Benchmarks please. And I want a wide range of them.
I saw a pretty wide-ranging table of Core i7 vs. Core 2 some time ago, can somebody pull it up?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Introduces New Mac Pro with Nehalem Xeon Processors
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I saw a pretty wide-ranging table of Core i7 vs. Core 2 some time ago, can somebody pull it up?
Yes of course that is what I meant. Apple have had good value Pro hardware for years and today there really is an Apple tax and it is big. Understandably people are frustrated and annoyed.
Well, time is money. Faster computers = less staff time = less staff = less overhead. I have a 2007 octo I'm looking to both upgrade and add a second workstation/cluster.
Spending like 7-G's will be a tough sell, but getting an assistant is a certain non-starter.
Why have the prices gone up so much for the baseline.
I was considering a base mac pro before the update for £1200 (downgraded the processor) but now the minimum is like £1900...
Also the mac mini price has gone up... Ahhh
I was considering a base mac pro before the update for £1200 (downgraded the processor) but now the minimum is like £1900...
Also the mac mini price has gone up... Ahhh
This thread needs to be re-titled: i want the fastest Mac in existence, but I refuse to pay for it. Post here:
To clarify for people who are not understanding all of this weird hate today, The Mac Pro has never been a good buy for the money. Ever.
Its always been a ridiculously overpriced machine for what is included, and adding features to it takes it to a new level of absurdity.
So, today's hate is about the following: Mac geeks were desperately hoping to buy their first Mac Pro in the wake of financial crisis (insane decision), because they expected the "best Mac Pro ever" to suddenly stop being a rip off, priced-inflated product.
Well that didn't happen, as it was never intended to.
To clarify for people who are not understanding all of this weird hate today, The Mac Pro has never been a good buy for the money. Ever.
Its always been a ridiculously overpriced machine for what is included, and adding features to it takes it to a new level of absurdity.
So, today's hate is about the following: Mac geeks were desperately hoping to buy their first Mac Pro in the wake of financial crisis (insane decision), because they expected the "best Mac Pro ever" to suddenly stop being a rip off, priced-inflated product.
Well that didn't happen, as it was never intended to.
I think he might have meant you needed two cards to run two Apple 24" monitors which require mini DisplayPort.
It's the damn international prices and integrated GPU's. Cost rift between PC's and Mac's are ourageous.
More accurately, as I just said, the Mac Pro is, and always has been (3 years), a ridiculously over priced joke. No one actually buys them if they care about their computer spending finances. No one.
Today is just more of the same, albeit with current technology.
Meanwhile, every other product is a steal for they offer.
The $1199 iMac is incredible value.
The $599 Mini is the most powerful Mac in the world that retails for less than a $1000 dollars.
The $1299 MacBook is the best value laptop money can buy.
---
The Pro lines suffer from being only slightly better, but more than slightly more expensive. Too damn bad. Buy what you can afford, not what you want.
ok geez I can never give advice out anymore. I wish I owned a nuke so I can blow this ****** earth apart. I'll use Macsales.com for now on you win ****.
You are wrong. The Mac Pro has always been GOOD value for what you got. The issues people had with it arose from the lack of options and the gap between it and the iMac not being filled by a cheaper single socket quad core option. In addition to lack of graphics card updates during it's lifecycle.
When the 2006 and 2008 Mac Pros came out you couldn't build a system from retail parts for less. Dell and HP were charging $4,500 for similar systems. But now that has changed and a system that would cost less than $1,500 from other sources is going to cost you $2,499 from Apple. The 2008 Mac Pro used two $800 processors and a systemboard with features that would run you $500 elsewhere. The $2,499 Mac Pro comes with a $300 processor and $300 board.
Whether that is true or not is debatable (it depends on the number of applications you want to run and which ones), but in the last generation Apple made a big thing of being 8 core across the board giving the impression that this was the way of the future. Now they've quietly dropped the idea.
Personally I want 8 cores to run multiple copies of the same application on different data sets so 8 cores is important (not just 8 logical threads). Not only have the prices risen sharply but the design seems cobbled together - 8 ram slots when the memory is 3 lane, 6 or 9 slots would make a lot more sense it doesn't inspire confidence in a well thought out design. Either Apple are giving up on the workstation market or else there will be a less rushed, proper design coming out later in the year.
