Apple Announces New Mac Pros With Up to 12 Cores, SSD Options

[Speedy2]

There are plenty of people who can use all the horse power that their money can buy. As long as Apple is making good coin off of these things, they will continue to supply them to those who need, or want them.

These people do exist, no doubt about it. But you're very wrong about the "plenty". The market share of workstations such as the Mac Pro has been shrinking constantly during the last 10-20 years into near nothingness.
This is a dead market, negative growth. The fact that Apple only released a mere speed bump after 1.5 years speaks for itself. They don't make a lot of money with them, so why should they invest too much?
The Mac Pro is a "truck" in Steve Jobs' words, a very heavy, specialised truck.

 

[twoodcc]

well it's about time. i really want that 12 core, but the price is so high

 

[Speedy2]

From ZDNet Wish I could win 3700 lotteries. Per Year.

You were saying ???

Please learn to intepret these numbers correctly. DRAM error rates are a non-issue in your "professional workflow". It's by orders of magnitude more likely that you'll suffer data loss because of other calamities.

 

[petsounds]

I can't see Apple dropping the Mac Pro line anytime soon -- they've invested too much into Logic Studio & Final Cut (both of which need the multicore madness of the Pro series).

However, this refresh is pretty anemic and the pricing is just absurd. When I bought my 2008 model 8-core, I bought the middle chip speed. Out the door it was around $3300. Looking at the new pricing, just to get your foot in the door on the 12-core is $5000. That's near Mac IIfx pricing levels (too ***** expensive was the running joke at the time). It's way out of line with pricing history on this model.

 

[Octobot]

So much bs being posted.. So many people still don't seem to get it.

I am a 30 year old freelance designer.. I do everything from print to 3D animation rendering. I can make 300-600 (&up) dollars a day. I welcome a faster computer, it makes my time more valuable. I can pay this thing off within 2 weeks. The speed makes experimentation and idea development more efficient and fun. I like Apple's designs, they make the prettiest computers. I really like the OS. If Apple wants to make a buck of me, so be it.. I can make lots more.

I grew up a PC user, been on a Mac for 10 years.
-
If you can't see potential or make up the cost.. Buy used, go PC or do something else. This is a Mac Pro.. Apple's best offering for Pro users.. Don't like it? Well tough.. There's nothing you can do about it.
-
The 12 core.. Slowly upgraded with more and more ram, will burn through my renders.. Can't wait. And ya I'll be playing Starcraft 2 on it as well

 

[milo]

No thanks. Will pass on this round of 12 core mac pros. Can build one allot cheaper.

I'd like to see your list of components/prices showing that.

Yeah... and $5000 for 12 cores? Wonder what that $5000 would buy on the PC side? I bet you get a lot more bang for the buck.

On the PC side, about twelve cores, maybe a little less. Price out a 12 core PC, you'll be surprised that you don't get a better bang for the buck, maybe worse.

For the quad, it's definitely badly priced compared to PCs (mainly since you can match the performance with i7), but on the high end the 8 and especially 12 core machines are fairly competitive.

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.

Bingo.

 

[siii]

Gutted about the price, was hoping for 12 core price around the current price of 8 cores... :/ Silly me... Guess it was never going to be cheap! Very jealous of future 12 core owners! Surprised apple didn't it make such an investment more future proof with usb 3, but hey would have been all about the cores for me...

I might go down the hackintosh route next, designing 3d work on the i7 iMac is fine for me, but would appreciate more cores to cut long animation/final images render times...a networked hackintosh or even a windows pc could be far price/performance realistic for me, (around £2000) give or take 15%..

what do you guys think of this build?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWg8fV5P4z8

 

[youngmaster]

is it actually possible to buy the old quad core (used) an upgrade it with the new 1gb Radeon HD 5870 (which i'd buy somewhere else)? or will there be problems with the motherboard or any other hardware?

 

[AppliedMicro]

Surprised apple didn't it make such an investment more future proof with usb 3

At least you have some PCIe slots for for that

 

[milo]

No, you can't. The quad-core Xeons (X5365) for the 2006 Mac Pro still fetch around $700 PER processor. A Core 2 Quad running at 3GHz is NOT a Xeon X5365.

