Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
The performance increase seems rather low for all the hoopla about how it will make mincemeat out of video, etc., and run multiple 4k monitors and all that.

Let's hope that the price reflects this modest improvement as well as the fact that you will also have to buy everything else to stick on to it externally.

To me, it seems that it was a poorly thought out form over function decision, because now we will go back to setups that look like a messy Rube Goldberg conglomeration of peripherals and cables and power supplies, not to mention the proprietary nature of its upgradeability.
But then, apple's philosophy is to keep you tied to their ecosystem and then nickel and dime you to death with their proprietary add-ons.
 
Yeah I have never understood a person who does rendering(anything more than a small amount) solely on their main machine as its horribly inefficient in terms of workflow and productivity.

I don't do a small amount of rendering. It's my living, and I do run 3 Mac Pro's as a render farm. I'm just saying the more cores the better.
 
Regardless, I am sure will do fine with the Mac Pro. The new design is sleek, small, yet more powerful than the previous generation computers. It is the future of the desktop computer.

Come on, you didn't write that.

Which Apple PR release did you copy and paste it from?

It really does just glide off the tongue.

Makes me want to stand up and salute something
 
The current high-end iMac has substantially more than 50% that geekbench score. The Haswell iMac will be even more.

Unless the machine with the 23,901 score is no more than $2,499, it's definitely a Haswell iMac for me!
 
But I am still waiting for thunderbolt 1 to be widely adopted. Now I gotta wait for #2?

Thunderbolt was waiting for Mac Pro. They will come. Whether welcome or not.

I having a hard time accepting that reasoning. All of apple's recent laptops and desktops sported thunderbolt, but the industry was waiting for the mac pro? I just can't buy that.

Considering most Thunderbolt devices out there are Pro devices I think it's fair to expect the Mac Pro to drive TB supply and demand.


Thunderbolt docking stations
Matrox - DS1 Thunderbolt docking station
Belkin - Thunderbolt Express Dock

Thunderbolt sound cards
Universal Audio - Apollo High-Resolution Interface with Realtime UAD Processing
ApogeeDigital - Symphony I/O 8x8: Thunderbolt

Thunderbolt video production
Blackmagic Design - UltraStudio for Thunderbolt
Matrox - MXO2LE/T Thunderbolt Device for Video Editing
Motu - HDX-SDI video interface

Thunderbolt hard drives
LaCie - Thunderbolt Series
Western Digital - My Book Thunderbolt Duo
Seagate - Backup Plus Desktop Drive for Mac
Freecom - Mobile Drive Mg
Buffalo - MiniStation Thunderbolt

Thunderbolt RAID storage
Promise - Pegasus RAID Storage
ATTO - ThunderStream™ 2x 10Gb Thunderbolt to Eight Port 6Gb SAS/SATA RAID
G-Technology - G-RAID with Thunderbolt

Thunderbolt external PCIe enclosures
Netstor - NA211TB Thunderbolt PCIe Expansion Enclosure
Magma - ExpressBox 3T
Sonnet - Echo Express Thunderbolt Expansion Chassis
OneStopSystems - nanoCUBE Enclosure
 
You are actually arguing my point. I think.

----------
I didn't think you had a point :) People were saying that based on this early benchmark, the brand-new, super-duper, kick-ass Mac Pro was only 10% more powerful that the model that came out 3(?) years ago. You just seemed to reiterate that it was only 1 CPU and not 2, as though that was relevant.

If you were alluding to something deeper, then you didn't mention it.
 
Come on, you didn't write that.

Which Apple PR release did you copy and paste it from?

It really does just glide off the tongue.

Makes me want to stand up and salute something

So you are saying a rectangular box who's design hasn't changed for 20 years, that is at least 2 or 3 times larger than the Mac Pro which was just showed off is the future of the high end desktop...

You have to give credit where credit is due, and Apple really deserves some credit on this one.

And if it does really glide off the tongue, I suppose Apple can hire me for PR. :D
 
I don't do a small amount of rendering. It's my living, and I do run 3 Mac Pro's as a render farm. I'm just saying the more cores the better.

Building a proper render farm would be a far better option for you.
 
So you are saying a rectangular box who's design hasn't changed for 20 years, that is at least 2 or 3 times larger than the Mac Pro which was just showed off is the future of the high end desktop...

You have to give credit where credit is due, and Apple really deserves some credit on this one.

And if it does really glide off the tongue, I suppose Apple can hire me for PR. :D

How much has the design of:

1. Scissors

2. Pens

3. Furniture

4. Refrigerators

changed in last 20 years?

