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

[xBerserker]

The state of apple’s professional line


Fantastic article.

Just read this, great article indeed. I need to upgrade from my PPC Power Mac G5 anyway. It's between the 4 and 6 core now..

Actually I almost a B consumer I guess. I'm a webmaster so mostly photoshop and a little final cut pro. So maybe 4 would be enough .. but hard to pass up a 6 core.

I actually had one of the first Intel iMacs, the white ones. After a year or so. The dvd drive wouldn't always see or burn discs. Very annoying. Not a easy thing to replace in a iMac.

So I bought a used PPC Power Mac G5 last one before the Intel switch. Still using that and it's working great. But some programs are Intel only and I like the option to run windows if it's really need for some odd task.

Not sure if I'll buy a iMac as a main computer again because of that. At least with a Mac Pro you can replace the parts very easily.

 

[jnpy!$4g3cwk]

In the 8-12 core range (not counting hyper threading) the macs are competitive on horse power but not on video cards.

What video cards would have impressed you? The 5870 is the fastest card you can get that is under 200W power, and, is one of the fastest out there.

On a related subject, a number of folks have mentioned the FireGL and Quadro product lines. What would the advantage of using one of these be for, say, running Final Cut?

 

[SirHaakon]

No one has to use OS X. Prefer to use it maybe. But no one is forced into OS X. At all.

That's rather silly and ignorant. I work for a company where we edit using Final Cut Pro. I often times prep files at home. Final Cut Pro is not available for any other operating system. I'm either forced to use OS X (though I don't mind, because I like it) or I can quit my job. When it comes down to one's line of work, it holds a little more significance than just "preference."

 

[xbjllb]

Further theories that Steve Jobs' ego interferes with the consumer:

Apple Drops nVidia from New Mac Pros to Snub Adobe

I can definitely see Apple dumping nVidia because Adobe's mercury engine in Premiere, based off of CUDA, makes FCP look old and busted. Steve doesn't want people switching to Adobe Premiere and dumping FCP. He doesn't have the software to back it up, so he gimps an entire hardware line to spite a software competitor.

There are 3d rendering engines based off of Cuda also (octane is pretty sexy, also I think Lux Render is on the mac).

Yes, we can always buy an extra nVidia card elsewhere, but it's just yet another expense on top of the enormous cost of being a "pro" on the mac. And this is assuming Apple would new Cuda capable nVidia cards in a timely manner, if at all.

I think I've had it with insanity of Steve Jobs. It's beyond ridiculous at this point. It seems like only yesterday he was snubbing any mention of ATI at the announcement of the G4 cube because they released the stats of the Cube's video hardware before his holy keynote. If anything, it only illustrates one thing - if you are not with Steve 100%, you are against him 100%.

Apple is a dangerous partner to have. You never know when it's going to turn on you and bite you in the rear. It could be out of competition or purely out of spite and an age old grudge. Apple's 3rd party hardware partners, 3rd party software developers, and even its customers and users should watch out. This time, Steve bit Adobe - again - and simultaneously took a swipe at the options of some pro users, all while smiling and demanding a massive price premium.

All hail Steve, and his gift of seeing enemies everywhere.

You couldn't be more correct, and thanks for finding EXACT evidence in the video card picks of what I've been finding everywhere else.

I think the man has a screw loose since his unfortunately disease; no, seriously. And it is a shame.

The state of apple’s professional line


Fantastic article.

Apple effectively gimped - or disabled entirely by the omission of nVidia - software tools that people use like Octane, Lux, and Premiere Pro. The best video card in the world doesn't matter if one can't use their tools with it.




Just buy a decked out iMac or PC at half the cost, because Final Cut isn't going to make use of the crazy amount of cores in the latest Mac Pro CPUs. Might as well get the iMac with it's faster clock speed and be happy with the big display and OSX.

I believe Brook Willard explained it well, although he took his time doing it. Here's a few snippets:

THANKS!

