2013 Mac Pro. Wait or buy now?

[MMcCraryNJ]

It's great that it's optimized for their own software, but I'm not sure the FCPX market alone can sustain sales for a machine like this. Especially when I'd guess the majority of FCPX users are on iMacs or Macbook Pros. I realize they have other apps as well (logic, motion), but they're really going to have to get 3rd party developers on board as well for any sort of longevity.

I would love to see Avid take advantage of the new hardware with Pro Tools, as I'm going to buy this machine primarily for audio production. But, knowing Avid, if it even happens it won't be for a very long time.

That being said, the Mac Pro is still the best option for it among the entire mac line. Big core counts, a huge amount of RAM, and an insanely fast disk I/O is all extremely helpful with large sessions at high sample rates/bit depth and multiple resource hungry plug-ins that run on the Native side. Considering that just a couple of convolution reverb or Ozone plugins can max out a 4-core iMac, it's very welcome to be able to jump up to 6/8 cores. More processing power without the thermal constraints of the rMBP or iMac, runs whisper quiet which is amazing for keeping in the same tracking room, etc. Sure, the nMP might be primarily geared towards video production, but that doesn't mean it's a bad choice for audio.

I just want the Haswell-EP refresh and I'm good to go. This machine, even barring any upgrades, would last me a long time, and I'd be extremely pleased with it.

 

[AidenShaw]

You may be confusing "Haswell-E" with the "Xeon E" line CPUs. Haswell-E is a "platform" while Xeon E is just a model.

E.g. the Haswell Xeon E3-12xx v3 CPU you're referring to is not compatible with Haswell-E (which includes the i7 "E" and Xeon "EP", "EN", "EX"). The current nMP uses the EP version of the Ivy Bridge-E platform of course.

We're still waiting for the September release of the Haswell-E platform.

Yes, there's some confusion here.

Last week we published preliminary list of Xeon E5-2600 v3 microprocessors, that will be launched along with forthcoming Grantley platform later this year.

The new processors will feature optimized "Haswell-EP" core, up to 18 CPU cores, and support DDR4 memory.

http://www.cpu-world.com/news_2014/2014080502_Xeon_E5-2600_v3_CPUs_are_available_for_pre-order.html

 

[ixxx69]

Yes, there's some confusion here.

There was some confusion or there still is some confusion?

I don't see any conflict between what I stated and the cpu-world article... if you're still confused, please specify about what and I (or someone else) will take a stab at clearing it up!

 

[Gav Mack]

It's great that it's optimized for their own software, but I'm not sure the FCPX market alone can sustain sales for a machine like this. Especially when I'd guess the majority of FCPX users are on iMacs or Macbook Pros. I realize they have other apps as well (logic, motion), but they're really going to have to get 3rd party developers on board as well for any sort of longevity.

I don't think they are - so far most of the new clients I specced nMP for are for use on windows. Having a workstation that silently renders instead of sounding like a hovercraft is quite a novel thing. As soon as they (don't) hear them in action they are blown away and take their anti apple blinkers off rather quickly. They buy one - orders quickly follow for more!

 

[AidenShaw]

There was some confusion or there still is some confusion?

There still is confusion, on your side.

I don't see any conflict between what I stated and the cpu-world article... if you're still confused, please specify about what and I (or someone else) will take a stab at clearing it up!

CPU-world clearly states that the "platform" is "Grantley", and that the CPU-family is "Haswell-EP". Intel calls the platform "Grantley", and the upcoming CPU family "Haswell-EP". Conflict #1.

The "Haswell-E" CPU family has been shipping since June 2013. Why don't you accept that "Haswell-E" is the "E3-xxxx v3" family that's been shipping for a year? Conflict #2.

Most of the known universe accepts that "Haswell-E" refers to a processor family with 4 physical cores max. Most of the SKUs are called Xeon "E3-xxxx v3", but some show up as Core i7 Extreme (but they use the same socket and chipset as the Xeon E3 v3 processors).

That same universe knows that "Haswell-EP" refers to processors with 4 or more cores, and most of the SKUs support one or two socket systems. These are the ones that we expect to be formally released in a few weeks.

There is a lot of conflict between what you've posted and the facts.

