-
Upgrade to 8 core or Quad.
-
[Joe Murray] “If you don’t have a problem being an unofficial beta tester for Apple, then jump right into the deep end with the octopus”
Sorry – realise this thread is long dead in all likelihood, but that’s just not the case. All you are getting with the 8-core is a different quad-core chip, tested for server use by Intel. What do you think you are beta testing, the chip? Think these components are not tested to destruction? When was the last time you heard of a faulty chip? None of this has anything to do with the Mac Pro or Apple rev’s or beta testing.
That’s just bad advice.
Ben
Editec Broadcast Editing Ltd
EVS & FCP specialists for live OB operations.
New HD edit/slomo truck on the road this month. Dual FCP systems/6 slomo positions.
-
Lots of us remember certain first generation Macs that had heat issues, or fan issues caused by Apple trying to avoid heat issues, and these problems were fixed quickly but were still very annoying to those who jumped right in and bought the very first version of a new configuration. It has nothing to do with whether Intel has tested the chip, it has to do with whether the entire Mac Pro quad system has been put under real world stress where things like excess heat and noise really show up as problems. So yes, in a sense early adopters of the 8 core will be beta testing this new configuration. I’m happy there are people like you who are willing to do this so I don’t have to. But the original poster asked for advice, and I stick with mine.
Joe Murray
-
Joe
These chips require exactly the same internal configuration as the Dual core one, and were tested independently some months ago when they were first released for heat and compatability.
Under these circumstances there is no reason to fear any ‘early adopter’ problems – the hardware is unaltered and already substantially subjected to real world stress, and indeed has run cooler than G5 Macs since its introduction. What problems with Mac Pros are you referring to? The Quad core chips have been used in many other systems since late last year – their introduction to the Mac Pros is late in the day and frankly cannot come too soon.
So – I stand by all my comments too. I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree, but I do think your comments are dogmatic rather than a relfection of this specific situation. I myself waited for the newer MBPs when they switched to intel etc. The same reasoning just doesn’t apply here.
Ben
Editec Broadcast Editing Ltd
EVS & FCP specialists for live OB operations.
New HD edit/slomo truck on the road this month. Dual FCP systems/6 slomo positions.
-
I never referred to Mac Pros specifically. You’re right, everything SHOULD work just fine. Hopefully it will. My skepticism of recently updated Apple products is not arbitrary or dogmatic, it’s based on experience. Just because something SHOULD work does not mean that it will. I’ll probably be getting a quad in the next six months, but would not get one this soon after release.
Joe Murray
-
[Joe Murray] “I never referred to Mac Pros specifically”
That’s a shame, because that was the original question. And my answer is not based on ‘should’ it’s based on a good deal of actual evidence. Still, enough already? I don’t think we’re helping much 😉
Ben
Editec Broadcast Editing Ltd
EVS & FCP specialists for live OB operations.
New HD edit/slomo truck on the road this month. Dual FCP systems/6 slomo positions.
-
Nice, when someone wants to have the last word, they say “enough already.” But there you go. I take it you work for Apple?
Over and out.
-
OK. I’ll play.
No, I don’t work for Apple. Can you tell me why I should have concerns about a system using pretty well tried and tested systems and a chip with a 6 month operational record that works off an identical motherboard within the same Xeon product-line? How long do you think I should wait before upgrading to be safe? Based on what? How is this specific situation the same as a new Apple hardware platform being announced/released? Should I have the same concerns when Apple puts a faster processor in the MBP, as it’s then an untested system?
If you can find someone else on this forum with the same concerns, or one article from independent testers like Barefeats that raises concerns about the systems they have tested, I’ll hold off my order. Deal? Nothing about the 8-core upgrade is risky in the sense you imply, because nothing has changed except the architecture of the chip, something I suspect Intel does not revise every couple of weeks. The additional cores may not be adequately utilised by OS X or all software, but that’s a completely different discussion, and leads to a decision based on cost/performance gains. I imagine that’s the kind of reasoning the orignal questioner, lost as he certainly now is, probably wanted to hear, not some vague and misleading comments about new systems – which this is not. In fact, how do you know that Apple has not revised ALL the Mac Pro hardware at the same time as releasing the 8-core iteration? Crikey – better not buy ANY for a while.
Sheesh.
Editec Broadcast Editing Ltd
EVS & FCP specialists for live OB operations.
New HD edit/slomo truck on the road this month. Dual FCP systems/6 slomo positions.
-
[Ben Holmes] “In fact, how do you know that Apple has not revised ALL the Mac Pro hardware at the same time as releasing the 8-core iteration?”
Actually, that’s the suggestion you’re making isn’t it? But that would make this a Rev-b Mac Pro though, wouldn’t it, and more than likely a better platform since they will have ironed out all those early-adopter wrinkles you rightly fear? In actuality, Apple makes countless hardware revisions during the life of all it’s products, in many small components and manufacturing techniques.
Editec Broadcast Editing Ltd
EVS & FCP specialists for live OB operations.
New HD edit/slomo truck on the road this month. Dual FCP systems/6 slomo positions.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up