HOWEVER even if he was saying single quad vs 8 core old. a single quad core AMD would kick its butt for sampling. this memory coupled with the sad memory architecture of the older Xeon boards were terrible for sampling.

The older xeon apples use pathetic DDR2 667 then later 800 FBDimm. (SEE THE FIRST TEST ON MY BENCHMARKS page)įor sampling ability as i said its huge 4-5 times better. The 2 x 2.66 Nehalem is nearly 2 times more powerful that the older 2 x2.8GHzĪ single quad Nehalem would still beat the the dual 2.8 old for effects at low latency.įor compare i7 920 (2.66GHz single) vs Xeon X5355 (2.66GHz Xeon old) 2.66 vs 2.8 is not much diff at all Was the OP talking about a single quad not dual? why would anyone consider that system? if so i missed that. The single quad Nehalem MacPro is from my point of view, overpriced and a step in the wrong direction for Apple.do you benchmark systems everyday for a living? But right now the older Early 2008 models outperforms the newer Nehalem MacPros with Logic Pro 8.0.2.

The Quad will not be faster with the next Logic update but the dual 2.26 ( and dual 2.66,2.93 of course) will and then the dual 2.26 will be around 65 percent faster than the 8 core 2.8 2008 model. You can run 20 percent more plugins with the 8 core 2.8Ghz 2008 macPro compared to both the single 2.66 Quad Nehalem and the dual 2.26 nehalem.

Arrrgghhh, and where have you been the last two months? tutt

Quad core vs 8 core mac pro 2008