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).

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

  • 24" iMac for Graphic Design studio workstation?

    Hi there, I've been using macs since the early 90s for graphic design and have always bought their "professional" models, ie towers. These days it seems the line between iMacs and towers is getting a bit blurred... iMacs are pretty darn powerful. So I need to add a workstation to the design studio and am considering just getting a 24" iMac instead of a tower + apple display. I use Adobe CS2 apps (photoshop, indesign, illustrator, etc.) Rarely, I deal with 500meg layered photoshop images, but I don't do any sound/video stuff.
    So my big question... is the iMac good enough for a full time graphic designer's workstation or should I stick with a tower? The difference is over a $grand.
    G5 tower Mac OS X (10.4.8)

    The 24" iMac is a perfect match for a graphic designer.
    On the plus side, the large screen is actually 4 inches larger than the smallest Cinema Display (20"), meaning great value. Secondly, you have the small form factor and the conveinience of an all-in-one unit, and the RAM is extremely easy to upgrade, with a ceiling of 3GB; plenty to run Photoshop or Aperture. The Nvidia graphics card is very potent as well; a must for people working with high-res images.
    On the downside, you still won't get the sheer performance that a tower such as the Mac Pro will offer. You also won't get the expandability. You can't upgrade the graphics card in the iMac. You also can't upgrade the hard drive easily, and USB and firewire card upgrades (necessary to keep up with todays latest connection methods for digital cameras) are out of the question.
    The 24" iMac is superb. It will give you the horsepower to run even a small graphics design business. But if you are serious about graphic design as a career, still go for a tower. You will be glad you did. I wouldn't be surprised if you found yourself selling the iMac and upgrading your system 3 or 4 years from now. However, if you expect to upgrade in that time anyway, the iMac is a better value.
    Good Luck with your decision. I know you will be happy no matter which machine you choose!

  • Which imac would work best for Graphic Design?

    I am a Graphic Designer, currently using Creative Suite 2 (soon to be upgraded to CS3) and I need a new Mac for home. A Powermac takes up too much space, so I'm thinking about an imac with a 24" monitor and I have a few questions for the experts:)
    Which imac would work best for graphics?
    Is the monitor acurate for Pantone color matching?
    Is the 24"monitor on the imac clear and bright?
    Is Leopard a stable OS?
    I also need an (inexpensive) color laser printer. Any suggestions?
    Thanks a bunch!
    Suzi (Machead since the beginning of Mac history)

    Hello and Welcome to Apple Discussions. 
    The 24" iMac uses a superior LCD panel to the 20" model and so is certainly better suited to your purposes. I don't know how badly having a piece of glass in front of the display would affect you as a designer though.
    The display certainly is clear and bright. I use it on it's lowest brightness setting.
    Leopard is stable but it's worth checking that drivers for any devices that you currently rely on are available. For example I have to go back to my 10.4.11 iMac G4 to use my scanner. Personally I can't get iCal to alarm in Leopard but that's a fairly minor gripe.
    As this is the forum for much older iMacs I'd suggest re-posting in the Intel iMac forum and even Mac OS 10.5 Printing forums for better informed opinion:
    <hr width="200">
    G4 (aka Flat Panel): Intel:
    Click image to go to correct forum.
    cheers
    mrtotes

  • What is the Best Power MAC G5 for Graphic Design and Video Edit

    I need the Best Power MAC G5 Processor CPU
    and Ram HDD Graphic card for Graphic Design and Video Edit
    and the name of the Processor
    how much the price

    Hi GabreilKnight;
    You are aware that the PowerMac G5 is no longer being produced hence if you find one it will be on the used market?
    For what you are looking at doing I would suggest that you consider a Mac Pro instead.
    Allan

  • 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 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

  • 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 G5 or Powermac for Graphic Design Industry?

