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

[PeterQVenkman]

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

Very much the same, except for ECC ram support and dual processor support (moot in the mac pro), they are going to be identical down to the transistors and the performance in single CPU configs.

But the desktop chips are overclockable, bringing 10-30% more performance for a lower price. My quad core PC I built two years ago is still faster than the fastest imac config. And I spent over $1000 less. That difference paid for software upgrades and then some.

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

The rest of the mac world gets along just fine without ECC RAM. Without it, a workstation for video or 3d will do just fine. You can get more ram for your money by not going with ECC. From what I've found the only thing I got from ECC ram in the past was more expensive and harder to find RAM.

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

Nope, not the same. Better. MUCH better for OpenCL 3d rendering in indigo as some have expressed interest in. GPU renderers need to load their scenes into ram on the video card. 6GB vs 2gb. If you so choose, with the leftover budget you could get 2 3GB cards for the same price.

That Titan was aimed squarely at the CUDA crowd. 6GB of VRAM isn't much of a gaming feature, as it is a 3d rendering / CUDA / OpenCL feature. It's a beast.

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

Not for Open CL / Cuda and the bulk of graphics apps out there. There are exceptions, like your CAD program or Maya. But they are divas and everyone secretly hates them for it!

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).

That varies depending on software. I use Cinema 4d, and it gets more benefit from more GPU cores and GPU ram. Workstation cards don't do didly squat for many applications over gaming cards. I don't doubt your CAD program requires it though. I used to use Maya, and they basically used to say "get a workstation card or we technically don't support your platform."

It sucks.

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).

Video editing, 3d rendering, and Adobe CS will fly on gaming class cards. Much faster than workstation cards for the price. The iMac I'm on right now gets wonderful acceleration in FCPX and Adobe Premiere CC.

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.

When comparing the exact same components, Apple has always been competitive or cheaper with their Xeon class systems.

But low end, single core Xeon systems used for most graphics work remain a poor investment regardless of platform. And that's all that Apple is building this time.

----------

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.

I was scared of that, too. After some internet research and watching some youtube vids, I was ready to try my first build.

Windows 7 handled all the drivers for me the first time I connected my franken-machine to the internet. It downloaded drivers for everything and I was good to go 15 minutes later, humming along at 4.2 GHz base speed.

 

[milo]

You will save massive amounts of money

Not as much as you get into more than four cores. I do agree that the quad core version of this has the most limited appeal, but many users who would be interested in that version have the iMac and other mac options as well.

for $500 less

That's all you're saving? And what's the speed on that SSD you spec'd out? If you're going to make an apples to apples comparison it needs to be a fast PCIe based one. And again, that's just the quad core version, we'll have to see how prices compare on the higher end. I'd be surprised if most of the Mac Pros sold are six core and up.

 

[aloshka]

[/COLOR]

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..

That would be awesome. But brushed black, I can imagine glossy black would too much of a fingerprint magnet. Especially on a keyboard

 

[aloshka]

I don't know where you got Pixar, they'd kinda be at the top of their segment in the professional video industry. There's a lot of room left for very serious video professionals without ever getting to Pixar. What you should be asking is if anyone here works for Vivid, but judging by the relative angst level, probably not.



Then you are a tiny minority of a tiny minority that are professional users who might be interested in the new Mac Pro. You should realize this, move on and find a better solution for your specific application.



I work in audio. You don't see me complaining that I've got to plug external speakers for studio monitors and mains into the Mac Pro to get any "professional" level sound out. So sure, you have every right, but the bigger deal you make out of your exact special needs not being catered to, the less it seems that you actually need a pro solution.



What sucks for you, does not suck for everyone else. Apparently nobody here can help you, bitch to Apple if you want a cylinder to fill with SSDs. If there's actually a market for that, then then might try to make a solution for you. Or you can keep ranting here and get less done.

I'll do a 180 and say I think you are 100% right. I have weird needs that are difficult to hit with any manufacturer and there aren't many people that do what I do, so the best I can do is ask advice and complain in these forums because it's the closest I can get. People have been extremely helpful in other posts around the forums.

