Yeah its roughly around that and always has been. Which made the 2006 ($2,499 w/ 2x$670 cpus) and 2008 ($2,799 w/ 2x$797) models really good value for what you got.
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
Yeah its roughly around that and always has been. Which made the 2006 ($2,499 w/ 2x$670 cpus) and 2008 ($2,799 w/ 2x$797) models really good value for what you got.
Still no eSATA, still no USB 3.0
Still no eSATA, still no USB 3.0. I would say still no Firewire 3200 but does anyone even make FW3200 devices? At least eSATA and USB 3.0 are available on the market, just not for Mac users paying $2500+ for a system. *sigh*
Still no eSATA, still no USB 3.0. I would say still no Firewire 3200 but does anyone even make FW3200 devices? At least eSATA and USB 3.0 are available on the market, just not for Mac users paying $2500+ for a system. *sigh*
If you want to upgrade a "Dual Quad Core Intel® Xeon® Processor E5620, 2.40GHz,12M L3, 5.86GT/s, turbo" in a Dell Precision T7500 to a "
Dual Quad Core Intel® Xeon® Processor X5677, 3.46GHz,12M L3, 6.4GT/s, turbo" it'll cost you over 4k, in addition to the 3k it costs beforehand. These are workstation prices people, Apple doesn't make a consumer tower. Workstation prices are kinda like server prices. Completely outrageous by consumer standards, but in the industries that use them, worth paying.
Dual Quad Core Intel® Xeon® Processor X5677, 3.46GHz,12M L3, 6.4GT/s, turbo" it'll cost you over 4k, in addition to the 3k it costs beforehand. These are workstation prices people, Apple doesn't make a consumer tower. Workstation prices are kinda like server prices. Completely outrageous by consumer standards, but in the industries that use them, worth paying.
As Apple pays nowhere near Newegg prices for their parts, we are looking at about a 50-60% markup here (if not more on the lower 2 models). Some might say that OSX, the build quality, and the looks are worth that markup. I disagree, but understand.
However, the real question is, do you need the server processors and ECC memory? If not, you might as well get the similarly specced i7 processors and regular DDR3 RAM, which sell for far less. While not an actual markup (Apple is paying a higher price for server grade parts) the actual performance value conveyed to consumers is the same as that of the cheaper i7s, adding to the "perceived markup" if you understand what I am saying.
While the xenons may have a higher actual cost, they are adding no value for the vast majority of consumers (like 99.999999999999% of users). This wouldn't frustrate me if there was another option to chose from, such as a consumer-grade Mac desktop with quad i5/i7 and the option for a decent videocard.
So, as far as OSX desktops go, you have a choice between a moderately powered all-in-one which derives most of its value from its oversized, high-resolution screen (that it doesn't have the power to drive) and has no expandability, or you can buy the desktop that uses super-expensive, high-grade components that most everyone wouldn't need.
The SATA/USB 3, Bluray, videocard, and surround sound issues present problems as well. If I'm paying premium prices, I want premium features. Hell, these aren't even premium features now.
Somehow the affordability and the value of what you get with the Mac Pro has gone way UP. I think my 8 core 2.8 was $2499 when I got it.
way to expensive.... come on Apple...
way to expensive.... come on Apple...
Wow. I will be keeping my 08 MP and be waiting again for a real update instead of a bump. I have upgraded my video card when needed only. My next machine may once again be a home built model... My 08 was value. I looked at building something comparable and couldn't for the money at the time, or at least it was comparable... I would have paid the same for a a home built system. MP's haven't been a value since.
I don't think you understand how computers work now. GHz-wize, yes, it's a small difference, but it comes with extra cores, which tends to be how CPU manufacturers update their CPUs now. So, a ton of extra cores + a slight bump in speed = a big win for applications that can take advantage of all those cores. People who need workstations are the type who would have those kinds of applications. Also, the 5870 is a great graphics card...
If these people's needs are so specific, then Apple isn't for them since they don't sell a computer that doesn't have all that but isn't a all-in-one or a headless laptop.
But hey, we still get a whopping 3 GB of RAM! That's only one less GB than the cheapest 21.5" iMac.
OK... to be fair and balanced... the Radeon 5770 that will now ship as standard mops the floor with the NVidia GT120. That's actually the biggest improvement. As for the speed bump from 2.66 to 2.8 after 16 months... I'm not gonna bother to comment on that one since the forum engine would replace every word with asterisks.
I would like to hear your definition of "Overpriced". For me this isn't "too expensive for you". Because I don't need expandability, 12 processors, etc and I buy a Mac mini, should I say the Mac Pro is overpriced?
As I said I amy be wrong. In any case the Xeon processors are advertised as being more reliable.
Well first of all, simply because I bring forth some facts about how Apple can continue to improve should not be labeled as 'whining' or anything.
Now, maybe you have not heard about HD video editing and multiple streams of video, BUT I need some throughput. Firewire 800 on an external RAID 0 has around 65 MB/s throughput. Quite anemic. With eSATA you can get over 240 MB/s depending on how you build your external enclosure.
