2010 Mac Pro pricing question

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by strausd, May 3, 2010.

  1. strausd macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2008
    Location:
    Texas
    #1
    So I have heard a lot of things in which people say that the next MP will cost way more than the current ones. This seems like it could happen because they are going to be hexacores which means better, which generally means more expensive. But I read somewhere that the price of the hexacores are pretty much the same as the current MP quad cores when they first came out. I do believe that the hexacores now are more expensive than the quad cores now. But I also believe that the hexacores now are about the same as the quad cores back then. Also, Apple has not lowered the price of the MP at all since its revision. So if the pricing thing about hexa vs quad is true, would this mean that the next MP will be the same price as the current ones?
     
  2. Ravich macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2009
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #2
    I dont have an answer for you. All I can tell you is that current Mac Pros, given their specs, are already overpriced for early-mid 2010.
     
  3. Icaras macrumors 603

    Icaras

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2008
    Location:
    California, United States
    #3
    Yes, which means if they decide to keep the quad core as an option, they need to DROP the price on the entry level Mac Pro, not raise it.
     
  4. mobilehaathi macrumors G3

    mobilehaathi

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2008
    Location:
    The Anthropocene
    #4
    Nobody here knows. Or someone does know but can't tell.

    My guess: it'll be the same as current prices.
     
  5. VirtualRain macrumors 603

    VirtualRain

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2008
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    #5
    The most likely outcome is more value for the same price, and possibly a lower price entry level quad... perhaps a 2.66 quad for $2200 or $2300? A 3.2GHz quad for $2800?

    A 6-core priced around $3500 is likely and a 12-core at $6K is not out of the realm of possibility.

    These are all just educated guesses though.
     
  6. Icaras macrumors 603

    Icaras

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2008
    Location:
    California, United States
    #6
    Those lower price points for the quad are my guess too.

    I don't keep track of processors, but is there anything between the 2.66 quad and 3.2 quad?
     
  7. strausd thread starter macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2008
    Location:
    Texas
    #7
    It just seems like they are already over priced enough for Apple to raise them even more when the processors cost the same amount as they did when they put the quads in for the 2009 model. Are you saying 6,000 for the highest clock speed 12-core or entry level 12-core?
     
  8. nanofrog macrumors G4

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    #8
    They could chose to use the W3530 (2.8GHz) as a replacement in the base Quad for the same MSRP, or very similar funds, as well as a slight increase in drive capacity and of course an improvement on the base graphics card. RAM I expect will remain the same in terms of both capacity and no ability to run 1333MHz (still stuck to 1066MHz as it currently is), even if the CPU's memory controller can handle it.
     
  9. strausd thread starter macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2008
    Location:
    Texas
    #9
    I think they really need 1333mhz RAM. It seems like all desktops have that now and some are even up to the 1600s. The major thing I'm wondering is how much more expensive will the top of the line dual socket be, if theres any price increase at all (hopefully none).
     
  10. VirtualRain macrumors 603

    VirtualRain

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2008
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    #10
    Have you seen any real-world benchmarks showing the difference between 1066 and 1333 memory?

    This is a good article with some real benchmarks...
    http://www.anandtech.com/show/2792/13

    A few snips from their conclusion (see bold text)...


    If they want to keep a product at the $2500 price point, I agree, the most likely candidate is the 2.8GHz CPU. See my comments above on the merits of DDR3-1333.
     
  11. DesmoPilot macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2008
    #11
    but durrr the numbers are higher!
     
  12. Deepshade macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #12
    The current MacPros are overpriced. Compare performance to currently available PC "workstations' and as one Design magazine put it - they barely qualify for workstation status - with only the bottom of the range being any where near value for money.

    If the price went up any more they would simply price themselves out of the market. And a lot of people are going to go the hackintosh route.
     
  13. Plutonius macrumors 603

    Plutonius

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2003
    Location:
    New Hampshire
    #13
    If you depend on your MP for a living, you are not going to go the hackintosh route. People who depend on the MP for a living will either switch to another platform, pay the higher cost, or not update at all.
     
  14. Kebabselector macrumors 68030

    Kebabselector

    Joined:
    May 25, 2007
    Location:
    Birmingham, UK
    #14
    I wish that was the case in the UK
     
  15. Deepshade macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #15
    I do. And the current situation really concerns me. Both in terms of current kit and Apples future in the Pro Workstation arena.

    Having never been in the situation where my studio kit is about to become obsolete and the only current alternative is to purchase overpriced 'old' technology - I certainly feel trapped between a rock and a hard place.

    MBPs are an option - but we really need a machine with serious 'grunt' for up and coming 3D work.
     
  16. bzollinger macrumors 6502a

    bzollinger

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2005
    #16
    This might be true, but I'd guess there are a lot of enthusists that are using G5's or early MP models that need to upgrade. If you're a PPC owner then you're being pushed out by lack of hardware support and OSX updates.

    I don't rely on my G5 for work but I use it everyday. It's getting long in the tooth when running LR2, CS4, iPhoto, iTunes, & Safari at the same time. It also works as my HTPC. It can't even play back video from the Canon 7D!:confused: Whereas my $500 HP laptop can.:confused:

    A hackintosh is tempting but I deal with computer issues all day long at work, so I like it that my Mac at home simply works 99% of the time. And as many have said the current MP offerings are a total rip off!!:mad:

    Come on Apple throw us a bone!
     
  17. nanofrog macrumors G4

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    #17
    As it mentions though, there is some software that can utilize it (i.e. specific usage, such as simulation). And should improve with future software (quantity of applications capable of doing so).

    There is psychological aspect to it, but there's also a real aspect as well, as future software should take advantage of it (the real question, is when - during the lifespan of the current Nehalem or Gulftown systems, or later, after those systems have been retired by the original user?).
     
  18. strausd thread starter macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2008
    Location:
    Texas
    #18
    So do y'all think the prices of the high clock speed hexacores will be the same as the current high clock speed quads? This is the main thing I am worried about, especially with the budget I will have when I am able to buy the 2010 MP.
     
  19. VirtualRain macrumors 603

    VirtualRain

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2008
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    #19
    Exactly. A 3.33GHz Quad sells for $3700 USD. I imagine the same clock 6-core would be priced similarly. Certainly no less than $3500.
     
  20. strausd thread starter macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2008
    Location:
    Texas
    #20
    That's definitely what I'm hoping for. I want to get the highest clock speed dodeca core machine and then I can add ram and drives in later over time
     
  21. nanofrog macrumors G4

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    #21
    That's going to be a pricey system though, so beware; ~$6k would be in the right ballpark. :eek:

    But if you're earning a living with it, and can get enough work to keep both you and the system occupied, then it would pay for itself. :D
     

Share This Page