I'm having a hard time with the Mac Pro because my pricing quote for an hp z620 is expiring tomorrow. The price is really good, although comparable to the Mac Pro. The hp does most of what I need, but that means I have to move away from apple and I'm not ready to do that. So I'm trying to project these issues on others to see how they'd respond, but no one seems to have these issues and hoping someone would say something that would swing me just a little, in one direction or the other.

Anyway, thanks for entertaining my rants. Sorry if I offended anyone. I think I just been brought back several years and in the mac vs PC fight in my head and it's frustrating. In the end I'm just hoping someone will offer up something or defend the Mac Pro in someway that can't be refuted so I don't have to switch back.

 

[PeterQVenkman]

Not as much as you get into more than four cores. I do agree that the quad core version of this has the most limited appeal, but many users who would be interested in that version have the iMac and other mac options as well.

True. The iMac brings the same costs problems with it though, since it packages in the giant monitor into the cost, and mobile graphics hardware.

That's all you're saving?

$500 less for more ram, significantly faster/more useful video hardware, and a faster processor. The gap widens significantly if you spend the same amount of money as the base mac pro.

And what's the speed on that SSD you spec'd out? If you're going to make an apples to apples comparison it needs to be a fast PCIe based one.

It's not like anyone will be storing all of their video footage on that tiny internal drive. So if your app boots 0.5 seconds faster on mac vs a traditional SSD connector, I don't think it's worth the cost.

And again, that's just the quad core version, we'll have to see how prices compare on the higher end. I'd be surprised if most of the Mac Pros sold are six core and up.

Apple has always been very competitive or outright cheaper on the high end of the mac pro line. But if we are talking about spending tons and tons, then we are talking about stuff I can only dream about.

 

[milo]

It's not like anyone will be storing all of their video footage on that tiny internal drive.

Different users have different needs, and many are going to find value in the fast SSD. If you're going to compare prices, you need to compare to a PC with fast SSD.

 

[wildmac]

So.. let's look at some price comparisons.

Hackintosh: $2k
(Looking at the CustoMacPro build as laid out on TonyMacX68, Amazon prices, http://www.tonymacx86.com/393-building-customac-buyer-s-guide-october-2013.html)
3.4 Ghz i7, upgraded singe GTX680

Loaded 27" iMac: $2750+
256GB SSD, 16MB, i7, additional graphics card

Loaded 15" rMBP: $2800

DarkPro: $3k

The iMac is probably out due to lifespan issues, and lack of cost savings. rMBP is probably out due to lesser graphics performance (especially when pushing external displays) as well as again lack of cost savings.

So the real question is..

What's the performance tradeoff between that $2k+ Hackintosh versus $3k for the DarkPro? It likely comes down to motherboard performance, as well as how well the graphics cards are tuned for the work you are doing.

Hope we get some benchmarks soon...

 

[flat five]

I was scared of that, too. After some internet research and watching some youtube vids, I was ready to try my first build.

Windows 7 handled all the drivers for me the first time I connected my franken-machine to the internet. It downloaded drivers for everything and I was good to go 15 minutes later, humming along at 4.2 GHz base speed.

if you think the pro computer market is niche, the pro DIY market is even that much smaller.. this new computer isn't aimed at hobbyists and geekbenchers.. if you're one of them, i'm sure you can outline all sorts of 'better deals' and whatnot.. most pros simply don't care about that stuff though.. they want to buy the tool, plug it in, and it works exactly as expected every time they turn it on and if something happens to go wrong, they want the manufacturer to deal with it instead of tinkering around for days on end..

so while i think much of what you're saying is valid etc, you're talking about a market other than the one for which this computer is aimed at / designed for.

 

[wildmac]

$500 less for more ram, significantly faster/more useful video hardware, and a faster processor. The gap widens significantly if you spend the same amount of money as the base mac pro.

See my post above. That CustoMac Pro is using an i7, Xeon apparently not an option. A GTX680 may or may not be better, depending on what you are doing with it. Adding a Titan card brings the price close to the MacPro, with likely much better framerates for gaming, but not necessarily the horsepower for other uses.

We need those benchmarks..

 

[milo]

That CustoMac Pro is using an i7, Xeon apparently not an option.

They also list a CustoMac Pro Socket 2011 which is probably more comparable to the MP. Power management not working, probably means fans run full speed all the time too so it may be very noisy.

