How satisfied are you with your Mac Pro?

I'm happy.

I bought mine at the end of 2009 to edit a feature film, and it turned into the foundation for running my own production business. It came with 10.6.2 if I recall, and I'm still on 10.6.8, which I love. It came with a quad core, and now has a 6-core. I've added a very nice 8x2TB RAID 6 box to it, along with SSD(s), USB3/eSATA, and for now, my 5870 is a good fit. I also have a 30" ACD and another Dell monitor in a dual setup.

For a 2009, it's kept up very well here in 2013, and I'd say it was an excellent investment, which I'll keep using until my work requires more from a machine.

I have been quite satisfied with my succession of Mac Pro machines. I originally purchased the 1,1 with a 30" ACD back in 2006. I updated that in 2008 with a Mac Pro 3,1 because I wanted the PCIe 2.0 bus slots for "future proofing". That 3,1 machine was upgraded with new video cards (several versions up to the HD 5870), 16GB RAM, SSDs for booting and some data, Windows SSD, larger RAID-0 hard disks, and eSATA card.

I decided to switch to the new iMac late last year and have the top end 27" SSD one, intending to replace the aging Mac Pro because I couldn't justify the price of the new ones and feared that the rumored model yet-to-come would probably be way out of my price range. I was going to keep the 2008 Mac Pro because I like having a tower computer that I can use as a test-bed by swapping parts inside easily.

Then the Best Buy / Amazon "1 day fire sale" on the 12 core 2012 Mac Pro caught my eye. My daughter had been bugging me for my 2008 MP, so I jumped on the offer and now have a shiny new 2012 Mac Pro, which has already been upgraded to a HD 7950 graphics card, 1TB of RAID-0 SSD, 256GB SSD for Windows (all SSD drives on PCIe cards for SATA-III speeds), BluRay burner, and a couple of 3TB hard disks. All my eSATA backup RAID drives still work with the new machine. I also switched from the single 30" ACD to a 24" ACD that I had along with a new 24" NEC matt screen with color-calibrator. Will try using a dual-screen system rather than the single large one for now. I can easily add USB-3 with a PCIe card if I decide I need it, and I don't need Thunderbolt on the Mac Pro at this time.

I am thinking of upgrading the dual CPUs to 3.33 GHz after I see what Apple may bring to the market as the "new Mac Pro". If I am disappointed by the design or price, I will simply go ahead with the CPU upgrade and enjoy my 2012 Mac Pro for several years. If the new model is attractive ... well, we shall see ...

So ... yeah ... I do like my Mac Pro's (and I am not a Pro, but an Electrical Engineer with a passion for photography).

my $ .02
-howard

Extremely happy here as well. I bought the MP1,1 about 3 or 4 months after it released. Mine was cheap tho. I think I paid $2,300 for it with 4GB Ram and the dual 2.66 procs. A company I was freelancing for at the time flipped the bill for the then very expensive x5355 replacement procs. I'm currently running the same machine for my daily fix but now with 32GB RAM and the 8800GT. I'll upgrade the GPU to either the GTX 570 or the 680/670 in the next few months and probably install 10.8.3 (or 10.8.4 by then?) before I'm done. I'll leave it like this for a year or two and then move up to a MP4,1 which I'll upgrade to a 5,1 and add the fastest procs to.

Prior to the MP1,1 the last Macs I used were any of many free (like gift) versions of the G1, G2, and G3 "PPC" "PowerMacs" meaning that I skipped the G4 and G5 systems (as the freebees dried up). And prior to that I used and owned most of (all of?) the Motorola based Macs.

My expectations of the MP1,1 were inline with reality so there were no disappointments here! And Mac OS X (10.4.x) reminded me very much of Amiga OS - which was a very nice feeling! Prior to the MP1,1 my daily pounder and control box was an Amiga 4000 Tower stuffed to overflowing (a bit like this MP1,1 is now).

So yup - Happy as a clam!

And clams are very happy!

Just ask one if you don't believe me!