    I was wondering what kind of computer does the Graphic Design industry uses? iMac G5 or the Powermac? What do you recommend?
    I heard that the Powermac is usually used by professionals. Is this true? How does the iMac G5 compare to it?
    imac G5   Mac OS X (10.4)  

    Hi Angela...
    As a design professional I can definitively say if you're working in the design industry with profesional applications such as Quark, Photoshop, etc., your only choice is a PowerMac. iMac's are consumer grade computers, and while quite elegant, and powerful, they are not up to the rigors needed in a professional work situation. Any of the newer PowerMacs will work, but IMO it's always best to buy the best you can afford. If you're working for a company, they should be able to buy top end for you, as it's a depreciable item that can be written-off as a company expense. Anything less and you're literally wasting your time, and the companies time, waiting for the computer to re-draw your screen or finish the task.
    good luck...
    ken

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • Mac Pro for Final Cut Studio -- The Buying Guide

    I am starting to think about upgrading my "old" Power Mac G5 Quad system to a Mac Pro system. As you might expect, this raises several issues.
    What I do: I edit DV and HDV on FCS2. My specs are below. I am looking for the best speed (especially for rendering), stability and video quality I can afford (between $5,000 and $6,000).
    Question 1: Is it true that Snow Leopard and FCP 7 are about a year away? If so, please assume for the following questions that I would be working with the full complement of FCS2 applications on the Leopard OS. (How worth waiting for do you think these are?)
    Question 2: Without directing me to the various benchmark and testing sites (which I’ve already looked at), can you suggest the actual performance differences I would see (again, using the whole range of FCS2 apps) in the following:
    Two 2.26GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon processors
    Two 2.66GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon processors
    Question 3: I have heard that (with the exception of Compressor) FCS can only use a maximum of 4GB of RAM, and that the 6GB that the Mac Pro ships with are already more than it can use. Is this true? Is it true that Snow Leopard would allow FCS to make greater use of more RAM? And would this show up in the programs’ performance?
    Question 4: To get the best video performance with my various FCS2 applications, is there a significant quality improvement in moving up from the NVIDIA GeForce GT 120 512MB to one of the other video cards? How would I notice a difference in the quality?
    Question 5: Are there any other purchasing considerations I should think about when configuring a new Mac Pro?
    Thanks a lot.
    Giraut

    Well, well, well, you make me think more about my last upgrade of an ATI Radeon 2600 to the latest ATI Radeon HD 4870!
    I was looking on the Final Cut Pro thread to find one answer and look what I found, your questions!
    Since yesterday night I was seeking the Apple Support threads just for fun and I now have doubts.
    I am a Mac Pro (earlier 2008) owner. I upgraded it to 4 x 1.5 Tb Seagate hard drives and 10G of RAM from OWC (Other Word Computing). First let me tell you NOT to buy from Apple Store for your hard drive and/or memory upgrade. They are totally out of price list. I got my Mac Pro first with one 500 Gb Seagate drive. Then I added 2 x 500 Gb hard drives from Apple. I payed them 199,00 $ each
    Last September, I upgraded the drive bays with 4 x 1.5 Tb from OWC. I paid them 229.00 $ each!
    199,00 $ for 500 Gb or 229,00 $ for 1.5 Tb (that"s 3 times 500 Gb) which one would you take? And we are talking about two models from Seagate running at 7200 RPM, with 32 Mb of buffer.
    I mean... What is that?!!?
    And the memory! Don't even think about it.
    I got first 4GB Matched Set (2 x 2GB) for 147,99 $ in September from OWC and my second order was 4GB Matched Set (2 x 2GB) for 132,79 $ in October.
    I payed a total of 280,78 $ for 8GB of RAM while the price for this upgrade on Apple Store woul have cost me 1998,00 $
    *+Source Apple Store :+*
    *+Apple Memory Module 4GB 800MHz DDR2 FB-DIMM ECC 2x2GB $999.00+*
    Multiply that by 2!
    Now how much memory would you need?
    I am not a Final Cut Pro user, but I use Final Cut Express a lot, with animation QuickTime movies exported from my Astronomy software Starry Night Pro Plus.
    Yesterday I posted this into a thread to answer a user :
    +Every morning I have my preferred applications started: Mail, Safari, iTune, Aperture and Final Cut Express. I just did a test for you. I started Mail, Safari, Aperture, Final Cut Express, Starry Night Pro Plus (OpenGL Astronomy Software), Terminal, Quicktime, TextEdit and NeoOffice.+
    +With all these apps running, I still have 6.48G of Free RAM out from the 10G installed!+
    +It's when I start hungry applications like VMWare Fusion running Windows XP, or Quicktime with a lot of movies opened that I could see the memory level going low!+
    +Your bottle neck in video editing will probably be the video card, after the disk speed. Be sure to use 7200 RPM disk and eSATA for your video plans if possible. Firewire 800 will works fine on external drive but it could giggle. I had an ATI Radeon HD 2600 that I recently upgraded to an ATI Radeon HD 4870. the drivers aren't ready yet from Apple. We are all waiting for the next OS X release 10.5.7 for the drivers! For now, I am running on Beta drivers.+
    +It's hard to say by now if I have better performance into Final Cut Express because the movie I was working on was an animation movie using plans exported from Starry Night Pro Plus via Quicktime and "animation" codec without any compression. As soon as I make a modification, I still have to render the output for smooth playing.+
    Now, after some test with Starry Night Pro Plus this morning, I can safety say that Starry Night Pro Plus with Open GL does use my video card extra speed and that my experience navigating into the Universe is much better and smooth.
    But honestly, even if I have to admit that I am using the Beta drivers for the HD 4870, I must say that I have very big doubt that Final Cut Express does use the extra power of the HD 4870 compare to the HD 2600!
    In fact, I am searching the support thread for this answer.
    Does anyone can say if Final Cut Express or Final Cut Pro does make use of the extra hardware feature of the ATI Radeon HD 4870 or not?

