threading.
    All the Xeon Macs are keeping their value very well, and that means there are very few real deals on eBay.

  • Over from PC...Need help configuringing my Mac Pro for FCP

    Just made the move a few weeks to Mac. Bought a Mac Pro ( and 2 Samsung T240 monitors) and am upgrading components for use with FCP. I have been editing for about 10 years (mostly volleyball highlight films and fishing videos) in Premiere Pro. I am currently using the Sony Vx-1000 but will be purchasing either the Sony EX-1 or HVR-Z7U to shoot and edit in HD while still doing some work in SD. I do maybe two or three 40 minute videos per year and some other shorter projects. I edit mainly for friends and family....not as a business. Here are the upgrades which I will be doing:
    1. Add 6 GB Ram to the already 2 GB's for a total of 8 1GB chips
    2. Install a Decklink HD Extreme card
    These is where I need advice:
    STORAGE...
    I am reading lots about external hard drives for editing. I am assuming that FCP would be on the operating system drive and the scratch disk(s) would be firewire (800) drive(s). I also read somewhere that Time Machine is not designed to back up video editing machines. I do not know if that is true with the smaller amount of work that I do. That would probably change how my storage is set up if Time Machine will not be backing up my files.
    Overall I am a recreational editor and but would like a system that is current for editing in High Defintion (and I guess Standard Definition at times.)
    Any advice would be much appreciated and I am really looking forward to the "Mac Experience"
    Thanks
    Kirk

    Thanks for that Nick and Jerry.
    I now think that the external hard drive posts that I was looking at were for machines that did not have the capability of adding internal hard drives.
    I actually have ordered a 1TB Samsung HD103UJ SATA2 32M (as per the Barefeats tests). Hoping that it would be a suitable internal dive.
    For the small amount of editing I do I am guessing that doing a raid would not be all that necessary.
    And Nick, I do not think that I was looking for a bootable drive for Time Machine, just something that has a copy of my video clips from my different projects in case I have some sort of hard drive incident. I understand how running Time Machine during editing would not be a good idea, but would it be ok to use it to back up my video files if I just ran it each night after editing. I am taking it that FCP has an auto save feature also for my projects backups.
    I had actually already ordered a Iomega Prestige 1 TB USB 2.0 3.5-Inch Hard Drive for the time machine drive. Should I be getting a firewire drive for that instead of USB?
    This is a brave new journey.....but I am really enjoying it.
    Thanks agian
    Kirk

  • 2010 Mac Pro for FCP work: ATI 5770 or 5870? performance vs. fan noise

    I'm planning to swap my old Mac Pro (2006 2 x 2.66 GHz Dual-Core Intel Xeon, 4 GB RAM, NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GT) for a 2010 Mac Pro model, because I need more speed for video (FCP 7, Color, Magic Bullet Looks) and photo (Lightroom 3, Photo Shop CS5) work. I'm thinking of the 6-Core (3.33 GHz) Mac Pro with 24 GB RAM and ATI Radeon 5870. I read a first review which said, that the 5870 is VERY noisy (fans), and now I'm little afraid. Is the 5870 really that loud, and will it bring clear advantages over the ATI 5770 (I dont't do 3D work yet)? I'd really appreciate your help. Thanks in advance.

    Our showroom unit arrived 8/24.
    Set it up and loaded it with my demo content. Motion rendering is noticeably faster.
    I have yet to thrash it hard, but it's certainly no louder than its predecessor as far as I can tell.
    EDIT: I see that you are in Germany. Where exactly?

  • Which Mac Pro for FCP?

    I'm considering purchase of a new Mac Pro, hoping that it would allow more real-time playback of our DVPro 50 edits and faster rendering and compression. I'm also considering purchase of a video card for export to DVCAM and Beta SP. Can anyone help us with advice on what kind of configuration would be best? Thanks in advance.

