Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 16,024
- Location
- 9th Inner Circle
That's something I must remember when I get my Mac Pro. What's the PSU like in a Mac Pro?
Spec me a Mac Pro
- Thread starter smogsy
- Start date
That's something I must remember when I get my Mac Pro. What's the PSU like in a Mac Pro?
Deleted member 651465
Deleted member 651465
Soldato
- Joined
- 10 Apr 2004
- Posts
- 13,496
980W I think is the general consensus.
Its one mahooosive 12V rail, something like 60A!
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 16,024
- Location
- 9th Inner Circle
I can support up to 6 GFX cards, you've got no issues
Yeah I forgot about that (having just spent ages looking at possible specs!)
Holy 12v rail Batman!
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 16,024
- Location
- 9th Inner Circle
Doing a bit of Googling it looks like the maximum draw is 980w. Wow. Better get shares in EON.
yeh well, i dont use all the power in my single I7
the only thing that uses all the power is my games even then thats two cores @ 80% usage
yeh i did know this but i heard non OSX cards when in OSX fans max out so i wouldnt want to do this. also i was going to try Crossover Games hopefully so i didnt need bootcamp just VPC's
One 285GTX wouldnt be as good as my setup know but its the best im going to get on a Mac Pro.. this most possibly the way i will go.
getting 1 285GTX bit more of a outlay but its worth it to get OSX/Windows in one box.
Deleted member 651465
Deleted member 651465
Yes, that is correct.
Although you are using an 8 core workstation as a gaming PC, so I suppose that's not the worst of your worries
(I did it too, when I had my Mac Pro)
And you're thinking about £5000 budget Mac Pros just now? What gives?
Soldato
- Joined
- 10 Apr 2004
- Posts
- 13,496
Ok.
I didn't read that bit.
How old are you dude?
Unless you are using 5D Mark IIs and higher or coding HUGE apps, your current rig is more than enough. Hell a iMac would be enough.
What gives on spending £4k on a MP? :/
BTW, I use a 2.66Ghz Quad Mac Pro with a 4870 for:
1. A 33,000 (20K+ RAW) image library (40D)
2. Aerospace Engineering 3D CAD work
3. 1080p HD video work.
I could have bought a 2.93, lost £360 more (being a student thats really pushing it...) and its perfect. Couldn't ask for more.
So I ask... what are you using it for photography wise?
Last edited:
Deleted member 651465
Deleted member 651465
e-peen
not much really (beginner nikon d60),i pefer the mac OS my Macbook is faster in most cases than my Windows PC.
i want a main Computer that can be used for oSX/Windows Legally.
i did consider the IMac i really did but its not a choice any more it would be a downgrade in hardware spec even if it was faster, plus my 30" would not work with the Imac & would not want to lose the 30" as i do really like the real estate.
this only leaves the Qaud/Oct option.
i asked for your suggests,which this thread was all about.
the ideal of this computer was to to move to OSX as my main OS with the intention of keeping it for some time (hoping 2-4 or more years if possible)
The Qaudcore may hold that long but the 8GB Limition seems a bit obsurd, now i know of it. specailly as i have 6GB now and can use 2GB-3GB in with all my software open. (vista)
i have worked hard for the money, I also recently got a massive bonus & pay Rise so can afford it quite easily. (heck could be my treat
)Btw, Im 20
if you want to reconsider your specfication you would buy with these new details you now know of so be it
(you will know more than me what a MP could handle)i did't really want to spend £5000 pound i really wanted to spend up to £4000 but could stretch to £5000 which is why i asked if it could be done cheaper.
hope it helps
Smogsy
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 10 Apr 2004
- Posts
- 13,496
not much really (beginner nikon d60),i pefer the mac OS my Macbook is faster in most cases than my Windows PC.
i want a main Computer that can be used for oSX/Windows Legally.
i did consider the IMac i really did but its not a choice any more it would be a downgrade in hardware spec even if it was faster, plus my 30" would not work with the Imac & would not want to lose the 30" as i do really like the real estate.
this only leaves the Qaud/Oct option.
i asked for your suggests,which this thread was all about.
the ideal of this computer was to to move to OSX as my main OS with the intention of keeping it for some time (hoping 2-4 or more years if possible)
The Qaudcore may hold that long but the 8GB Limition seems a bit obsurd, now i know of it. specailly as i have 6GB now and can use 2GB-3GB in with all my software open. (vista)
i have worked hard for the money, I also recently got a massive bonus & pay Rise so can afford it quite easily. (heck could be my treat
Btw, Im 20
if you want to reconsider your specfication you would buy with these new details you now know of so be it
i did't really want to spend £5000 pound i really wanted to spend up to £4000 but could stretch to £5000 which is why i asked if it could be done cheaper.
hope it helps
Smogsy
I had a 3.456Ghz C2D before this Mac Pro which ran games a touch faster along with Single threaded apps.