I did, and it's not as pleasing as some people make is seem, no matter how hard I wanted to LOVE OSx86 and hackintosh.

I would spend more than $1000 in a system that'd need to be built to specification, with specific hardware just so that later I could hack it and patch it, to install one fixed version of OS X and still have 1 or 2 hardware features not working. Then, I wouldn't be able to update the OS without worries, because it could just stop working, and I'd have to redo the installation again. Am I wrong?

Sure, it's cheaper. And it's fun to play around with. But is it really worth the hassle and risk, when you need a system to work with Pro Tools or Avid? No, it's not.

PS: you're right that it is a pathetic update to the Mac Pro line, though. I'm glad I'm waiting for my mail delivery of a Nehalem Mac Pro from the previous generation, that I actually got for a good price, new (just over $2100). It's the only way to buy a Mac Pro, IMO.

Shhh. Don't tell anyone, but that's what I just did too. From the Mac Store even. They're outfitting all the old ones with 4870's. And I AM going to use it for my youtube cheese grating videos. And Jobs is damn lucky these babies run Windows natively. I cover my ass at all times.

And you should have SEEN my online feedback report to Apple. Store? A+ Current refresh because of no Blu-ray and better video card support and FW and USB upgrades? F

With a lot of angry words most folks here have already read ad nauseum.

 

[Eidorian]

You couldn't be more correct, and thanks for finding EXACT evidence of what I've been finding everywhere else in the video card picks.

I just jumped to nVidia after years of ATI love. Frankly, CUDA, OpenCL, and many other GPGPU support is great.

 

[xbjllb]

Doesn't matter at this point. There is so much else wrong with their lineup that I can't convince anyone, including myself, to pay for Apple's crap anymore.



Yup, which is why I complained about that adding to the ridiculous cost. Apple has to snub nVidia to spite Adobe, and I'm not going to pay for it.



Oh yes they do. Bosses and the accountant that answers to them care a WHOLE lot.



Speak for yourself. It's my responsibility to keep on top of computer tech to help plan my studio's next upgrade cycle. I also wanted a mac pro for home.



Hint: that's what our competitors did, and that's what we're doing. Apple has officially chased away at least 5 companies that I know of in my area. now they may not care about small business (that much is clear from their product line), but business tire of them, too.

my boss's words, after waiting for the MacPros: "It's just not worth the Apple drama anymore. We can't plan upgrades around the whims of a black turtle neck wearing, tantrum throwing child."

At least our current macs will also run windows as the rest of the company gets brand new windows machines.



Well, I, my company, and other creative companies in my area are done contributing to that. 6 months from now we'll be mac free.

And you're the tip of the iceberg. Me? I gave them one last chance (perhaps stupidly) with a quadcore nehalem 2.93 but at least I have a machine that will run windows and vastly outperform my last matte era iMac.

Whether I ever buy another will depend on whether or not they start servicing their pro base again via TRUE cutting edge hardware and keeping all the pro app software up to date. I deal in video and audio equally, and I have to send out tons of demo Blu-ray discs (but not enough to replicate them.)

I wouldn't have even bought this if I hadn't started to do projects with massive 3D rendering.

And God help Adobe too if CS5 Encore doesn't author Blu-ray multi-menus properly without choking, and crashing every five minutes.

 

[PeterQVenkman]

What video cards would have impressed you? The 5870 is the fastest card you can get that is under 200W power, and, is one of the fastest out there.

A nice nVidia card. I don't care if ATI gets better wattage or even better framerates. ATI products don't work with some of the tools I use.

On a related subject, a number of folks have mentioned the FireGL and Quadro product lines. What would the advantage of using one of these be for, say, running Final Cut?

I don't think there is any big advantage in Final Cut. Getting the right nVidia card for Premiere pro, however, makes a big difference.