Your machine may be faster, but if there's one thing I have learned from reading these forums it's that a lot of people here don't seem to have any idea what the difference between workstation class components are versus high end desktop components and that premiums get charged on anything considered to be "business class."

Sorry, but I can and I did. And then you admit it - you say I can't but then you admit my machine may be faster. And it is. And then you admit that YOU have built a hackintosh as well - really, you're trying to make the case that the xeon machines are better yet your actions certainly don't seem to agree?

So enlighten me, please explain what benefit Workstation Class Components give me over the same machine built with i7? I can run the same apps on both, SPECIFICALLY what benefit do I see as a user?

 

[snberk103]

Originally Posted by snberk103
From ZDNet Wish I could win 3700 lotteries. Per Year.

You were saying ???

Please learn to intepret these numbers correctly. DRAM error rates are a non-issue in your "professional workflow". It's by orders of magnitude more likely that you'll suffer data loss because of other calamities.

I realize that I'm not suffering 3700 memory errors per year, but I used the, umm, dramatic tone with the poster to emphasize that in fact ECC and non-ECC memory are not the same thing, and that if just one of my images is protected from an unrecoverable error then I paid for the Mac Pro. The whole thing. The worst part is that some of these errors are "silent".... they are being written to disk without being flagged. At this point you can back up all you want, you are merely copying the original damaged file.

As well as spending money on an ECC memory system, I also spend money on other back up systems to protect from those dangers too.

 

[siii]

At least you have some PCIe slots for for that

Good shout

 

[seedster2]

Not too impressed. They could have done 6 RAM slots per CPU like most 1366 boards to support triple channel memory when the RAM is maxed. Also for the price they could have used the ICH10R south bridge for built in hardware RAID support like just about every 1366 board made.

I just figured that Apple is making at least $1000 profit on the octo core. On newegg you can build it for $2400 using the same or better parts.

I make this comparison because when the 2006 and 2008 MP's were released. You could not build part to part match on Newegg for less than Apple was charging for the MP. As I recall the MP was a couple hundred cheaper.

This is my only qualm about Apple keeping the case. It appears they are hindering the processing power to maintain the same external design.

What utter crap.

Comparing a camera whose sole function is to take photographs, to a machine which is designed to multifunction and accommodate a variety of use platforms is asinine. Especially since Leica also make a contemporary design specifically aimed at high-end Nikon, Canon, etc. multi-use cameras. which looks exactly like a standard DSLR.

Not only that, when you buy a Leica, you buy their glass (which is worth more than the body) and their specific engineering. That's why the exterior is not relevant to the quality of the image or the purpose. If Apple made the processors and the rest of the hardware there might be a point in there, but they don't. It's off-the-shelf stuff.

I dont know how zealots can compare leica and Mac Pros. These baffling analogies are getting more preposterous as time goes on. This is from a Nikon shooter too.

Yep, your right, i am thinking an imac is a better deal. I am even thinking that a refurbished last model from apple.

this just isn't worth it, without:

1- Blu-Ray
2- USB 3
3- Optional HDMI output also for secondary monitor

Also, it would be great to get a new case. this one is pretty dated. they have been using this aluminum design for many generations now with only minor changes.

These incremental updates and huge omissions make me so happy I jumped on my EOL 8 core.

 

[milo]

Actually you need to read back to where I stated the i7 iMac is better value then the base Mac Pro.

That doesn't answer my question! You keep insisting that it's somehow invalid to compare a quad i7 to a quad xeon since they aren't the same but providing no reason why one is supposedly better.

WHAT BENEFIT DOES THE XEON PROVIDE TO THE USER?

The more you fail to answer that question, the more it looks like an admission that you can't think of an answer.

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?

No shirt, sherlock, of course a six core chip is faster than a quad. But we were talking about quad versus quad. And again, you seem to be admitting that the xeon provides no real world advantage over the i7.

