Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="bobtomay" data-source="post: 439353" data-attributes="member: 24160">Didn't feel the need to respond to this at the time since chad had already made his decision.&nbsp; But, upon reading this again, just feel as if I should for those of you that may be reading this post with the same question later on down the road.1)&nbsp; While 13% is an over simplification and depends greatly upon the program in use, according to your own calculations of 13% per 200Mhz - moving from the 2.0 to the 2.66 would yield over a 40% improvement.2)&nbsp; There was no 10 seconds per 90 seconds savings.&nbsp; The savings seen was 22-30 per 90.&nbsp; The difference here is quite dramatic and a savings of only 1/9 does require a different answer than a savings of close to 1/3.3)&nbsp; $300 in my pocket:&nbsp; Guess it all depends on what your time is worth.&nbsp; The difference in time only to re-encode a single 7GB file between the 2 processors in question will be approx. 5 minutes.&nbsp; This does not take into account the time savings that will also be seen during the actual editing phase of the work.&nbsp; I just am not able to envision too many of those looking at the Mac Pro line not looking at the time is money equation.&nbsp; And, to be on the conservative side of things, lets say you save only 3 minutes a day for a 3 year life expectancy of a Mac Pro.&nbsp; This is a savings of 18 1/4 hours per year or a total of 54 hrs 45 min.&nbsp; That makes the cost of this processor upgrade $5.48/hr.And anyone actually doing much of this type of work, should in reality expect to save a minimum of an hour a week or more.&nbsp; At an hour per week over 3 years, the price of this upgrade is now $1.92/hr.I kind of doubt anyone looking at a Mac Pro to begin with would not value</blockquote>

[QUOTE="bobtomay, post: 439353, member: 24160"] Didn't feel the need to respond to this at the time since chad had already made his decision. But, upon reading this again, just feel as if I should for those of you that may be reading this post with the same question later on down the road. 1) While 13% is an over simplification and depends greatly upon the program in use, according to your own calculations of 13% per 200Mhz - moving from the 2.0 to the 2.66 would yield over a 40% improvement. 2) There was no 10 seconds per 90 seconds savings. The savings seen was 22-30 per 90. The difference here is quite dramatic and a savings of only 1/9 does require a different answer than a savings of close to 1/3. 3) $300 in my pocket: Guess it all depends on what your time is worth. The difference in time only to re-encode a single 7GB file between the 2 processors in question will be approx. 5 minutes. This does not take into account the time savings that will also be seen during the actual editing phase of the work. I just am not able to envision too many of those looking at the Mac Pro line not looking at the time is money equation. And, to be on the conservative side of things, lets say you save only 3 minutes a day for a 3 year life expectancy of a Mac Pro. This is a savings of 18 1/4 hours per year or a total of 54 hrs 45 min. That makes the cost of this processor upgrade $5.48/hr. And anyone actually doing much of this type of work, should in reality expect to save a minimum of an hour a week or more. At an hour per week over 3 years, the price of this upgrade is now $1.92/hr. I kind of doubt anyone looking at a Mac Pro to begin with would not value [/QUOTE]

Verification

Name this item 🌈