Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

evildede · Nov 4, 2007, 01:18 AM

Hi!
I am going to be buying a new computer soon and need some advice. I have been waiting for a while hoping Apple would update the Mac Pros and it seems like it's going to be happening soon. I currently have the first revision Core Duo iMac and it runs pretty well. I use it mainly for gaming (world of warcraft exclusively) and also for video editing. I wanted to get a new computer to do some HD video editing and I need a lot of space for it as well as good performances which is why I was thinking about getting the Mac Pro. The main problem here is that there is a 1500$ diffference between the 2 setups I am contemplating, and that difference made me consider getting a second iMac instead. The reason I am getting another computer is because the girlfriend and I both need a computer so I am getting a new one for myself.

So, would the difference between a 2.8 GHz iMac and a Quad Core Mac Pro be that big, especially on video editing? I don't know what the standard configuration on the new Mac Pros will be like (that's what I was thinking of getting) but anyone has worked with both the iMac and the current Mac Pro with video editing and could tell me how big of a difference it was? I'll be getting the 1 TB HDD and also an external one of the same size for space so hopefully that won't be an issue.

I'm planning on getting the iMac this week if it can do the job. Well, I know it can do it, would just like to know if the speed increase of the Mac Pro would be worth it. I'm not rich so the $$$ difference for me is huge although I would be willing to sacrifice a bunch of things if it is worth it. Thanks!

mduell · Nov 4, 2007, 09:58 AM

After the next Mac Pro update (should be next week), there will be a huge difference between the iMac and Mac Pro in terms of capability: 2 cores vs 8, 4GB max vs 32GB max (or maybe 64), more SATA drives, much better GPU options, etc. So I think the question is really "Is the iMac good enough for what you're going to do in 3 years?" and that's a difficult one to answer.

What do you mean when you say HD video editing? A few home movies in iMovie HD, or commercial grade productions in Final Cut/Motion/Color?

evildede · Nov 4, 2007, 12:11 PM

I'm using Final Cut Pro at the moment for my video editing, and while this is not what I do for a living, it does look almost professional. My current iMac runs it pretty good, but encoding is really long and it does slow down a bit in FCP. It's not unbearable, but at the sme time I wouldn't mind having something better.

If I buy a Mac Pro, it will be the standard configuration probably, and I will just be upgrading the RAM to 4 GB as I cannot really afford more. I am also suspecting the standard configuration to be only quad core and the advanced ones to be 8 cores so depending on what it is they offer, we might be looking at a dual core 2.8 against a Quad Core 2.6 maybe? Although the FSB difference will probably be huge...

mduell · Nov 4, 2007, 01:30 PM

Originally Posted by evildede

I'm using Final Cut Pro at the moment for my video editing, and while this is not what I do for a living, it does look almost professional. My current iMac runs it pretty good, but encoding is really long and it does slow down a bit in FCP. It's not unbearable, but at the sme time I wouldn't mind having something better.

I think the Mac Pro is the machine for you, especially if you see your work level increasing over the next few years.

Originally Posted by evildede

If I buy a Mac Pro, it will be the standard configuration probably, and I will just be upgrading the RAM to 4 GB as I cannot really afford more. I am also suspecting the standard configuration to be only quad core and the advanced ones to be 8 cores so depending on what it is they offer, we might be looking at a dual core 2.8 against a Quad Core 2.6 maybe? Although the FSB difference will probably be huge...

It's not just what you're doing to do with the machine today, it's what you're going to do with it over its n year lifespan. If you're planning on going to 4GB today then I really don't think the iMac is the right machine for you (since that's it's limit).

I'm not sure what you're basing your expectations on; I'm basing mine on Intel's 1Ku pricing. The CPU in the current base model (2.66 dual) has a list price of $690; the CPU in the $690 spot following the Nov 12 release is 2.83Ghz quad. Similarly, the price point for the current 2.0Ghz dual ($316) will become 2.5Ghz quad, and the current 3.0 dual ($851) will become 3.0Ghz quad. So the base model comparison would be 2.8Ghz dual in the iMac vs 2.83Ghz dual quads in the Mac Pro; dual duals will likely be unavailable in the Mac Pro.

evildede · Nov 4, 2007, 05:26 PM

If the Mac Pro comes with standard dual quads I guess that would make an even bigger difference. My only issue here is that I'm not that rich, so I'm kinda scared on spending that much money on a computer right now even though I know it would be worth, especially since the Mac Pro would last me longer than the iMac. I really wanted to go with the 30 inches screen although I could probably do with a 24 right now and that would make the prices similar.

Guess I'll wait 2 more weeks for Intel to release the new CPUs and see the upgraded Mac Pros. I'll make my choice then.

bearcatrp · Nov 9, 2007, 09:12 PM

Pick up a refurbished one. I grabbed a 2 ghz one for 1999.00. I will be upgrading the processors down the road when the prices drop. Thats the beauty of the mac pros. Exspandability.
Randy

Simon · Nov 10, 2007, 01:49 AM

Originally Posted by evildede

Guess I'll wait 2 more weeks for Intel to release the new CPUs and see the upgraded Mac Pros. I'll make my choice then.

Good idea. If the new octo MPs are too expensive for you, you could still get the previous generation refurbished or from a dealer. The prices of the current models will come down quite a bit once Apple finally updates the MP with the new Penryn-based Xeons.