I was thinking that for those people who want more than 8 cores, why not just buy cheap mini's and setup a render farm? I would think that a base 4 core machine (for the edit) along with a couple of mac minis would be cheaper and faster for rendering. I can't think of any reason to buy 12 cores in one machine when you have options to setup external renders. What I think would be the best solution is to have fast CPU on the edit machine, and multiple external cores to send the final file out to. Why would anyone want to keep the whole process confined to one box? Please enlighten me.

Maybe for video edit/render, but for things like audio it's way easier to have everything in one box. And for render farms, i7 pcs make a TON more sense than minis.

Why should this be a valid point when the product isn't even targeted at consumers, but professionals?

Because 1) since there is no other consumer tower option, it IS targeted at consumers whether apple says that or not and 2) since plenty of professionals ARE using i7 machines and are ecstatic about the performance they are getting.

If machine A runs software as well as machine B for half the price, why should the user even care about the branding of the chips in either machine as "pro" or not?

 

[Justinf79]

I just want to buy the 5870 for my 2008 Mac Pro.

GL

Same here, for my '09 MP.

 

[Kusakun]

Care to explain how it is extremely overpriced when only the CPUs are 2000$ already?

Im not only refering to Apple. I know what you mean. The 6 core processors are the overpriced ones. Other than that -a big piece of the money goes to the processor and Intel actually should offer a "cheaper" option as Xeon models- Not only high end ones. The bad thing is that the lower end computers such as 4 and 8 models are almost the same as last year releases.

 

[milo]

The plain fact is, if you don't need a Xeon or ECC ram, why even look at the Mac Pro ?

Apple doesn't make a consumer grade tower anymore. Whining about it is futile.

Your second sentence answers the first. People look at the mac pro because apple doesn't make any machine with these features without Xeon or ECC.

And please PLEASE explain to me, who exactly "NEEDS" quad xeon and ECC ram, and why? Especially since the main "need" for xeon is for dual cpu chips.

Just because YOU keep it hidden away doesn't mean that EVERYONE keeps their PowerMacs/Mac Pros under a desk.
At work our PMG5s/MPs are on top of our desks next to our Apple Cinema Displays. It's handy to have instant access to the front ports for headphones, USB flash drives, FW/USB external drives, etc..

Seems like an odd choice to me but whatever. I guess if you care that much about how it looks, you just need to get your priorities straight.

 

[benpatient]

Nothing here to make me consider upgrading from my 2008 dual 2.8...but that's good...no need to be envious. Happy to stick with the 08 for another year or two until there's a serious development.

And what good value those 2008's were!

Might check out one of those trackpads though...

Yeah, I'm really laughing it up with my 8-core 2.8 2008 mac pro.

Last year's update was pathetic, and this one is pretty good on the top end, but it freaking double's the price to make that happen. I'm sure the current 4-core is as fast as the 2008 8-core most of the time with the same specs otherwise, but when you're using all 8 cores, there's no comparison.

I can't wait to see what the maximum price you could pay for a loaded mac pro will be (without any external devices like printers or monitors or whatever).

I'm guessing close to 20,000.

hahahahahaha.

 

[TheNoize]

That's it?

That's it? A slight CPU upgrade, a "major" graphics update, and same price?

I'm glad I just bought a Nehalem Mac Pro (4,1) last week, open box for $2150!
I'm glad I didn't wait.

Question: can we install the new ATI cards (5770, 5870) in the current 4,1 Mac Pros?

Usually we should be able to, but with Apple wanting to snatch money from their most loyal customers, you never know....

 

[Stridder44]

I can't believe I waited for this...... $5k and

NO SATA3
NO USB 3.0
NO NVidia Cards for 3D work

Bend over and get hosed on the pricing.

I work in 3D and was hoping that the new MacPros would be something worth waiting for. If this is Steveo's version of "Amazing" I'm pretty darn disappointed. Win7 is looking better and better.

Win7 is very good. I love Apple as much as the next guy here, but they really need a good kick in the financial ass to let them know that we're tired of these crap Mac Pro updates. The specs aren't so bad, it's the price they're asking for said specs is what gets me.