If you have 3 DIMMs or 6 DIMMs, you get tri-channel (ca. 19GB/sec).
If you have 2 DIMMs, 4 DIMMs, or 8 DIMMs, you get dual-channel (ca. 13GB/sec).
The performance difference between tri-channel, and dual-channel, outside of some corner-case benchmarks, is insignificant.
Who.........cares? If you can't afford one, you don't buy one. Its simplest economic concept in history.
Yet people have this ridiculous idea that they SHOULD be able to buy THE computer they want, when they want one. LOL, hilarious.
Its called spending within your means. Most peoples means don't enable the purchase of a new MacBook Pro every year. And people blame APPLE for that.
Hil....arious
I'll more than likely buy one of the new Nehalem-based Pros, but my rationale is not based on brute power now, but on future-proofing. I'm no expert on Intel's development roadmap, but my understanding is that Nehalem is a fundamental architecture change, which suggests that we're unlikely to see a further step jump like this for some years. Snow Leopard will bring in better multi-core support, and developers will start to optimise software for multiple cores over the next few years.
As far as I can see it, buying a Nehalem system might be paying a premium, but may keep pace with software development a year or so longer than a current Harpertown-based system, so in the long run represents more bang for buck. I'm happy to have this assertion disproved by someone, but my philosophy is generally spend up front to maximise long-term benefit.
The graphics card option is woeful however- putting a £60 graphics card in a £2500 machine is like putting plastic bucket seats in a Ferrari- I'll be holding off on my purchase until the 4870 option is in place.
As far as I can see it, buying a Nehalem system might be paying a premium, but may keep pace with software development a year or so longer than a current Harpertown-based system, so in the long run represents more bang for buck. I'm happy to have this assertion disproved by someone, but my philosophy is generally spend up front to maximise long-term benefit.
The graphics card option is woeful however- putting a £60 graphics card in a £2500 machine is like putting plastic bucket seats in a Ferrari- I'll be holding off on my purchase until the 4870 option is in place.
Benchmarks ok but overpriced
I understand that benchmarks of the new processors are better than previous mac pro architecture .But my doubt is , is it worth? In times of economical recession prices of high tech should drop .If you want to buy a high end Mac Pro you now have to spend much more .The problem may be that Nehalem Xeon Processors are very new and overpriced at the moment. Apple should have waited a longer time before upgrading the Mac Pro line if these were the premises. Another disappointing feature is the lack of Blu Ray drive . I hope Apple will reconsider these factors .For now I decide not to buy a new Mac Pro
I understand that benchmarks of the new processors are better than previous mac pro architecture .But my doubt is , is it worth? In times of economical recession prices of high tech should drop .If you want to buy a high end Mac Pro you now have to spend much more .The problem may be that Nehalem Xeon Processors are very new and overpriced at the moment. Apple should have waited a longer time before upgrading the Mac Pro line if these were the premises. Another disappointing feature is the lack of Blu Ray drive . I hope Apple will reconsider these factors .For now I decide not to buy a new Mac Pro
The Mac Pro has actually been somewhat underpriced compared to any machine with the same or similar specs. It merely doesn't fit some very vocal people's demands.
Pros who need workstation power have loved the Mac Pro since it came out and still do.
jW
Pros who need workstation power have loved the Mac Pro since it came out and still do.
jW
Yes it would degrade performance, I don't think Ive's gang would change anything to give them the extra room for the extra two DIMMs. With 2 or 4 DIMMs, they run in dual channel instead of triple channel.
Price drop?
http://store.apple.com/us_edu_43939/browse/home/shop_mac/family/mac_pro
Quad is now $2299. 8-core is now $2999.
http://store.apple.com/us_edu_43939/browse/home/shop_mac/family/mac_pro
Quad is now $2299. 8-core is now $2999.
Oh well. Too bad. So sad.
Buy it, or don't buy it. And life goes on.
(and no, you're wrong. it has never been a good buy. I would still be paying for a $3000 standard macpro if i bought one in 2006 and it probably would choke on snow leopard coming soon. Whereas, a new $600 mac mini will not.)
That's the education store. Of course it's cheaper, by about the same margin as before.
jW