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.
Mac Pro Reviews Find Impressive Hardware, But Few Software Titles Take Advantage
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That's how I do it with my iMac and FireWire.
I have a USB dock and a FireWire 800 SATA dock on my desk. The SATA dock can daisy chain another FireWire 800 device, when I need that.
Lol the back of my current Mac Pro is a mess, and how many times do you plug and unplug anything once it is set the way you want? I don't ever move the damn thing its too heavy (50 lbs). The new mac pro is 11 lbs.
The crappy part is now we have to wait for software companies to revise programs for this platform before we see the "true" potential? The true potential is how it handles software TODAY. 
It's completely silly IMHO to say, this machine will smoke when software eventually utilizes this-n-that. Why should I cough up money for a machine that won't reach its potential for awhile, when in a year, faster parts will exist and be put into newer machines, or new versions of the machines?
It's completely silly IMHO to say, this machine will smoke when software eventually utilizes this-n-that. Why should I cough up money for a machine that won't reach its potential for awhile, when in a year, faster parts will exist and be put into newer machines, or new versions of the machines?
Lets be realistic though how many times did you turn your old mac pro around?
I don't touch mine its too heavy. once it is set up, it stays. Get a desktop hub for things plugged in and out all the time.
I wouldn't have been happy. The old design was too big to put on my desk and there's too much dust to put it on the floor (as I learned the hard way, with a previous Mac Pro).
I switched to the mac mini (and put up with a huge performance drop), and now have an iMac. This new design Mac Pro does fit on the desk, so I might go back to owning one when this iMac needs upgrading.
This is the pro if you don't want cables get an iMac. I love how they put the Mac Pro in front of the screen and have the cables exposed. really not realistic what a spin. Bottom line is that you're going to have cables no matter what
The crappy part is now we have to wait for software companies to revise programs for this platform before we see the "true" potential? The true potential is how it handles software TODAY.
It's completely silly IMHO to say, this machine will smoke when software eventually utilizes this-n-that. Why should I cough up money for a machine that won't reach its potential for awhile, when in a year, faster parts will exist and be put into newer machines, or new versions of the machines?
Such a short sighted way of looking at this.
Why? It might be a year before Adobe revamps their software for this machine, and that's assuming they are. Am I just supposed to drop frames like on an iMac and pretend I'm getting better results than I am?
I think you totally missed the point and don't realize how fast developers are going to get up on this to optimize their software for the Mac Pro. By your logic Apple made such a great product the industry is not ready for it.The crappy part is now we have to wait for software companies to revise programs for this platform before we see the "true" potential? The true potential is how it handles software TODAY.
It's completely silly IMHO to say, this machine will smoke when software eventually utilizes this-n-that. Why should I cough up money for a machine that won't reach its potential for awhile, when in a year, faster parts will exist and be put into newer machines, or new versions of the machines?
Last edited:
I agree the verge's entire review is bias negative because there a "Premier" house. So just because Adobe is slacking in updating there software they base there whole negative opinion on that one point that its not really that big of an upgrade. The upgrade is huge!. Adobes is not. It really is a wasted review.
Also Adobe is really in love with nvidia gpus and there cuda optimizations.
----------
Like I said in the other post here Adobe loves nvidia gps and cuda.
They don't hardly support Open cl. The difference with OpenCL is huge and anyone that does not support it is stupid.
Last edited:
Yeah that was pretty opportunistic of the verge. Failed. Apple needs to start paying these reviewers like everyone else
I seriously hope you are right!
I want one, believe me, but the review wasn't reassuring. I don't agree that it is a wasted review. I don't know any editors who use FCPX, but I know a bunch that use Premiere. Adobe may be slacking, but the reality is that an overwhelming number of professionals prefer and use Premiere (or Avid) over FCPX.
That being said, they judged the machine based on what they would use it for. That seems reasonable to me.
So in my opinion Adobe is the one that is lacking here and just shot themselves in there foot, because they love nvidia gps and cuda, and barely support OpenCL. What a stupid company. Also in the verge's test there comparing there 2010 12 core mac pros to a 2013 8 core. If you want the test to be correct then compare a 2010 mac pro 12 core to a 2013 12 core mac pro.
