fcp users: 2006 2.66 mac pro or 2008 3.08 24" imac?

R

robfilms

Veteran
fcp users: 2006 2.66 mac pro or 2008 3.08 24" imac?

i am a new final cut pro user. my needs are lightweight-i won't being using color or even motion-just cutting short projects in sd/hdv/hd.

my budget is limited. i am looking at local craiglist offerings.

the two machines i am most interested in are a 2006 2.66 mac pro and a 2008 3.08 24" imac.

the imac comes with the nvidea geforce 8800/512 video card. the mac pro nvidea geforce 7300 gt/256 video card.

the mac pro comes with 4gb ram expandable to 8gig. the imac comes with 4gb ram and is filled.

the imac comes w/500gd hard drive. the mac pro comes with 2x500 gb hard drives and is able to take 2 more internal hard drives.

the imac "comes" with a 24" 1920 screen. i would need to buy a decent monitor for the mac pro.

both come with airport.

the mac pro has many more firewire in/outs. the imac has one fw400 & one fw800 which i imagine are on the same bus. neither have any esata ports.

the bus speed of the mac pro is 667, the imac bus speed is 800.

the imac has 2 more years of applecare. the mac pro does not come w/applecare.

i can get both machines for the same price-$1400.

the is my 1st final cut pro dedicated machine, not my last.

so all u final cut pro users, which machine would u buy and why?

thanks in advance to all who care to share.

be well

rob
 
noah/david-

i appreciate your opinions and this might be a well worn topic but perhaps u can go into a wee bit more detail as to why an investment in a 2006 mac pro which is 3 generations old is money well spent rather than a 2008 imac?

again, thanks in advance for any info u can share

be well

rob
 
MacPro is expandable - 4 internal SATA HDs will give a tremendous speed advantage over external HDs on the iMac. 2 dual-core processors will also be an advanyage over the iMac's single processor. The whole architecture of the MacPro (memory bus, etc) is faster. Mac Pro will take more memory. If you decide you need better monitoring / more I/O capability, the MacPro is expandable via PCIe cards. Dual monitors. The discs don't shoot across the room when you eject them...
 
Yeah in a word- more powerful, more expandable, just more of everything. It's like asking why a 2006 Ferrari is better than a 2009 Hyundai. It just is.

Noah
 
iMac - you cannot add a second internal drive. Cannot add eSATA. Limited to one firewire bus; no way to add another. Cannot upgrade the graphics card or monitor.
 
david-

i appreciate the feedback. along w/posting on dvxuser.com, i also posted on dvinfo.net & creative cow.

all seem to suggest that the mac pro is the way to go. i knew the idea of using the imac would be functionally okay but in time i would want more. i was willing to allow that learning curve to take some time then move the 24" imac into its role as a machine for my home. that said, i am a video professional who now wants/needs to edit his own efforts-or at least make the 1st attempt. my needs are rather simple-mostly cuts and simple transitions all which can be easily accomplished on a imac w/4gb of ram and a 512 video card. where i am less secure is in the rendering time and dvd burning time. i imagine the mac pro would accomplish both tasks much quicker.

the difference in price between a mac pro and an imac is $1k which translates into 4 days of me paying one of my editors to sit w/me and go thru my footage. i'm sure once i get up and running on a mac pro, i'll find 4 days "savings" to justify the cost.

at this moment, i'm leaning towards an 8 core. sounds like a bit over the top but the pricing for the cheaper models with additional ram and quicker video card leads me to believe the 8 core is the sweet spot in the used mac pro market.

of course, ymmv (your mileage may vary)

be well

rob
 
Rob:

My eight core is in transit. I'm moving from our 2.66 GHz 2006 MacPro.

Can't wait. But our 2.66 is still a workhorse and has been faultless.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top