You are not going to be using all 16 threads of power so whatever you do it will be slower.
Lightroom only uses all 8 threads when its exporting, and even then its 70-80%, only the video encoding really uses it to its full extent.
Get the 2.93Ghz Quad if you want the best speed that you would actually use.
Btw im the same age as you and no I wouldn't change my spec [even tho I *could* have bought the 2.66Ghz Octo, but that would have left me with NOTHING]
Just because you can afford it doesn't mean you should. Hell, investing in a full frame camera with a range of IS/VR glass would be better :/
Even with my 40D and 12-15Mb RAWs im not really pushing my MP tbh.
And 6Gb is more than enough, even with a VMWare Fusion taking 3Gb Lightroom doesn't fill up the rest.
Waste of money going for the Octo. The 2.66 is perfect for both of us.
Because, in a years time when the 6 core variants are released you can upgrade then.
Last edited:
thankyou for your help
ok i read through your comments & see your point.
i had a relook at apples site going to work in a minute
so for my needs you would reccomded somthing long these lines?
ok i read through your comments & see your point.
i had a relook at apples site going to work in a minute
so for my needs you would reccomded somthing long these lines?
i only uped the Ram (might aswell for £80)
Below is A Oct core Spec i used previously reason for putting these here it see the unstanding on costs.
Last edited:
Deleted member 651465
Deleted member 651465
For £300 more you're getting an extra 4 cores and 4GB but a slower CPU*
*Which will be faster with the apps you intend on using.
Go for the second spec.
*Which will be faster with the apps you intend on using.
Go for the second spec.
Soldato
- Joined
- 10 Apr 2004
- Posts
- 13,496
Which ones will be quicker?
There is nothing there that I don't use and it never maxes my 2.66 out :/
BTW, why is all that so expensive?! My 2.66/1Tb/6Gb/4870 was £1900, so even if you get rid of the HE discount its still £2200...
Edit: Oh the applecare is well expensive for non-HE, nevermind Add the 2nd 1TB yourself, get a 300Gb Veloci as a boot drive.
As for the specs, the 2.66 is the best bet IMO. The 2.26 will show its slowness in single threaded apps and games, the 2.66 will be 2.93 after Turbo Boost (although i've only ever seen it go to 2.8 :/)
MPs hold money very well, save the money, see how it goes, and in a years time when the next lot come out, you could very well be using 16 thread apps and thus the 24 thread Mac Pros may be better for you
8Gb is more than enough at our levels IMO. (I use Xcode as well btw, forgot that bit
)But ultimately up to you:
1. Pretty much same spec as me, handles everything I throw at it fine.
2. Faster CPU, more what your used to, 13% increase in cost for a (what I was thinking about at the time a 5-10% increase in performance)
3. Slowest for what you are used to, highest overall power, but that list of apps and that SLR its a waste (and a BIG drop in games)!
Deleted member 651465
Deleted member 651465
Which ones will be quicker?
There is nothing there that I don't use and it never maxes my 2.66 out :/
BTW, why is all that so expensive?! My 2.66/1Tb/6Gb/4870 was £1900, so even if you get rid of the HE discount its still £2200...
Add the 2nd 1TB yourself, get a 300Gb Veloci as a boot drive.
As for the specs, the 2.66 is the best bet IMO. The 2.26 will show its slowness in single threaded apps and games, the 2.66 will be 2.93 after Turbo Boost (although i've only ever seen it go to 2.8 :/)
MPs hold money very well, save the money, see how it goes, and in a years time when the next lot come out, you could very well be using 16 thread apps and thus the 24 thread Mac Pros may be better for you
8Gb is more than enough at our levels IMO. (I use Xcode as well btw, forgot that bit
But ultimately up to you:
1. Pretty much same spec as me, handles everything I throw at it fine.
2. Faster CPU, more what your used to, 13% increase in cost for a (what I was thinking about at the time a 5-10% increase in performance)
3. Slowest for what you are used to, highest overall power, but that list of apps and that SLR its a waste (and a BIG drop in games)!
A Quad 2.93GHz will be quicker than a Octo 2.66GHz because the apps that aren't written for multiple cores essentially see raw clock speed.
Soldato
- Joined
- 10 Apr 2004
- Posts
- 13,496
I think we crossed wires here.
You said extra 4 cores and 4Gb which points to the 2.26Ghz Octo.
The 2.66Ghz or even the 2.93Ghz Quad will be closer to what he is used to in terms of gaming and will almost certainly be quicker in OS X doing the above.
I could have got a 2.26, I didn't.