topic Re: Which Mac Pro; One 2.93 GHz Quad or Two 2.26 GHz Eight C in Installation & update

Which Mac Pro; One 2.93 GHz Quad or Two 2.26 GHz Eight Core?

Anonymous — Thu, 16 Apr 2009 15:37:01 GMT

I am in need of a new Mac as my 5 year old G5 Power Mac is getting arthritic. I run ArchiCAD 12 most of the time, with a little Photoshop and Piranesi thrown in at the odd times.

I have read the previous discussion on the two options (One 2.93 Quad or Two 2.26 Eight Core) and feel the verdict is still out.

It seems that looking into the future is necessary, and the big question is whether or not ArchiCAD will be needing 8 cores to process the large 3D files for the buildings I design, and then render them quickly enough as we get more upgrades on the program. I don't want to need to purchase a new computer for another 5 years.

What opinions have people formed now that the new Xeon Nehalem Mac Pros have been out? Any advice and opinions are welcome!

I am considering one of the following:
Mac Pro One 2.93 GHz Quad Core 3 GB SDRAM (w/6 or 8 GB memory upgrade), GeForce GT 120 Video Card
Mac Pro Two 2.26 GHz Eight Core 6 GB SDRAM, 640 GB HD, GeForce GT 120 Video Card

I will be adding another GeForce Card, as I have 2 monitors.

Thank you very much!

Re: Which Mac Pro; One 2.93 GHz Quad or Two 2.26 GHz Eight C

Thomas Holm — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 07:57:35 GMT

Gail wrote:
I don't want to need to purchase a new computer for another 5 years.

THAT is the crucial part. With such a long perspective, you should aim for th most powerful combination you can afford. The applications, Archicad or Artlantis or whatever, will only get heavier and more demanding but also better utilizing the power of the multicore machines. At the moment, the sweet spot seems to be the 2xQuad-core Nehalem, with 12 GB memory. It shows as 16 cores to the software, using hyperthreading. Go for the 2.26 GHz!
If budget concerned, buy the basic upgradable parts, (memory and graphic card) and count on upgrading them later.
Read this test: http://arstechnica.com/apple/reviews/2009/04/266ghz-8-core-mac-pro-review.ars

Re: Which Mac Pro; One 2.93 GHz Quad or Two 2.26 GHz Eight C

Chazz — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 14:31:55 GMT

I've been happy with my 8 core 2.66 but the disconcerting thing is how LITTLE ArchiCAD ever uses the available cores. Lately I've been working with Activity Monitor/CPU usage on and the conclusion you have to draw from this is that there is a lot of computer under my desk that is not doing much. Unless I thought GS would be making use of more of the cores in future releases (doubtful), I'd recommend getting a faster 4 core machine. Skip the 8 core altogether. The issue with the 4 core is the limited Ram slots and the expense of 4 gig chips.

In short, the machine is great, the problem is AC.

Re: Which Mac Pro; One 2.93 GHz Quad or Two 2.26 GHz Eight C

Thomas Holm — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 15:30:57 GMT

Chazz wrote:
I've been happy with my 8 core 2.66 but the disconcerting thing is how LITTLE ArchiCAD ever uses the available cores....

Chazz, with all due respect, I think your negativity clouds your conclusions. If you think back 5 years, you'll see what's happened in the mean time with both hardware and software. I think it highly likely that GS will considerably overhaul the internals of Archicad in the coming years (just read what Cigraph's representatives have hinted at in another thread).

Such an overhaul will just as likely concern how it utilizes multiple cores. To look 5 years ahead isn't easy, but just as with weather forecasts, the safest bet is that the recent development will go on, more or less. AC12 is multithreaded in several aspects, not single-threaded like previous releases, and that development will continue!

The difference btw 2.26 and 2.66 GHz is minimal, but the difference btw 4-8-16 cores can become huge with this development. Also, the 2.66 4-core machine cannot currently utilize as much memory as the 8/16-core 2.26 MacPro. Read the test I linked to!

Re: Which Mac Pro; One 2.93 GHz Quad or Two 2.26 GHz Eight C

Chazz — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 15:55:42 GMT

Thomas wrote:
Chazz, with all due respect, I think your negativity clouds your conclusions....

No need for the respect. We Nabobs dont expect it.

Here is what I've learned over the last several years, expressed as an equation:

ArchiCAD upgrades = Disappointment.