 

[PeterQVenkman]

Different users have different needs, and many are going to find value in the fast SSD. If you're going to compare prices, you need to compare to a PC with fast SSD.

I did have a fast SSD in there.

----------

See my post above. That CustoMac Pro is using an i7, Xeon apparently not an option. A GTX680 may or may not be better, depending on what you are doing with it. Adding a Titan card brings the price close to the MacPro, with likely much better framerates for gaming, but not necessarily the horsepower for other uses.

We need those benchmarks..

Nah, the titan is better for non-gaming uses. 6 GB of VRAM? Awesome for iRay or Indigo renderers!

----------

if you think the pro computer market is niche, the pro DIY market is even that much smaller.. this new computer isn't aimed at hobbyists and geekbenchers.. if you're one of them, i'm sure you can outline all sorts of 'better deals' and whatnot.. most pros simply don't care about that stuff though.. they want to buy the tool, plug it in, and it works exactly as expected every time they turn it on and if something happens to go wrong, they want the manufacturer to deal with it instead of tinkering around for days on end..

so while i think much of what you're saying is valid etc, you're talking about a market other than the one for which this computer is aimed at / designed for.

Can't argue with that. Having one company to fix your problems can be invaluable.

 

[wildmac]

Can't argue with that. Having one company to fix your problems can be invaluable.

After browsing through their forums, sounds like I would wait anyway to see if there is a kernel update that breaks things (or opens up new options) once the MacPro is released.

So.. need to wait for that, and performance specs.

 

[TheDoctor7x]

3000 for a quad core. I'm trying hard to keep a straight face.

Well, Let's see here:
$300 for the CPU. http://ark.intel.com/products/75779

$1200 (about. the D300 is a W7000 with half the RAM, so take off about $50 each) For both GPUs. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814195118

$150 (about. $200 * .75 = $150) for the RAM. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820239756

$100 (about. This unit should be comparable) for the wireless. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16833320173

So far, we're up to about $1750 dollars. This is without the motherboard, I/O, form factor, and manufacturing. Added up, this could easily hit $2500 at least.

Is the price high? Yeah, it is, but it's not like they're charging 3K for absolutely nothing.

 

[milo]

I did have a fast SSD in there.

PCIe based with 1.2 Gigs per second reads? You didn't give specifics.

 

[MyMac1976]

They also list a CustoMac Pro Socket 2011 which is probably more comparable to the MP. Power management not working, probably means fans run full speed all the time too so it may be very noisy.

It means that it runs full speed all the time, speed step and sleep are not working. It has nothing to do with fans or noise.

PCIe based with 1.2 Gigs per second reads? You didn't give specifics.

The additional speed of that little drive is not going to be noticeable except on sustained writes and even then the benefit is linited because of the limited size. The poster also said he didn't much care about an app opening .5 seconds faster.

==========

The new MP isn't for everyone with the exception of some internet people I cannot think of anyone who benefits by the changes but I'm sure people will "love" it when they recieve it and we'll get threads full of the wonders of the new MP. Meh

 

[flat five]

The new MP isn't for everyone with the exception of some internet people I cannot think of anyone who benefits by the changes but I'm sure people will "love" it when they recieve it and we'll get threads full of the wonders of the new MP. Meh

i don't really get that.. who benefits? anybody needing a fast mac. that's who.
it's the fastest computer they've ever made.. by far.. in many different areas.

 

[groovyd]

...

Besides looking cool, small and sexy, what is better performance wise about this over the same components in a case of conventional design?

the fact it runs OSX instead of windows or some flavor of linux and of course comes with all that free iWork and iLife and garage band and whatever the tool of the day is.

 

[groovyd]

let's get real

It's a $299 Xenon "server" processor.

Still, I don't see anything really revolutionary besides the fan placement and overall form factor. TB2 is cool, but since when was TB1 not fast enough? For For $3000 you can build a bonified multiprocessor server.

I don't think they market this really as a server machine. Infact more people use a cluster of Mac minis for that to give them the massively parallel, redundant, and rack-able design most server environments require.

Pro is obviously a buzzword here for anyone normal who just wants a pretty awesome machine that also looks great for a reasonable price considering all things. I am pretty sure it will run loops around any iMac or MBP or Mac mini and therefore in that context it 'is' pro. they do not consider 'pro' to mean people who like to build and tinker with their machines which seems to be the definition many people would like to attach to the word pro on here. It just means the highest performance product in their line.