 

[fuchsdh]

It's great that it's optimized for their own software, but I'm not sure the FCPX market alone can sustain sales for a machine like this. Especially when I'd guess the majority of FCPX users are on iMacs or Macbook Pros. I realize they have other apps as well (logic, motion), but they're really going to have to get 3rd party developers on board as well for any sort of longevity.

I think they're ahead of the curve regarding dual GPUs, so from that perspective I think they're skating to where the majority of editing pros are probably going to be in a few years. Even now from a cost standpoint it makes far more sense to run two GPUs and leverage that power than the monster prestige cards. Davinci is another program that pretty much assumes you're going to have two cards. The tide is shifting.

The most that can hurt Apple in regard to its pros is that they don't have to care as much about them. As much as it feels great to be the belle of the ball, the "enthusiast" Mac market has to be what, 100,000 people? Maybe 200,000? And that's including the smaller pro market within that. So Apple doesn't commit as firmly to the pro market, hence why you've ended up with people feeling burned about Aperture, et al.

Adobe isn't really that much more responsive, but you know they aren't just going to kill After Effects and Photoshop because their life depends on that.

 

[MMcCraryNJ]

btw, CPU-World has a very nice comparison tool that you can use to see the breakdown of the Ivy Bridge-EP chips that are in the nMP now, and the corresponding Haswell-EP chips that will be replacing them. So, if I did my model numbers correctly, comparing the 6c option would be as follows:

http://www.cpu-world.com/Compare_CPUs/Intel_CM8063501292204,Intel_E5-2643 v3/

If this is the correct comparison, it seems as though the clock speeds will be decreased by 100 Mhz almost across the board, but the newer chips will have a lot more L3 cache (as well as the newer technologies introduced with Haswell). TDP is going up by 5w. I'm not a CPU guy at all, so I could be wrong here, but that doesn't seem like anything meaningful. The turbo numbers for the chips are also not known, so it seems.

It seems as if Haswell-EP will be released almost to the year that Ivy Bridge-EP was. While we don't know for sure if Apple will even refresh the nMP with Haswell-EP, if there are no supply constraints with the new chips/RAM, I would assume that they could have the refresh done and out by December.

 

[ixxx69]

There still is confusion, on your side.

Hi Aiden, I'm sorry, did I offend you some how? I was just trying to be helpful.

CPU-world clearly states that the "platform" is "Grantley", and that the CPU-family is "Haswell-EP". Intel calls the platform "Grantley", and the upcoming CPU family "Haswell-EP". Conflict #1.

"Platform" is a pretty generic term used in a lot of ways - there is no exclusive use of the word in discussing all the parts and pieces of CPUs, chipsets, architectures, etc. "Haswell-E" can be used generically to include all iterations of "-E" and "-EP" CPUs, so that you don't have to specify every iteration when referring to the underlying platform architecture (at this time, there's just -E and -EP for Haswell, but previous platforms had -E, -EP, -EN, -EX, which could be a mouthful). The "codename" for the Haswell-EP Xeon E5-26xx product family and Intel C610 chipset is referred to as the "Grantley-EP Platform".

The "Haswell-E" CPU family has been shipping since June 2013. Why don't you accept that "Haswell-E" is the "E3-xxxx v3" family that's been shipping for a year? Conflict #2.

Okay, this was the only critical item I was originally trying to help you with. The Haswell-E has not been shipping since June 2013. The Haswell Xeon E3-12xx v3 CPU has been shipping since June 2013. The Xeon E3 is not a Haswell-E part. It's part of the "Denlow Platform", not the Grantley-EP platform. It's a plain Haswell part. It is almost identical to the Haswell i7-47xx part except it has support for ECC memory.

Most of the known universe accepts that "Haswell-E" refers to a processor family with 4 physical cores max. Most of the SKUs are called Xeon "E3-xxxx v3", but some show up as Core i7 Extreme (but they use the same socket and chipset as the Xeon E3 v3 processors).

That same universe knows that "Haswell-EP" refers to processors with 4 or more cores, and most of the SKUs support one or two socket systems. These are the ones that we expect to be formally released in a few weeks.

