Interesting how USB continues to SURVIVE as the years go buy.
I think in 2015 USB will still be here.
I think in 2015 USB will still be here.
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.
Apple Announces New Mac Pros With Up to 12 Cores, SSD Options
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If by "blow the doors off" he means a computer that will outperform a Mac Pro at the vast majority of tasks ... then yes he can. Server class parts are great for the extraordinarily small group of high-caliber professionals who actually need them, but for 99.99999% of users the Xenons offer nothing beyond what the i7 provides.
Actually you need to read back to where I stated the i7 iMac is better value then the base Mac Pro. That should answer your question. You also need to word your comments better, don't say 'Core i7 tower' when you really mean a core i7 MAC.
Now back onto my line of thoughts, the Xeon is better once the multiple cores come into it, I would expect a six core 3.33 xeon to be faster then a 4 core i7 so long as the software uses the cores which if your buying a Mac Pro in the first place I would imagine does, otherwise why buy one?
Sigh, if you want to run your business on some hacked together machine with NO technical backup what so ever, go ahead. I am not using any hackintosh in any argument for that reason, no business uses them with any common sense.
It is announced in time for SC2 and will be ready in time for Catacylsm
yes! I have a Mac Pro 2009 with 8-core i just need ATI HD 5870! I hope it will be released stand alone soon.
OK so in this thread we are going to need someone to post the obligatory how to build a hackintosh for under $1000 with all the requisite links and prices.
thanks in advance.
thanks in advance.
HEAR THAT. Thank you Adobe for dropping a $600 upgrade that will cost a lot of us $3500... or kick a lot of Design Pros down to the iMac. Yes, that was a snark. Design as a profession is not as comfortable a living as it was in the 90s!
+1
Wow. A pretty big day on the Apple website to be sure!
But I must say, I'm very disappointed in this Mac Pro update. Its pretty obvious Apple is basically just holding on to last year's model for another year or so until 2011.
The entry level Pro is actually embarrassing. After 500 days thats all we get? What the hell were they waiting for on the non-12 core models? Couldn't they have upped many of these specs on the models that were'nt waiting for new processors months ago? Can't they up the specs even more and still make money on these things? Is it just not possible?
By the way, have you guys checked out the update on the Imac? Pretty impressive. The I7 was already really fast- but is now gonna be even faster than the entry Mac Pro. Compare the specs (and the performance figures when they come out.) At least with this Mac Pro update I don't have to wait anymore to buy something else. Nothing much to see here. Move along.
I too, have bought my last Mac Pro. The numbers look great only if you have your head buried in the sand. But if you comparison shop? .... yuck.
Never again. I'm just not that rich, or stupid. Or rich AND stupid.
Ive been on the fence for a while about the Imac vs the Mac Pro, but the updates today makes my decision easy. I'm going to go ahead and buy the 27" i7 quad-core, with 4GB 1333mhz (2x2GB which leaves me more open slots left than most Mac Pros have!) Radeon HD 5750 1GB GDDR5, and the upgraded 2TB hard drive. Ill plug in my 2TB external drive, and together, with 4TB, that will eliminate my need for the internal drive expandability of the Mac Pro. I'll have a big 27" monitor to look at my digital photography and Photoshop work, and Ill be able to upgrade to an internal SSD someday in the future. (looks like the new imac has room internally for both a hard drive and a SSD?!) This machine should easily outperform the entry mac pro. Even the last i7 did. This one more so. I have coworker friends that bought the i7 recently and they absolutely love them. Only negative thing is, I have some reservations about the monitor quality... other than that, an obvious choice.
But of course I'll have to live with the terrible, dark secret that I'm a Pro user, but I didnt buy a "Pro" machine.
LightPeak with its support for multiple protocols and 10 gigabit speed would probably be able to replace most, if not all currently used external cables, as well as replace slower internal connections. Intel says somewhere that they expect it to go up to 100 gigabit at some point... If that happens by 2015, I don't really see why USB would still have a use. But who knows. There are still many things that aren't so clear about LightPeak.
Wow! Crappy video cards.... AGAIN?!
Seriously?
I find it so humorous that people in this thread are claiming that we're always whining about something. And that Apple can never make us happy.
But please, take note, most every single person complaining about the GPU is *only* complaining about the GPU, and has been complaining for YEARS!
It's the only complaint I ever have with Apple computers. We get great processors, we get decent HDDs and RAM, and a fantastic design and build quality. But my God, are the GPUs always lackluster at best.
The old white iMacs had terribly outdated ATI cards.
The top of the line iMac after that, which I bought, had a measly 2600XT.
The 8800GS was okay; but was already a year old when it released.
The 4850, again, was okay, if a year old at release.
But then using the 4850 to drive a 27" res was a terrible idea.
And the new 5750 is *maybe* 10% faster than the 4850 they've been using for two years.
Pathetic.
Really, they couldn't put a 5770 in? Or at least a mobile 5870? If a laptop can fit two mobile 5870s, I don't know how a 27" iMac couldn't fit one.
I still love Apple. Love my iPhone. I love my iMac. But, it kills me they can't give us decent GPUs.
Same goes with their laptops. If tomorrow Apple released a 13" MBP with a i3/i5 and a 335m, I'd buy it in a second.
...Otherwise, I'll hold onto my 9600, which is a rebadged 8600, since I don't feel like I need the 300M, which has about the power of a 9600
EDIT: In my rage, I see I posted in the wrong thread. I apologize. ;p
Seriously?
I find it so humorous that people in this thread are claiming that we're always whining about something. And that Apple can never make us happy.
But please, take note, most every single person complaining about the GPU is *only* complaining about the GPU, and has been complaining for YEARS!
It's the only complaint I ever have with Apple computers. We get great processors, we get decent HDDs and RAM, and a fantastic design and build quality. But my God, are the GPUs always lackluster at best.
The old white iMacs had terribly outdated ATI cards.
The top of the line iMac after that, which I bought, had a measly 2600XT.
The 8800GS was okay; but was already a year old when it released.
The 4850, again, was okay, if a year old at release.
But then using the 4850 to drive a 27" res was a terrible idea.
And the new 5750 is *maybe* 10% faster than the 4850 they've been using for two years.
Pathetic.
Really, they couldn't put a 5770 in? Or at least a mobile 5870? If a laptop can fit two mobile 5870s, I don't know how a 27" iMac couldn't fit one.
I still love Apple. Love my iPhone. I love my iMac. But, it kills me they can't give us decent GPUs.
Same goes with their laptops. If tomorrow Apple released a 13" MBP with a i3/i5 and a 335m, I'd buy it in a second.
...Otherwise, I'll hold onto my 9600, which is a rebadged 8600, since I don't feel like I need the 300M, which has about the power of a 9600
EDIT: In my rage, I see I posted in the wrong thread. I apologize. ;p
My understanding is that Apple has always been accused of over pricing their hardware that was middle of the road performance. Especially with graphics cards.
The only time in recent memory that Apple had a significant hardware advantage was when the G4 PowerMac was released over a decade ago. At that time Apple was not allowed to sell it to some countries because the US considered it to be a super-computer. Interestingly you could by a PowerMac for under $2000 back then. Since then the Mac has often trailed in hardware performance when compared to the PC's. Photoshop just didn't run as fast on the Mac as it did on a comparable PC, irregardless how many times Steve Jobs said "Boom".
There seems to be those who consider the late nineties as the Mac's "glory years" but really it was Apple just trying to pull itself up from foreclosure. The iMac and the iBook's were nothing special hardware wise, and the Powerbooks were very expensive.
s.
Now compare the 3500 Xeon series price in the base quad Mac Pro. Pretty nasty.
People keep chanting that, as if Apple offers workstation class components in the machine other than the Xeon processor and ECC ram.
The base mac pro is simply not worth the price. The only thing making the base mac pro as a "workstation" is apple marketing.
Apple is kicking you down to the iMac.
Sigh, waited so long ...