So all I was saying is that a simple eSATA port could vastly improve the external functionality of the iMAC and make it a challenger to the MacPro for people like me who love the Pro but feel a little priced out right now.
In case you didn't know, the MacBook Pros with the PCI slot have the capability of running eSATA - which is what people are doing on movie sets and pro photo shoots. With that speed, you can hook up fast externals and watch dailies and edit the shots on the set - and especially with this HDDSLR movement, Apple should know we need some hard drive bottlenecks to be removed.
I am happy about that, however the main monitor has brought up questions from professional photographers. I don't want to look at a shiny new monitor that gives me false data - I want to buy something and use it.
Now maybe the monitor is fine with the blacks - I need to research that some more.
2 x 6 core xeon chips for $4,999 is a really good price. If you would price out the parts, Apple is making the least profit off the 12 core machine and the most profit off the starting Nehalem Quad that just got a simple speed bump (people, remember, that Nahalem chip is a year old!)
My point is, the starting point of the quad that is not even using Westmere; it could of started at $1999. Most people will be wanting the 6 core model which sits nicely in the middle and actually performs at the level of the mid 2009 8 core. The problem is, Apple will probably charge $1299 on top of the $2499 starting point to get the upgrade.
It is that starting point that is really painful. Let's see where they price the 6 core, I am really hoping for something under 3k.
Finally the update is announced.
Just checked the Apple Japan website and they have the same announcement here, 4,6,8 and 12 core options available from August. Unfortunately for now they are only showing prices for the Quad and 8 core models...
Now what to do... wait for the new models or quickly buy one of the currently available.....
Just checked the Apple Japan website and they have the same announcement here, 4,6,8 and 12 core options available from August. Unfortunately for now they are only showing prices for the Quad and 8 core models...
Now what to do... wait for the new models or quickly buy one of the currently available.....
The Mac Pro is too expensive for you, but since the Mac mini meets your needs - Apple has a system that meets your needs at a price that's competitive.
If you want an expandable, affordable system with expandability (available disk and PCIe slots) with 4 to 6 cores - Apple pushes you to a workstation class system that's far more expensive than non-server-based offerings from other vendors.
The definition of "over-priced" differs for each individual, and their requirements. For many people who want more than an all-in-one or a headless laptop - Apple's only other desktop offering is far more expensive than other mid-range systems on the market.
It's clear that a 12-core Mac Pro is priced in the range of other dual-socket Xeon workstation class systems. Only a blind Windows Fanboi would claim otherwise.
For a 4-core or 6-core desktop class system, however - Apple has no offering. You are forced to pick a workstation class system that is far more expensive than desktop class systems from other vendors.
That is "overpriced" for those who don't need server/workstation features.
So, Aiden's definition of "overpriced" depends on the user and her needs. A $2000 system can be "overpriced" for one person, a $4000 system can be a bargain for another.
And your links to those advertisements are?....
That's interesting to hear a real power-user's perspective. I'd think if Apple wanted this to truly be a PRO line of products they'd think a little higher up the food chain, yet. Perhaps a super-customizable version thats BTO and pricy, but at least the option would be there for guys like this who can't work with whats being offered.
That's where we didn't meet. For me overpriced is too expensive for what it is. I don't think the Mac Pro is overpriced. I do think though that it is too expensive for me. Semantics, but that's how I see it.
Ah, precisely. That is what the real problem is IMO - not that they are overpriced, but that they have huge gaps a in their offering.
I see this"
"The Intel® Xeon® processor 7500 series delivers exceptional, scalable performance with advanced reliability for your most demanding server requirements."
here:
http://www.intel.com/itcenter/products/xeon/7500/index.htm
http://software.intel.com/sites/oss/pdfs/Intel_Xeon_Processor_7500_Series_RAS.pdf
"The latest Intel® Xeon® processor 7500 and 6500 series can be expected to dramatically accelerate this trend. Four-socket servers based on this new processor family deliver the greatest performance and scalability increase ever for a new Intel Xeon processor generation. They also provide advanced support for 24/7 computing environments with abundant new reliability, availability, and serviceability (RAS) features."
from:
http://www.dell.com/downloads/globa...anced-reliability-intel-nehalem-processor.pdf
Admittedly not great links. I may be wrong, but it seems to me that they are supposed to be more reliable.
You pretended to know right here:
You don't know what people other than yourself need, that includes me. It came off as harsh wording and I apologize for that. I'm just all grumpy from Apple's update today. I don't look forward to switching to windows to get the power I need to do my work.
Truly, you have a dizzying intellect!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TUee1WvtQZU#t=02m54sI read it. And this one. Because I'm waiting for Starcraft 2 to install on my aging macbook pro. God help me I am addicted to these forums.
be thankful they didn't use the word "magical" to describe a Xeon.
Yep!
Yep. If it were me and I were in the market, I'd take MORE CORES over a speed bumped processor any day especially since most of the software I'm using now uses multithreads.
Yep. If it were me and I were in the market, I'd take MORE CORES over a speed bumped processor any day especially since most of the software I'm using now uses multithreads.
That would have to be one big blender! And I don't think he could break it in half like he did the iPad.