LOL, well, maybe there are alternate universes? The current Ivy-Bridge-E CPUs actually have up to 6 cores, and the Haswell-E CPUs will have up to 8 cores. The SKUs of the "Haswell-E" are not Xeons, but rather i7 Extreme CPUs. They are not socket compatible with the Xeon E3 v3 CPUs you are referring to. The Xeon E3 v3 CPUs you are referring to are socket compatible with regular Haswell i7/i5/i3 parts.

There is a lot of conflict between what you've posted and the facts.

It's admittedly all pretty confusing, so I hope I was able to help clarify a few things for you. You can fact check everything I've stated via a simple google search. I don't quite understand why you seem to be trying to call me out though when I was just trying to be nice. Best of luck.

 

[ixxx69]

So, if I did my model numbers correctly, comparing the 6c option would be as follows:

http://www.cpu-world.com/Compare_CPUs/Intel_CM8063501292204,Intel_E5-2643 v3/

If this is the correct comparison, it seems as though the clock speeds will be decreased by 100 Mhz almost across the board, but the newer chips will have a lot more L3 cache (as well as the newer technologies introduced with Haswell).

You've compared a E5-16xx to an E5-26xx. You're actually comparing two difference CPU types, so it's not an Apples to Apples comparison (no pun intended ). That chart doesn't include the E5-16xx CPUs used in most current configurations:

E5-1620 v2 - 3.7 GHz 4C
E5-1650 v2 - 3.5 GHz 6C
E5-1680 v2 - 3.0 GHz 8C
E5-2697 v2 - 2.7 GHz 12C

We of course don't know what the future Mac Pro would use, but the equivalent lineup of CPUs would be:

E5-1620 v3 - 3.6 GHz 4C (though they would almost certainly use the E5-1630 v3 @ 3.7 GHz)
E5-1650 v3 - 3.5 GHz 6C
E5-1680 v3 - 3.2 GHz 8C
E5-2697 v3 - 2.6 GHz 14C! (or maybe they'll use one of the 12C, e.g. E5-2690)

Of course all those numbers may not be official yet and are subject to change.

 

[MacProCard]

I'll admit I'm new to Apple and it's culture. And I still don't get the logic of how people associate and declare themselves as pros. I've never seen that in the PC market before. --Like I'm part of the PC pro market. Or don't buy that because you're not a pc pro. This just comes off as so obnoxious and really insecure to me.

 

[sigmadog]

I'll admit I'm new to Apple and it's culture. And I still don't get the logic of how people associate and declare themselves as pros. I've never seen that in the PC market before. --Like I'm part of the PC pro market. Or don't buy that because you're not a pc pro. This just comes off as so obnoxious and really insecure to me.

But your name is MacProCard!

 

[MacProCard]

But your name is MacProCard!

LOL. Yeah. You got me.

Besides, if correcting pixels and splicing video is pro work, than I'm super duper pro.

 

[fuchsdh]

I'll admit I'm new to Apple and it's culture. And I still don't get the logic of how people associate and declare themselves as pros. I've never seen that in the PC market before. --Like I'm part of the PC pro market. Or don't buy that because you're not a pc pro. This just comes off as so obnoxious and really insecure to me.

Like I said above, I think there's a difference between enthusiast/power user and pro, but the term gets used interchangeably. All you need to be a pro is really to make your living off whatever you're doing with your computer. You can be using pro software like Final Cut, but unless you're cutting wedding videos, corporate events, narratives or whatnot and getting paid, I don't think you classify as a "pro".

 

[AidenShaw]

"Haswell-E" can be used generically to include all iterations of "-E" and "-EP" CPUs, so that you don't have to specify every iteration when referring to the underlying platform architecture (at this time, there's just -E and -EP for Haswell, but previous platforms had -E, -EP, -EN, -EX, which could be a mouthful).

This where we disagree - most professional sites are quite careful to use the specific name. It's confusing to use one of the specific names as a generic term.

Since the variants are on different schedules and focused on different markets, a generic term isn't needed that often. "Haswell-E*" would do....

/eof

 

[sigmadog]

Like I said above, I think there's a difference between enthusiast/power user and pro, but the term gets used interchangeably. All you need to be a pro is really to make your living off whatever you're doing with your computer. You can be using pro software like Final Cut, but unless you're cutting wedding videos, corporate events, narratives or whatnot and getting paid, I don't think you classify as a "pro".

Before I started using computers, I was a professional T-Square, non-photo blue pencil, drafting table, and technical pen user.