This is one way to marginalize the inconsequential profit to be made from a the very limited 'pro' market being broadcast here. People that fit this mould would always build their own or go straight to a rack computer vendor directly. This machine clearly is targeting the other 90% who just want a faster better grade of Apple then their neighbors.

 

[wildmac]

Pro is obviously a buzzword here for anyone normal who just wants a pretty awesome machine that also looks great for a reasonable price considering all things. I am pretty sure it will run loops around any iMac or MBP or Mac mini and therefore in that context it 'is' pro. they do not consider 'pro' to mean people who like to build and tinker with their machines which seems to be the definition many people would like to attach to the word pro on here. It just means the highest performance product in their line.

The "pros" can be photogs, designers, CAD guys, 3D guys, audio guys, or any number of other specialties, which is part of the problem. No one machine is going to suite all those markets, especially if it's not another version of the large tower with lots of space inside.

Apple seems to not be trying to target all those folks here, but they also don't want to completely abandon that overall market (possibly due to the noise we made). Perhaps they realized that if all the creative professionals had to go PC, there would be a lot less gratuitous Apple placement in movies and whatnot.

 

[HurtinMinorKey]

I don't think they market this really as a server machine. Infact more people use a cluster of Mac minis for that to give them the massively parallel, redundant, and rack-able design most server environments require.

Pro is obviously a buzzword here for anyone normal who just wants a pretty awesome machine that also looks great for a reasonable price considering all things. I am pretty sure it will run loops around any iMac or MBP or Mac mini and therefore in that context it 'is' pro. they do not consider 'pro' to mean people who like to build and tinker with their machines which seems to be the definition many people would like to attach to the word pro on here. It just means the highest performance product in their line.

This is one way to marginalize the inconsequential profit to be made from a the very limited 'pro' market being broadcast here. People that fit this mould would always build their own or go straight to a rack computer vendor directly. This machine clearly is targeting the other 90% who just want a faster better grade of Apple then their neighbors.

I agree these are not really "server" processors, they are for workstations (the dual processors configs will probably be the limit).

And for the purpose of naming, the Mac Pro, is for anyone who want an upgradeable, heavy duty, desktop mac. It's not revolutionary, but it's probably good enough to stop the bleeding of high end users moving over to PC based workstations.

 

[flat five]

Apple seems to not be trying to target all those folks here, but they also don't want to completely abandon that overall market (possibly due to the noise we made). Perhaps they realized that if all the creative professionals had to go PC, there would be a lot less gratuitous Apple placement in movies and whatnot.

apple seems to be targeting and bulding to suit the same people they have always targeted with their top end offering.. the creative pros.. you're going to be hard pressed to find actual working creative pros knocking this thing.. the people that rip on it are geekbench players and spec nerds (i.e.- the people that would generally be more inclined to join/post on a tech forum.. these threads aren't examples of the real world. i've yet to talk to anyone in real life that uses macs in their work saying the type of stuff you see so much of in these threads)

 

[milo]

It means that it runs full speed all the time, speed step and sleep are not working. It has nothing to do with fans or noise.

If it's running full speed, isn't that going to generate more heat? Which should make the fans run more?

The additional speed of that little drive is not going to be noticeable except on sustained writes and even then the benefit is linited because of the limited size.

Maybe for you but there are users who will benefit from that additional speed. It's funny how some people nitpick every little flaw they can find regardless of if it makes any real world difference, but then when the machine has an actual measurable advantage it somehow doesn't count.

 

[MyMac1976]

If it's running full speed, isn't that going to generate more heat? Which should make the fans run more?




Maybe for you but there are users who will benefit from that additional speed. It's funny how some people nitpick every little flaw they can find regardless of if it makes any real world difference, but then when the machine has an actual measurable advantage it somehow doesn't count.

No it won't generate we enough extra heat to begin to stress modern cool in systems it will however use more power.

At 128GB its to small to notice an improvement in speed because the files you're putting on it will be to small.

 

[milo]

At 128GB its to small to notice an improvement...

256.

There are also 512 and 1TB options available.

 

[chrono1081]

This needs to be my new Mari machine…