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.
All-New Mac Pro Launches Thursday, December 19 Starting at $2999
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Why do people keep saying the $2999 model is "ridiculously powerful"? It's not.
Performance wise it should be about on par with a iMac with the GTX775 unless you're one of the few people that will benefit from ECC RAM or OpenCL.
Why the hell do you need 2TB for a boot drive? Surely you must mean some sort of scratch drive for photoshop or similar. Because I don't know anyone that needs more than 500GB for OS and applications...'
Also, I don't think a Mac Pro is a good fit for you anyways -- in fact I think its a little overkill. Let me explain:
1. [Most] People whose livelihood depends on their computer won't use a Hackintosh (speaking as a Hackintosh owner). They're just more work than their worth (not to mention the questionable legality). When a point update breaks your bluetooth, you have to wait for an audio DSDT patch, or maybe you just can't get HDMI audio to work ... it just isn't worth it to save those few extra bucks by getting a hackintosh. It really isn't. A Hackintosh is more of a hobby machine.
2. The Mac Pro is not designed (primarily) for people who need ~4 data drives. If those are redundant, you're looking at a max of 8TB of data (And if they're not, you'll need to hook up those curses boxes you were referring to earlier anyways). The Mac Pro is designed for businesses who need more storage anyways -- and usually use centralized external storage arrays. So the lack of internal storage isn't really a problem for the target customer. What IS actually a much larger problem is lack of PCIe, as that is a interface of choice for connecting any number of eternal arrays -- external SAS expanders, fibre channel etc.
Finally, let's get a couple things straight:
1. You're vastly overstating the "rat's nest" of cabling, especially for your use case. From your own description, all you really need is some sort of storage solution? Get a nice box with an included power supply, and you're looking at one additional box. Hardly a "rat's nest".
I have a Hackintosh with 8TB of internal data drives, and back all those up externally (backups really should be offsite anyways) using an external "box" and it isn't too bad keeping it attached at all times.
2. The CPU is indeed user replaceable in the new Mac Pro, as it has always been. Feel free to pop out that xeon and replace it with another ~$1,000 CPU if you wish.
3. I really don't see how this Mac Pro is that different from previous ones in terms of upgrade cycles. Why would you have to buy a new one "every three years (or less)", but you could get by better with the old design?
As far as I can tell, the only possible reason would be an inability to upgrade certain components. But I'd be surprised if you couldn't upgrade the internal storage if you needed to, despite the proprietary connector. Likewise, I see no reason to believe that the GPU is as un-upgradeable as you claim. (There was an article to this effect a couple months ago, IIRC. And we've already established that the CPU is easily replaceable by the user. The only component you're really left with is the motherboard. And if you need a new chipset, you're probably going to need to replace the computer anyways -- that was just as true of the previous generation Mac Pro.
FYI for the complainers that still want the OLD tower models: this week Apple put up several models of the last Mac Pro in the Refurb section: http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/specialdeals/mac/mac_pro
The iMac doesn't have a Xeon E5 processor, 12GB of RAM (by default), a PCI-based SSD, or dual AMD FirePro D300s. Probably a slower system bus or something as well. Not on par with the Mac Pro.
The low-end Mac Pro also supports 3 4K or 6 ATB displays according to Apple, which the iMac most certainly does not.
I want one...I may have to rob a bank... or sell my soul... anyone want to buy a slightly used and sinful soul?
I don't get this, honestly! I use iMac myself and do lots of photo/video editing and it works fine for me. But i though Mac Pro is aimed to professional/business users, no? If so, why such a struggle to buy this Mac Pro that you want to sale your soul or rob a bank?
I read another post at the start where another forum member jokingly was offering his kidney!! I don't think everyone needs this Mac Pro.
For most tasks, quad Xeon is just as fast as Core i7. The biggest benefit of a Xeon is support for dual CPU and ECC RAM, otherwise I'd save the money and just go with i7 instead. PCIe SSD is also an option for iMac. The MacPro have dual FirePro D300 (which is not so great but it's expensive just because it's a FirePro) but iMac has a built in display which added the cost for MacPro.
System bus is unknown but I bet they would be the same. Spec wise, high end iMac can always compete very well with base quad MacPro. You need to go with with higher MP configuration to win the dick measuring competition.
Thank you for posting what I was thinking...guess a lot of these posts are from people well under 50+ of age.
Heck I remember even my first pc build (p1 133MHz,16mb ram,1.6gb hd,ati 2 mb pci vid,14.4 usr modem,15" sony crt,win 95-non usb ver-ect) cost me close to $2500...heck even my internet cost like $70 a month and was good for 100 hrs a month (on that blazing 14.4 us robotics modem).
The Xeon's 32-bit benchmarks are out, and it's significantly faster than the i7. Xeon tends to be faster for multi-core. Having TWO FirePro D300 GPUs has got to be better than ONE GeForce 775M (especially if you want more than just the 2 monitors the iMac supports). Didn't know the iMac had PCI-based SSD, but yeah you're right about that. Wow, a 1TB PCI-based SSD in an iMac was unthinkable just a few years ago.
----------
Didn't know that, and I heard from an unreliable source that you can't replace it. That's good if you can.
at least you were able to recognize it was a joke.. now you just have to feel that it was a joke.
I kind of hate the way intel names their cpus. i7 is used in multiple sockets. There's even the typical i7s like you find in the imac and "enthusiast" i7s that are i7 labeled versions of Xeon EP chips. Do keep in mind though, only 2600 cpu variants can be used in dual configurations. All 1600s types are single only. The quad cpus are also about the same price. They're mostly around the $300 mark whether you look at Haswell's i7 cpu, Ivy Bridge E, or Xeon EP.
Lordy, this new Mac Pro took forever to finally be open to orders.
NOTE TO SELF: next time Apple says a product is being released in the "Fall/Autumn" they really mean expect it the week before winter officially begins.
I don't recall Apple saying Fall. Just 'later this year' and then December
----------
I'm still not too keen on the black plastic cylindrical form factor. With wires coming out everywhere, not a very premium look on the desk. Blech!
It's not wires coming out everywhere. Just the one panel.
it's the end of Apple.
Oh well, it was a nice run.
Seriously, I don't know what else it could mean.
I'm sorry but where did you find Xeon's 32 bit benchmark? I found this as a comparison.
In the table below you can find geekbench result for 2013 quad MacPro
While a high end 2013 iMac with i7 listed here
http://browser.primatelabs.com/mac-benchmarks
CPU wise, Xeon E5 is outdated compared to i7 4771 found on iMac. And that's quad vs. quad. No doubt hex and dual Xeon config obviously will be faster.