Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: Marcus Lavendell Sep 22 2008, 08:35 AM

It’s about time I get a new Mac Pro, but I’m not sure that now is a good time to buy one

MacRumors.com don’t recommend buying now because they say that Apple will probably release a new Mac soon.
Historically there have been a new upgrade every 8-9 months, and the latest Mac Pro was released in January 2008, so….
http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/#Mac_Pro

But then I read on several forums that Apple will probably not release a new Mac Pro anytime soon, because they’re waiting for a new processor which is estimated to arrive sometime in 2009 (?)

Anyone here with more knowledge about this?

Posted by: OrganisedConfusion Sep 22 2008, 08:55 AM

Mac wont release a new system till next year. They spent ages working on the mac air notebooks and next year microsoft release the windows 7 os. Mac will no doubt work alongside a new mac os whilst designing new systems.

Posted by: Marcus Lavendell Sep 22 2008, 08:58 AM

Thanks OC!

Posted by: Emir Hot Sep 22 2008, 09:10 AM

Whenever you buy something, soon there will be better thing on the market. If you really need it then go for it. I made myself waiting many times like that and then I realized there is no point waiting if I really need the thing. Mac Pro is upgradable. You can have 8 core processors in it. Supports up to 32 GB of RAM. I think you can be happy with this beast for a long time.

Posted by: MickeM Sep 22 2008, 09:25 AM

My reasoning exactly Six months after you get your computer, it's outdated anyway

So in general terms just get the computer that's suitable for the needs you have at the time you need it. And never look back!

Posted by: Marcus Lavendell Sep 22 2008, 09:32 AM

Thanks for your input Micke and Emir!

It's just that I'd hate to buy now if waiting a few weeks would mean I get a better machine for the same money. But I know you're right, few months after it will be outdated anyway

Posted by: javari Sep 22 2008, 09:36 AM

Whatever you buy today, there will be a better, faster computer tommorow...

I'm using a MacPro for a couple of months now and its great. I use it mostly for Photoshop (for Logic I use my old G5, which is fine)
The MacPro is very stable.
The only problem is that a lot of software isn't using the power it has. Most software uses 1 or 2 cores, not all 8.
So at this point, the coding of the software is a bigger problem than the speed of the computer...

Posted by: audiopaal Sep 22 2008, 09:36 AM

I'm thinking of buying a MAC too, but I can't afford one untill next year so I guess I'll wait

Posted by: OrganisedConfusion Sep 22 2008, 10:12 AM

It isn't entirely true. You do get technology moving forward quickly of course but there are peaks when buying a computer is better. There is always a peak hard drive space for example for the price which is around 500GB at the minute and there are bad times to buy a PC like just before a new processor type comes out. When Intel Core 2 Duo came out it slashed the price of every processor below it so buying just before this is a bad move.

Posted by: MickeM Sep 22 2008, 11:01 AM

You're right of course. I'm just a dumb consumer (that's true) and I wanted to share my point of view for less personal worries, agony and still get a computer that works since I know how frustrating and how much time it takes to keep up with technology in order to get "the right" machine. My focus was on something that suits ones needs rather than the new new newest hot technology.

And surely, if you and I went out shopping I'm 100% sure you'd get a computer that would beat mine in all aspects. But as long as I get one that works for me I don't care. A kind of Dalai Lama approach

Sorry Marcus for ranting in your thread, better listen to the experts instead of me

Posted by: OrganisedConfusion Sep 22 2008, 11:06 AM

Yes that is the case but what I mean is if you bought a PC the week before it was slashed by £200 you would be a bit annoyed. PC's don't get slashed in value every week so you just need to wait for a big event and you'd save money but you are right to know when this is isn't easy and sometimes it's just easier to get what you need and ignore the change in price by not looking the few weeks after

Posted by: wrk Sep 22 2008, 11:37 AM

I use macs a lot for work and my experiences with Apple is, when they release a new Mac it needs a few months before it is on stock somewhere. Like this i'm often one version behind. The good thing is ... when they release a new one, the previous version is available on the "refubished" store for quite cheap and i have had never problems with them.

The every 8-9 month release you mean, is normally just an CPU update, it is not really worth to wait. The few .XX GHz more you can compensate with RAM .... RAM for Mac you can get cheap at www.crucial.com.

It's just my experiences of course, but i do a lot of Animation/2D/3D editing and i never felt my Mac was not fast enough.

Posted by: javari Sep 22 2008, 11:58 AM

when you get a new computer, the first couple of days you think it's pretty fast, then you get used to it and you don't notice the speed anymore.
That's why computers are never fast enough, you will get used to them.

