What's the better Mac- 8 Core 2.93 or 6 Core 3.33

[karljohnson]

Hi guys - I've swapped two Mac in last week and still aren't happy with my performance - I've decided to just buy a really great machine - but which one ?
I've been offered a brand new Westmere 6 core 3.33 ghz machine at a great price but can also have a 8 core 2.93 nehalem at an even cheaper price with 16gb ram - I'm using Pro tools hd3 at the moment and am wanting to either go Native or HDX - ANY ideas ? - This will be my last ask Mac wise I promise ....
Cheers
Karl

[millennial]

Originally Posted by karljohnson

Hi guys - I've swapped two Mac in last week and still aren't happy with my performance - I've decided to just buy a really great machine - but which one ?
I've been offered a brand new Westmere 6 core 3.33 ghz machine at a great price but can also have a 8 core 2.93 nehalem at an even cheaper price with 16gb ram - I'm using Pro tools hd3 at the moment and am wanting to either go Native or HDX - ANY ideas ? - This will be my last ask Mac wise I promise ....
Cheers
Karl

I would go for the 8 core. More cores = better thread processing, multitasking performance.

But either should be more than enough for a screaming fast Pro Tools rig. I'm jealous =)

-Jason

[kstackm]

Originally Posted by karljohnson

Hi guys - I've swapped two Mac in last week and still aren't happy with my performance - I've decided to just buy a really great machine - but which one ?
I've been offered a brand new Westmere 6 core 3.33 ghz machine at a great price but can also have a 8 core 2.93 nehalem at an even cheaper price with 16gb ram - I'm using Pro tools hd3 at the moment and am wanting to either go Native or HDX - ANY ideas ? - This will be my last ask Mac wise I promise ....
Cheers
Karl

If you are working at sample rates of 96 Khz and lower, the 8-Core is your machine. Also, in the somewhat "near" future when processor prices go down you may want to put in two 3.6 ghz's or two 3.42 ghz's or even two 3.33 ghz's, swapping out the 2.93 ghz's.

Realistically, you can do the same things with the 6-Core, but it may be a little cheaper to do with the 8-Core sometime down the line.

[bugscoe]

I just went through this same dilemma a few months back and went with the 6 core. It's a beast, fast as hell.

Using LP 9.1.5.

[studiotee]

Originally Posted by karljohnson

I've been offered a brand new Westmere 6 core 3.33 ghz machine at a great price but can also have a 8 core 2.93 nehalem at an even cheaper price with 16gb ram - I'm using Pro tools hd3 at the moment and am wanting to either go Native or HDX - ANY ideas ?

Sorry this probably doesn't help you too much, but Native HD doesn't really have processing power for other than monitoring, right? So when mixing all the audio tracks strain CPU, so I don't understand how people can move from HD3 to Native HD. Are the newer Macs really so much more powerful that they play all the audio tracks and plug-ins without problems. Sorry if I've misunderstood something.

[karljohnson]

wow - two different answers - anymore answers ? - On paper the 2.93 should be slightly faster but the 3.33 has faster processing per core and the slightly faster ram...... the difference in price is about $900
Help - lol

[The Beatsmith]

What exactly do you plan to do with it? What plugins do you use regularly?

[karljohnson]

Quite large track counts - at 48k usually - I do mainly rock/pop commercial tracks - I use Ivory piano, East West Strings and Komplete 8 ...... Usually around 50-70 audio tracks .......
kj

[jcschild]

tough call.

track count = HDD ability
more cores means more Effects power
Higher GHz better for lower latency sampling

single proc 24Gig ram dual proc 48Gig (installed correctly in tri channel)
so capable of more instances of samples on the dual due to large ram amount.
(and vastly more money)
if it were me
i would buy the cheapest single quad MP (refurbed even) swap out the processor myself with a Xeon W3680 (3.33GHz 6 core)
(about $600, vs $1200 Apple tax price)

then if you need more samples ability get a windows slave with the savings for even more sampling ability.

Scott
ADK

[cananball]

Word on the street is HD native on an 6 or 8 core Mac Pro blows away an HD3 for mixing. My 2.26 8 core is 6 to 12 times more powerful than a G5 depending on the model according to the geekbench scores

Sent from my DROIDX using Gearslutz.com App

[jazzymike]

Originally Posted by karljohnson

Hi guys - I've swapped two Mac in last week and still aren't happy with my performance - I've decided to just buy a really great machine - but which one ?
I've been offered a brand new Westmere 6 core 3.33 ghz machine at a great price but can also have a 8 core 2.93 nehalem at an even cheaper price with 16gb ram - I'm using Pro tools hd3 at the moment and am wanting to either go Native or HDX - ANY ideas ? - This will be my last ask Mac wise I promise ....
Cheers
Karl

Just out of curiosity what configurations did you go through while swapping?

