New Mac Pro 2.8 vs. Refurbished Mac Pro 3.0?

Question

I'm trying to decide between a new Mac Pro 2.8 and a refurbished Mac Pro 3.0. The refurbished 3.0 is roughly $375 less. I'll be using this for a graphic design business, so we'll be routinely using CS3. Help me decide.

Answer 1

I was faced with the same question at the end of 2007. I had even picked up a new Mac Pro 2.66 quad core, but did not open it. I decided to return it, and fortunately the next day, the 2008 Mac Pros came along. I went with the 8 core 2.8. The 3.0 from 2006/2007 is already dated, and there is no way you will make it faster without spending a ton of money. The refurb unit you are looking at is 2 years old in design. It first came out in August 2006. The expansion slots are all PCIe 1.1 if I recall. With the newer machines they have 2 slots that are PCIe 2.0.
You also have to factor in the upgraded graphics card. Barefeats.com did a little comparison of the video cards, and the 2600 XT fared very well against the 1900XT that is what most folks upgraded to with the 2006 3.0 GHz Mac Pro. The 1900 xt is not a bad car, however, there is no guarantee that you will ever be able to put newer cards in that older machine. There is conjecture that the 8800 GT card that was released for the Early 2008 Mac Pros may work in the older units, but that is not a done deal yet. The 2600 XT does fairly well with Motion.
The 3.0 also ships with 1 GB of RAM while the 2.8 8 core ships standard with 2 GB of RAM. Granted, you will want additional RAM, but you still come out ahead with the early 2008 8 core unit. You do not need to overspend on RAM. Otherworld Computing sells great RAM. I have Apple RAM, OWC RAM, and the Techworks RAM (sold by OWC) in my Mac Pro. I cannot tell the difference and I have had no crashes. 4 GB of RAM is about 219 bucks at OWC.
As for any video or graphics work that you may want to do, the 8 core unit is much more robust for crunching the compression. Compressor can take advantage of the multiple cores. Barefeats.com also did some benchmarking of the 2.8 octo core and the 3.0 octo core unit from 2007. The early 2008 unit was just about even because of the improved L2 Cache and the improved front side bus speed. Overall, the early 2008 units are great performers. The 2.8 quad core should be just about even with the 3.0 quad core in terms of speed. The 2.8 octo core is faster yet, and is about even with the older 3.0 octo core MP. The reason for this is that the 2008 Mac Pros have a faster front side bus and a bigger L2 cache.
I think you are wasting your money going with a discontinued unit, that has questionable upgradeability paths in regards to video cards, fewer cores, a slower bus speed, less RAM, slower RAM, and less L2 Cache memory. As an aside, the early 2008 Mac Pro features PCIe 2.0 slots, whereas the 2006 Mac Pro does not.
As for adding a second DVD drive, you can get the drives for about 30 dollars. They are not expensive like they used to be.
In regards to all of the stuff floating around about Leopard, I do a lot of graphics, including Final Cut Studio 1, and Creative Suite 3. I have had few issues. With the latest Leopard upgrade, and the recent updates with the other programs, Leopard runs every bit as good as Tiger did. The only recurring theme I have seen that has not been resolved with the newer systems and hardware has been the drivers for audio gear and recording. Otherwise, the new machines are very stable and speedy.
Other folks have went the refurb way and have been very happy. Some folks went with the newer machine, and they are happy. Only you can decide what makes the deal the best for you. Do not base everything on the higher priced Crucial RAM. Oh, one other thing that you get with the early 2008 Mac Pro is a nifty aluminum keyboard. After using this keyboard you will not want to use anything else.
Good luck with your decision. I know it is difficult.