But then the verge never lets truth get in the way.
Apple have worked for years making its OS extreme SMTP capable.
Now with MacPro we see one of the reasons why Apple have done this.
Unix + grand central dispatching + optimised development tools.
A 6 core high end Intel manages about 100Gflops.
A FirePro GPU manages 35Tflops.
What Apple is doing is revolutionise the computer market. When did we get 35times more speed before? And Apple is the only one that can do this because they control the hardware, OS and some software.
The idea of using 1 GPU for graphics/graphics acceleration and 1 GPU exclusive as a compute cluster is genius.
Intel have stopped innovating for the consumers. Instead of release faster stuff they have for the last 7 years been more about maximising profits since Intel have no competition on X86.
Thats why a desktop CPU is just 100-120% faster in 7 years. Compare that to ARM that have plenty of custom designs and competition: 4000% last 6 years.
Intels 20core CPU cost 4000-4400 dollars. Its under 500mm large. About 4.5 billion transistors.
A high end GPU (home) cost 500-600 dollars. Its around 500mm larger and 7 billion transistors.
Its cheaper for Intel to manufacture their 20core CPU than large graphics chips.
If we had competition in X86 we would have 16core cpus under 500 dollars.
Look at the MacPro prices that are linked to Xeon prices. 2006 a high end xeon cost 300 dollars. Just 2 years later intel charged 1000 dollars for anything over 2.6ghz.
This is why Apple and the industry is moving away from X86. Thats why Apple didn't put XeonPhi cards in the Mac Pro. (imagine using pure x86 chips in the compute cluster. Everything would be much easier to optimise).
We are moving to extreme multicore ARMs with compute clusters. Faster, cheaper and less energy.
Now with MacPro we see one of the reasons why Apple have done this.
Unix + grand central dispatching + optimised development tools.
A 6 core high end Intel manages about 100Gflops.
A FirePro GPU manages 35Tflops.
What Apple is doing is revolutionise the computer market. When did we get 35times more speed before? And Apple is the only one that can do this because they control the hardware, OS and some software.
The idea of using 1 GPU for graphics/graphics acceleration and 1 GPU exclusive as a compute cluster is genius.
Intel have stopped innovating for the consumers. Instead of release faster stuff they have for the last 7 years been more about maximising profits since Intel have no competition on X86.
Thats why a desktop CPU is just 100-120% faster in 7 years. Compare that to ARM that have plenty of custom designs and competition: 4000% last 6 years.
Intels 20core CPU cost 4000-4400 dollars. Its under 500mm large. About 4.5 billion transistors.
A high end GPU (home) cost 500-600 dollars. Its around 500mm larger and 7 billion transistors.
Its cheaper for Intel to manufacture their 20core CPU than large graphics chips.
If we had competition in X86 we would have 16core cpus under 500 dollars.
Look at the MacPro prices that are linked to Xeon prices. 2006 a high end xeon cost 300 dollars. Just 2 years later intel charged 1000 dollars for anything over 2.6ghz.
This is why Apple and the industry is moving away from X86. Thats why Apple didn't put XeonPhi cards in the Mac Pro. (imagine using pure x86 chips in the compute cluster. Everything would be much easier to optimise).
We are moving to extreme multicore ARMs with compute clusters. Faster, cheaper and less energy.
What a review
Thank you, Captain Obvious. Most people are well-enough off with an iMac, you bet. It's not a gaming machine. Apple would have to do a much better job of writing the code for its OpenGL to have a $4000 gaming computer.
There will be many thousands of these sold. And Adobe will update its Mac version. Maybe they'll improve the gaming Open GL, which is slow as hell.
I don't really understand the point he was trying to make. If Adobe understood what they were doing besides losing everybody's financial information and personal data, they would put out a version for the new Pro.
Thank you, Captain Obvious. Most people are well-enough off with an iMac, you bet. It's not a gaming machine. Apple would have to do a much better job of writing the code for its OpenGL to have a $4000 gaming computer.