  • 2 iMac & 1 Mac Pro render a job of Maya

    Hi all!
    I have a LAN with 3 machines: 2 iMac 2GHz - 2GRam and MacPro 2.4GHz - 2GRam. And I'm use QMaster2 to render a small project Maya( This project, if batch render with 1 machine just take 1min).
    My setting:
    first iMac have been setting with: Services and cluster controller.
    second iMac and MacPro have been setiing with: Services only.
    So, I'm rendered. It is successful.
    But i have some problems.
    1. How to distribute batch. It seem not distributes in my job.
    2. Time to render is very slowly. something wrong??????
    3. Just MacPro submit a job to cluster, second iMac didn't add job in QMaster. Why that ???
    please help me !!!!!!!!!!
    Thank.
    Thanh.

    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

  • Mac Pro buying advice for Graphic Design

    I am going to be purchasing a Mac Pro and was hoping I could get some advice on the right set-up for what I do. I use CS4 heavily on the Mac for graphic design spending a good amount of time in Photoshop working with files that can easily go over a few gigs (when working on convention booth displays, etc.). I also use my Mac for casual video editing in iMovie, and use Apple's other great offerings like iWeb, iPhoto, etc.
    My main questions are:
    - I'm leaning towards the Quad. I keep my Macs for at least 5 years. Is that a good decision?
    - If I do go with the Quad should I opt for the 2.66 or 2.93?
    - At the moment I am running 8 Gig on my current Mac, should I configure this new one with 8 Gig?
    - Is the Radeon the correct card choice for a heavy Photoshop user?
    I hope these questions aren't ones that have been asked a thousand times. It's a lot of money to spend (especially right now) and I want to make sure I configure it correctly for what I do.
    Thank you in advance for your input.

    Hi hatter,
    Thank you again for your responses. That really helps clear up the RAM situation. I think that is part of what swayed me towards the 8-Core as opposed to the Quad. Please correct me if I am wrong, but looking at prices of RAM on Crucial I see that if I wanted today to put 16 Gigs of RAM in a Quad-Core it would cost me $1200 (for 4 4-Gig chips using all slots). However if I was going to put 16 in the 8-Core I could do it for $400 (8 2-Gig chips using all slots. Actually it would only be $200 more since I configured my Mac with 4 2-Gig chips from Apple for an extra $100). Seems like having more slots open will save me money when I want to upgrade ram since I don't have to go for the 4-Gig chips. That coupled with the theory that Snow Leopard is around the corner and will take advantage of the 8-Core it seems like opting for a low end 8-Core vs a high end Quad is worth the $300 difference.
    Side note: Are there any reports that say running more 2GB chips is worse than running fewer 4GB chips? Just curious.
    Even though I understand that the processor speed makes a difference I am hoping that the advantages of more RAM slots and future benefits of Snow Leopard, CS5 and other apps that will take advantage of the 8-Core in the near future will make it the right decision. If I could afford a faster 8-Core obviously I would opt for that but with a jump of $1,400 to the next processor speed I am afraid it is out of my reach.
    Regardless I'm sure I will feel very spoiled as soon as I unwrap this beast and get it up and running. Then in a year I'll give into the temptation of slipping a SSD in for the boot drive and I'll have to find a way to contain my excitement. I have a SSD on my laptop and WOW what an amazing difference it really is.
    Wow, these forums are great. I can't believe how helpful all of your responses have been. I feel much more informed and was able to order my Mac today not feeling like I was shopping in the dark.
    Thank you all again!

Maybe you are looking for