As the owner of iMacs, a Mac Mini, and a couple of Macbook Pro's the Mac Pro outperforms on many levels. Not only does it have more raw power but the expandability puts it on a different class. When I bought my Mac Pro USB 3.0 really didn't exist. Now that I use USB 3.0 drives, I now have a pcie card that does USB 3.0. I have five drives inside the tower. An iMac can't do that. When I do Motion projects or FCPX stuff, the Mac Pro accomplishes everything very well. The same projects don't run so well on the Macbook Pro.

Special mention should be made for the Mac Mini. Due to expenses my office bought a Mac Mini as a network server and it has run 24/7 for three years without a hitch.

I've been a Mac user since the earliest days. In my graduate lab at MIT in 1979 we had an Apple II used to control bioreactors. Much later, I bought a Mac Classic in 1990 to write my PhD thesis in biochemical engineering. I followed up that with a Mac IIsi in 1992, a Power Computing (a licensed Mac clone) machine in 1996, a blue&white G3 tower in 2000, a G4 mirror drive door tower in 2004, a G5 tower in 2006, and a Mac Pro Nehalem 2.66 quad core in 2009. I'm about to complete upgrading this 2009 machine with a 3.33 hex core, 14GB RAM, a 500GB SSD boot drive, and 8TB of internal drives to bring it in line with more up-to-date Mac Pros.

In addition to these Mac desktops, I bought a MacBook Pro in 2006 and replaced it last summer with a retina MacBook Pro last July.

Yeah, I guess it's pretty clear that I like Mac hardware and software!!

Refresh my memory, Tessalator.. But were there ever PowerMac G1 and G2?

Tesselator said:

Extremely happy here as well. I bought the MP1,1 about 3 or 4 months after it released. Mine was cheap tho. I think I paid $2,300 for it with 4GB Ram and the dual 2.66 procs. A company I was freelancing for at the time flipped the bill for the then very expensive x5355 replacement procs. I'm currently running the same machine for my daily fix but now with 32GB RAM and the 8800GT. I'll upgrade the GPU to either the GTX 570 or the 680/670 in the next few months and probably install 10.8.3 (or 10.8.4 by then?) before I'm done. I'll leave it like this for a year or two and then move up to a MP4,1 which I'll upgrade to a 5,1 and add the fastest procs to.

Prior to the MP1,1 the last Macs I used were any of many free (like gift) versions of the G1, G2, and G3 "PPC" "PowerMacs" meaning that I skipped the G4 and G5 systems (as the freebees dried up). And prior to that I used and owned most of (all of?) the Motorola based Macs.

My expectations of the MP1,1 were inline with reality so there were no disappointments here! And Mac OS X (10.4.x) reminded me very much of Amiga OS - which was a very nice feeling! Prior to the MP1,1 my daily pounder and control box was an Amiga 4000 Tower stuffed to overflowing (a bit like this MP1,1 is now).

So yup - Happy as a clam!

And clams are very happy!

Just ask one if you don't believe me!

Click to expand...

Couldn´t be more happy. Ever since I first saw the MP (1,1) I wanted one. Last year I bouhgt me a refurbished from Germany.
Thinking of trying a dual monitor set-up for the first time - otherwise I´ve no intention of upgrade.
My MP came with stock 1TB HD, and HD 4870, which has been upgraded...

PowerPCMacMan said:

Refresh my memory, Tessalator.. But were there ever PowerMac G1 and G2?

Click to expand...

Of course... Like the 7100 and the 8100 were "Power Macs" based on the G1 (PowerPC 601) at 66MHz and 80MHz respectively. And so on and so forth.

Tho come to think of it I actually didn't skip the ones I said I did... I only forgot about them till just now - when your question jogged my memory

Heh! See how you are!?!?

Love it!

I recently got a 12 core 2.4. It has 12 GB ram, a 1 TB HD, and the lowest end video card. The beauty is that over the next 5 years, I will be able to drop in more hard drives, ram, video cards, etc. so that I'll continue to have a kickin' machine for years.

Who knows? I might even upgrade to new processors someday.