    Hi Gerret,
    I would opt for the base Mac Pro model over the higher clocked BTO models and put the saved money into adding more memory and- storage.
    The card choice absolutely depends on your (input/output connection) needs.
    Some DVCAM decks have Firewire in/outs so this would require no card at all.
    If you really only need SD i/o then Blackmagic is the only remaining vendor to offer SD-only cards.
    http://www.blackmagic-design.com/products/sd/
    Depending on the video i/o interfaces on your deck(s) there are two cards available for PCIe machines (like the Mac Pro):
    $595 DeckLink SP (analog only)
    $895 DeckLink Extreme (analog + SDI)
    AJA has the external Io / Io LA / Io LD boxes available.
    I can only talk about the Io though. It has great quality, a plethora of in/outputs but sets you back quite a bit, moneywise.
    http://www.aja.com/html/productsIoIo.html
    http://www.aja.com/html/productsIoIoLAD.html
    Maybe you should consider getting a HD capable card, though.
    Blackmagic's HD cards start at only $100 more than the SD-only DeckLink Extreme and you would be 'future-proof' then (if that's possible at all
    Best regards, Oliver

  • Which Mac to buy - Is a Mac Pro for me?

    I have been using a PC for nearly 20 years starting in High School. I am desperate to change my ageing and slow PC for a Mac as I mainly use it for video and photo editing. To start with I will be using FCE 4 and Appeture 2, but see myself outgrowing these within a couple of years. For a while I have wanted a Mac Pro, but a friend recently suggested getting an iMac and upgrading it to 4GB ram and 1TB hard drive. I want to be able to easily upgrade my mac in months / years to come as I have done with my PC. Is the Mac Pro the best option for me, plus does any one have any ideas when the new Mac Pro may be announced. Possibly WWDC 2009 in June?
    Many thanks
    Matt

    I just received my new Mac pro dual 3.2 system. I have been a Mac user for 15 years and find it hard to think about going to a PC. I have both PC and Mac, but do all design work on a Mac. The RIP programs need to use a PC and that's all I can do with them.
    I too work some with video and I can tell you what I have come across. I started with FCP 3 when it come out and upgraded along the way and started using FCP Studio 2 recently. There seem to be more problems with all the HD stuff. I guess it depends on how much video you plan to do, but you will find it takes a heavy duty system if you plan to work in HD (highly dysfunctional). I have dealt with post production houses and most are using PC systems with Avid. All have a Mac with FCP, but it does not seem to be the main system they use. There is a big jump in price to go the next level and now the Mac Pro with FCP Studio is working OK. There are issues as I would think there would be with Avid, but I am not willing to spend the money to find out at this time. The other thing I ran into is the large Apple displays are a problem for some editing systems. I am running two 30 inch cinema displays and they will not work with Avid.
    I feel Apple has dropped the ball on working with the graphics people that supported them for so many years. They are so big it is hard to deal with them like the old days and i-pods are their number one market. I am disappointed in the experience in this last purchase, but again, I can't see making the move to going all PC....not yet any way!
    So depending on what you plan to do in the future, I would suggest looking deeper than the Apple site for suggestions on a new system. If you plan to work with video and stay under 30,000...Apple is the best option from my experience.

  • Which  current Mac Pro for Aperture/Photoshop

    After much research and what seems to be chasing my tail, I though I'd ask the forum for some advice on which machine will best suit my needs. I am currently running Aperture and Photoshop CS3 and looking for a fast machine for the job. I sort through around 2500-3000 raw files per week and hope the new Intel Xeons will speed up my workflow. It's the question of "How many cores are better?" that's confusing me as I am unclear on how many Aperture and Photoshop can actually make use of.
    I'm looking to upgrade from my 3.06 iMac to a Mac Pro but having trouble choosing between a new 2.66 quad or a refurbished 2.26 8-core. I understand the drop in processor speed might be noticeable in some instances but the from what I have gathered an upgrade to the ATI HD 4870 is a must as is 6GB ram on the 2.66 and 8GB ram on the 2.26. It's not so much the price difference of the two machines (£2200 for the upgraded 2.66 and roughly £2700 for a refurbished 2.26 plus upgrades) it's will my workflow see any great benefits from the 8-core over the quad. The program I use most is Aperture, followed by Photoshop then FotoMagico, iDVD and Toast Titanium. Does Snow Leopard affect the use of cores in these programs?
    Any feedback is much appreciated or pointing in the direction of some real world tests as all the bench tests of the 8-core are so impressive but I'll not be using it for 3D/Video at all.
    Thanks in advance for your help.

