Skip navigation
This discussion is archived

2.8 ghz vs 3.2 ghz

3576 Views 4 Replies Latest reply: Apr 22, 2008 5:41 AM by The hatter RSS
Levoqd Calculating status...
Currently Being Moderated
Apr 21, 2008 2:55 PM
Not doing extrelmy technical things (3 web site hostings, running some applications (excel, quickbboks etc) but looking into buying an investment computer that can expand over time. Is it worth spending the extra bucks and go to the 3.2 ghz machine or go with the 2.8ghz and dump that extra cash into RAM. Either way I'll be upgrading ram....thoughts? I need speed..
Mac Pro, Mac OS X (10.5.2)
  • Kappy Level 10 Level 10 (221,025 points)
    Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 21, 2008 3:21 PM (in response to Levoqd)
    I need speed.

    Your words. 3.2 GHz is faster than 2.8 GHz.
    Mac Pro 2.66 Ghz; MacBook Pro C2D 2.33 Ghz; MacBook Pro 2.16 Ghz, Mac OS X (10.5.2), Intel iMac C2D 17 "; MacBook 2.0 Ghz; 30 GB iPod Video (Black); iPod Nano 2 GB
  • gearhead429 Calculating status...
    Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 21, 2008 7:58 PM (in response to Levoqd)
    You might find this article in Bare Feats interesting (especially the last paragraph of the analysis section).

    This article from Macworld is also worth a look because it compares how each of these machines stack up when they are upgraded (RAM and hard drives) in equal measures. From this you might gain some insight as to which upgrades suite your needs and where best to put your money.

    Hope this helps.
    Dual quad core 2.8 MacPro 10 gigs NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GT, Mac OS X (10.5.2)
  • mbean Level 4 Level 4 (1,250 points)
    Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 21, 2008 8:34 PM (in response to Levoqd)
    The Mac Pro 2.8 GHz performs so well that you will not notice a difference between the 3.2 nd the 2.8 except that you will be $1600 lighter

    I would suggest putting the $1600 savings in a CD and in two years when you need an upgrade you can use that $1600 plus the resale value of the Mac Pro 2.8 to purchase a new Mac Pro model that is twice as fast as anything available now.

    I would only purchase the Mac Pro 3.2 GHz if I had money to burn.

    Have fun!
    Mac Pro 2.8, Mac OS X (10.5.2)
  • The hatter Level 9 Level 9 (58,560 points)
    Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 22, 2008 5:41 AM (in response to mbean)
    You could save on single cpu for your needs; or Apple Store Specials; and be just fine.

    Maybe if you run multiple OSs concurrently in a VM like Fusion... ? and even then the stock 2.8.

    Time is money, vs money to burn
    Mac Pro 2.0 6GB Nvidia 8600GTS Raptor, Windows Vista, 64-bit RocketRAID 23" ACD 2 APC RS1500


More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (0)


  • This solved my question - 10 points
  • This helped me - 5 points
This site contains user submitted content, comments and opinions and is for informational purposes only. Apple disclaims any and all liability for the acts, omissions and conduct of any third parties in connection with or related to your use of the site. All postings and use of the content on this site are subject to the Apple Support Communities Terms of Use.