[adamfilip]

I am about to order a Mac pro
Unfortunately i cannot wait until the end of November to see if the processors are updated to Quad cores.


I would like to know what you think is best

a 3.0Ghz Mac pro with 2Gb ram
or a 2.6Ghz Mac Pro with 4 gb ram

chances of this machine being upgraded much after purchase are next to Nil

I do heavy Illustrator/Indesign/Photoshop work

[Wyatt]

I think I would go for the 2.6 GHz machine. The extra 400 MHz in the 3.0 GHz model would not likely make up for cutting the RAM in half. Go for RAM over a slightly faster processor, definitely.

[Windowsrookie]

3.0GHZ. You can upgrade ram anytime.

[dmegatool]

I heard the .4 ghz difference was about 12% boost in performance. Don't know if it's true but I know would go for the 2.6 (look at my signature ).

You could still drop in the new processor when they are released...

[adamfilip]

so the .4ghz is a 12% Performance increase
how much of a performance increase is going from 2gb to 4gb on the 2.6?

[Windowsrookie]

Originally Posted by dmegatool You could still drop in the new processor when they are released...

At only about $1000 more than upgrading to 4GB would be.

[adamfilip]

the 3.0 upgrade is the same as the 2.0 gb to 4.0 Gb upgrade
atlease in canada

[Windowsrookie]

No, I ment you can upgrade RAM Later to 4GB for around $200. But to upgrade to 3.0GHZ would cost about $1200.

[adamfilip]

where can you upgrade for $200?

[Wyatt]

Originally Posted by adamfilip where can you upgrade for $200?

You can buy RAM at hundreds of online retailers. Buying RAM from Apple is extremely expensive, and flat out pointless if you are capable of upgrading it yourself (and upgrading the Mac Pro is very easy). Apple WAY overprices upgrade options when you order. Get your RAM from somewere else and save a ton of money--just make sure you get the right type.

[adamfilip]

Originally Posted by dmegatool I heard the .4 ghz difference was about 12% boost in performance. Don't know if it's true but I know would go for the 2.6 (look at my signature ). You could still drop in the new processor when they are released...

This I realize but i dont recall anyone selling 2gb worth of FBDImms for $200

[Yonzie]

The 12% sounds plausible (15% faster CPU). However, around 10% or less is an impercievable speed increase. I'd say 10,6Ghz of processing power is more than enough though.
Therefore, I'd go for the RAM.

I would, however, probably buy memory somewhere else. Here's some Apple-specific memory. It's $430 for 2GB. two of those for $860. The Apple 4GB upgrade is $1100. The Kingston edition (seen here) is however $570, slightly more than Apple wants for the upgrade (but then you'd get 5GB )

[dmegatool]

He don't need to upgrade the cpu the day it will be release. I think the ram offer the best performance between the two configuration he mentionned.

So with that said, I think he should go for the ram (as it will be more noticiable). He can buy a new cpu not of the next gen but the other ones, the "true" octo-core (if it fit in).

[Windowsrookie]

Originally Posted by dmegatool So with that said, I think he should go for the ram (as it will be more noticiable). He can buy a new cpu not of the next gen but the other ones, the "true" octo-core (if it fit in).

Again, upgrading the CPU's would be much more (probably thousands) expensive than getting the 3.0GHZ now, and upgrading RAM later.

[macleod]

Originally Posted by windowsrookie No, I ment you can upgrade RAM Later to 4GB for around $200. But to upgrade to 3.0GHZ would cost about $1200.

RAM is way more expensive for the Mac Pro because it has to have those huge heat sinks!

Originally Posted by adamfilip where can you upgrade for $200?

You can't if you want it to be "safe" or approved for your Mac Pro.

Originally Posted by fcgriz You can buy RAM at hundreds of online retailers. Buying RAM from Apple is extremely expensive, and flat out pointless if you are capable of upgrading it yourself (and upgrading the Mac Pro is very easy). Apple WAY overprices upgrade options when you order. Get your RAM from somewere else and save a ton of money--just make sure you get the right type.

