How hard should I get shafted by apple's overpriced schlong?
Posted: August 10th, 2010, 7:46
I know this may fall on deaf ears a little, but I need a bit of help sinking my hard-earned money into one of the new Mac Pros that just came out. No getting into the get argument of Mac vs Pc, I need a mac for Logic to do my course (and hopefully job) and I'm happy with the faggotry, it's just a case of how badly I want to be shafted by apple and with which colourful dildo.
Basically it's fallen between the Quad and the Oct. I'm under the belief (right or wrong) that the quad will be snappier in the short term but under logic I'll generally have less track to use, say 50 in total, compared to 70. Logic isn't the greatest at sharing the load between cores apparently so it makes slightly more sense to have more ghz per core, rather than more cores respectively. So the Oct would be a little slower, but it would take more demanding use.
There's about a £200 price difference between the two, and these are the differences:
Quad: can take only 16gb max memory, 3.2ghz x 4 cpu "nehalem"
Oct: can take up to 32gb mem as it has 8 lanes rather than 4 for expansion, the cpu is the newer 2.4ghz x 8 "westmere" chip.
I'm getting either one with 8gb of ram and the HD5870 so there's not big difference that end of things, it just comes to the case of is it sensible to buy older (but more responsive, i think) architecture or a newer one that can do some heavy lifting. I'm undecided whether the RAM expandability is a big thing for me as I doubt over 16gb will ever be of use/affordable.
There is the wild card of the new Hexcore, which is 3.33ghz, but that comes with the standard amount of RAM as the quad (so it'd be even more expensive to get it at 8gb) and would be a good £100 more than the oct, with half the RAM.
I R CONFUS.
Basically it's fallen between the Quad and the Oct. I'm under the belief (right or wrong) that the quad will be snappier in the short term but under logic I'll generally have less track to use, say 50 in total, compared to 70. Logic isn't the greatest at sharing the load between cores apparently so it makes slightly more sense to have more ghz per core, rather than more cores respectively. So the Oct would be a little slower, but it would take more demanding use.
There's about a £200 price difference between the two, and these are the differences:
Quad: can take only 16gb max memory, 3.2ghz x 4 cpu "nehalem"
Oct: can take up to 32gb mem as it has 8 lanes rather than 4 for expansion, the cpu is the newer 2.4ghz x 8 "westmere" chip.
I'm getting either one with 8gb of ram and the HD5870 so there's not big difference that end of things, it just comes to the case of is it sensible to buy older (but more responsive, i think) architecture or a newer one that can do some heavy lifting. I'm undecided whether the RAM expandability is a big thing for me as I doubt over 16gb will ever be of use/affordable.
There is the wild card of the new Hexcore, which is 3.33ghz, but that comes with the standard amount of RAM as the quad (so it'd be even more expensive to get it at 8gb) and would be a good £100 more than the oct, with half the RAM.
I R CONFUS.