Apple Sends Mac Pro Posters to Journalists: 'The Computer We Were Insane to Build'

[wildmac]

And for God's sake, where are the actual working professionals to comment in these forums? I want to hear from someone who uses Photoshop and Final Cut Pro X. Tell us YOUR thoughts on the Mac Pro. Why the hell anyone would buy a beautiful piece of hardware like this and then waste it playing World of Warcraft is beyond me...

Well, I might do Photoshop/Lightroom, and World of Warcraft...

But it's all about those D800 raw files right now. Waiting for Lightroom to redraw previews is painful on my 6-year-old MacPro, and I'm not sure there's enough bang for the buck from the graphics card in the iMac. (plus the other iMac issues).

 

[PeterQVenkman]

weird... i pretty much said the exact opposite a few posts above..

what type of performance will it give you? and which type of system is going to give better performance?

It's not terrible, but the top of the line intel desktop chip (4-core only), which is also capable of being overclocked, will give you much faster clock speed on your single core threads, at a significantly lower cost.

It will also be close - sometimes faster, in CPU bound rendering.

And as for the GPUs - if you really are doing all of your rendering in Indogo, then you can get more bang for your buck with a single top of the line Nvidia (or ATI) GPU that costs a lot less.

You don't need a workstation card for GPU rendering. The "workstation" class cards are unnecessarily expensive and don't bring the extra performance associated with their extra cost.

heck, in C4d, there is no benefit to a workstation card.

 

[wildmac]

It's not terrible, but the top of the line intel desktop chip (4-core only), which is also capable of being overclocked, will give you much faster clock speed on your single core threads, at a significantly lower cost.

It will also be close - sometimes faster, in CPU bound rendering.

And as for the GPUs - if you really are doing all of your rendering in Indogo, then you can get more bang for your buck with a single top of the line Nvidia (or ATI) GPU that costs a lot less.

You don't need a workstation card for GPU rendering. The "workstation" class cards are unnecessarily expensive and don't bring the extra performance associated with their extra cost.

heck, in C4d, there is no benefit to a workstation card.

Of course the problem here is, if you want to stay with OSX, you don't have that choice. You either go with a new rMBP, an iMac with somewhat dated graphics, or an new MacPro with workstation cards.

The 2012 MacPro refurbs are still expensive enough that they are not a viable option, especially if you consider the price of the Mac versions of the 680 or 780 cards.

 

[thatdrh]

ummmm....

Not sure if anyone has brought this up... You think they will release a black version of their aluminum keyboard(s) and trackpad (and mouse) when this comes out? Silky smooth black mac, bright silver aluminum keyboard sticking out like a turd in a punch bowl..

 

[wildmac]

Not sure if anyone has brought this up... You think they will release a black version of their aluminum keyboard(s) and trackpad (and mouse) when this comes out? Silky smooth black mac, bright silver aluminum keyboard sticking out like a turd in a punch bowl..

Bigger question is the availability and reliability of dual-link DVI to Thunderbolt adapters for monitors.

 

[JavaTheHut]

...sticking out like a turd in a punch bowl..

hahaha As soon as I read that I thought of Bill Murray in "Caddy Shack"

 

[demars]

Bigger question is the availability and reliability of dual-link DVI to Thunderbolt adapters for monitors.

Dual-link DVI to mini-displayport adapters currently work, although they do eat up a USB port to provide power.

It would be nice to have a Thunderbolt-specific adapter that could draw power from the Thunderbolt port without the need for using a USB port, but I think if someone was going to come out with something like that, it would already exist.

 

[hwrdrrk]

This isn't a snide remark. It's a genuine question from a novice to all you experts out there:

Can someone explain to me how this mac pro will not be a flop?

My novice thinking:

1) Who will buy these? Anyone in professional video.

2) Who will want to buy these? Professional audio people and professional photography people who need the fastest of the fastest. The rest will continue to enjoy the portability of their macbook pros and the wonderful 27" screens on their iMacs.

3) Will PC users switch over to a $3000-base machine because Apple made a cool-looking trashcan /darth vader mac? No.

So who is buying these? People with old mac pro's who aren't satisfied with them. People who would have been happy if the old Mac Pro had internals that were up to date with 2013-2014 technology.

The design may be kind of innovative, but I just don't see why apple is pushing THIS as their revolutionary thing. It's a niche product. A long overdue product update. It's not an iWatch, iGlasses, or an iTV. Those are the products people (ages 4-94) will go absolutely insane over.

And one thing that just absolutely baffles me about this entire product release: So what if it's high speed SSD. The fact that apple is selling a $2999 product with a 256GB hard drive seems insulting. But then I step back and remember that it's part of the apple way:

1) Make a product so enchanting and desirable that you can...
2) Cut back on the specs
3) overprice the hell out of it
4) early adopters will still buy it because
a) they love tech
b) they are wealthy
c) they are successful professionals
or
d) they have a deep need for love that isn't being met socially

 

[wildmac]

Who will want to buy these? Professional audio people and professional photography people who need the fastest of the fastest. The rest will continue to enjoy the portability of their macbook pros and the wonderful 27" screens on their iMacs.

