cowasaki
TPer Emeritus
- Messages
- 19,708
- Name
- Darren
- Edit My Images
- Yes
The mac mini is not just some starter computer. If apple stuffed it into a box 10 times the size people would accept it as an alternative to the Mac pro. The cost of £500 with 1Gb,120Gb HD, DVD writer, wireless networking, FW800, decent graphics with dual output is not at all unreasonable. If I were being picky I would suggest that £500 inc 2Gb would have been nicer but you get a lot of computer for the money. The computer will quite easily handle CS4 whilst doing something else too.
As a current Apple owner you will also know the way that their computers hold their value in a totally non computer like way!! You could have bought an iMac for £1000 2 years ago and it is still worth £600 now second hand. Try that with a PC !!
I do feel that the pros have got a little expensive based on what you get. The Nehalem processor is allegedly 30% faster for the same clock speed BUT you now get a QUAD processor pro for about the same price as an EIGHT processor one was !!
4 x 2.66 x 1.3 = 13.86
8 x 2.66 = 21.28
21.28/13.86 = 1.53
So on RAW processing power the older one is 50% better for the money.
Obviously the way that OSes work you get much less benefit from the 2nd processor then less from the 3rd etc etc etc unless the process is massively parallel and written that way so in essence the Nehalem model will feel faster in normal running but be slower for things things that can take the parallel processing into account. BUT it is these things that you buy a pro for as even a 1.8GHz Apple intel computer can handle normal everyday stuff without a problem!
All in all the top flight mac pro is better now but who is going to spend £9300 on a EIGHT core Nehalem Xeon workstation with 32Gb of RAM......
My Quad Xeon variant 1 mac pro with X1900 and 6Gb ram is more than quick enough to handle anything I need so I am not going to upgrade. I might stick the faster 8800 graphic card in as the latest super duper one requires a variant 2 or 3 pro and will not go in a variant 1 (although they brought one out specially when they did the 8800 so it is a possibility!).
As a current Apple owner you will also know the way that their computers hold their value in a totally non computer like way!! You could have bought an iMac for £1000 2 years ago and it is still worth £600 now second hand. Try that with a PC !!
I do feel that the pros have got a little expensive based on what you get. The Nehalem processor is allegedly 30% faster for the same clock speed BUT you now get a QUAD processor pro for about the same price as an EIGHT processor one was !!
4 x 2.66 x 1.3 = 13.86
8 x 2.66 = 21.28
21.28/13.86 = 1.53
So on RAW processing power the older one is 50% better for the money.
Obviously the way that OSes work you get much less benefit from the 2nd processor then less from the 3rd etc etc etc unless the process is massively parallel and written that way so in essence the Nehalem model will feel faster in normal running but be slower for things things that can take the parallel processing into account. BUT it is these things that you buy a pro for as even a 1.8GHz Apple intel computer can handle normal everyday stuff without a problem!
All in all the top flight mac pro is better now but who is going to spend £9300 on a EIGHT core Nehalem Xeon workstation with 32Gb of RAM......
My Quad Xeon variant 1 mac pro with X1900 and 6Gb ram is more than quick enough to handle anything I need so I am not going to upgrade. I might stick the faster 8800 graphic card in as the latest super duper one requires a variant 2 or 3 pro and will not go in a variant 1 (although they brought one out specially when they did the 8800 so it is a possibility!).
that's a lot better than £1800 just to have a 1TB hard drive and updated graphics card!
