New iMac vs Mac Pro with PT M Powered

[robbo01]

Hey guys,


So I know there are a few other threads out there about this, but what I am interested in is slightly different.

The relatively new pricing from Apple puts a 21.5 inch 3.06Ghz iMac at $1599 (Australian). If I mod this up to 8gb of RAM it comes up to roughly $1900.
So thats 3.06GHz, 8gb ram, and 500gb HD

Comparing this to the base Mac Pro (2.66GHz, 3gb RAM, 640gb HD) which is $3600 here in Aus. If I mod it up to similar specs as the iMac (2.93GHz, 8gb RAM) it comes up to $4640.

I understand the biggest downfall of the iMac would be I can't run Pro Tools HD and TDM, but aside from that (and the ridiculous price difference), wouldn't I get better results with the iMac rather than the Mac Pro???

From numbers alone, the iMac is just in front of the Mac Pro, but what difference does the Mac Pro's "quad-core" make compared to the iMac's "Core 2 Duo"?

I would be running Pro Tools M-Powered with ProjectMix I/O expanded to 16 tracks with Profire2626 (as I am now on my Macbook Pro - 2.53GHz, 4gb RAM). And using external hard drives as audio drives.


Thanks.

[Dism]

Hey guys,


So I know there are a few other threads out there about this, but what I am interested in is slightly different.

The relatively new pricing from Apple puts a 21.5 inch 3.06Ghz iMac at $1599 (Australian). If I mod this up to 8gb of RAM it comes up to roughly $1900.
So thats 3.06GHz, 8gb ram, and 500gb HD

Comparing this to the base Mac Pro (2.66GHz, 3gb RAM, 640gb HD) which is $3600 here in Aus. If I mod it up to similar specs as the iMac (2.93GHz, 8gb RAM) it comes up to $4640.

I understand the biggest downfall of the iMac would be I can't run Pro Tools HD and TDM, but aside from that (and the ridiculous price difference), wouldn't I get better results with the iMac rather than the Mac Pro???

From numbers alone, the iMac is just in front of the Mac Pro, but what difference does the Mac Pro's "quad-core" make compared to the iMac's "Core 2 Duo"?

I would be running Pro Tools M-Powered with ProjectMix I/O expanded to 16 tracks with Profire2626 (as I am now on my Macbook Pro - 2.53GHz, 4gb RAM). And using external hard drives as audio drives.


Thanks.

A Mac Pro is lightyears ahead of an iMac. It's been said before, but I'll say it again... the processor "speed" is irrelevant. Pro Tools, like any other DAW is resource demanding. As are VIs. It's not about how "fast" it can crunch data, but moreso how much data it can crunch at once. Aside from that, much of the speed numbers can be misleading. A nehalem Xeon at 2.66 is technically faster than a harpertown Xeon at 2.93. It comes down to a lot of other factors beyond just the GHz reference.

Aside from that... The iMac's C2D has 2 cores, while Pro Tools will recognize 8 with the Mac Pro's quad. You can also slot up to 32GB of RAM, while the iMac caps out at 8. The Mac Pro also has a full size video controller, is far easier to expand/upgrade and you can slot it with several internal hard drives, which is certainly a boon to any recording system.

Of course, it also comes down to your needs. If you don't need the insane processing power of a Mac Pro, an iMac will probably suit your needs just fine.

[bradch00]

I was using a 3.06Ghz 24" iMac, but have since upgraded to an i7 quad core iMac with positive and very apparent results. The main thing is (as has already been mentioned) the number of "engines" you can dedicate to PT. The core duo 2 did throw the odd -6101 (processor overload error).

One thing that has been a concern (and an issue with some) is the fact that the iMacs now come with one only firewire port. Personally I have had no trouble chaining the ProjectMix through a hard drive and into the iMac, but some have. The Mac Pro provides 4 firewire ports (whether they share the same internal bus I don't know) as well as PCI express slots providing you the option of a completely separate FW port. Also if you ever intend on using something like a UAD DSP card, to support some of the UAD plug-ins, you can't with an iMac, as there are no expansion slots.

[robbo01]

Thanks for the info guys. Looks like I'll be saving up for a little while longer!

[Jaystar]

A Mac Pro is lightyears ahead of an iMac. It's been said before, but I'll say it again... the processor "speed" is irrelevant. Pro Tools, like any other DAW is resource demanding. As are VIs. It's not about how "fast" it c
Aside from that... The iMac's C2D has 2 cores, while Pro Tools will recognize 8 with the Mac Pro's quad. You can also slot up to 32GB of RAM, while the iMac caps out at 8. The Mac Pro also has a full size video controller, is far easier to expand/upgrade and you can slot it with several internal hard drives, which is certainly a boon to any recording system.

Of course, it also comes down to your needs. If you don't need the insane processing power of a Mac Pro, an iMac will probably suit your needs just fine.

I don't know what imac you have tested but an imac quadcore does indeed allow you to select up to 8 engines in pro tools. I just tested it a few weeks ago on my friend's imac and you can slot up to 16 gigs of ram in an imac.

[tribedescribe]

Fyi- you can get a refurbished Mac Pro Quad from apple for $2,119. Same warranty and brand new. You can save some bucks with that option, I bought a macbook refurb in 06 and its is still going strong. Just type refurb in the search engine at apple.com. I went with ebay on my lastest computer a macbook pro. Sort of took a chance on that one though.

Also, once you get into serious editing and mixing you will need your hard drive on a different firewire bus. This is why the Mac pro is so ideal for pro tools. Chaining works o.k. at low track counts, but for some its a major headache.

[Dism]

I don't know what imac you have tested but an imac quadcore does indeed allow you to select up to 8 engines in pro tools. I just tested it a few weeks ago on my friend's imac and you can slot up to 16 gigs of ram in an imac.

I wasn't talking about the iMac quad... he was asking about the C2D...