Maybe not.. see.. https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1663335/

My fears about getting that iMac

So who is buying these? People with old mac pro's who aren't satisfied with them. People who would have been happy if the old Mac Pro had internals that were up to date with 2013-2014 technology.

Totally.

----------

4) early adopters will still buy it because
a) they love tech
b) they are wealthy
c) they are successful professionals
or
d) they have a deep need for love that isn't being met socially

You missed a category, which you pointed out earlier.

e) they are sitting on MacPros that are ancient and are in desperate need of replacement, and there's no other option if they still want OSX.

----------

What this really boils down to is...

If you need a new system that is going to last a while, the new MacPro is your only option if you are planning on staying with OSX. The new iMac thread just illustrates that those systems are not likely to last much beyond 3 years, while the number of us here with 6+ year old MacPros testifies to their staying power.

I certainly would like a lower price point, but there's not much I can do about it, nor am I willing to go Windows to save $500 at most, likely closer to $200 or no savings at all.

 

[everything-i]

The fact that they built this gives me hope that in the post Jobs era they are still willing to do some radically different stuff. We need more crazy stuff like this because that is where the next big thing comes from. After all the industry said the iPhone was a crazy idea when it was first demoed and also the iPad.

 

[Jiten]

I'm not in Apple's target market for these things but I'm curious to see how fast it will run in practice. It is definitely obvious that this is the machine for the video and motion pros. Can't wait for December for the reviewers to but this machine to its paces.

 

[PeterQVenkman]

Maybe not.. see.. https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1663335/

My fears about getting that iMac



Totally.

----------



You missed a category, which you pointed out earlier.

e) they are sitting on MacPros that are ancient and are in desperate need of replacement, and there's no other option if they still want OSX.

----------

What this really boils down to is...

If you need a new system that is going to last a while, the new MacPro is your only option if you are planning on staying with OSX. The new iMac thread just illustrates that those systems are not likely to last much beyond 3 years, while the number of us here with 6+ year old MacPros testifies to their staying power.

I certainly would like a lower price point, but there's not much I can do about it, nor am I willing to go Windows to save $500 at most, likely closer to $200 or no savings at all.

Build a computer. It's fun! You will save massive amounts of money and get exactly what you want. Windows is not the terrifying wasteland it once was. If you are already on Adobe CC it will install just fine using the same license.

Just pricing out at one of the crappier gaming computer companies, I'm getting a 4-core 3.7 Ghz, 16 GB of ram, 256 GB SSD, and a 6 GB nvidia titan. That's more ram, basically the same CPU, and a monster video card - for $500 less and you won't need to worry about OpenCL vs CUDA, because it will be a monster at both.

You can build it on your own for less if you want to save more money and get something that doesn't look like it's a castoff from 2 Fast 2 Furious.

The irony is I'm typing this from an iMac at work. Ah, well. There will always be those who won't switch their workstation to PC. It really isn't bad!

 

[wildmac]

Build a computer. It's fun! You will save massive amounts of money and get exactly what you want. Windows is not the terrifying wasteland it once was. If you are already on Adobe CC it will install just fine using the same license.

Just pricing out at one of the crappier gaming computer companies, I'm getting a 4-core 3.7 Ghz, 16 GB of ram, 256 GB SSD, and a 6 GB nvidia titan. That's more ram, basically the same CPU, and a monster video card - for $500 less and you won't need to worry about OpenCL vs CUDA, because it will be a monster at both.

You can build it on your own for less if you want to save more money and get something that doesn't look like it's a castoff from 2 Fast 2 Furious.

My biggest concern here is the motherboards, and the mess of drivers. I've had my hands in the guts of Macs since the days of the SE30, but I know crap about motherboards, and I've heard horror stories about drivers on BYO systems. Have no idea how to find a good motherboard, what the memory busses are and what their performance is.

That said.. $500ish is borderline on the savings being worth it for what I hope would be a 6 year investment.

 

[lildimsum7]

My biggest concern here is the motherboards, and the mess of drivers. I've had my hands in the guts of Macs since the days of the SE30, but I know crap about motherboards, and I've heard horror stories about drivers on BYO systems. Have no idea how to find a good motherboard, what the memory busses are and what their performance is.

That said.. $500ish is borderline on the savings being worth it for what I hope would be a 6 year investment.

It's not as hard as you think. If you wanna stick to OSX, you can build a hackintosh! tonymacx86 is a pretty big hackintosh community with tutorials

 

[cjmillsnun]

Same concept as "can't innovate my ass" or most of the buzzwords from the last 2 events. It makes apple sound like apple is run by incompetent fools who can't properly express themselves. The current management team is so far beneath the quality of the company.

The same management team that for the most part has been part of the company for a decade or more?

