Used Mac - Which of these 2 is the better choice?

Hi there, I'm wondering which of these 2 macs is the better choice for $300:

Apple iMac "Core i5" 2.8 27-Inch (Mid-2010) (see the specs on www.everymac.com)

OR: Mac Pro 1.1 with 2.66 GHz Intel Xeon Quad Core with 12 GB of high-speed server RAM (667 MHz DDR2 FB-DIMM), DVD Burner, Bluetooth, dual ethernet, 750 GB Serial-ATA hard drive, two dual DVI graphics cards (NVidia GeForce 7300 GT and NVidia G70). Fresh install of OSX 10.6.8 with all the updates.

Thanks for any advice! I primarily need the system to convert files to Pro Res.

I would go with the 2010 27" iMac. Of course you know the details of this deal better than I.

But if you're still in the early stages of this deal. I SERIOUSLY doubt you can get 2010 27" iMac for $300.

- If this deal is on eBay…my guess is the eBay auction is not over.
- If this deal is on Craig's List. Scammers/phishers post low prices like this all the time trying to get folks to respond…and maybe get personal info…or drive folks to a website.

If you can get a 2010 27" iMac in 100% working condition for $300…that's an absolute steal of a deal!!!

- Nick

Thanks for the reply, Nick! No doubt you're right about the prices. It was more of a hypothetical question based on what I saw for sale and what I was hoping to spend. Obviously the seller will have the final word on that one.

~Adam

Approximate "real world" prices (United States) for the two computers mentioned in post #1:

- The Mac Pro 1,1 probably about $250-$300.
- The 2010 27" iMac probably about $850-$950.

As you can see…the iMac is worth a lot more. And like I mentioned. If you actually can get the 2010 27" iMac for $300 (100% working). You should JUMP on this deal ASAP (if it's a real deal)!!!

- Nick

The iMac by a long, long way. Be aware the Mac Pro can only run up to Lion OS X.7, now three operating systems old. The reason being tha particular Mac Pro, and the 2.1 model, both have 32bit firmware. There are hacks about that may do it, and may also turn it into a door stop.

I would suggest you try and get a later model iMac, the mid 2011 to late 2012 in both 21.5" and 27" are both user upgradeable for memory and come with an optical drive.

No contest - the iMac. Upgradable and newer. But I doubt it will cost $300. The Mac Pro 1.1 probably will be $300 but not worth it - IMO.

And as Harry said, an iMac 2011 or 2012 would be an even better way to go.

Lisa

Actually the mac pro can be firmware hacked and you can use sixty four on thirty two to run yosemite and maverick just fine and build you own computer if you like i have 2 both where firmware updated to 2.1 and both where updated with 3.00 GHz processors and 32 gig's of ram and run excellent.

this is a notable option.

However i agree i would purchase a iMac or a mac mini.

But please notice.

Ebay sellers do a price scam right now:

How it works:

A seller creates 2 accounts:

one primary

one secondary

Then they use the primary to sell the item.

then they use the secondary to bid the item up in price slowly so what looks like a legit bidder is actually the sellers bogus account.

A recent example for me was i was bidding on a third mac pro 1.1 i placed in a 150.00 bid for it the machine was a recycled computer no hard drives but did run.

the bogus bidder went and jacked up the price to $599.99 so i did a test to see if the bidder was real or the seller trying to jack everyone.

i bid him up another 200.00 on my secondary account using his tactic against him he rebid again to $1,000

thats when i stopped bidding and i watched the item very curious to see what happens.

Guess what two weeks went buy the item was relisted again by the same seller.

Thank you so much Nick, Harry, and Lisa for your very helpful advice!

$650 is the lowest the seller will go on the Imac. As for the Mac Pro 1.1, I had no idea it was only a 32 bit OS. I guess I assumed with 12 GB ram it was 64 bit.They also wanted $600, but a few days earlier someone had sold a similar model for $150. I wish I had checked the ads then. My primary use for it will be to convert files to licensed Pro Res for clients who demand it. I already have a workstation... but it's a PC.

Many thanks!

~Adam

$650 for the iMac is still a very good price. But understandable if that's above the budget you decided on.

$600 for a quad-core Mac Pro 1,1 is an "out of site" price. You can actually get an 8-core Mac Pro 3,1 for under $500 (I think I've seen some for $400). $150 for a Mac Pro 1,1 is a nice price. I actually bought myself a used Mac Pro 1,1 for $150 about 9 months ago. Then for an additional $40 bucks…upgraded it to 8 cores.