 

[fuchsdh]

Before I started using computers, I was a professional T-Square, non-photo blue pencil, drafting table, and technical pen user.

I loved playing with all the amberlithe and drafting film my parents had in the studio. Hated the pencils!

 

[MacProCard]

Like I said above, I think there's a difference between enthusiast/power user and pro, but the term gets used interchangeably. All you need to be a pro is really to make your living off whatever you're doing with your computer. You can be using pro software like Final Cut, but unless you're cutting wedding videos, corporate events, narratives or whatnot and getting paid, I don't think you classify as a "pro".

It's just such an odd distinction. Divides the market base in a way. I own a Nikon DLSR but that doesn't make me a pro. Same with FCPX. On the other hand, I can develop n tier applications with the best of them, but still don't consider myself a pro.

Either way I really like the nMP, so I guess I'll get used to it. And i'll try not to be so obnoxious during the transition.

 

[beaker7]

Up to 18 core CPUs, DDR4, More Storage, more powerful GPU's.

Thats minimal update?

The 18 core chips won't go into the next Mac Pro, assuming there is one. It's a 145w part and runs 2.3 Ghz.

There won't be much if any CPU performance improvement in the next nMP unless they improve the thermal capacity to handle higher TDP chips. The current E5-2697v2's direct replacement jumps to 14c @ 2.6 Ghz but also jumps to 145w.

 

[fuchsdh]

It's just such an odd distinction. Divides the market base in a way. I own a Nikon DLSR but that doesn't make me a pro. Same with FCPX. On the other hand, I can develop n tier applications with the best of them, but still don't consider myself a pro.

Either way I really like the nMP, so I guess I'll get used to it. And i'll try not to be so obnoxious during the transition.

I think you could make more of a hard-line argument back in the days when the hardware and software were tens of thousands of dollars, finicky and hard to use, and slow as to be useless unless you really needed to use it

These days there's plenty of people who can afford the expensive software because expensive software is dramatically less expensive, and likewise with the hardware in many cases. You have people doing Hollywood-level production using Blender or After Effects, no Flame $30K workstation required. You can learn a professional color tool for free, and use it for free on 1080p work.

So making the distinction purely what that software is used for seems like a fine compromise to me. I'm a pro motion graphics designer since that's how I make my living, but while I can cut and have been paid to do so in the past, I don't consider myself a pro editor.

I think also when we're discussing "what pros need" we have to admit that pros all have varying needs. As pointed out many times elsewhere the new Mac Pro is far more an ideal machine for certain pros than others, that's just how the cookie crumbles. Everyone's coming at it from different needs, experiences, and wants.

 

[Gav Mack]

This where we disagree - most professional sites are quite careful to use the specific name. It's confusing to use one of the specific names as a generic term.

Since the variants are on different schedules and focused on different markets, a generic term isn't needed that often. "Haswell-E*" would do....

/eof

Boy - all this because I left off the 'P' off EP

 

[sigmadog]

I loved playing with all the amberlithe and drafting film my parents had in the studio. Hated the pencils!

Amberlith! Gawd! The nightmares!

 

[AidenShaw]

Boy - all this because I left off the 'P' off EP

The first few comments were tongue-in-cheek jests about your small error.

 

[kingtj]

But they ARE .....

That's the thing... Technically, a hard-core gamer *is* absolutely a "pro" class user. That may insult those of you who feel your expensive rig is only justified by the important work you do with it? But historically, even on the Windows side of things, gaming is what always pushes the envelope of what the hardware can do and promotes OS fixes and improvements.

(I remember when World of Warcraft first came out, the OS X version caused a whole slew of video driver updates/fixes in subsequent versions of the operating system. The notes would specifically say they addressed issues found in WoW!)

Let's be honest here. If you knew someone who said they wanted to buy a new machine primarily for gaming and for whatever reason, he/she also wanted to go only with a Mac? Would you tell them one of Apple's entry level machines would be "good enough", or would you steer them towards one of the "Pro" series machines like a Macbook Pro or high-spec iMac with better 3D graphics chipset?

As for "real software developers"? I'm afraid you just took practically everyone I ever knew who got hired full-time as in-house software developers out of the equation with your comments. I wasn't referring to website builders either, because sure, many of them can work wonders with an old "beater" PC running Linux. It doesn't take a lot of hardware....