So often the upgrade includes junk I don't want. The last several "upgrades" have included mostly:

1) Stuff I don't need (Curtain wall tool)
2) Stuff I don't want (Trace)
3) Stuff that should have been done ages ago (3D Docs, better detail linking)
4) Stuff that should have been a free .01 fix because the previous functionality was so laughably terrible (dimension tool enhancements )
5) OR is something I do want but is not bundled (VBE, MEP modeler)

Thomas wrote:
To look 5 years ahead isn't easy, but just as with weather forecasts, the safest bet is that the recent development will go on, more or less. AC12 is multithreaded in several aspects, not single-threaded like previous releases, and that development will continue!

In 5 years we will be using Revit (keep praying for that Mac version) or feel like dorks for not using Revit. Now that is a product that is getting some good upgrades.

Re: Which Mac Pro; One 2.93 GHz Quad or Two 2.26 GHz Eight C

Thomas Holm — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 16:12:56 GMT

OK Chazz, you really live up to your signature. I just don't think you should let your own AC disappointment influence your hardware advice this way.

Because I'm positively convinced that if you're talking hardware, it doesn't matter wether we'll be using Archicad or something else in five years. Revit may not be there completely yet, but I'm sure they - and others - will be utilizing multiple cores soon too. And even perhaps in a more demanding way, especially if it means you'll have to install Vista or W7-64 on the machine.

Re: Which Mac Pro; One 2.93 GHz Quad or Two 2.26 GHz Eight C

Chazz — Sat, 18 Apr 2009 15:09:32 GMT

Here in the US, the quad core is $800 less than the cheapest 8 core. That's a lot of scratch for 4 extra cores that ArchiCAD does not use now and may or may not use in future. If you use a lot of Apple creative apps (logic, FCP, etc) or Atlantis etc, you could see some gains but otherwise, I remain unconvinced of the value proposition. As I start to increasingly use Artlantis, I appreciate the 8 cores more but this i still a pretty small fraction of my usage. With these caveats, I'm sticking by my original recommendation. Go quad core.

Re: Which Mac Pro; One 2.93 GHz Quad or Two 2.26 GHz Eight C

Thomas Holm — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 08:22:18 GMT

Chazz wrote:
...Go quad core.

I'd agree with Chazz if the perspective ahead was just two years. But thinking five years ahead, I'm convinced 8-core is the only viable choice, if the budget allows it.

Re: Which Mac Pro; One 2.93 GHz Quad or Two 2.26 GHz Eight C

Anonymous — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 09:33:18 GMT

I've ordered the quad-core with 8 GB ram.
In computer development 5 years is like eternity. I'll be more than happy to replace this machine in x? years for a 32-core - 64 GB ram - 2 GB graphic card or wathever I can dream of

Re: Which Mac Pro; One 2.93 GHz Quad or Two 2.26 GHz Eight C

Chazz — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 17:54:26 GMT

Joeri wrote:
I've ordered the quad-core with 8 GB ram.

Per the reports on bare feats I thought the choice was between 6 GB and 12 GB RAM. Seems like the biggest bang for buck is in the first 3 slots.

Why is this thing so hard to spec? Jeeze, it's like ordering from Dell.....

Re: Which Mac Pro; One 2.93 GHz Quad or Two 2.26 GHz Eight C

Anonymous — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 16:16:36 GMT

Thank you everyone,

What you have said is very helpful. I also heard from someone else that ArchiCAD 13 won't support my G5, so it seems the time is now to buy that new computer.

I had pretty much decided to purchase the 8 core 2.66 GHz, but the price is staggering! Not priced for the small practitioner!

As the price for the 8 core 2.26 GHz computers is only a little more than the quad 2.93, they seem about equal, but none of the tests I have read about seem to test the slower 2.26 processor. Only the faster 2.66 GHz seems to be a player.

That, combined with the fact that if AC13 doesn't support the G5, I will need to purchase more than one computer, has gotten me back to the cheaper solution, the quad 2.93 GHz.

Chazz has given me hope that at least for a little while, I won't feel that I gave up the potential of 8 core. I do have faith that Graphisoft will keep up with technology, as I have always been happy with the ArchiCAD upgrades.

