Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Swordmaker
Actually if I was going to use Intel, I would have used the i7 920 Nehalem 2.66 quad (it's the same chip as the XEON but is over-clockable, which the XEON isn't, and it doesn't have the ECC turned on) currently selling for $279 so add a hundred for the chip and another hundred for the more expensive MB; you're still at $1200 and you can overclock it if you choose.

I prefer AMD chips so I'm using the AM# Phenom II. Then again I'm using 1333 DDR3 SDRAM - no ECC (it serves no real purpose any more) and the case is a Coolmaster Storm Scout a highly regarded high quality case with superior cooling, filters and a nifty carrying handle.

Unless you are running a server the use of XEON chips is massive overkill. The only real difference is that XEON chips, like their Opteron AMD opposites, are tested to a much higher standard. The general reliability of commercial chips is such that for a work station or for home computing purposes server grade chips are unnecessary and a waste of money...unless you are looking for snob appeal, which most Mac users are.

I'm happy to go on trading shots, you can't win because you have no real arguments. Apple Mac Pros are way overpriced (2-3 times) for the computing power you are getting.

I'm sure that Mac Pros are wonderful computers, I'm just not willing to pay the price for a cult status. Bragging rights is a poor reason to spend an extra grand or two.
200 posted on 07/01/2009 8:53:48 PM PDT by Sudetenland (Without God there is no freedom, for what rights man can give, he can take away.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies ]


To: Sudetenland
Actually if I was going to use Intel, I would have used the i7 920 Nehalem 2.66 quad (it's the same chip as the XEON but is over-clockable, which the XEON isn't, and it doesn't have the ECC turned on) currently selling for $279 so add a hundred for the chip and another hundred for the more expensive MB; you're still at $1200 and you can overclock it if you choose.

Or did you use an AMD? The i7 920 is NOT the same chip as the Xeon... the i7 uses 130Watts while the Xeon uses only 95Watts. and the Xeon's QPI is 50% faster. That's a big difference.

Unless you are running a server the use of XEON chips is massive overkill. The only real difference is that XEON chips, like their Opteron AMD opposites, are tested to a much higher standard. The general reliability of commercial chips is such that for a work station or for home computing purposes server grade chips are unnecessary and a waste of money...unless you are looking for snob appeal, which most Mac users are.

These are PRO machines. That's why the higher standards. They are used in mission critical jobs. They are, I agree, complete overkill for the average home owner, but for the purpose they are designed for, saving a small amount of upfront cost can be exceedingly expensive when you are on a deadline and need that high standard the Xeon's are tested for.

I don't know of any professional user that is looking for "snob appeal", they are looking for reliability and something that will get the job done better than the competition.

I make my living keeping WINDOWS computers running for numerous small professional offices. I assure you that there are many reasons why I have elected to use Macs for my personal use and "snob appeal" is not one of them. I certainly did not buy my 24" iMac for "bragging rights" or to join a "cult." It is amazing how many Windows users get on Mac threads and tell us that our subjective and objective experiences with both Windows and Macs are reducible wanting "snob appeal" or "bragging rights." when the Windows user is really the one taking his position with a lack of experience or knowledge having used only one platform. Most of us Apple users are fully knowledgeable and experienced in Windows... because we have to work with them for our employers or have had them before we switched to Macs. The so-called "Apple Tax" is worth paying for the peace of mind a Mac provides and the expansion of our productivity that we have experienced once we switched.

We Mac users appreciate VALUE over PRICE.

245 posted on 07/01/2009 10:40:30 PM PDT by Swordmaker (Remember, the proper pronunciation of IE is "AAAAIIIIIEEEEEEE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies ]

To: Sudetenland
Actually if I was going to use Intel, I would have used the i7 920 Nehalem 2.66 quad...

That's what I did, clocked it up to 3.8 Ghtz, got 3 TB of WD storage, a couple of ATI 4890's in CrossfireX, 6 gigs of DDR3 @ 1600, BLUUU-RAAAAY, Coolermaster Cosmos with a window to see all my cool quality custom picked equipment inside, 25 inch Asus monitor, tuner, etc., all for 2500 bones. Your comments about the XEON are spot on. Nice to see an avid builder around here...I know there's more, but we usually just sit back and laugh. I've seen a certain Apple expert around here spec out i7 systems using DDR2 and power supplies twice as big as needed...LOL. The OS debate is as old as the hills, everybody should just use what they like. That Scout is a nice case, I also considered the Sniper. Take good care of your spanking AMD rig :)

273 posted on 07/02/2009 1:08:13 AM PDT by cabojoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson