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

Apple Allowed Developers to Test a Prerelease Mac Pro Hidden Inside a Metal Box

gnasher729 said:
For me, 2.3 GHz rMBP beats an eight core MacPro, with both running side by side. The MacPro is faster in some bits, the rMBP in others, but overall rMBP is a bit faster. iMacs go up to 3.3 GHz I think; at that point it's no comparison.
Click to expand...

I can imagine that a TB expansion chassis will be very popular just because of the sufficient level of performance that the rMBP has for pro apps.
 
Any word from Audio developers? I guess Not. :(

Any words on Logic Pro X. I guess Not.

Does Apple even listen to the Audio community. My guess is NO!
 
cgk.emu said:
Posts like this with trashcan pictures were old after about the first one that was posted after the keynote...
Click to expand...

Best to get used to it.

People are STILL making "pad" jokes about the iPad name, despite years of using mouse pads, keypads and gamepads every day. The beloved PowerMac G5 design lasted 10 years, but got "cheese grater" comments for nine of them :p
 
OrangeSVTguy said:
Workstation GPUs are usually not that good for gaming. Best to get some external Titans if you're wanting to game.
Click to expand...

Tomshardware did a workstation GPU analysis for gaming.

It was just as good as regular GPUs, which isn't surprising considering the hardware is exactly the same.
 
Shaun said:
...I've also noticed a definite move away from "flat" devices to "upright" devices with the introduction of the Mac Pro and the new AirPort devices. I wonder if this means an upright Mac Mini and/or AppleTV will be next?
Click to expand...

What? They gave the reason why they increased the height of the airport, it's for signal strength, it's not simply a design choice. They HAD to do something different with the Mac Pro to make it stand out, and it happens to be a different shape...the previous Mac Pro was "upright" also, not sure what you are getting at here. The iMac sits upright on your desk, so does the Mac Mini. Pretty sure you mean taller devices...unless it serves a real hardware purpose I don't see them redesigning things for the hell of it. And, I'm not sure how you figure they are definitely moving away from a design aesthetic when they've only released two devices...you can't really conclude a damn thing about anything with two examples, that's how you get into trouble making assumptions.

And whoa whoa, hang on just a second. One of the most significant changes with the new Mac Pro is its color? Are you serious??? Okay, then you pretty obviously missed the entire section of the keynote talking about dual GPU's, thermal core, flash storage, thunderbolt 2, etc...to say the that friggin' COLOR of the machine is one of the most drastic changes is ridiculous.
 
ChrisCW11 said:
Apple needs to come out with the "Mac", period. Not iMac, not Mac Mini, not Mac Pro, but a consumer level "high-end" desktop. And I don't want a laptop with "near" desktop performance.
Click to expand...

Huh? The MacMini is the Mac you are looking for.
The Mac Mini is the Mac.
 
nagromme said:
Best to get used to it.

People are STILL making "pad" jokes about the iPad name, despite years of using mouse pads, keypads and gamepads every day. The beloved PowerMac G5 design lasted 10 years, but got "cheese grater" comments for nine of them :p
Click to expand...

Yeah what can I say? I agree, it's still unfortunate that people think they are funny or witty with these images, though.
 
sseaton1971 said:
You honestly think the color of the machine is one of the most significant changes? That is very funny! ;)
Click to expand...

Yeah, comments like his really concern me. They concern me because he's probably out there making decisions at a job with that sort of mentality. Unless you are an artist looking at something in the context of color = greatest importance, to say a computer with a different color is its most radical change is pretty ridiculous.
 
ChrisCW11 said:
This is a great design, which will be accompanied with a great price tag.

But the average consumer does not need Xeon's and dual workstation class GPU's. Way too many "developers" are going to buy this but people making iOS apps do not need a 12 core Xeon CPU to do the trick.

I am tired of Apple missing a market segment to build a "high-performing" consumer level desktop WITHOUT an integrated display. A lot of people think they are "pro" but they are deluded by Apple's marketing and the lack of a upper-middle tier desktop option. Apple just wants to funnel developers into an expensive desktop product.

Apple needs to come out with the "Mac", period. Not iMac, not Mac Mini, not Mac Pro, but a consumer level "high-end" desktop. And I don't want a laptop with "near" desktop performance.

Make a grey version of this using desktop Haswell CPU's, and the option to have one or two GPU's.

Fine, it will steal market away from the "pro" consumers, but it will INCREASE market presence overall. Now that services like Steam are no longer bound to PC gaming Apple is just ignoring the importance of not offering a desktop in this class without the Mini or "i" monikers.

Why not? It just makes sense. Do it now!
Click to expand...

Doesn't make sense.

There really is no middle ground between Mac Mini & Mac Pro. (an iMac is a Mac Mini with a display.) You're either doing compute intensive work, or lightweight UI work. There is no such thing as "medium" work.

What you want is a Mac Mini (or iMac). Get it. It's plenty fast, and does everything you need, and is cheap.
 
ChrisCW11 said:
This is a great design, which will be accompanied with a great price tag.

But the average consumer does not need Xeon's and dual workstation class GPU's. Way too many "developers" are going to buy this but people making iOS apps do not need a 12 core Xeon CPU to do the trick.

I am tired of Apple missing a market segment to build a "high-performing" consumer level desktop WITHOUT an integrated display. A lot of people think they are "pro" but they are deluded by Apple's marketing and the lack of a upper-middle tier desktop option. Apple just wants to funnel developers into an expensive desktop product.

Apple needs to come out with the "Mac", period. Not iMac, not Mac Mini, not Mac Pro, but a consumer level "high-end" desktop. And I don't want a laptop with "near" desktop performance.

Make a grey version of this using desktop Haswell CPU's, and the option to have one or two GPU's.

Fine, it will steal market away from the "pro" consumers, but it will INCREASE market presence overall. Now that services like Steam are no longer bound to PC gaming Apple is just ignoring the importance of not offering a desktop in this class without the Mini or "i" monikers.

Why not? It just makes sense. Do it now!
Click to expand...
What's wrong with the Mac mini?
 
cgk.emu said:
And whoa whoa, hang on just a second. One of the most significant changes with the new Mac Pro is its color? Are you serious??? Okay, then you pretty obviously missed the entire section of the keynote talking about dual GPU's, thermal core, flash storage, thunderbolt 2, etc...to say the that friggin' COLOR of the machine is one of the most drastic changes is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

For me the black color scheme stands out as quite different than the aluminum Macs we've seen over the last decade (except for the briefly produced black plastic MacBook). The color is definitely not the most significant part of the new MP, but it sure is interesting. Time will tell if this is a new direction at Apple.
 
This crying about the mac pro is just ridiculous.

If you are a "pro" in sense you are an professional programmer, any of the macs can do the job just fine. Which iphone developer need a mac pro? none.

And when its going to expandability. The new Mac Pro does you a favor.

Dropping PCI cards shifts everything to Thunderbolt. And like we all know Thunderbolt support right now isnt the best. Now the Hardware manufacturers have to deal with Thunderbolt, because no OSX user can now use their PCI cards.

This helps everyone, especially everyone who doesnt need a mac pro. Just take Pro Tools. For big system you always needed the the cards. Now you take your cards in some 3rd party case or Avid is going to make more Thunderbolt devices which can be used with a Mac Pro, a Mac Mini Macbook.. you call it. Isnt that what everyone wanted with Thunderbolt?
 
cgk.emu said:
The GPU mostly. Other than that, I *personally* don't see anything wrong with it.
Click to expand...

Again, if the GPU is important, get a Mac Pro. It has the 2 fastest GPUs they can possibly get.

You either need a fast GPU, or you don't need a GPU. There really is no application for a mid-level GPU.

Can you name a use-model for a mid-range GPU? (and macs aren't used for games.. if you wanted games, you would have gotten a PC)
 
As someone else just mentioned in the thread, Tom's Hardware did a comparison of workstation graphics cards and gaming cards on a Windows box.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/workstation-graphics-card-gaming,3425.html

The FirePro W9000 (which is essentially what is in the new Mac Pro) did very well. In overall, cumulative scoring, it beat almost every other card tested. Out of the 40 cards testes (of which, about 50% could be considered "modern" gaming cards, the Fire Pro W9000 just barely lost out to two: the NVidia GTX 680 and the AMD 7970 Ghz Edition.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/workstation-graphics-card-gaming,3425-14.html

So I don't think the video card will be an issue for gaming. Mac OS X drivers, on the other hand...
 
chirpie said:
You'd think if it's good enough for a Hollywood Studio that would sort of put the kibosh on stuff like that.
Click to expand...

Not when all they did was run some software on it in a test lab. Big difference between simple tests like that and how something really works when it's in the field... especially when a couple/few years have passed. Plus, they didn't see what it actually looked like when they were in the lab. According to the article, they thought it was the same form factor as the old Mac Pro.
 
cgk.emu said:
The GPU mostly. Other than that, I *personally* don't see anything wrong with it.
Click to expand...

Yep--I'd love a Mini with more 3D power. Not AS much as a costly Pro, but more.

Integrated GPUs will eventually catch up with my needs, I suspect.

But I'd still be interested in Pro... depending on price. (iMacs are a great deal after all--and I don't own a display.)

There truly IS a gap between Mini and Pro, which is currently filled by a machine with display built-in. I don't think that hurts Apple much, but the gap is there. (One good thing about the iMac: even if you have to replace it in a few years, and decide not to take advantage of the great resale value, it can be used AS a display, in Target Display Mode. Meanwhile you can use the storage as an extra backup, and you've got a whole spare Mac if you need it.)
 
The engineering firm I just came from across town has a room full of 2002-2003 era Dell machines with 2GB of ram in them each, running a 6 year old version of solidworks. The architecture firms we compete with are using Autocad 14 and Acad 2000 on computers from that era as well.

By comparison, real-time rendering complex assemblies with thousands of 3D parts on current, fully loaded 27" iMacs, even with resources cut in half by the VM, is still utterly freaking science fiction to anyone who visits our office or is fortunate enough to work in it. ...laptop-spec or not.

Some of you are spoiled as hell.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back