Still not the right machine for me: either too much or too little power for the money. No USB 3, FW1600/3200 / eSata built in, but that may be fixed with add on cards. Maybe I'll wait for the FCS update and see if they add some BTO options for this thing.
What we "prosumers" really need is an iMac some configurability for external devices, especially storage. one FW port doesn't cut it (ideally, two busses), and no way to add anything to that configuration. Yes, I still have FW HDV video cams, Avid (ne Digidesign) 002 Rack (FW), but would like to move up to Intel so I can use the new FCS and Snow Leopard stuff.
Oh, well.
Still not the right machine for me: either too much or too little power for the money. No USB 3, FW1600/3200 / eSata built in, but that may be fixed with add on cards. Maybe I'll wait for the FCS update and see if they add some BTO options for this thing.
What we "prosumers" really need is an iMac some configurability for external devices, especially storage. one FW port doesn't cut it (ideally, two busses), and no way to add anything to that configuration. Yes, I still have FW HDV video cams, Avid (ne Digidesign) 002 Rack (FW), but would like to move up to Intel so I can use the new FCS and Snow Leopard stuff.
Oh, well.
Wow! Crappy video cards.... AGAIN?!
Seriously?
I find it so humorous that people in this thread are claiming that we're always whining about something. And that Apple can never make us happy.
But please, take note, most every single person complaining about the GPU is *only* complaining about the GPU, and has been complaining for YEARS!
It's the only complaint I ever have with Apple computers. We get great processors, we get decent HDDs and RAM, and a fantastic design and build quality. But my God, are the GPUs always lackluster at best.
The old white iMacs had terribly outdated ATI cards.
The top of the line iMac after that, which I bought, had a measly 2600XT.
The 8800GS was okay; but was already a year old when it released.
The 4850, again, was okay, if a year old at release.
But then using the 4850 to drive a 27" res was a terrible idea.
And the new 5750 is *maybe* 10% faster than the 4850 they've been using for two years.
Pathetic.
Really, they couldn't put a 5770 in? Or at least a mobile 5870? If a laptop can fit two mobile 5870s, I don't know how a 27" iMac couldn't fit one.
I still love Apple. Love my iPhone. I love my iMac. But, it kills me they can't give us decent GPUs.
Same goes with their laptops. If tomorrow Apple released a 13" MBP with a i3/i5 and a 335m, I'd buy it in a second.
...Otherwise, I'll hold onto my 9600, which is a rebadged 8600, since I don't feel like I need the 300M, which has about the power of a 9600
EDIT: In my rage, I see I posted in the wrong thread. I apologize. ;p
http://www.apple.com/macpro/specs.html
"ATI Radeon HD 5870 with 1GB of GDDR5"
It's not default I don't think, but it's definitely an option, and as you said, it's a "decent" GPU.
EDIT: I just read your edit! NVM!
And the i7 version is $1000.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...223&cm_re=core_i7_980x-_-19-115-223-_-Product
+1
Wow. A pretty big day on the Apple website to be sure!
But I must say, I'm very disappointed in this Mac Pro update. Its pretty obvious Apple is basically just holding on to last year's model for another year or so until 2011.
The entry level Pro is actually embarrassing. After 500 days thats all we get? What the hell were they waiting for on the non-12 core models? Couldn't they have upped many of these specs on the models that were'nt waiting for new processors months ago? Can't they up the specs even more and still make money on these things? Is it just not possible?
By the way, have you guys checked out the update on the Imac? Pretty impressive. The I7 was already really fast- but is now gonna be even faster than the entry Mac Pro. Compare the specs (and the performance figures when they come out.) At least with this Mac Pro update I don't have to wait anymore to buy something else. Nothing much to see here. Move along.
I too, have bought my last Mac Pro. The numbers look great only if you have your head buried in the sand. But if you comparison shop? .... yuck.
Never again. I'm just not that rich, or stupid. Or rich AND stupid.