- Nick

Thanks Nick! I will continue to keep my eyes open.

I almost jumped on this one this morning. It seemed like reasonable deal for $300:
Mac Mini (6,1)(late 2012), Intel Core i5, 2.5 GHz, 4 GB RAM, 500GB disk space. Excellent condition. Also included: 20" LG display, Apple keyboard with numeric keypad, mouse, and all cords.

Would be nice to get an 8-core Mac Pro 3.1 though...

Copperplate said:

Thanks Nick! I will continue to keep my eyes open.

Click to expand...

This is really the best strategy. The best way to find the best deals are to not be in a hurry.

Sounds like you're mostly "shopping" based on price...and not features or performance. Since you've mentioned a Mac Pro, an iMac, and a Mac-Mini. Each of these computers is very different in their own way.

Shopping based on price only is fine. But if you're looking for a certain level of performance or specific features...it may help to decide on this so you can narrow things down a bit.

- Nick

Thanks, Nick, you're right. I guess since my primary purpose is using the Mac to convert already mastered files into Pro Res, performance would be fairly basic, limited to the computers ability to run the appropriate software. However, I always like the idea of having more horsepower... but I'd prefer to not have to pay up too high for that. If it comes down to it, I'd take lower horsepower for less coin.

I think I should add, while it's nice to have a 2nd computer on hand, if I could find a fully legal and licensed way to have Pro Res encoding on Windows, I'd go for it... as long as it didn't cost more than buying a Mac (which some solutions do)

Copperplate said:

I guess since my primary purpose is using the Mac to convert already mastered files into Pro Res, performance would be fairly basic, limited to the computers ability to run the appropriate software.

Click to expand...

I'm not familiar with the Pro Res. Will Pro Res use all CPU cores that it's given?

- Nick

Hi Nick,

That's a good question. I guess it would depend on whether the program used to create the Pro Res video clips supported multi-core/multi-threaded encoding. I'd probably be using Apple Compressor as it appears to be the most affordable solution to buy new.

Copperplate said:

That's a good question. I guess it would depend on whether the program used to create the Pro Res video clips supported multi-core/multi-threaded encoding.

Click to expand...

I was hoping this would be an answer you would already know…since it sounds like doing the "Pro Res" stuff sounds pretty important.

This would be a VERY important question for you to get an answer to…since…you wouldn't want to purchase an 8-core Mac Pro (for example) if pro res only uses 1-2 cores. On the other hand. If pro res will use all available cores…then this is a very important thing to consider when purchasing the computer you're looking for.

- Nick

Thanks Nick. It seems Compressor (as of 2013) was only 32 bit and was by default configured to use only 1 core. There were ways around this, but I don't know if the new Compressor (which is 64 bit) has improved on this. I guess I'll have to ask Apple. I know on a friend's 2013 Imac with a Core 2 Duo processor converting a 1 minute clip in Final Cut Pro 7 was about realtime. He didn't use compressor, though. I don't mind waiting a bit...
Transcode to ProRes 422, fastest software?? - MacRumors Forums

Copperplate said:

It seems Compressor (as of 2013) was only 32 bit and was by default configured to use only 1 core.

Click to expand...

Yikes. 1-core processing is not so promising. This of course is something very important to know when purchasing the computer you're looking for !

- Nick

Very true! Thanks for prompting the research.

Kind regards,
Adam

I am familiar with ProRes and understand it is an HD codex that creates virtually lossless files great for storage. I have never played with it but I understand it comes with Final Cut Pro or can be added to Premiere Pro CC for Mac edition only.

I am a video editor and use the regular encoding spectrum - mpg, m2v, mp4, etc. I couldn't find any recommended system specs for ProRes but I imagine it is the same as for Final Cut Pro or Premiere Pro.

I have Premiere Pro CC on my mac pro currently (1year and then I will decide if I will keep it.) I will give ProRes a try, it is a plug I can download, and use it on a couple of videos just to see how it stresses my mac pro. It will probably be Monday before I get time to do it but if I find out anything of interest I can post back. FYI: My mac pro is a dual 6-core Xeon, 32GB memory, 2-500GB SSD's, 1TB hard drive internal and a variety of storage drives.

I am curious - are you creating files for storage for clients?

Lisa