Mac Pro 2006 worth it?

Question

Level 1

0 points

Mac Pro 2006 worth it?

Someone local to me is selling his Mac Pro 2006. Its a 2 x 2.66 Dual Core with 6 Gigs RAM. No warranty.

I have been reading about this model and that it cannot boot 64 Bit Snow Leopard and Windows Vista/7 64 Bit because the EMI is only 32 bit.

I was planning on adding another 6 gigs to have a total of 12 Gigs and want the system to see all the RAM both in Mac OS and Windows.

The system is 4 years old at this point and don't want to send $1500 for something obsolete but I do love the Mac Pro form factor because of the expandability and don't have $2500+ to buy a new Mac Pro.

Your thoughts? Pro's ? Con's?

Thanks all...

Macbook Pro, Mac OS X (10.5.8)

Posted on Jan 12, 2010 1:42 PM

Reply

Answer 1

The hatter

Level 9

61,031 points

Jan 12, 2010 2:04 PM in response to marand

Apple Store Specials - $220 for a 2009 quad.

You can boot 64-bit Vista/7 like I have.

It won't boot in Mac OS 64-bit kernel mode (allows for accessing more than 32GB RAM).

Worth it? for $1k probably. Not $1500.

Reply

Answer 2

marand Author

Level 1

0 points

Jan 12, 2010 2:08 PM in response to The hatter

You mean $2200 for a 2009 Quad right?

Understood about 64 Bit Vista.

Bummed about not running 64 Bit Kernel.

Also agree that its not worth more than $1K

Thanks

Reply

Answer 3

The hatter

Level 9

61,031 points

Jan 12, 2010 2:28 PM in response to marand

The Specials section is nearly empty, but yes, and I'd expect to see a lot more models, espcially if/when 2010 model is rolled out.

That said, I use my Mac Pro for Windows 7 Pro 64-bit, and while it feels a little more sluggish than what 2009 model would be (I'm using my own custom built PC with "best of class" parts and oc'd processor) it is quiet, decent system still after 3 yrs.

The cost of, and lack of parts, like graphics, RAM etc was one reason I went and built my first PC.

The plus side of that olde Mac Pro is you don't need to jump into Snow Leopard which is still rough around the 64-bit edges of drivers, still runs Tiger if need be as well - latest can be bleeding edge and it can cut both ways.

If you can get a 60 day guarantee and cut the price to $1200 it might be fine. Otherwise, check out used/ref'd iMac line.

Reply

Answer 4

Jan 13, 2010 1:48 PM in response to marand

This is old technology and I would not recommend it unless you get it sub $1000
Id rather pay $1700 and get a Quad on Ebay. Again there will be no apple care so Id be very careful.

Note the PC equivalent is about sub $600 stick with you imac

Reply

Answer 5

marand Author

Level 1

0 points

Jan 13, 2010 2:19 PM in response to Wilbur507

The seller won't go under $1400. Anyhow, this Mac is not for me. Especially without a warranty.

At this point I am looking at the i7 iMac, perhaps version 2 when it comes out.

Reply

Answer 6

marand Author

Level 1

0 points

Jan 13, 2010 2:28 PM in response to marand

Actually, it would be amazing to have the Mac Mini with an i5 or even better with an i7 inside it and can go to 8 gigs RAM.

Would be the ideal systems for me, even if it has limited upgrade-ability but I really doubt Apple will ever release a Mini with an i5 or i7 as it would

hit their bottom line against iMac and mac Pro line.

I know the next gen Macbook Pro's will have an i5.

Reply

Answer 7

Jan 14, 2010 11:05 PM in response to marand

marand wrote:
At this point I am looking at the i7 iMac, perhaps version 2 when it comes out.

My mother just bought one of these and if it had been available when I purchased my Mac Pro, I probably would have purchased it instead of the Mac Pro. It will take 16 GB of RAM and it's a quad core and it has tested faster than the Mac Pro. The screen is GORGEOUS - same resolution as the 30" and cheaper than the 30" display! I'm tempted to get an i7 iMac and just use it as a monitor.

Reply

Answer 8

marand Author

Level 1

0 points

Jan 15, 2010 5:15 AM in response to Eric Eskam

Agree with you on all points. The reality is that 95% of the apps out there cannot take advantage of all the cores that a Dual CPU Quad Xeon has in the highest end Mac Pro. Perhaps in time, who knows.

But until then, Having a 2.8 GHz i7 IS faster that the 2.26 XEON in the Standard Mac Pro. They are both Nahelam CPUs so CPU speed makes the difference.

But again, the issues is with the Screen or GPU or both. I will likely wait until the end of the year for a refresh of the line (hopefully).

Even though Apple takes care of its customers, I dont want to have endless trips to the Apple Store.

Reply

Answer 9

The hatter

Level 9

61,031 points

Jan 15, 2010 8:28 AM in response to marand

What does a quad-core 2.8GHz performance look like?
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/quad-core-cpu,2499-5.html

Reply