Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

dlpro

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Jun 5, 2014
28
1
Hi, I'm running Pro Tools on a 2013 Mac Pro 3.0GHz (8 core / 64GB ram). I'm thinking about updating to the new iMac Pro 3.0GHz (10 core / 64GB ram).

Question is, how much will I really benefit? Is it worth it?

Thanks!
 
If your Mac Pro can handle what you throw at it now and its doesn't feel sluggish, then I don't see how the iMac Pro can help you, unless you're drooling at the 5K Retina display.
 
Well the MP can handle it, but isn't the iMP more powerful? Also having TB3 for my external enclosures wouldn't be a bad idea.

I'm wondering if anyone here has compared the two in everyday work, especially using Pro Tools.
 
Yes, the iMac Pro is more powerful. But is it $5,000 more powerful? Will it make a difference for what you use it for? Is TB3 worth $5,000 to you? This is all subjective. Maybe if you find someone to compare the two that would help, but you'd have to find someone comparing the same configurations that you have/would have. No easy answers here.
 
I upgraded from an 8 core trashcan with two D700s to an iMac pro 10 core Vega 64.

I use FCPX, compressor, Aperture, handbrake.

The performance difference depends on the app and what its doing, but in general the iMac Pro does better. I use stabilization effects often and sometime 4K video.

As mreg376 says, if you are happy with the MacPro, the iMac isn't going to add much to your satisfaction. If your MacPro is struggling, then you will be happier... but the cost value is subjective.

The my world TB3 vs TB2 difference is in video monitor support. Disks and peripherals perform about the same.

There are tons of benchmarks about that will give you quantitative data. Based on the benchmarks I was hopping for a noticeable improvement, but in my real world usage of one hour video tops, there is not a whole lot of difference in general. If it takes 2 hours to transcode/export vs 2 hour 15 minutes, its still a long wait. The iMac seems to be less quirky, however. I don't think there is a situation where the iMac is slower.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nugget
I was really hoping for a life changing experience. :) What do you mean by, "the TB3 vs TB2 difference is in video monitor support"?

I also have an iMac 5K - 4 core which I use as a slave. I use a lot of orchestral VI's and the 4 core just doesn't cut it. My thought was to get the iMac Pro to replace the Mac Pro, and the MP replaces the iMac 5K. I need a lot of juice to power these VI's.

Is the Vega 56 better than the D500 in the MP? Thanks!
 
Basically 5k monitors can be driven over one TB3/DP port, instead of needing two TB2 ports.
 
Last edited:
I don't believe your existing thunderbolt2 drives are going to be any faster after you plug them into a thunderbolt3 port.

That said, I agree with others here.
If ProTools is running well for you right now, the "upgrade" doesn't make sense.
Wait for the -real- "Mac Pro" debut sometime next year.
 
Last edited:
Basically 5k monitors can be driven over one TB3/DP port, instead of needing two TB2 ports.

Thanks ColdCase!
[doublepost=1527358554][/doublepost]
I don't believe your existing thunderbolt2 drives are going to be any faster after you plug them into a thunderbolt3 port.

That said, I agree with others here.
If ProTools is running well for you right now, the "upgrade" doesn't make sense.
Wait for the -real- "Mac Pro" debut sometime next year.

What about if I had TB3 enclosures? Would the drives be any faster then? Thanks!
 
TB-3 drives are screeching, but super expensive.

I've never heard of TB-3 drives before. I did a Google search but couldn't find anything. What are you referring to? Thanks!
 
Last edited:
I've never heard of TB-3 drives before. I did a Google search but couldn't find anything. What are you referring to? Thanks!
Screen Shot 2018-05-26 at 10.51.30 PM.png
 
Thanks. That looks pretty amazing.

I had a chance to try an iMac Pro (3.0GHz, 10 Core, 64GB Ram, Vega 56). Everyone was right. I saw a 5% CPU boost, that's all. I was really expecting 20-25% boost compared to my 2013 Mac Pro (3.0GHz, 8 Core, 64GB, D500).

I did notice a boost in the screen redraw. Editing clip files in Pro Tools was faster, Launching and quoting programs was quicker. Is that due to the Vega 56 graphics card? Thanks!
 