In addition to that, the files get bigger and the software gets more complicated, so part of the increase in speed is used for that.
When I started a 5-10 MB files was considered a big file, now files are easily 200 - 300 MB

Posted by: Marcus Lavendell Sep 22 2008, 12:09 PM

Thanks all for your input! I appreciate your help

Posted by: OrganisedConfusion Sep 22 2008, 12:16 PM

I'd say give it a bit of time yet as next year when a new one is released the old systems will go heavily down in price.

Posted by: blindwillie Sep 22 2008, 01:48 PM

Regarding hardisk you get most bang for the buck, at least for SATA disks here in Sweden, comparing the same manufacturer and series of disks (Segate Barracuda in this case) with 1.5TB disk.

Posted by: Ivan Milenkovic Sep 22 2008, 03:24 PM

The never ending IT question - wait or buy now? I will agree with MickeM and Emir and say buy now if you really need the better machine and feeling the old one is slowing your work. My 2 cents mate. Good luck with the purchase, that is one hell of a computer.

Posted by: tonymiro Sep 22 2008, 03:30 PM

Slightly different way of looking at the question...

Will the present Mac Pro be able to run your current and envisaged software at a performance level you're happy with? If it can Marcus then I would suggest that you buy it. If not then wait until a model appears that can.

Cheers,
Tony

Posted by: OrganisedConfusion Sep 22 2008, 03:36 PM

It's actually better to have 3 500GB than 1.5TB however for performance.

Posted by: Jakub Luptovec Sep 22 2008, 03:41 PM

Ill drop my few cents in:) Ive been planing to buy a Macbook - but they should get updated anytime soon, with Montevina Intel Dual core platform. However, for Mac PRo, they are waiting for Nehalem platform, which will be much stronger, faster and coming next spring/summer.

The question, you have to answer yourself is - Will you even use some Quad core processor? Do you really need the extra kick? Are you going to grab video in HD format and stuff like this? IF not - for recording music for exaple, the current Mac Pro will do magic for you:) Its insanely strong, as it is and will last you for years of rapid performace;)

Btw. Mac is always enough

Posted by: Ivan Milenkovic Sep 22 2008, 03:41 PM

I agree, 1.5TB disks are "lazy" compared to 3x500GB disks. Also there are RAID combinations that can lift the performance even more.

Posted by: Marcus Lavendell Sep 22 2008, 04:15 PM

Well, I can't wait until spring/summer. Are you sure it will take that long?
Thanks Jakub!

Posted by: Jakub Luptovec Sep 22 2008, 05:14 PM

Well... Apple's marketing is kinda tricky thing to predict.. they made unexpected things too many times for me, to be sure about anything..

But as of yet, I havent heard of any Mac (not MacBook) event going around - I ve been scanning the web all day long for last 3 months - all i found was some fake pictures of Macbook Pros, Macbooks and iPod Shuffles - only those got upgraded, even though at MacRumors, they were sure that the september event will unveil both new Macbooks and both new iPods...

Another thing is, that new Mac Pros would mean new iMacs and new MacBooks as well.. so this would be a rather large event. That means:

1) It would be known at least month in advance
2) Looks most suitable for MacWorld 2008 - thats in 3 months. I am 99% sure, it wont be earlier than that. That 1% is, that they would "unleash" it for christmas crowds.

Those are my thoughts:)

What others think?

Posted by: blindwillie Sep 22 2008, 05:52 PM

Well, I was replying with regards to most storage for the money.

I understand the reasoning behind this but there are more factors to weigh in. Each generation harddisk is more advanced than the one before. How many discs there is, how many heads and so on. Is it for use from the same computer or will it be shared on a network? So I would disagree. You can't say generally that a smaller disk have better performance.

I haven't tried the 1.5TB disks yet so I won't speak for them because I don't know. They might have extremely bad design but generally speaking I'd say most of the time the biggest issue isn't the difference between individual disks, the main concern is space. Both on disk and in your computer/cabinet, you only have this amount of hw-slots and that amount of cool air to blow between the disks. Heat reduce the life of the disk dramatically. Another important thing is the need of continous space, having 20GB left on each of the three disks is more depressing than having 60GB free on one disk. Also, the more data you put onto a disk the slower each access will be, and when a disk reaches above 50-60% fill rate, access starts to get REALLY slow. So having 480GB stored on a 500GB disk would most likely be drastically slower than 480 GB on a 1.5TB disk if the disks are otherwise comparable.

If I had to choose between putting four 750GB SATA disks in a computer or two 1.5TB SATA I would definitly choose 2 SATA. And if speed was my main concern I would stripe them. Now reliability is more important to me so I wouldn't do that.

With harddware RAID solutions you can get better performance with 3 (or more) disks, but that goes for bigger disks too

I have never regretted buying as big disk as possible. I have many times regretted bying to small disks. In the long run it get's too expensive and a hassle to replace small disks with bigger.

/edit: I managed to double quote