Great idea for a thread monkeybagel! This makes me realize how much everyone loves their Mac Pro!

I love my Mac Pro, or should I say Mac Pro(s). I have 4 of these machines. They've been highly upgradeable and suit me well.

They do cost a lot, but the best part is that it's 3 year old technology.... which makes them such a great bargain now!

The new Mac Pros will be sweet, but will it be worth it? Maybe... if I was doing 3d Graphics or video editing.... But I'll be happy with the current Mac Pros as a professional photographer & Engineering jobs.

8 Cores Mac Pro used to host virtual machines
6 Cores Mac Pro = Photography work stations connect to a pair of 30" ACDs.

I'm excited to see the new Mac Pro! and hope it can be a worthy of the title "Mac Pro"

I have Mac Pro 2008, 8 Core 2.8 GHz, 16 GB RAM, Radeon 7950, 3 x HDD and Soundblaster Xfi PCIe (for in Windows).

I still am extremely happy with it.

I have been upgrading the grfx annually (8800 GT, 4870, 5870, 7950) and much to Apple's dismay, it still is going strong!

Extremely satisfied. I bought my 2.8 ghz quad in 2010 right after the release. I just upgraded my 5870 to a gtx 670 without any problems. I plan to upgrade the processor to a 3.33 hex this summer since I want to use this machine until it falls apart. For me this is so much better than buying and selling an iMac or mbp every 2 years.

I use it for graphic design, 3D, video editing and gaming.

monkeybagel said:

I have been extremely happy with this machine. No, it wasn't inexpensive, but the build quality, reliability, performance, and versatility are top notch.

Click to expand...

I have 2 complaints regarding my Mac Pro:
1. It was damaged in shipping because the idjit I bought it from (EBay sale, used) didn't pack it well. Damage: just physical in nature. The top rear carrying handle took a hit and is bent a bit. Since I'm more of a "form follows function" guy, I don't really care. If I did, I'd go buy a new case and transplant the internals.

2. The (affordable) software available for video editing basically sucks royally at taking advantage of the massive CPU threads and GPUs available. I've tried both FCPX and Premiere Pro. The latter is much better at taking advantage of the hardware, but Adobe's software seems to suffer from a diminishing returns issue with cores. I have clue-zero whether the more expensive pieces of software like Smoke and/or Avid would be any better.

Neither of those are the Mac's fault at all. Meaning: I'm ridiculously happy with mine. I've customized it fairly extensively with the help of various folks here (Mango, MacVidCards). It's equipped with ESATA, USB3, and a Mac/EFI-compatible GTX570 video card. Further, the Xeons it came with were pulled and replaced with 2 3.46GHz 6-cores, then loaded up with 48G of RAM. Blu-Ray reader in front slot 1, SSD in front slot 2, and various disks in the carriers on the side.

A new, fairly inexpensive Windows rig would run circles around this machine with software that was optimized for it. Intel's latest Core i7 chips are just plain faster than the Xeons in the Mac Pro, but that's OK. I have OS X running without any issues at all, and I like that.

jas

monkeybagel said:

You would be hard pressed to find an i7 machine keep up with that monster! Sounds like an awesome machine you have!

Click to expand...

Thanks, but again: it depends on the software. Twelve cores (24 virtuals) seems like a great idea, but if the software you're running isn't properly threaded, it'll spend more time context switching than it will doing real work. Unfortunately, that's all I have available to me at the moment: poorly threaded apps (see: Adobe).

jas

Plenty....

It can do anything I need, even run a W7 partition without problem. Anything I throw on in it, it get done.

Perfection would be better I/O options (as USB 3.0 without problems and Thunderbolt) and better graphics support.

jasonvp said:

Thanks, but again: it depends on the software. Twelve cores (24 virtuals) seems like a great idea, but if the software you're running isn't properly threaded, it'll spend more time context switching than it will doing real work. Unfortunately, that's all I have available to me at the moment: poorly threaded apps (see: Adobe).

jas

Click to expand...

Everything you just said is incorrect you realize of course?