Thanks. That looks pretty amazing.

I had a chance to try an iMac Pro (3.0GHz, 10 Core, 64GB Ram, Vega 56). Everyone was right. I saw a 5% CPU boost, that's all. I was really expecting 20-25% boost compared to my 2013 Mac Pro (3.0GHz, 8 Core, 64GB, D500).

I did notice a boost in the screen redraw. Editing clip files in Pro Tools was faster, Launching and quoting programs was quicker. Is that due to the Vega 56 graphics card? Thanks!
Quite possibly. But can't you upgrade the graphics on your Mac Pro?
 
Thanks. That looks pretty amazing.

Internal SSD will be faster, much less latency. Lots of folks look at the raw "up to" data rates, but its latency that matters with video editing. Just saying that you can get very close with TB2 raids of SSDs too. Its not a noticeable real world difference in performance except for perhaps some specialized applications. But you can certainly sink a lotta bucks in SSD storage, however. :)

BTW I use both TB2 and TB3 storage boxes and notice no difference. The storage media itself can have a significant look and feel difference, however.
 
Quite possibly. But can't you upgrade the graphics on your Mac Pro?

I can upgrade to the D700, but I don't think that would make a huge difference. Also from what I understand, you can't use an external GPU via TB2. Something to do with limitation, but there is some sore of hack to bypass this.
[doublepost=1527437589][/doublepost]
Internal SSD will be faster, much less latency. Lots of folks look at the raw "up to" data rates, but its latency that matters with video editing. Just saying that you can get very close with TB2 raids of SSDs too. Its not a noticeable real world difference in performance except for perhaps some specialized applications. But you can certainly sink a lotta bucks in SSD storage, however. :)

BTW I use both TB2 and TB3 storage boxes and notice no difference. The storage media itself can have a significant look and feel difference, however.

The SSD speeds on the iMac Pro were twice as fast. Using the Blackmagic Disk Speed Test, the Write read close to 3000MB/s and the Read, 2500MB/s. Is MP is half that. How did Apple get the SSD in the iMP to perform so quickly?

Are there certain app's that slow down a computer and is there a way to get a 2013 MP to perform better overall? Thanks!
 
Last edited:
The SSD speeds on the iMac Pro were twice as fast. Using the Blackmagic Disk Speed Test, the Write read close to 3000MB/s and the Read, 2500MB/s. Is MP is half that. How did Apple get the SSD in the iMP to perform so quickly?

The dual internal iMac Pro SSDs are not the standard SATA SSDs... Unlike a standard SSD, which has the controller logic onboard, these raw flash modules made by apple only have an interface buffer—the PCIe/NVMe controller lies elsewhere. These storage modules sit directly on a PCI bus, not hanging off a SATA controller.

This is similar to the Mac Pro and at least some Laptops.
 
ColdCase, thank you for the explanation. I have (8) SSD 2.5 drives in 2 Akitio TB2 enclosures. The drives all read/write between 400-500 MB/s. Anyone with a TB3 computer, aside from the ThunderBlade, is there anything on the market that can up the speed on the (8) SSD 2.5 drives? Again, thanks!
 
ColdCase, thank you for the explanation. I have (8) SSD 2.5 drives in 2 Akitio TB2 enclosures. The drives all read/write between 400-500 MB/s. Anyone with a TB3 computer, aside from the ThunderBlade, is there anything on the market that can up the speed on the (8) SSD 2.5 drives? Again, thanks!

My old TB1 Pegasus with 6 spinners is faster than that on either the nMP or the new base model iMP via the adapter. I moved from my old trash can to the iMP and have not looked back. I can't say that the raw power is that great as I rarely push either of them, but everything is so much smoother and the 4K external behaves better overall. I would not go back
 
aside from the ThunderBlade, is there anything on the market that can up the speed on the (8) SSD 2.5 drives? Again, thanks!

OWC also makes the thunderbay 4 which they claim is 35% faster than the previous TB2 models.
  • Up to 1527MB/s sustained performance
  • Works with 3.5" or 2.5" drives – no adapter needed
  • User configurable in RAID 0, 1 , 4, 5 & 1+0
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.