Mac Pro 8 Core Difference

[Soundtrack2life]

I am considering upgrading my Mac Pro from my quad core 2.66 / 8 GB I am only doing rock productions so I am not going to need to run CPU / RAM heavy virtual instruments. And the ones that I do use I record to an audio track anyway (one at a time) for mix down. I know there would be a max ram difference between the Westmere, Nehalem, Harpertown & Clovertown but they all have 8 core offerings at close cpu clocked cores. . . . Obviously I could jump into a used earlier model for about +/- half the money then the latest greatest (and would like to do so). I am assuming that any of them would be a big step up in terms of running more RTAS plugins then the 4core 2.66 I am using now. . . . . but is a Westmere going to offer me anything more substantial then say the Harpertown or Nehalem (all say with about 8 GB ram). I am partly considering this move because I am considering also selling my HD2 cards & two 192 I/O's and using the RME Fireface 800 I already own.
Joe

[Soundtrack2life]

One other thing is right now I am not concerned with going 64 Bit. So I am not looking to "future proof" my system as much as having something that will work good right now. . . . Also I am interested in real world performance differences and not in theory of what the specs say. . . . .
Joe

[Meads]

Having worked with a Quad-Core at a studio for a long time, maybe I can give you an idea for the Nehalem. They have an HD2 system there, and when I got the 8-Core Nehalem for my home studio, running LE (so RTAS), I took a fully packed session from the other studio to test on my system.
I couldn't find any difference in performance or stability, even though all plugins now were sucking on the cpu.
I can't tell you how it differs from Westmere, but Nehalem is Godzilla.

[groundcontrol]

+1 for the Nehalem.
My 8 Core LE system (bought used) is very stable & powerful.
Keep in mind this is a mix room mainly so no need for tons of inputs of VIs.
(Can't wait to use the added busses in 9 for my mix template though.)

It may be a better investment to get the Westmere 12 for composers who use have big templates (especially if they record lots of real stuff on top.)

The used Nehalem was a better value for me. I invested in my monitoring chain & ended up using LESS plugins.

Cheers!

[drumster]

Agreed! The Nehalem MacPro's are very powerful machines that can handle high track counts with lots of plugins. With that said, I run a 2008, 8 core Harpertown and have had nothing but great results with that machine. From what I've read, lots of guys on this forum are using the 2008 model and have yet to max out their full potential. Obviously, a newer, Westmere Mac Pro will be relevant for longer but there's also the additional cost to consider beyond a used 2008 or 2009 model.

[mhelm01]

Has anyone tried this upgrade?