True. Apple overcharges but for the Mac Pro RAM is still really expensive. Even from like OWC it is expensive but saves you a couple hundred.

Originally Posted by Yonzie The 12% sounds plausible (15% faster CPU). However, around 10% or less is an impercievable speed increase. I'd say 10,6Ghz of processing power is more than enough though. Therefore, I'd go for the RAM. I would, however, probably buy memory somewhere else. Here's some Apple-specific memory. It's $430 for 2GB. two of those for $860. The Apple 4GB upgrade is $1100. The Kingston edition (seen here) is however $570, slightly more than Apple wants for the upgrade (but then you'd get 5GB )

You can't use that RAM. Yes the specs are what the Mac Pro needs but you need to get them with those huge heat sinks. Crucial and OWC offer them. I am sure there are other places two, but those are trusted by most people and Apple to provide RAM that will work perfectly with your apple computer. Especially the Mac Pro with its demanding requirements for RAM. Some tests have even said OWC's RAM might run cooler than even Apple's RAM.

Right now you can only really get Mac Pro RAM from a few places and it runs about $900 dollars for 4 GB. I would personally save myself a lot of money and order your 2.66 Mac Pro with the lowest RAM allowed and then purchase 4 GB from OWC (macsales.com) in 1GB DIMMs for 900 dollars. Unless you are really worried about the specs the jump to the 3.0 isn't that huge and you will save some money to later put into more RAM, applications, or fancy accessories and such. Maybe even a display. IMHO, that is your best deal for your money.

[Windowsrookie]

Originally Posted by macleod RAM is way more expensive for the Mac Pro because it has to have those huge heat sinks!

No it isn't. You don't have to use Apple's oversized heatsinks.

[macleod]

If you want them to work on your Mac Pro if anything ever goes wrong I would think that it is pretty helpful to use the *correct* RAM. But could you please provide an apple document that says it isn't necessary or a document that shows they don't run hotter and cause more stress on the fans?

[bikinistud]

I would go for the Apple ram for this reason alone:

http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2832&p=2

If you read down the page a bit, it appears that 3rd party memory doesn't meet thermal specifications like the genuine Apple memory does.

Plus, OS X loves memory and I think you would see a bigger benefit from more memory than with the extra MHz...

[Windowsrookie]

Did you not read that crucial has Mac Pro RAM?

http://www.crucial.com/store/listpar...?model=Mac+Pro

[macleod]

And the crucial has the big heatsinks and is $1000 for 4GB. The heatsinks seem to be a *very* good idea.

[Windowsrookie]

Only $500 for the 2GB kit. Wich would bring you to 3GB.

[remlemasi]

Originally Posted by adamfilip chances of this machine being upgraded much after purchase are next to Nil

Taking that into consideration, I don't think the extra .4 Ghz will make as much a difference as you think unless you are doing EXTREMELY CPU intensive work.

2.66Ghz X 4!!! I think that's enough.

I think you would notice the extra RAM more than the faster CPU.

That being said, if I were getting a Mac Pro, I would get the 2.0 Ghz w/ 2GB RAM (as it would be plenty fast for MY needs) and buy something else that I would REALLY notice (a 30" Cinema Display (unless you're already getting that)).

[Yonzie]

Originally Posted by macleod You can't use that RAM. Yes the specs are what the Mac Pro needs but you need to get them with those huge heat sinks.

The first set from NewEgg has huge heatsinks in the picture.
The second set from OWC has them too, at least Kingston says that's what one should use for a Mac Pro and I'm pretty darn sure they don't screw up. The picture wouldn't fit with a FB-DIMM, heatsinks or not, so it's obviously OWC that just has a wrong picture.

[macleod]

Sorry I think I accidentally multiquoted yours. Yes those should be fine just like the crucial and OWC ones. Sorry about that I missed those as alternatives and just though it was links to heatsink-less RAM.