2x2.4 8 cores, 2TB HD + 480GB SSD vs. 2x2.66 Ghz 12 core w/ 2TB HD

So thinking about making my new mac pro faster. A or B which will make the machine run faster when using the whole adobe suite cs5, 3D rendering apps such as C4D and After Effects provided that both get either 24GB or 48GB of ram?

A) 2x2.4 8 cores, 2TB HD + 480GB SSD
or
B) 2x2.66 Ghz 12 core w/ 2TB HD

$700 more for the one with the higher clock speed. How much faster in terms of % and do you think its worth the higher cost?

Thank you in advance for your response.

The X5650 (2.66) is almost twice as fast as the E5620. In raw processing power it blows the 2.4 out of the water. You can start here. Pretty sure you can find some other direct comparisons between the two of them with some googling.

Just so it's clear...are you talking about upgrading your current Mac Pro?...via purchasing faster cpu's and doing the upgrade yourself?

As far as which upgrade is faster...seems pretty clear to me...12 cores is more than 8 cores...and 2.66ghz is faster than 2.4ghz...so the 12-core 2.66ghz would be faster (and I would think more expensive).

- Nick

i just bought the 8 core mac pro but thinking of upgrading it through OWC parts and i guess i have to do the install even though i am no tech person.

if the 12 core is faster then i have to return what i bought and fork out more $ for it even though i really really don't want to. but i gotta do it within 14 days according to Apple's return policy.

from both responses it sounds like having a 480GB SSD is not going to make up for the 2.4 clock speed.

man i was hoping i could get away with not having to get the 12 core; its just so steep....

thanks guys!

Mackenna said:

from both responses it sounds like having a 480GB SSD is not going to make up for the 2.4 clock speed.

man i was hoping i could get away with not having to get the 12 core; its just so steep....

Click to expand...

First off...you must have TON of money available (or REALLY need a fast machine)...since a 12-core Mac Pro, a 480 gig SSD, and 48 gig of ram is about as expensive as you can get.

An SSD drive will make reading & writing files to/from the drive much faster than a traditional HD...but do you NEED a 480 gig SSD? Why not something smaller like a 128 or 256 gig SSD?

As far as the ram...do you REALLY need 48gig? 16 or 24gig might be a better place to start...then upgrade later as needed.

Finally. What sort of computer are you upgrading from? Depending what you're upgrading from...the 8-core Mac Pro may still be a tremendous upgrade! Everyone would like to have the absolute fastest computer possible...but sometimes you have to be realistic...and stay within a reasonable budget.

HTH,

- Nick

my budget is 5k max and i don't need a really fast machine. heck if it weren't for this motion graphic stuff i wouldn't even think about upgrading my old mbp. i just want a machine that can run C4D, After Effects, and possibly Premiere Pro smoothly without feeling like i am dragging its feet every time i move something. i don't want to see that beach ball spin for 2 mins every time i use an affect or have multiple layers of polygons.

i am upgrading from an old mbp with 2.33 GHz intel Core 2 Duo with 3 GB Ram maxed out. that sluggish feeling i mentioned above is from having to render something on this laptop (that is if the machine allows me to render). No doubt i will be seeing a big jump in speed with the 8 core+ram upgrade. But is it going to be fast enough to do what i want it do? if not then will adding a SSD get me there? if still not, then i will have to return the 8 core machine and just get the 2.66 12 core + the ram upgrade from OWC. No SSD just the regular 2TB HD. The problem with the 12 core is it has more overhead which means more ram is needed. so is the 24 GB going to be enough or has to be 48GB?

honestly i have no idea how fast a 480 GB SSD vs a 256 GB one because i never had one. i am thinking of the 480 because i want to future proof as much as i can (if there is such a thing) and i don't want to do an upgrade every 1 or 2 years. 2 reasons for that 1) who knows maybe by that time what i need might be hard to find because technology changed. 2) to avoid having too many hands touching the inside of the machine. the more hands touched the more problems the machine has. speaking from past experiences with taking my problematic tower to the geniuses at the apple store in an attempt to have them fix it. those trips to the genius bar eventually forced me down the road of getting a new computer.