Regarding the MacPro, depends on the deal you're getting.
Apple seems to have pretty much pulled all 2010 MP's except for the Quad 2.8 off stock sale, even if they do come out with new MacPro's in Q1 2012 I wouldn't plunge anymore dough into a 2010 MP than you'd pay for the current topline iMac.

Of course if resale value is of no matter choose whichever suits your tasks best, IMO the MP2010 is as EOL as EOL gets, in terms of tech trends as well, might just as well build a Hackintosh with better specs for 1/4.
Keep in mind though that the topline iMac + a MacMini Server is equal to the maxed out MP2010 12 Core in terms of Benchmark scores, and they're already Thunderbolt proof (whatever that means ).

[mista min]

Originally Posted by jcschild

tough call.

track count = HDD ability
more cores means more Effects power
Higher GHz better for lower latency sampling

single proc 24Gig ram dual proc 48Gig (installed correctly in tri channel)
so capable of more instances of samples on the dual due to large ram amount.
(and vastly more money)
if it were me
i would buy the cheapest single quad MP (refurbed even) swap out the processor myself with a Xeon W3680 (3.33GHz 6 core)
(about $600, vs $1200 Apple tax price)

then if you need more samples ability get a windows slave with the savings for even more sampling ability.

Scott
ADK

That's some damn good advice!

[karljohnson]

Hi - I had a 2.8 8 core Harpertown (2008) then after PT10 announcement and me using an hd3 rig I decided to look at Nehalem as Harpertown are not working on HDX and issues with Native - bought a quad 2.93 but then was offered a 2.66 8 core - It turned up after I sold my 2.93 only for me to find out it was a 2.26 - I've come to a financial arrangement with the seller (company) and can have a Westmere 6 core 3.33 with 16gb at a great great price or have a used 8 core 2.93 with updated radeon 5870 graphics card in for even less - I 've 32gb ram I can put in this machine too - I'm trying to weight up if the 3.33 has any benefits over the 2.93 except the slightly faster per core speed and slightly faster ram. I'm guessing both would be great for Native or HDX right ?
Thanks
Karl

[nst7]

It just seems to me like the 6 core is the best value overall. If you think about it, you get 3/4 the cores (real or virtual) as the 8 core, and much faster processing per core. So for things that take advantage of fast individual core processing, the 6 core would be the better choice. And for stuff that needs more cores, you have 75% of the cores as the 8 core. Seems like the best balance overall.

[bastawa]

i use pt9 native but not that much. however i use logic 9 as my main daw. you need to read how does pt native spread plugins over cpu cores. for example my old macpro 4x3.0ghz is overall much slower than my new macbook pro i7 2.2ghz BUT on new macbook pro i can't use oxford supresser. it chokes my system. it worked fine with old macpro. so i would go for 6x3.33.

[Jeff19]

I'm no computer whiz, but I think you landed in a pretty grey zone as far as comparisons go. I think either way you are going to be fine and those are two great choices. I THINK the 3.33 would be a slightly better choice and it is reflected in the slightly higher price. You do get overall more computing power with the 8 core (8 x 2.93 vs 6 x 3.33), but then there are the advantages of newer core technology and faster ram.

[Jeff19]

(continuing) So I'm not sure how that will all play out as far as overall performance. There is a really long thread comparing benchmark speeds when all cores are firing. It's a good reference, but is not a 100% speed comparison in the real world with virtual instruments and all that.

I wasn't sure if you already had ram available for the 8 core only or for both. That would obviously would be another consideration considering the extra expense of adding ram.

I have the 6 core 3.33 and have been happy with it, but I have no comparison. I think I would have liked the 8 core 2.93 too. Who knows???

[jazzymike]

Originally Posted by jcschild

tough call.

track count = HDD ability
more cores means more Effects power
Higher GHz better for lower latency sampling

single proc 24Gig ram dual proc 48Gig (installed correctly in tri channel)
so capable of more instances of samples on the dual due to large ram amount.
(and vastly more money)
if it were me
i would buy the cheapest single quad MP (refurbed even) swap out the processor myself with a Xeon W3680 (3.33GHz 6 core)
(about $600, vs $1200 Apple tax price)

then if you need more samples ability get a windows slave with the savings for even more sampling ability.