These are the cards listed on Adobe's website:

GeForce GTX 285 (Windows and Mac OS)
Quadro FX 3800 (Windows)
Quadro FX 4800 (Windows and Mac OS)
Quadro FX 5800 (Windows)
Quadro CX

Adobe is planning to support additional cards in the future, including some of the new NVIDIA solutions based on the upcoming Fermi parallel computing architecture.

http://www.adobe.com/products/premiere/performance/

Introducing the Mercury Playback Engine — the completely redesigned playback engine in Adobe Premiere® Pro CS5, delivering dramatic performance and stability improvements. The Mercury Playback Engine is native 64-bit, multicore, and GPU-accelerated to provide an amazingly fluid, real-time editing experience

 

[DMann]

Getting the right nVidia card for Premiere pro, however, makes a big difference.

These are the cards listed on Adobe's website:

So, Adobe refuses to support ATI GPUs, and this is somehow Apple's fault?

 

[tonyGriggs]

]In fact, I would say that most 3D rendering is done on PCs. While Windows does tend to have more issues than Mac, the situation has greatly improved with Windows 7 and the same programs are generally priced lower for the PC than Mac (there is also a greater selection).

The first point is half-correct. While most rendering in larger studios is done on PC hardware, it's not done in a Windows environment. Typically, for a solid pipeline you're going to want a Linux backbone from top to bottom. There may be some OSX boxes in the mix for artist to work with up-to-date versions of, say, Photoshop, but that's about it.

Did you have some examples of high-end software being priced differently for different platforms? AFAIK, the high-end stuff is all priced the same; most developers are charging by the license/seat without regard to platform.

--
tG

 

[TheNoize]

Mac is still the best choice to run ultra-unstable software with very old codebase, like Pro Tools 8.

Yes, it's still important in the industry - and we can't do anything about the fact that it runs worse on PCs because it's so picky about hardware configurations, and at least Macs are factory built to a number of 10 different hardware combinations.

So even us, ex-engineering major students, who love to tinker with configurations and workarounds, are forced to use Mac if we want to get real music work done... And with an old MacBook Pro that only supports 3 GB of RAM, things were looking tight, so I got the Mac Pro.

The new update to the line makes me feel alone, like no one gives a crap about people who create the media that goes in all the stupid iPhones and iPads. Apple has been blinded by a profitable consumer market where, no matter how broke and jobless everyone is, they will pay $150 monthly to AT&T off their credit cards, to keep a stupid touchscreen phone that doesn't even allow developers to write applications freely.

I wish professional apps were made for UNIX powered machines with great driver support and stability for all kinds of hardware. But no, we're stuck with a fisher price computer with big icons that you can touch with your fingers.

It's like we're heading to a world like Idiocracy, and there's nothing we can do about it.

 

[NickK1066]

Apple's business roadmap

I think what people are failing to see is the bigger picture.

* Apple have a data centre
* Companies want flexible delivery of power
* IP Networks are booming pushing down the cost of access

So this is what you will see over the next five years from Apple:

1. The Mac Professional line become less based around an expensive investment on the customer's premises.
2. Major processing is farmed out to Apple's cloud using their Grid technology. Apple's cloud is a one-stop-shop.
3. Apple offering enterprise cloud based services using iWork etc as well as providing OSX based cloud based service Xcode toolset for third party developers.
4. OSX Applications being hosted out of the cloud - Apple maintaining a 30% cut in the revenue form these services.

5. Content providers such as film studios will utilise the cloud for processing and then release through to Apple's delivery platforms (AppleTV, iOS etc) for the consumers.

Make no bones about it Apple is looking to host and process the content from the camera through to the end user.

 

[KnightWRX]

Y
If the studio works with Digital Performer or Logic Audio, and they want you to be comfortable with OS X to work better in the studio, you're stuck to OS X. And they won't pay for a mac themselves either, obviously - that comes out of YOUR pocket because you're the one who wants to work for them.

That's rather silly and ignorant. I work for a company where we edit using Final Cut Pro. I often times prep files at home. Final Cut Pro is not available for any other operating system. I'm either forced to use OS X (though I don't mind, because I like it) or I can quit my job. When it comes down to one's line of work, it holds a little more significance than just "preference."