Don't shoot me, it's just my opinion. Sure it looks nice but I hate the design. I primarily look at it from an enterprise standpoint and it's a big PITA. The server is too tall to lay sideways in a rack. So it needs to stand upright which takes up a huge amount of space. Just to give you an idea, we have a blade server chassis that holds 16 servers and its associated switches in a 10U space. They've come out with 1/4 height blades that can fit up to 32 server in a 10U space. We use SAN storage so do not need internal storage. The raid controller with the model we had wasn't supported by VMWare. Not a big deal but just another %&*# moment.

I bought my pre-owned '09 quad about eighteen months ago from a vendor in Hollywood, and would give it a 3 out of 5.

It is noisy, a constant hum/drone emanates from the machine and the superdrive rattles like crazy when in use.

Also, the pointer occasionally jumps and disappears and I'll have to move the mouse around a bit to find it again.


Otherwise, it is plenty of powerful for my modest needs and I'm generally happy with it, but I gotta say my old '07 iMac feels like a better machine.

qgoof said:

Don't shoot me, it's just my opinion. Sure it looks nice but I hate the design. I primarily look at it from an enterprise standpoint and it's a big PITA. The server is too tall to lay sideways in a rack. So it needs to stand upright which takes up a huge amount of space. Just to give you an idea, we have a blade server chassis that holds 16 servers and its associated switches in a 10U space. They've come out with 1/4 height blades that can fit up to 32 server in a 10U space. We use SAN storage so do not need internal storage. The raid controller with the model we had wasn't supported by VMWare. Not a big deal but just another %&*# moment.

Click to expand...

Yeah, it's a workstation, not a server. There were servers based on the same general design tho. Maybe look into one of those? They're called Xserve as you probably already know. I think the last one is the same spec as the MacPro4,1 which can be upgraded to 5,1 with a little tinkering (I could be wrong tho).

Tesselator said:

Everything you just said is incorrect you realize of course?

Click to expand...

Feel free to correct me if you like.

jas

I bought my 3,1 2 x 2.8 GHz as an end-of-life purchase from the local Apple store when the 4,1 Mac Pros became available - saved almost $1,000 off the normal purchase price.

Other than one failed Radeon 2600 graphics card and two failed memory sticks, it has performed flawlessly. It has since been updated with 12GB of memory and two SSDs.

Couldn't be happier ... waiting patiently for the 2013 version.

jasonvp said:

Thanks, but again: it depends on the software. Twelve cores (24 virtuals) seems like a great idea, but if the software you're running isn't properly threaded, it'll spend more time context switching than it will doing real work. Unfortunately, that's all I have available to me at the moment: poorly threaded apps (see: Adobe).

jas

Click to expand...

jasonvp said:

Feel free to correct me if you like.

jas

Click to expand...

Well, as I believe you already know, it will not "spend more time context switching than it will doing real work". In fact it won't spend almost any time "context switching" at all compared to a single core processor of the same speed where no switching occurs at all. 4-core, 6,core, 12-core HT or not indeed help speed up MP unaware applications and application environments - and the more cores the merrier as environments become more and more complex.

These days there are at least as many applications written for MP environments are thee are not. The vast majority of these scale really well with more than a few scaling nearly linearly across the procs. Most Adobe applications scale fairly well actually - with the main exception being LightRoom.

So your two remarks were actually both incorrect.

Do keep in mind that not all operations can be or even should be "threaded".

Tesselator said:

Yeah, it's a workstation, not a server. There were servers based on the same general design tho. Maybe look into one of those? They're called Xserve as you probably already know. I think the last one is the same spec as the MacPro4,1 which can be upgraded to 5,1 with a little tinkering (I could be wrong tho).

Click to expand...

Yes. If they were available, we would buy it. For us, warranty support is also critical. Personally, I have no problems buying parts building/upgrading my own systems. For business, it's another matter that I believe, requires warranty and support. I hate for any executive to say to me, "So you're telling me we're running production systems on outdated equipment with no support?" I wish I can say all our systems are properly supported but we do have some *ahem* legacy app/systems still running but that's not the norm.