I will no doubt be purchasing an 8 core in the next few years and not waiting the 5 years I had hoped for, but will at least be very happy in the shorter term. The Ars Technica review linked to by Thomas has shown that the full potential of the 8 cores is taken advantage of by only a few programs at present, and you have to tweak things a bit to make sure you are indeed using all the threads.

Thanks again.

Re: Which Mac Pro; One 2.93 GHz Quad or Two 2.26 GHz Eight C

Thomas Holm — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 07:32:20 GMT

Gail wrote:
The Ars Technica review linked to by Thomas has shown that the full potential of the 8 cores is taken advantage of by only a few programs at present, and you have to tweak things a bit to make sure you are indeed using all the threads.

Gail, you asked for a 5-year prognosis. I'm convinced that in that time, the number of cores will be much more important than it is today for users of high-end software like us. Our AC12 uses more than one core for several tasks already, and Artlantis saturates all of them.

As for the GHz issue, remember the difference btw 2.26 and 2.66 is just above 10%. Absolutely not worth the premium price, you won't notice it. The 2.26 is the sweet point, if possible equipped with 12 GB of memory.

For now, if you want a cheaper but still really fast alternative, I'd look for a refurbished 2.8 GHz 8-core MacPro of the previous generation. There may even be unused machines around still.

Good luck!

Re: Which Mac Pro; One 2.93 GHz Quad or Two 2.26 GHz Eight C

Anonymous — Mon, 04 May 2009 17:42:24 GMT

Thomas,
Thanks for keeping up with this topic.

You have persuaded me. I think I will go for the 8 core 2.26 GHz as you are correct, the speed difference is 15%, and this will be negligible in the long run, especially coming from the G5.

I too believe that Graphisoft can't help but keep up with the technology and take advantage of as many cores as possible. This will keep me in the running for 5 years. I just hate to look over my shoulder and say " I coulda, shoulda ...", but in this case the price difference of $2000 for the faster machine will probably not pay off.

For my second seat, I will get the older computer as you suggested.

Thanks!

Re: Which Mac Pro; One 2.93 GHz Quad or Two 2.26 GHz Eight C

Erika Epstein — Mon, 04 May 2009 18:45:28 GMT

Check out the refurbished machines on apples website. They come with the same guarantee and can be 1/3 less in price!

Re: Which Mac Pro; One 2.93 GHz Quad or Two 2.26 GHz Eight C

Anonymous — Mon, 04 May 2009 19:48:27 GMT

Thanks; I didn't even know they had them!

Re: Which Mac Pro; One 2.93 GHz Quad or Two 2.26 GHz Eight C

Anonymous — Fri, 21 Aug 2009 17:54:20 GMT

Gail wrote:
I am in need of a new Mac as my 5 year old G5 Power Mac is getting arthritic. I run ArchiCAD 12 most of the time, with a little Photoshop and Piranesi thrown in at the odd times.

I have read the previous discussion on the two options (One 2.93 Quad or Two 2.26 Eight Core) and feel the verdict is still out.

It seems that looking into the future is necessary, and the big question is whether or not ArchiCAD will be needing 8 cores to process the large 3D files for the buildings I design, and then render them quickly enough as we get more upgrades on the program. I don't want to need to purchase a new computer for another 5 years.

What opinions have people formed now that the new Xeon Nehalem Mac Pros have been out? Any advice and opinions are welcome!

I am considering one of the following:
Mac Pro One 2.93 GHz Quad Core 3 GB SDRAM (w/6 or 8 GB memory upgrade), GeForce GT 120 Video Card
Mac Pro Two 2.26 GHz Eight Core 6 GB SDRAM, 640 GB HD, GeForce GT 120 Video Card

I will be adding another GeForce Card, as I have 2 monitors.

Thank you very much!

Re: Which Mac Pro; One 2.93 GHz Quad or Two 2.26 GHz Eight C

Anonymous — Fri, 21 Aug 2009 19:57:35 GMT

I ended up getting the (2) 2.26 8 core Mac Pro with the Radeon Video card. I am very happy, and ArchiCAD does render much more quickly with it.
I think I made the right choice! It is a balance between speed and cost.
I only needed the one video card, as its 2 ports work with two monitors.
A word of caution though, I bought a View Sonic VG2230wm monitor to go with it, and I still don't know what went wrong, but it seems that putting that on the main display port caused my mouse to jump all over. I put it on the mini display port and that works.
Good luck.
Gail