You guys are getting shafted by your employers. If my employer wants me to work from home on tools he chooses, he will pay for the equipement and software and I will bring it home, or I will expense it to him.

If you're too meek to ask this simple gesture of your employer, that is your problem, not Apple's.

And what forces you to have a Mac Pro to dabble in Logic Studio or Final Cut Pro at home ? Those pieces of software work just fine on a less expensive Mac.

 

[KnightWRX]

So, Adobe refuses to support ATI GPUs, and this is somehow Apple's fault?

I get his point though, it's not that Adobe refuses to support ATI GPUs, it's that ATI GPUs lack any support for GPGPU technologies from ATI. Even Apple's own OpenCL doesn't run on them.

In a sense, it's a funny move by Apple to move close to their entire desktop line-up to ATI GPUs in light of this. They do still sell nVidia cards though, so I don't see the issue. Buy a GTX 285 and use it as the GPGPU in your shiny new MacPro or wait to see what is going to go out on the store with the new ones in August before you start the paranoia.

 

[batchtaster]

Yes because it appeals to many more people. The average user isn't sitting there lusting after a Mac Pro. When you consider the price it isn't something that anybody would have a use for except for professionals.

Then explain to me why iMac also isn't in the prime position on the front page.

It should.

Putting this up front would be just embarrassing.

Embarrassing? Because you, personally and singularly, don't like it? Because of your over-expectations based on nothing but rumors? I have no use for it either, like I have no use for a BMW 7 Series. But that doesn't mean it doesn't deserve Apple's full promotional bragging juggernaut.

 

[Simon R.]

You guys are getting shafted by your employers. If my employer wants me to work from home on tools he chooses, he will pay for the equipement and software and I will bring it home, or I will expense it to him.

If you're too meek to ask this simple gesture of your employer, that is your problem, not Apple's.

And what forces you to have a Mac Pro to dabble in Logic Studio or Final Cut Pro at home ? Those pieces of software work just fine on a less expensive Mac.

No they don't. Or - tell me how to put a PCIe soundcard into an iMac - or how to put my UAD-2 card into the iMac. Oh.. and the Blackmagic video card with HDMI output into the iMac. Oh... and how do I put 4 harddrives into the iMac? And don't get me started on external drives, USB soundcards etc. If you want a professional, streamlined setup for pro audio work with loads of ins and outs you need PCI.

Maybe you should stick to talking about issues on which you have more insight.

 

[-hh]

I think what people are failing to see is the bigger picture.

* Apple have a data centre
* Companies want flexible delivery of power
* IP Networks are booming pushing down the cost of access

So this is what you will see over the next five years from Apple:

1. The Mac Professional line become less based around an expensive investment on the customer's premises.
2. Major processing is farmed out to Apple's cloud using their Grid technology. Apple's cloud is a one-stop-shop.
3. Apple offering enterprise cloud based services using iWork etc as well as providing OSX based cloud based service Xcode toolset for third party developers.
4. OSX Applications being hosted out of the cloud - Apple maintaining a 30% cut in the revenue form these services.

5. Content providers such as film studios will utilise the cloud for processing and then release through to Apple's delivery platforms (AppleTV, iOS etc) for the consumers.

Make no bones about it Apple is looking to host and process the content from the camera through to the end user.

This is a very good point ... to look at the larger strategic business implications ... but it does have its shortcomings, particularly when one looks beyond the (I hate to say it, but) 'iToy' offerings and into the Pro products.

Specifically,

* Farming out to the Cloud works for only some customers ... because I already know that my Employer will flat-out refuse to use it at any price, ironically because of something that's a trademark of Apple: SECURITY.

* Farming out to the Cloud for computational power is contrary to Apple's strategy to farm it out to your local GPU via Grand Central Dispatch (GCD).

