Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by badlydrawnboy, Oct 22, 2013.
There it is: $2,999.
It makes sense. The iMac is exponentially less powerful than it, and if it cost any less than that I probably would have sold my iMac and gotten one.
For the 12 core, D700, 1TB flash model it'll be at least $5000.
WAAAAYYYY too much.
That thing is amazing, but that is not worth it. Sad. I was convinced it might be $1999 for an entry model, and as they introduced other Macs and gave lower starting prices I felt the Pro would be the same.
Nope. Shoulda known: Apple always kills expectations.
I've been trying to decide between MP and iMac. An iMac in the config I would want is close to $3k, and thing is, I don't really need the monitor because I already have an NEC PA271 attached to my 3,1 Mac Pro. So I'm actually pretty happy with the entry level price. I think I'm going to get one!
****ing ripoff. I expected that to be the price for the 8-core with 512GB SSD.
I was thinking it was going to be priced at 3k, and they did. Its way too much of me, but given the technology Apple is using inside the MP, I can understand the price point but that doesn't mean I'm not disappointed at the high price.
Sounds about right. I don't think it is priced that high.
I am ready to order. I may be interested in the 6-core model, but need to know the price. If it's under $3500, I'll go for it. If not, I'll stick with 4-core.
Thought they'd get a hex-core in there for that price.
Kind of hard to spend $3k on a quad core computer with a non-standard, brand specific GPU setup. 256GB of flash with no HDDs is a bummer (but we already knew that.) Add in the cost of a raid enclosure and its a very narrow market even for professionals (considering the firePro choice as well.)
I didn't like the nMP anyway, but the right price could have balanced out its shortcomings. Defenders have said, many times, don't judge until we know the pricing. Well now we do.
That is not the right price.
I also don't really care for dual GPUs. It's seemed like more problems than its worth, and without crossfire in OS X, the usefulness of dual GPUs is even more limited than Windows.
Also no sign of Nvidia and no obvious way to add it third party means CUDA apps will suffer.
And 256GB SSD seems way too small.
I'm sure many people will like it, but to me it's a complete fail except for aesthetics and assembled in the USA.
I'm definitely in for the second generation - no need for a new computer now. At $3000, it's less than I paid for my 2008 model.
I love the specs, especially the 3.7Ghz Quad-core. That's gonna speed-boost my Photoshop and Painter work tremendously.
It was the video cards. Phil mentioned the names of the options but didn't list them and we can't yet rewind. That minimum card option is to high end to make an economy config. If you don't need those cards, this machine doesn't make sense. Damn.
Honestly when they said dual workstation GPUs standard I was expecting a $4500+ entry price. I think 3k is pretty fair for what you get, though it might be more than some people looking into the new mac pro actually need so it will be hard to justify that price to them.
Too pricey in my opinion, but not surprising. Maybe my student discount will be worth something.
It should come with 512 SSD at the minimum.
At $3K base price, it's a tough decision. They certainly didn't price it to bring in people on the fence. The economy is crap and $3K is a ton of money for me and my wife.
d300 is the base video cards
I am not sure what to think .. 256gb base ssd size kind of sucks .. and was expecting a hex core in there .. I am kind of tempted to sell my current pro and upgrade but I am not sure.. any increase in gpu models is gonna be a small fortune as well as cpu .. 12 core would be awesome but it will probably be like 6k
Faster CPU, more RAM, significantly faster storage and dual GPUs for, what, $500 more than the old model?
Seems reasonable to me. *shrug*
disappointed (as always with those keynotes) always the same story really..."its the best Mac we ever made...blablabla".
Just cut the crap and give us the prices of all the models, why is this so hard...its so typically Apple to be utmost mysterious about stuff that's not even a big deal, people are going to find out sooner or later.
Why give the entry model's price but not for the rest? Afraid its going to be found ridiculously high maybe and all negative comments?
Dumb question, but how would I know if I need those cards or whether an iMac would suffice? I edit 1080P video all the time.
$2,999 for a quad core? This will join the cube in about 18 months.
My entire workflow is built around CPU cores, not GPU cores for rendering.
A 4 core @ $2,999 plus $2500 for adding 3 thunderbolt enclosures & a dock for additional cabling needs vs $5500 for a 16 core Dell that doesn't require a rat's nest of cables and is easily user-upgradeable.
I have looked at moving to dell, but I was hoping I could avoid it. Oh well.
Yeah, that's kind of the problem. The costs actually make sense, especially if you look at a competitor like Boxx, who offers their barebones quad-core TB2 machine for $3200. But at least there, you can pop out the k600 and upgrade the video card at any point.
Great, releasing at Christmas when no one has extra funds. LOL
I was expecting more like 2499USD
I was waiting to buy one. The waiting is over;
Its weird when you spend $3k and you are pretty much on your own for mass storage. I don't even know what a D300 is, AMD doesn't list the card. It could be two 7770's with new firmware for all I know.