There will be many thousands of these sold. And Adobe will update its Mac version. Maybe they'll improve the gaming Open GL, which is slow as hell.
I don't really understand the point he was trying to make. If Adobe understood what they were doing besides losing everybody's financial information and personal data, they would put out a version for the new Pro.
I second most everything you said, but it's not ahead of time if you ask me. It was basically the same when the Retina displays were introduced with the MacBooks Pros. A great display with only Apple being able to provide such high revolution software. But soon after a large number of the popular software around supported the high resolution. I guess exactly the same will happen the next couple of month. So, I don't think it's ahead of its time.
I've said this before in several other threads but it bears repeating again
Many of these reviews compare this machine to the prior generation of Mac Pro. There is a solid number of owners who have MP 4,1 3,1 and even some 2,1 and 1,1. The point is, this machine is a massive upgrade in almost every way for those who have been holding out for 4+ years for a new machine.
And for those comparisons to today's iMac which doesn't have TB2 or the capability of having dual GPUs (which will dramatically increase processing power as more and more apps optimize for OpenCL) this machine has much longer legs than any other machine that Apple currently produces.
Many of these reviews compare this machine to the prior generation of Mac Pro. There is a solid number of owners who have MP 4,1 3,1 and even some 2,1 and 1,1. The point is, this machine is a massive upgrade in almost every way for those who have been holding out for 4+ years for a new machine.
And for those comparisons to today's iMac which doesn't have TB2 or the capability of having dual GPUs (which will dramatically increase processing power as more and more apps optimize for OpenCL) this machine has much longer legs than any other machine that Apple currently produces.
Well the guy that builds Mari some of the best CGI software made (think lord of the rings, Hobbit Monsters University and just about every other blockbuster uses it) Says it is the fastest computer running Mari. This is from the developer. Also Pixar's lead CGI artist on Monsters University says so too.
Go watch the WWDC video of him designing Dean Hardscrabble character from Monsters Universtity for the crowd onstage live.
----------
Exactly! It was a piss poor review because they base there dislikes on Adobes lack of support.
----------
Those Thunderbolt ports can be paired. Acting as one. Plus there all dedicated ports (not sharing bandwidth).
Also for those that are saying the iMac is a viable alternative to the mac pro they could not be more wrong.
For everyday single processor tasks yes an iMac is just about as fast. But for multi cpu tasks the Current maxed out iMac gets stomped on hard by the new mac pro. Video rendering especially shines on the new mac pro where it does not on the iMac.
Rotate 180 degrees and keep it there=Problem solved?
EXACTLY. Keep the ports in plain sight. Maybe the back is actually the front guys! It IS the side with the logo.
No ******, Dick Tracy. And they're all the same length? Not tangled? Some not headed for the floor and others headed out on the desk?
Sure, you can tip it or put the back to one side -- of course. But that's not what I'm talking about. The "just spin it" thing was pushed as a great thing. I think we're going to see that it's not. I see the spinning thing as a triumph of marketing spin over function spin.
I spent 25 years plugging and unplugging cables carrying crucial real-time data inside and (mostly) outside, in crowds, in any kind of weather, in panics and in hurries and so really, I don't need to be told about "slack."
You want to know how you do "slack" for when it really counts? That's when you take your ethernet cable or your data cable or your power cable or the cable to your UPS or the one coming from the generator and you tie the damn thing off to something solid. Then you run some slack to your router or switch or RFID electronics controller or barcode reader or electronic timer sitting a hundred yards away or computer. And you know just how long the slack is and every cable going into the same box has the same slack. That's how you do what I used to do, when having stuff come unplugged would be disastrous.
Im pretty sure it was mentioned above, but until the software is updated, its not going to crush. Your friend should know that.
actually the verge's computer is a 12 core and the nmp is an 8 core. Wouldn't it be more fair to compare the 12 core nmp with the old 12 core mp? Pretty obvious an 8 core machine would lose to a 12 core machine if the app depended heavy on parallel processing