But as one example? I used to work for a commercial steel fabricator who had a big, in-house application to track inventory, sales, customer data, etc. The team of software devs responsible for it were querying an Oracle database on a big server in the back room. All of the real work happened on the server, not on the PC they developed on. They just needed a client installed to connect to it. And again, the app they maintained had to be able to run well on machines that were 4+ years old in many cases, out in the shop or in the front office. There was simply no point in giving the coders ultra-fast machines that would just allow them to write sloppy code and not feel the painful results. Yes, compile times would be faster on faster workstations -- but they were given adequate hardware to at least achieve "reasonable" compile times. (That means, management didn't feel it was impacting employee performance in a meaningful way.)

Obviously, it's going to be different in different situations. But as another example ... one of my best friends wrote code for a Point of Sale vendor, and while he made use of virtual machines extensively? He found, like the rest of his department, that having 2 or 3 physical computers set up on his desk was superior. He didn't need a "beast" of a machine that way; and didn't have to deal with waiting for the VM software to launch different environments either. He could move to another machine and work on a task while the other was pretty much tied up compiling or what-not.

Cough. I'm not talking about website builders...or your version of a software developer. Besides, by your account any old gamer is a pro.

Real software developers run on high-end systems usually with servers/compilers/ and Databases(DBs) instances all at once. Sometimes multiples DBs instances depending on the data structure/testing environments etc. Some very complex object oriented architecture can be very taxing alone by itself. And none of this takes into account complex data queries that pushes everything to the max and brings the most robust servers to their knees.

Who do you think they build these servers for anyways!? Photoshop!?

Why would you ever want to compile software on an older machine anyways? Do you really mean testing older version of browsers/performance? Either way .Net tackled most of that problem many moons ago.

I may be biased but I doubt many can justify a powerful machine more than a software developer.

 

[noke]

i just got a nMP and im super happy with it. I also thought about waiting, but hey, you can always wait. Thats not new.

Its super fast and quiet. Exactly what I wanted.
In the morning, I open the window, sip coffee and type away my codings in silence. No vacuum cleaner somewhere in my room.

I need some GPU power because I recently play games like LoL (good osx port) and CS:GO (not so good osx port :/ ).
I would have bought a mac mini with dedicated graphics too, but its not available. Its a pity OSX does not support crossfire, so I (as a developer) cant use the second gpu in OSX. That hurts, but im getting an external bootcamp on a thunderbolt SSD with windows to play around with crossfire..

Oh, I got the entrylevel model.

 

[MacProCard]

As for "real software developers"? I'm afraid you just took practically everyone I ever knew who got hired full-time as in-house software developers out of the equation with your comments. I wasn't referring to website builders either, because sure, many of them can work wonders with an old "beater" PC running Linux. It doesn't take a lot of hardware....

But as one example? I used to work for a commercial steel fabricator who had a big, in-house application to track inventory, sales, customer data, etc. The team of software devs responsible for it were querying an Oracle database on a big server in the back room. All of the real work happened on the server, not on the PC they developed on. They just needed a client installed to connect to it. And again, the app they maintained had to be able to run well on machines that were 4+ years old in many cases, out in the shop or in the front office. There was simply no point in giving the coders ultra-fast machines that would just allow them to write sloppy code and not feel the painful results. Yes, compile times would be faster on faster workstations -- but they were given adequate hardware to at least achieve "reasonable" compile times. (That means, management didn't feel it was impacting employee performance in a meaningful way.)

Obviously, it's going to be different in different situations. But as another example ... one of my best friends wrote code for a Point of Sale vendor, and while he made use of virtual machines extensively? He found, like the rest of his department, that having 2 or 3 physical computers set up on his desk was superior. He didn't need a "beast" of a machine that way; and didn't have to deal with waiting for the VM software to launch different environments either. He could move to another machine and work on a task while the other was pretty much tied up compiling or what-not.

I'm not sure where you're going with all this. Just because your company does it that way really has no bearing on what tools a software developer uses and needs. -All shops do things differently. -All projects have different requirements. -And all shops have different budget constraints.

But, if you're suggesting it's common practice to give designers and other professionals more powerful machines than developers you're way off.