    According to the Adobe blog the delay in offering a 64-bit suite for Mac is because the entire suite has to be rewritten in Cocoa (both previous and current offerings are written in Carbon) CS5 will be written in Cocoa and will utilise the full functionality of the Snow Leopard OS (OpenGL, GCD etc) so memory addressing will be a huge step forward on Photoshop (which I use).
    I used Photoshop CS4 on a 2008 Mac Pro 2 x 2.8GHz 8 core (dual Xeon 5400 series Quad core CPUs) and just recently switched to a 2009 Mac Pro 2 x 2.26GHz 8 core (Xeon 5500 series Quad core CPUs). I used CS3 on the original Mac Pro 2 x 2.66Ghz (Dual Xeon Dual Core CPUs = 4 cores total). It's not a fair reflection as CS3 ran under Rosetta on the original Mac Pro and CS4 has better integration on the Intel based Macs, but in general, I noticed a much better rate of workflow on the 8 core machines over the 4 core machine.
    More importantly, I would point out that running batch process of RAW files in CaptureOne Pro was significantly performing the batch process on the 8 core machines than on the 4 core machine. (250 RAW files {with no corrections] from a Canon EOS 1D MKII into 16-bitt TIFF files). I can't remember the exact figures but the 8 core machines were @ 23 - 25 minutes quicker than the 4 core machine.
    I know it's not scientific and software versions were different which could add to the different results in part, but the 8 core machines both out performed the 4 core machine substantially.
    However, the 2009 Mac Pro Quad Core is capable of running 2 threads per core (in effect a virtual 8 core machine and as many reviewers have pointed out, perform faster than the 8 core Mac Pro in certain applications (which have not been written to utilise the full multi-CPU-multi-core environment.
    The Memory limitation on the Quad Core is 16GB RAM (Apple state 8GB but reviewers have installed 4 x 4GB DIMMs into the Quad Core without issue). Unless you are doing 3D or HD rendering etc you probably won't really need over 16GBs of RAM, however the cost of 4GB memory sticks is expensive. Crucial only offer a 12GB kit for the Quad Core Mac Pro 2009 to make full use of the triple channel memory speeds (DDR3 best performance in multiples of 3) and 12GBs from Crucial is @£771.00 (prices correct at time of writing this. This equates to @ £257 per 4GB.
    Total for Quad Mac Pro with 12GB (3 x 4GB RAM) = £2670
    Total for Octo Core Mac Pro with 12GB (6 x 2GB RAM) =£2731 (New price not refurb)
    Graphics card upgrade etc will be the same on both machines. Memory based on Crucial Memory prices.
    So, for a 2009 Mac Pro with 12GB RAM, it is £61 dearer for an 8 core (virtual 16 cores) machine over the Quad Core Mac Pro. The 8 core system will give you further memory expansion once prices of the 4GB memory sticks come down significantly. The Quad Core will only be able to be upgraded with 8GB RAM sticks over the 4GB sticks available now and will cost a huge amount at time of launch.
    Buying a refurbishment 2.26 GHz with similar memory upgrade would in my opinion be the way to go. I know the CPU clock speed is lower, but in real time non memory intensive applications the difference will be hardly noticeable.
    I went through the same dilemma as you. I opted for the 8 core system with 12GB RAM and the ATI HD4870 graphics (bought as an upgrade kit so was dearer than the build to order option). I am very happy with my purchase.
    The other option is to check out eBay there may be a very well spec'd 2008 Mac Pro for sale with warranty, 16GB RAM and the 8800GT graphics card for less than either of the new systems.
    Over the long term, the 8 core offers more affordable customisation options over the Quad Core, but it depends on how long you plan to use the machine

  • Relative Noise Output of Intel iMac and Mac Pro

    I run a computer based recording studio. I have been using a Powerbook for the last two or so years and I am thinking of upgrading to an iMac or Mac Pro.
    However, noise is a sensitive issue for me. I have enjoyed near silence with the Powerbook, which enables me to hear into every aspect of my sound. I would like to continue enjoying that experience with an iMac or Mac Pro and wondered whether you could tell me how quiet these machines are? And whether there are any stats on the noise output of the Mac range?
    Regards,
    Stuart

    I'm sure there were some noise figures published once for the G5 and MacPro but I've had a quick look and can't find them on the Apple site anymore.
    In my experience the G5 is actually quite quiet compared with say a PC Workstation - that is until the Fans ramp up during heavy processing at which point it does get quite noisy. I expect the MacPro is similar in this respect.
    Hope that helps a bit.
    Rik

Maybe you are looking for