Ive been on the fence for a while about the Imac vs the Mac Pro, but the updates today makes my decision easy. I'm going to go ahead and buy the 27" i7 quad-core, with 4GB 1333mhz (2x2GB which leaves me more open slots left than most Mac Pros have!) Radeon HD 5750 1GB GDDR5, and the upgraded 2TB hard drive. Ill plug in my 2TB external drive, and together, with 4TB, that will eliminate my need for the internal drive expandability of the Mac Pro. I'll have a big 27" monitor to look at my digital photography and Photoshop work, and Ill be able to upgrade to an internal SSD someday in the future. (looks like the new imac has room internally for both a hard drive and a SSD?!) This machine should easily outperform the entry mac pro. Even the last i7 did. This one more so. I have coworker friends that bought the i7 recently and they absolutely love them. Only negative thing is, I have some reservations about the monitor quality... other than that, an obvious choice.
But of course I'll have to live with the terrible, dark secret that I'm a Pro user, but I didnt buy a "Pro" machine.
"Apple is a mobile company now."
Building pro computers is not on their radar. It is obvious with this update, they were just waiting to make some monsterous 12 CORE announcement.
Expect no updates to this computer line till summer 2012.
There I said it.
I'm sure I'll be trying to attach myself to my local domain that doesn't exist.
I am dying to know what momille is inviting Steve Jobs to do to himself here.
Peace
policy
"That pick up truck is so overpriced!
Thank you! That was great.
Well.. it's fine... But...
It's a perfectly OK upgrade. But it's just that. Just "keeping pace" - no innovation, no real breakthroughs or cutting edge. A lot of people were hoping for USB 3.0 or Firewire 1600/3200. No such luck. Yawn.
And while it's nice to see the 27" display coming in... and good for Apple to consolidate the production lines. But that marks the end of Apple non-glossy screens on the Mac Pro. Only on the BTO MacBook Pro. So just one more hassle point. And STILL, the bottom end of the Mac Pro line with a display, cost about the same as a 27" iMac nicely kitted out AND a MacBook Pro. Seriously, some of us who are Design Pros, but not massive users like video, 3D modelers, audio, engineering and science pros... but would still like an expandable and configurable tower form factor are CRYING for a Mid-range choice.
A lot of us will look at the price/value of the Mac Pro and be "downgrading" to iMacs or giving up for WinTel when we have to pull the trigger on the Adobe Creative Suite 5 upgrade. Honestly, I would have been happier if they waited till after iMac update and the September iPod, and possibly iPad updates and given us a bit more meat. ... Sandy Bridge?
As for Me, I think I'll just dig in with my G5 till a client or vendor sends me a CS5 file that I CANT OPEN... (CS5 requires multicore Intel ) then revisit the question then. Faugh.
Color me unimpressed. ... and budget stressed.
It's a perfectly OK upgrade. But it's just that. Just "keeping pace" - no innovation, no real breakthroughs or cutting edge. A lot of people were hoping for USB 3.0 or Firewire 1600/3200. No such luck. Yawn.
And while it's nice to see the 27" display coming in... and good for Apple to consolidate the production lines. But that marks the end of Apple non-glossy screens on the Mac Pro. Only on the BTO MacBook Pro. So just one more hassle point. And STILL, the bottom end of the Mac Pro line with a display, cost about the same as a 27" iMac nicely kitted out AND a MacBook Pro. Seriously, some of us who are Design Pros, but not massive users like video, 3D modelers, audio, engineering and science pros... but would still like an expandable and configurable tower form factor are CRYING for a Mid-range choice.
A lot of us will look at the price/value of the Mac Pro and be "downgrading" to iMacs or giving up for WinTel when we have to pull the trigger on the Adobe Creative Suite 5 upgrade. Honestly, I would have been happier if they waited till after iMac update and the September iPod, and possibly iPad updates and given us a bit more meat. ... Sandy Bridge?
As for Me, I think I'll just dig in with my G5 till a client or vendor sends me a CS5 file that I CANT OPEN... (CS5 requires multicore Intel ) then revisit the question then. Faugh.
Color me unimpressed. ... and budget stressed.