if a 256GB SSD is going to get me where i want to be then i would much rather do that then get the 480. heck, if a regular HD works that is even better.

maybe i should just return the 8 core in exchange for the 6 core 3.33 GHZ with 32GB Ram and possiblty 256 SSD and call it a day. read so much that its the sweet spot. i agree its the sweet spot for adobe photoshop, illustrator, indesign apps that are single threaded. but what about for multi-thread apps that are core/ram intensive. i know C4D and AE are core/ram hogs. isn't 8 core better than 6 core despite the slower clock speed at 2x2.4 GHz? aren't they going to make more and more apps with 64 bit/multi threaded in the next few years?

you think i should just do the hex core with upgrade mentioned?

Mackenna said:

i am upgrading from an old mbp with 2.33 GHz intel Core 2 Duo with 3 GB Ram maxed out.

Click to expand...

Sounds like you have the same computer I have...I'm typing this on my 17" MBP 2.33ghz Core 2 Duo...2 gig of ram.

Mackenna said:

The problem with the 12 core is it has more overhead which means more ram is needed. so is the 24 GB going to be enough or has to be 48GB?

Click to expand...

Mac Pro's are very expandable when it comes to ram. I would say get 24 gig now...see how it works out...and if you need more...then get more later.

Mackenna said:

honestly i have no idea how fast a 480 GB SSD vs a 256 GB one because i never had one.

Click to expand...

I don't think that you're going to see much of a difference in performance between a 256gig SSD and a 480gig SSD. I'm mostly concerned about cost. SSD's are relatively new (to the mainstream) technology...and thus you're going to pay a lot for it.

Mackenna said:

i am thinking of the 480 because i want to future proof as much as i can (if there is such a thing) and i don't want to do an upgrade every 1 or 2 years.

Click to expand...

Like I mentioned...SSD's are newish technology (still very expensive). In 1-2 years the cost of SSD's will most likely drop dramatically.

Mackenna said:

maybe i should just return the 8 core in exchange for the 6 core 3.33 GHZ with 32GB Ram and possiblty 256 SSD and call it a day. read so much that its the sweet spot.

Click to expand...

I think that at this point you should return the computer ASAP (while you still can). It sounds to me that you haven't done all the research yet...to make yourself 100% convinced what specific model Macintosh & upgrades you need for your projects.

Return the computer...then let's continue the discussion here at Mac-Forums. We can discuss cpu's, ram needed, SSD vs. traditional hard drives, etc. Once this is done...you can then purchase another Mac Pro...and feel 100% confident that you're getting the best computer setup for you.

- Nick

p.s. Here's a Macintosh benchmarks list for you to look at comparing different cpu setups (# of cores & speeds):

http://www.primatelabs.ca/geekbench/mac-benchmarks/

Keep in mind that more cores are only better if the software being used is able to take advantage of all of the cores. Some software is not written to take advantage of all the cores...and if this is the case a 6, 8, or 12 core computer will not speed things up...versus a Core 2 Duo (2 cores) or a quad-core setup. If the software being used IS NOT written to take advantage of all available cores...then a computer with the fastest cpu speed is the way to go.

Thank you for that Geekbench list!

Ok. Lets start over. So here is a list of what I need my next Mac Pro to do:

I am a print designer but would like to move into the motion graphics industry. The intended use for this machine are:
1) To sharpen my After Effects skills
2) Learn Cinema 4D so can create a portfolio reel to get real work. Goal is to hopefully show something by Jan 2012.
3) Do real work with this machine in case I need to work from home.
4) Use a handful amount of plug-ins for both apps
5) I know there is no way to future proof a computer but ideally would like it to last me around 5 years. I understand that by that time what ever i am getting now will be a dinosaur and slow compare to the latest then. But I still want to be able to use it for motion graphic work despite its age.
6) Run cs5 photoshop, illustrator, indesign, flash, dreamweaver
7) I plan to do some complex scenes that involves lots of layers and lighting with the motion graphics apps mentioned (AE and C4D)

I don't need the fastest machine but i need one that won't be sluggish when i use core/ram intensive apps like After Effects, Premiere Pro, and Cinema 4 D. One that is fast enough so I don't have to watch the beach ball spin every time I make a move with AE or C4D or wait for a 4 hr render for a 5 sec video clip. If it weren't for these programs i would still continue to work on my old 2007 mbp with 3GB of Ram.