 

[neonRing]

OVER a BILLION different configurations?

A BILLION?

are you kidding me?

 

[milo]

A decent post from someone who appreciates what the Mac Pro is all about - good performance, rock solid OS and extremely robust build quality.

Sense at last.

Except that it's wrong. If this alleged "workstation" had good performance, wouldn't it beat an imac (which has that same rock solid OS)? The quad has awful performance for the price.

Hackintoshes are fine for hobbyists who like to fiddle but not for folks that make their living with the computer.

Wrong. It took a little while to set up but since then zero fiddling and it works every bit as well as the Mac Pro. No question that you can make a living using it (and better than the base mac pro for much cheaper).

You compare this to what? Try to check how much a similarly specced Dell would cost you.

That has already been done - in the case of the quad, hundreds less.

 

[nascimento]

It's 5% slower. These are the same processors, just at different speeds.

LOL what a nice speed bump.
Umbongo! crazy drink.

 

[-hh]

I agree that this update isn't that "amazing". I think that there will be another "update" in January or possibly March for the Sandy Bridge processors, which will be significant.

Will that be 2011 ... or 2012? Wish I was joking.

I plan on waiting until then. I prefer a tower and a separate monitor rather than an "all in one". I wish the Mac Pros would have more options to choose from, also.

I've been deliberating between an iMac or a mini as an interium solution - - the iMac would satisfy most of my needs, except that I have multiple desktops that I (KVM-esque) switch my keyboard/mouse and display between to move between environments. Since I can't exactly go plug in a computer's VGA-out into an iMac...

The 911 (997) ain't the same car that was around in 2003 (996).

Nor earlier - - both of your dang newfangled models actually have water in their engines!

...Can someone please tell me why we care about USB 3, especially since half the people frothing for it were disappointed about the lack of LightPeak (which is why it's unlikely you're going to see any further FW and USB speed bumps, LightPeak IS about as Apple as it gets). In a Mac Pro I can put in an eSATA card. So, besides storage, what exactly do people need/want USB 3 for? (The lack of eSATA on the iMacs is far more of an irritation than the lack of USB 3.)

In simplest terms, it is partly about future-proofing one's purchase, and partly about trying to get more I/O performance today, rather than having to wait for another ~2 years for it to show up.

Is Apple moving away from Pro users? I dunno. Could be. If it turns out it's more profitable for them to leave that market, they will. It doesn't matter if you have been buying Apple workstations for the last 25 years, the company owes you nothing. They are a business. I think a lot of the anger is that some people seem to think of Apple as something more. It isn't.

Agreed, and I think a lot of the angst here is that the traditional Higher-End Macintosh customer has been a small business / entreprenurial -type, so the consideration of a $5K machine versus a $1K one is not insignificant. This is effectively why the longstanding debates over things like ECC RAM come about: for certain elements, it simply isn't an important feature, but because of Apple's "All or Nothing" Mac Pro product line, this customer is left with a decision to make, which is fundimentally unpleasant.

'm thinking the next Pro release will have Light Peak. The Light Peak technology was demo'd in '08 on a MacPro motherboard ...

Great, but its now been two years since that demo - - is the business agility paradigm for advanced Mac stuff now being modelled by how glacially slow my S&T gets done in the DoD? Apple's tech for Mac is now moving slower than I am...

Who buys these things? Workstations are a niche that is getting even tinier every year. The Mac Pro is becoming a hobby. I bet they are already making more money with the iPad than with this behemoth of the last millenium.

This is really the key to understanding a big part of this. By my personal educated guesses, I figure that the Mac Pro is probably 2%-4% of total Mac sales. As such, it is going to get ignored as a priority ... even if it really shouldn't be, because of the "Halo Enabler" effect it has: it should be expected that its an enabler to help drives sales of other Apple products, such as Final Cut Pro, etc.


-hh

 

[DesterWallaboo]

Usb 3.0??

WTF is the USB 3.0 and FireWire 3200? Don't tell me we have to wait another 2-3 years for USB 3.0.