And most significantly:

* IP Networks are going to have to get a lot faster .. while also getting cheaper .. in order to compete with even a laggardly FW800 I/O connection for moving data around...particularly when it comes to the large sizes often used by Mac-centric creatives.

Its been awhile since I bothered to check, but I believe that its still true that physically sending a few tapes overnight via FedEx still results in a higher bandwidth transfer rate than trying to FTP them electronically. Until you're able to outperform Sneakernet, certain "Cloud" aspects simply aren't going to cut it for serious works.


-hh

 

[KnightWRX]

No they don't. Or - tell me how to put a PCIe soundcard into an iMac - or how to put my UAD-2 card into the iMac. Oh.. and the Blackmagic video card with HDMI output into the iMac. Oh... and how do I put 4 harddrives into the iMac? And don't get me started on external drives, USB soundcards etc. If you want a professional, streamlined setup for pro audio work with loads of ins and outs you need PCI.

Maybe you should stick to talking about issues on which you have more insight.

Why do you need all that at home exactly ? And why can't you get a cheaper PC ?

Seriously, if you're locked into Apple software and can't afford their hardware, time to start planning a migration of your stuff or asking your employer to pay for your equipement.

What a hard concept to get for some of you. Again, you guys seem to PREFER OS X, that doesn't mean you're forced to use it.

 

[Simon R.]

Why do you need all that at home exactly ? And why can't you get a cheaper PC ?

Seriously, if you're locked into Apple software and can't afford their hardware, time to start planning a migration of your stuff or asking your employer to pay for your equipement.

What a hard concept to get for some of you. Again, you guys seem to PREFER OS X, that doesn't mean you're forced to use it.

Why I need it "at home"? Because I do my work at home, that's why.

Why not PC? Are we going in circles now? The whole premise was that some people need the software that is only available on Mac. In my case it is mainly Logic. Because it is the sequencer I have found to fit my needs the best and it is the one I know best - and the one that for me runs most stable on a Mac (and I prefer OS X as a working environment, and the silent, nicely designed Mac Pro over any PC tower I have seen/heard). There are many reasons why I am on Mac (while I do have 4 PC's running as slaves connected to my Mac). So just accept that some of us need to work with software only available for Mac for different reasons.

And I haven't said I can't afford it. Actually this is my first post in this thread. While I agree that the price is too high for what these "new" Mac Pros are, I am probably going to buy one, since I need another one for my ProTools system. And getting my employer (=myself) to pay for my equipment is an excellent idea

Obviously you don't realize what a big deal it would be to migrate to a different platform/setup altogether. And of course, if you have no idea about what these setups can look like and how complex they are, how could you know....

 

[KnightWRX]

Obviously you don't realize what a big deal it would be to migrate to a different platform/setup altogether. And of course, if you have no idea about what these setups can look like and how complex they are, how could you know....

You're right, I have no idea how big your setup is. But I do know about migrating. We've just moved over hundreds of SUN boxes to Linux x86-64 ones. We carried over data.

Again, you prefer to use Logic and a Mac. You could use a Windows alternative or you can pay to play. Apple decided that it only plays in the high-end.

And I don't know, but PeterQVenkman says he's moving away from Mac, so it doesn't sound as impossible as you and others claim it is. And since you've just jumped in this conversation, it was primarily about price. People said they were forced to use Macs and Macs were expensive. I just claimed they are not.

 

[Manzanito]

So, Adobe refuses to support ATI GPUs, and this is somehow Apple's fault?

The thing is ATI doesn't support CUDA. You don't even need to have one of the graphics cards officially supported by Adobe, you only need to change a line in a .txt to use mercury playback and any CUDA card with enough vram will take advantage of mercury playback.

But back to the subject, it's a feature that needs CUDA, so it's not Adobe's fault.

Apple, on the other hand, is forcing us to buy a crappy ATI card (that will be removed as soon as the computer arrives home, btw) and the nvidia card that will allow you to use mercury playback.