Since AE, PP, & C4d eats up as many memory and cores as the machine throws at it. Of course the higher # of cores/ram and clock speed is better. But my budget is 4-5K max.

Any upgrade I need to do will be through OWC. That is ram or even SSD upgrade.

With that said which of these is more suitable to my needs:

A) 2x2.4 GHZ 8-Core 2TB HD w/ 24 or 48 GB of ram
pros—least expensive, 8-core
cons—slowest clockspeed
willing to add OWC 256 SSD if it helps to get that machine to where i want it to be.

B) One 3.33GHz 6-Core 2TB HD w/ 24 or 32 GB of ram
pros—higher clockspeed
cons—ram maxed out at 32GB, single thread, 6 core, $300 more than then 8 core but i am willing to pay this.
maybe willing to add OWC 256 SSD if it helps

C) 2x2.66 12-core 1 TB HD w/ 24 GB of ram
best machine but means $1300-$1500 more.
cons—the 12-core=more overhead=more ram=more $
i rather not go down this road.

Given my past experiences with having the inside of my computer touched I want to try to avoid having to upgrade something every 1-2 years. The least the computer has to be open the better; less chance of accidents.

Will be getting Apple Care being that I am in no way tech savvy.

I have a chance to get a discount but this discount will expire in 5 days. So i gotta pull the trigger by next Tuesday at the latest.

Really appreciate your advise! Thanks.

UPDATE
After all the responses I got. I did more research and ended up returning the 2010 2x2.4ghz mac pro for a refurbished 2009 2x2.93. Came with the Nvidia GeForce 120 graphics card. Might have to upgrade that later. Also bought Apple Care.

Both machines cost about the same. more power in exchange for older/used model. hope I made the right choice.

I would like to thank all the people who has given advises relating to this topic. It really helps!!

Mackenna said:

UPDATE
After all the responses I got. I did more research and ended up returning the 2010 2x2.4ghz mac pro for a refurbished 2009 2x2.93.

Click to expand...

Sounds like a pretty good deal to me. There's really nothing wrong with Apple refurbished units. I've always found them to be just like new (they probably have very little use on them)...so I wouldn't really look at it as "used".

Mackenna said:

Came with the Nvidia GeForce 120 graphics card. Might have to upgrade that later.

Click to expand...

Yeah...I have one of these in my Mac Pro as well (I have a 2009 model Mac Pro)...and I'm not very impressed with it. I actually have two of them...so I can drive 4 monitors simultaneously if I want. But like you said...you can always upgrade it later.

Thanks a ton for the update...we always appreciate an ending to a story (a happy ending I think)!

- Nick

Thanks for the reassurance!

so what kind of graphics card would you recommend to run the new OS, adobe software, and c4d? i don't want to spend a lot of dough but i don't want a crappy one either. a good enough card to do 3d stuff (not referring to gaming) but reasonably priced.

Mackenna said:

Thanks for the reassurance!

so what kind of graphics card would you recommend to run the new OS, adobe software, and c4d? i don't want to spend a lot of dough but i don't want a crappy one either. a good enough card to do 3d stuff (not referring to gaming) but reasonably priced.

Click to expand...

I was thinking about getting a Radeon 5770 (balance of cost & performance improvement):

ATI Radeon HD 5770 Graphics Upgrade Kit for Mac Pro (Mid 2010) - Apple Store (U.S.)

There is a more expensive Radeon 5780 as well:

ATI Radeon HD 5870 Graphics Upgrade Kit for Mac Pro (Mid 2010 or Early 2009) - Apple Store (U.S.)

- Nick

p.s. YES...the 5770 works in a 2009 Mac Pro even though the Apple link says 2010 Mac Pro.

Thanks pigoo3!!