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.
A Closer Look at Processor Options and Performance for Apple's New Mac Pro
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yep... it's horses for courses, although I use Adobe Premiere / After Effects and the Pro will be a very good machine for those too. I am heading towards doing 4k work and already do a lot of After Effects rendering on my i7 iMac which, at full RAW image size, takes forever. There is just no iMac around right now as capable as the Pro for my particular needs.
The Pro suits me perfectly, it won't suit everyone. I for one don't want to spend my time faffing around with hackintosh stuff, I'd rather pay more money and get on with creating.
Prove it .. here is a hint "mac pro" like case will cost more then the processor..
Attachments
Or people doing lots of multi-cam (one of FCPX's strongest features). Or people doing video involving tones of rendering. Or people wanting great realtime performance out of DaVinci Resolve.
You're right that many people are well served by a beefy iMac. I do corporate, commercial, TV, documentary... The dual GPUs make this a no-brainer for me.
Between the sheer processor speed, the PCIe storage and the super fast RAM, my 2008 MP is going to look like chopped liver. I, for one, am looking forward to massively increased speed and performance.
I'm just holding out hope that my 8-core, 16GB RAM, 1TB and D500s setup is going to come in under $6k.
I'm just holding out hope that my 8-core, 16GB RAM, 1TB and D500s setup is going to come in under $6k.
In terms of processing power – of course it wouldn't be, 12 core vs 4 core – how do you figure that?
Perhaps it was Phil Schiller talking about how much faster the new Mac Pro is compared to last generation's, and that the price started at $3K.
MY External 3TB USB 3 Time Machine hard drive just died today Disk Utility and Disk Warrior can't repair it. External Drives are problematic and messy. Cables, power supplies and noisy enclosures are a pain.
Internal Drives have always been more reliable and convenient.
I will definitely get the new Mac Pro but I will miss the ability to stuff 7 HD's in just ONE box...
CC, Resolve, Mari, etc., have all been configured to take advantage of OpenCL. Let's see how performance stacks up once these machines are out.
You are comparing Apples to Oranges. An i7 is a desktop processor whereas the Xeon is a workstation/server class processor. That processor coupled with ECC ram gives you high precision calculations and depending on your altitude and amount of local background radiation, that difference can become significant.
You are also comparing a gaming card to dual workstation gfx cards.
Sure, and obviously he [Phil] was correct.
How could you mistake that for the new entry level Pro performing better than the top level previous generation?
Read the article, it's all based on estimates of PC machines running the same CPU's.
The base D300s aren't that expensive, so if GPU performance isn't important to your work, you're not paying that much for them.
You are comparing Apples to Oranges. An i7 is a desktop processor whereas the Xeon is a workstation/server class processor. That processor coupled with ECC ram gives you high precision calculations and depending on your altitude and amount of local background radiation, that difference can become significant.
You are also comparing a gaming card to dual workstation gfx cards.
I wasn't comparing xeon with i7.. I just quoting people who compare mac pro with hackintosh and say its much cheaper & better.
if you see my Post & post images you can see I compare mac pro with titan ws and conclusion Mac pro is cheaper & is better value
Last edited:
These tests are only of the processor...this is just speculation that will not help us know how well this will do in real world performance. To quote the writer: "CPU capability is of course only one part of the overall system performance...".
I won't make any pre-judgements, like most all of the commenters here have and will, until we get real-world tests from a production model. Everything is upgraded on this machine, and this supposed test is only of the processor's speed, nothing else. This does not take into consideration the faster RAM, Flash memory instead of hard drives, two graphics cards which are supposed to also be able to boost processing power....
Let's just wait until we get some real world full tests of a production model before we speculate that "oh, apple has failed us, it's because you know who is no longer with them" blah blah blah blah blah blah.
Ugh. Why do I bother...this website is called macrumors, not macfacts.
I won't make any pre-judgements, like most all of the commenters here have and will, until we get real-world tests from a production model. Everything is upgraded on this machine, and this supposed test is only of the processor's speed, nothing else. This does not take into consideration the faster RAM, Flash memory instead of hard drives, two graphics cards which are supposed to also be able to boost processing power....
Let's just wait until we get some real world full tests of a production model before we speculate that "oh, apple has failed us, it's because you know who is no longer with them" blah blah blah blah blah blah.
Ugh. Why do I bother...this website is called macrumors, not macfacts.
What I still don't understand is why they don't offer BTO dual-CPU with one GPU or vice versa? This became such a specific machine that is either mostly show off or for a highly specialized 'niche' market with programs already taking advantage of this config.