 

[Manzanito]

I get his point though, it's not that Adobe refuses to support ATI GPUs, it's that ATI GPUs lack any support for GPGPU technologies from ATI. Even Apple's own OpenCL doesn't run on them.

In a sense, it's a funny move by Apple to move close to their entire desktop line-up to ATI GPUs in light of this. They do still sell nVidia cards though, so I don't see the issue. Buy a GTX 285 and use it as the GPGPU in your shiny new MacPro or wait to see what is going to go out on the store with the new ones in August before you start the paranoia.

They've discontinued the GTX285 in Apple's website. Maybe they'll replace it with the GTX480 by the time Mac Pros are released?

The main issue I find is Apple is forcing you to buy the entry level ATI card and the one you're really gonna use. As if their profit margins weren't big enough, somehow they found a way to charge you for something you aren't gonna use. How hard would it be to put the nVidias as BTO?

 

[NickK1066]

The thing is ATI doesn't support CUDA. You don't even need to have one of the graphics cards officially supported by Adobe, you only need to change a line in a .txt to use mercury playback and any CUDA card with enough vram will take advantage of mercury playback.

But back to the subject, it's a feature that needs CUDA, so it's not Adobe's fault.

Apple, on the other hand, is forcing us to buy a crappy ATI card (that will be removed as soon as the computer arrives home, btw) and the nvidia card that will allow you to use mercury playback.

Nothing stopping Adobe using OpenCL. Both ATI and nVidia support it (it's close to CUDA).

 

[Manzanito]

Nothing stopping Adobe using OpenCL. Both ATI and nVidia support it (it's close to CUDA).

Well, Premiere was released months ago, so that might be a problem when trying to add OpenCL support. I don't know why Adobe chose CUDA over OpenCL, or even if it will be possible to design something like mercury playback using OpenCL.

The nVidias that shipped with 2009 Mac Pros couldn't use it either (I could be wrong, but I think you need over 700 Mb of VRAM to use it), what's really annoying is that Apple force feeds you a crappy card (be it ATI or nVidia). If they can't add as BTO the ones they sell in their very own store, at least they should give you the option of buying the Mac Pro without the graphic card.

 

[Simon R.]

You're right, I have no idea how big your setup is. But I do know about migrating. We've just moved over hundreds of SUN boxes to Linux x86-64 ones. We carried over data.

Again, you prefer to use Logic and a Mac. You could use a Windows alternative or you can pay to play. Apple decided that it only plays in the high-end.

And I don't know, but PeterQVenkman says he's moving away from Mac, so it doesn't sound as impossible as you and others claim it is. And since you've just jumped in this conversation, it was primarily about price. People said they were forced to use Macs and Macs were expensive. I just claimed they are not.

You're obviously not listening. As I wrote, I prefer using Logic as my sequencer program. I tried other sequencers over the time, and Logic suits me best and I have worked on my template here for the past 4 years. Having to redo all that work on another platform in another piece of software would take a tremendous amount of time, as well as a lot of adjustment. So there really is no choice for me if I want to feel inspired and comfortable doing the work I do. Even if we had to make it about the $$$, the amount of time (=to some extent, lost income) I would have to spend on doing a completely new setup compared to the extra $$ spent on a new Mac Pro instead of a PC, would not make it a sound decision.

So, while I still have my doubts about Apple's commitment to the pro segment, I will take another bite of the bittersweet Apple.

 

[polaris20]

I love the people ripping into Apple that still end up buying Macs anyway. Migrating isn't generally that big of a deal on a small scale. We switched from Avid systems to FCP, from Cubase to Logic. Photoshop is on both platforms. Office is on both platforms.

These are tools, not ways of life. If you don't like Apple, Steve Jobs, whatever, vote with your wallet.

If you're that tied into Apple software that you really can't move to a Windows alternative without it just being a preference thing, I question the competence of that field of work.

It can't be nearly as rough as switching from Sun Solaris to Linux, which we (along with KnightWRX) did as well.