 

[wildmac]

It's not as hard as you think. If you wanna stick to OSX, you can build a hackintosh! tonymacx86 is a pretty big hackintosh community with tutorials

Yeah, seen that stuff. Same concern there, the motherboards. No idea at all of the performance of them, or what the issues might be. And from what I've seen on Tonymacx86, most if not all of those motherboards are very low-end.

Building is not the issue, it's knowing what the heck an Asus motherboard is, and is it worth it at all?

 

[Tech198]

Lol. "Insane" is right.

No-one else would ever thing of it being round.

 

[cjmillsnun]

Build a computer. It's fun! You will save massive amounts of money and get exactly what you want. Windows is not the terrifying wasteland it once was. If you are already on Adobe CC it will install just fine using the same license.

Just pricing out at one of the crappier gaming computer companies, I'm getting a 4-core 3.7 Ghz, 16 GB of ram, 256 GB SSD, and a 6 GB nvidia titan. That's more ram, basically the same CPU, and a monster video card - for $500 less and you won't need to worry about OpenCL vs CUDA, because it will be a monster at both.

You can build it on your own for less if you want to save more money and get something that doesn't look like it's a castoff from 2 Fast 2 Furious.

The irony is I'm typing this from an iMac at work. Ah, well. There will always be those who won't switch their workstation to PC. It really isn't bad!

A desktop CPU vs a server class CPU. Not the same.

Is the RAM in that machine ECC? It is in the Mac Pro. It's more expensive than conventional RAM for a reason.

2x graphics cards capable of driving 3 4k resolution displays vs 1x graphics card designed for gaming at 1080p. Again, not the same.

Also a gaming card has very very different needs to a workstation card.

I have a workstation PC at work. The graphics card is from the nVidia Quadro family. It is specifically designed for the type of work (GIS and CAD) that I do. It is more expensive than the equivalent in the GeForce family, and would stink at gaming with a very low FPS count. It is, however significantly faster than a GeForce doing the work it's designed to do. I know this because I've benchmarked them. Using both benchmarking software used in CAD applications (Bentley do one) and a seat of the pants how does it actually perform using the software I use (literally someone standing over me with a stopwatch timing screen refreshes).

The graphics chipsets in the Mac Pro are designed and optimised specifically for the kind of tasks that a Mac Pro would be typically used for (video editing, CAD, 3D rendering, Adobe CS).

The Mac Pro is overpriced, however it uses some of the most kick ass parts available for the type of work it is designed to do and to produce something that used exactly the same components PC wise would also be more expensive than the system you pulled down the details of.

 

[AidenShaw]

The Mac Pro is ready to kick some serious contenders people. check out the full review right here http://goo.gl/eb5wpH

What a lightweight, inaccurate, fawning review.

 

[blumpy]

Analogy

Adding nitric oxide to your Honda and gluing a fin on the back might yield a very fast car but it is not the same owning a Tesla or Aston Martin.

 

[Squilly]

Definitely a first to see a swearing reference in an Appl-- any ad for that matter.

 

[flat five]

Heck if you want it done proper, you can situate the external devices some 10m away if I remember the spec of thunderbolt 2 correctly.

don't overlook the possibilities of 802.11ac.. it's plenty fast for most data moving operations a typical pro may encounter throughout a day. plug in for large moves but such transfers are rare in many workflows.

your laptops etc have easy access to the drives as well.. no wires

it seems that wifi has reached a point which will do very well in a single seat to small studio environment.

so while we're waiting to see how well thunderbolt devices develop and catch on, hope to see some more powerful wifi options as well.

 

[aliensporebomb]

Clarification:

Just like iOS was *cough* no flash *cough*

Lack of CUDA support was intentional. It may be harder to kill than Flash was, but we will no doubt see more OpenCL support.

Cuda is an Nvidia technology.
The Mac Pro uses ATI cards.
The equivalent ATI technology is called "Stream".

And, for those needing further clarification it is a Xeon processor. Not Xenon.

 

[groovebuster]

"The computer that would be insane to buy!"

I really don't get what the Apple managers smoked to give something like that to their pro users.

I don't give a flying fart about how quite that thing is. The old Mac Pro with SSDs was and still is completely fine noise wise. All that counts is speed! Not only for the CPU and GPU, burt also for I/O. No PCI slots is a no go for a pro machine. Too many are relying on cards that require a bandwidth much higher than Thunderbolt can deliver. Those slots could be also used for very fast internal PCI-based SSDs. Now we are stuck with a "mini" internal HD that can hold barely more than the system and a bit of software! I don't even want to start about not having HD slots anymore.

May Apple win a design prize for the urn. It doesn't change that this machine is junk out of the box for most pro users who need really heavy gear. It also won't change, just because some semi-pros with a bit Photoshop here and a bit of video and audio editing there wet their pants to get one.

The real pro market is dead now for Apple. The first time since 1986 I am seriously considering to switch platforms. The problem is not the bang per buck ratio anymore… You just can't get the bang you need at all anymore.

The new Mac Pro is an expensive toy, that's it.

 

[groovebuster]

I think I call this machine the iSuppository in the future...