Change to designs is only a positive when it improves something.

But if you are satisfied with the new one based upon how sleek and futuristic it is, by all means buy one. Apple will need customers like you.
 
A 11% speedbump compared to a 2010 machine, that should be way much more.

Considering you are comparing a 12 core machine to another 12 core one, the speed improvements will likely come in form of memory performance mostly, and also GPU.
 
damn-friday-o.gif
 
My 2008 is till kicking I guess. I feel a bit "after" still using a 2008 comp as my main computer, but damn it was good value back then... Hope this 2013 model will be the same good value as the 2008, then I might upgrade, otherwise I will probably keep the 2008 for a few more years and then get an iMac.

If anything Apple makes them to last, I only updated my 2008 Macbook Pro last year. It's still kicking though was to slow and I couldn't update any further otherwise I would still be using it.

If the new Mac pro is built to some of the old Mac standards I believe you'll get 4+ years out of it.
 
it's funny that most people complaining here:
1. don't own
2. can't afford
3. don't have any plans to buy
the mac pro anyway.

You can say they are just screaming 'grapes are sour, grapes are sour', to help them sleep at night.
 
Last edited:
I was expecting overall geekbench scores to be much higher...
What's worrying is that it's not like the hardware isn't much more state of the art.

People saying this benchmark is very synthetic are right, but also disregarding the fact that this machine indeed has much more raw power which this synthetic benchmark should reward. So it seems to me that something's at play here?

(besides, pro users using a Mac Pro in rendering farms etc are very interested in this particular kind of raw CPU power)

I have a bad feeling about this: "... could be indicative of thermal issues"
 
They're making one hell of a gamble. People use MPs for all kinds of things. For me as an audio guy, if Steinberg choose not to use GPU processing for Cubase (and why would they, I can't even imagine the work they would have to do) then my current MP will be the last Apple desktop I buy. I'm not going to spend thousands of dollars for some fast GPUs I won't ever use.

Perhaps I'm engaging in wishful thinking here, but could this be the reason we haven't seen an upgrade to Logic Pro for such a long time? If they were working on Logic Pro X that DOES take advantage of the GPU?!
 
And it does improve on something. The Mac Pro is now:

- smaller
- lighter
- looks better and more futuristic
- more powerful
- still has good expandability with thunderbolt 2
- can still be carried by it's top

See, the problem is, everyone was asking for all of these things for a long time, it was called/rumored to be "The xMac".

Pro's on the other hand were asking for the same old MP case (with a few minor tweaks) packed with modern tech inside. Pro's got a MiniPro, and now everyone is looking at the refurb current machines. I bet you won't see a 3.06 12 core in stock there ever again. People will be snatching them up like hotcakes.
 
And it does improve on something. The Mac Pro is now:

- smaller
- lighter
- looks better and more futuristic
- more powerful
- still has good expandability with thunderbolt 2
- can still be carried by it's top

- "smaller"? Who cares? Many Mac Pros sit under desks.
- "lighter"? Totally meaningless. Need a light computer? Get a MacBook Air!
- "looks better and more futuristic"? Now were getting down to who the new Mac Pro was really designed for. Just like the "pro" app Aperture "pro" means "Prosumer".
- "still has good expandability with thunderbolt 2"? Expensive expandability maybe. "Good expandability" is internal SATA3 and more USB3.
- "can still be carried by it's (sic) top" Wow that's always what I look for first in a computer. I agree, a "pro" (or even "production") computer must be able to be "carried by its top".
 
- "smaller"? Who cares? Many Mac Pros sit under desks.
- "lighter"? Totally meaningless. Need a light computer? Get a MacBook Air!
- "looks better and more futuristic"? Now were getting down to who the new Mac Pro was really designed for. Just like the "pro" app Aperture "pro" means "Prosumer".
- "still has good expandability with thunderbolt 2"? Expensive expandability maybe. "Good expandability" is internal SATA3 and more USB3.
- "can still be carried by it's (sic) top" Wow that's always what I look for first in a computer. I agree, a "pro" (or even "production") computer must be able to be "carried by its top".

Yeah, but he's good for a laugh
 
Wonder what speed the CPU will go up to? I also think as they have opted to use one CPU the cost of the machine will be lower than expected. Will be interested to see the configurations they offer for this machine.

Up to now, no Apple product has been priced lower than expected. Higher is the rule. I predict at least $2500.
 
Last edited:
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.