Scott
ADK

Scott, is this going to work physically?
AFAIK the single Quad Nehalem W3530 is 45nm and the BTO 6core W3680 is 32nm.
Or is that not a problem at all?

[jamwerks]

Originally Posted by jcschild

i would buy the cheapest single quad MP (refurbed even) swap out the processor myself with a Xeon W3680 (3.33GHz 6 core)
(about $600, vs $1200 Apple tax price)

My thoughts exactly.

[jazzymike]

Originally Posted by jamwerks

My thoughts exactly.

but is this going to work???
Doesn't Apple change logic boards when doing the BTO 6core upgrade??
I just talked to a tech, he said, Apple doesn't do after-market CPU upgrades, but he had no confirmation on what logic boards were used for the single quad core.
Has anybody successfully upgraded the 45nm quadcore to 32nm 6core W3680 without changing the logicboard????

[jazzymike]

apparently it is... Hex 3.2 update from 2010 quad 2.8 photos new!! cpu to use!!! - MacRumors Forums

[khollister]

Just upgraded my 3.2 quad 2010 MP to a W3580 3.33 6-core. The logic boards and firmware are exactly the same. One of the previous poster's advice was spot on - if you are a MIDI guy, you will get better and more cost effective results by augmenting a SP MP with VEPro slaves than dumping a ton of money into a DP box. If you are not a heavy MIDI user, I can't imagine needing more than a 3.33 6-core to begin with unless you pile some very heavy effects on every track via inserts (2C Aether in oversampling mode comes to mind as an example).

I am picking up my new 2011 i7 quad core Mac Mini later today to use as my first VEPro slave to host Kontakt libraries (going to spring for LASS and probably Cinebrass). Just waiting on VSL to ship VEPro 5.

$1300 for a quad core Mini with 16GB of 3rd party RAM plus $300 for VEPro is a lot less than the cost differential on a 6 versus 12 core MP. Takes up almost no space either. The Mini server (the one with the quad CPU) benches out a little faster than the base 2.8 quad MP. I'm putting in a 256GB SSD for samples so I can set the Kontakt streaming more aggressively and make the 16GB of RAM go farther.

Newegg has Corsair RAM at $299 for 2 8GB 1333 DIMM's that several folks have successfully used with the 2011 Mini's and MBP's.

I think the days of needing huge MP's for audio are coming to a close - A rack tray of two of Mini's with UAD Satellite's and you're there. SSD's for samples, TB disk array for audio and Bob's your uncle. Or a quad core MBP for the DAW and Mini's for slaves if you need portability. If I was starting over, that is the approach I would take. VEPro slave(s) and SSD sample drives is a workaround for the current 16GB limit on MBP's and MM's.

[thedomus]

Just upgraded a '09 nehalem 2.66 quad macpro to hex 3.33 this evening, it all works.
I had to hack the EFI (Mac Pro Firmware Upgrade Utility Released!) before the upgrade, but it seems all good, 5 degrees cooler at idle too!

[jazzymike]

nice! I'm getting my Quad 2.8 tomorrow
The W3680 should arrive in a week or so, will let you know how it went.

[khollister]

Originally Posted by jazzymike

nice! I'm getting my Quad 2.8 tomorrow
The W3680 should arrive in a week or so, will let you know how it went.

You will need a long handle 3mm hex key or ball driver to get the heatsink screws out. They are recessed way down inside the heatsink.

It is really easy.

[jazzymike]

And the thermal paste, check
Just wanted to make extra extra sure I would not be playing the lab rat on this one.

[xgman]

With six cores and a faster speed, I'd have a hard time justifying the slower 8 core box.

[jazzymike]

Just out of curiosity.. The 2010 quad 2.8 base model has an FSB of 1066 for RAM
when updating the CPU to hex 3.33 will the FSB bump up to 1333?
I have no idea how those things work.. does the logic board determine the FSB?

The thing that bothers me most is whether Apple ships out with a different logic board when choosing the 3.33 BTO.

[jcschild]

yes it works..

you may have to update the EFI (bios) highly recommend you do that period

you can actually put in DDR3 1600 ram (none ECC) hynix or Samsung.
up to 3x8gig.
(FYI the 3 x 8 i used were ECC as they were the only ones out that had 8 gig sticks at the time.)

pretty sure they run @ 1333 regardless.
and no the motherboard is the same for all single proc.
Scott
ADK

[jazzymike]

Excellent! Thank you very much for the clarification Scott!
I'll try to find a tutorial how to update the EFI.

regards