Performance Difference Mac Pro Nehalem and Westmere

• Mac Pro 2.8GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon (Nehalem)
• 2.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon (Westmere)? <-- this Mac is not currently for sale, 2.8 is the slowest. There is an 8-core, but that is much more than you need. In case of a tie, always choose More MHz/GHz over more processors, since after about three processors, additional processors are a diminishing return.

Then compare like-to-like, maybe 2009 2.66 4-core which Apple still sells for mere $2099 and can be found on MacPerformanceGuide link for $1800.

What you do need is CS5 and RAM, maybe the ATI 5870 too.

And 3.2/3.33GHz processor in 4-core configuration.

that 2.4 8-core is pretty much a lemon, the 2.26 being outright disaster design.

Also let me add that for those with slower 2.8 and 3.2 2010 Mac Pro's, those who don't need 6 cores, can always put in the w3580 which also supports 1333 mhz memory.. I used that for awhile when I did my initial upgrade from the 2009 parts to the 2010 parts for 300 dollars.

The W3580 is a workhorse and it is a great replacement for those using the W3530 and W3565 both of which can't support 1333 mhz memory.. The W3570,80, and W3680 all support 1333 mhz memory..

In some tasks I do the 4-core w3580 is faster than the w3680 which its real performance is due to the pro apps and multi threaded capable apps, ALL of which I really have no use for..

romko23 wrote:
In some tasks I do the 4-core w3580 is faster than the w3680 which its real performance is due to the pro apps and multi threaded capable apps, ALL of which I really have no use for..

How does that work? Same clock's and turbo. The 3680 has 3.6GHz on 1 AND 2 cores, 3.46GHz on 4 and 3.33GHz on 6. Don't see how 1 at 3.6GHz, 2 at 3.46GHz and 4 at 3.33GHz would ever be faster. TDP is the same at 130 which is pretty high for the 4-core. Thread management doesn't have that much overhead. Just curious what tasks you are referring to.

Hi, just everyday tasks.. I don't use pro apps with my Mac Pro.. I only got the Mac Pro for replacing a desktop PC of mine.. I might use them someday, but as of right now I have no use for such apps.

I primarily run emulation, windows in Mac OS X Snow, sheepshaver etc? You might think its overkill, but I just like to have an expandable computer, plus I am an A+ certified tech on PC hardware and also a tinkerer.. The only thing I need to do with my Mac Pro at this point is upgrade my memory to 12GB.. I would like an SSD, but they are still quite high.. and since I am playing with my new toys - a G4 Powerbook and Pismo, my time has been spend on nostalgia, though my G4 Powerbook(The last model before the macbook pro) is more than capable of doing what my gateway laptop can do.

The W3680 and W3580 are the same in clock speed.. the although I just got the w3680 3 months ago, I really don't see any much of a difference between that and the w3580.. but again, other than DVD encoding and ripping, I really am not using all 6 cores either. Microsoft office doesn't use any cores.

Pretty much everyday tasks are what I use my computers for..

Same here. Pretty sad how cores just sit there idle as 1 is hammered 90% of the time. So you replaced your 3580 with a 3680? Just dropped in or full tray?

The OP should get the 2.8GHz 4-core over the 2.4GHz 8-core. The money saved can be put to an SSD boot drive purchase. Which WILL be felt.
In the end the 2.4GHz will be terrible for Adobe's single threaded apps.

Best for Adobe Premier in order:
3.33GHz 6-core with GTX 280 for mercury engine. (If you can find one).
3.33GHz 4-core with GTX 280 for mercury engine.
3.2GHz 4-core ''
2.93GHz 4-core ''
2.8GHz 4-core ''
You get the idea. Don't need cores, you need clocks.

I'd take my picks from here first:

http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/specialdeals/mac/mac_pro

Too much software is not multithread/multicore and that extends into what really is the elephant - Finder - that is "too big to fail" and too big to redo.

PS

: I can’t tell any difference running my 6-core 3.33GHz instead of my 12-core 3.33GHz, unless the 6-core is slightly snappier.

http://macperformanceguide.com/index.html

PPS: other web sites load fine, but AD? could be using 9600 baud to access.

The W3580 rips the 2.8 and 3.2 apart.. same family of Nehalem.. I don't know why people are saying their 2.8's are faster unless they are using SSD which sad to say I have yet to get one.. other than that, the w3580 and w3680 for that matter are both faster than the lower bloomfield processors.

W3570
W3580 = ALL these 3 support 1333 mhz memory..
W3680

More:

A 6-core 3.33GHz machine is a superb choice for most every user (but also more than really needed for many applications).

A 12-core machine is best only for computing chores that have time-consuming jobs to crunch, and software that uses more than 6 cores effectively.

Or when 48GB or 64GB memory is required to keep data in memory (the one exception for the 8-core 2.4GHz).

Save your money, you could buy two Mac Pros and upgrade appropriately on the money saved, or pick up Quadro 4000 and new monitor to go with it.