With only a 450W power supply, throttling actually seems inevitable on the high end model.
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.
Entry-Level Mac Pro Offers Comparable Pricing Versus OEM PCs, DIY Systems More Affordable
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
With only a 450W power supply, throttling actually seems inevitable on the high end model.
as a firm software user of both OSx and WIndows.
********.
while the experience is slightly different in where things are and the look. They ultimately do the exact same things. Some doing some things better than others.
For example: any gamer should be able to tell you that OSx is not great for performance in gaming, yet WIndows works much better.
multitouch touchpands on the other hand and gestures in OSx flies compared to windows.
but to think that OSx alone is worth several hundred dollars in premium cost alone to you makes me beleive you've been drinking the coolaid about "most advanced operating system in the world". a tag line that nobody can actually back up with facts that is pure marketting.
and considering that overall, Mac's are using the same architectures as Windows Based PC's. the OS premium argument is moot.
the Value of a computer is not by the OS on it, but by the performance that machine can provide.
The new Pro is a good value machine for what you get.
Maybe, but as the review stated that the situation that caused the 12 core to throttle down to 2.1 Ghz does not represent a real world workload and any real world workload they ran didn't cause throttling.
No, the value of a computer is by how fast and effortless it lets you do your work. For a specialised workstation which is sued to run one or two specialised applications all of the time, the OS does not really matter, true.
Still, for things I do, OS X is just much more convenient than Windows. And as to 'most advanced OS in the world' - well, it kind of is. But you only realise this when you start programming for it.
If music software developers embrace OpenCL... then musicians, engineers and sound designers can benefit from those GPU's.
I said this before, and I'll say it again:
An Apple computer being considerably cheaper than a PC counterpart is one of the first signs of the apocalypse.
And we all know what comes next, right?
LOCUSTS!
An Apple computer being considerably cheaper than a PC counterpart is one of the first signs of the apocalypse.
And we all know what comes next, right?
LOCUSTS!
Actually, I have now re-read the article. They actually didn't include the case and OS price in it! So basically, a DIY PC with consumer CPU, non ECC RAM and consumer SSD (but two professional GPUs) will end at more then $3000 - just $200 short of the Mac Pro. How is 'much cheaper' or even a valid comparison??
P.S. I strongly suggest that macrumors point these things out in the newsitem!
All PCs only have one or two USB controllers, and all the USB ports fan out using a few switches (USB switches are a little better than USB hubs but still split up bandwidth). With Thunderbolt each port gets its own controller.
I understand OpenCL isn't as "mature" as CUDA is.
But can you explain a little bit more about getting documentation or answers From Apple?
I've been reading over the OpenCL Programming Guide myself to understand it better and start playing around with it.
Can you give me some examples? i hear things bantered around and in my experiences, All the major OS players have Pro's and Cons. Neither stand heads or even shoulders against the others.
For example: COnfiguration of the system. OSx's simplistic "preferences tab" beats the snot out of Windows Control panel, which is often "too much". And Linux.. well... I have hard time ever recommending linux to a non geek (Though I like it for its uses too). But, on the flip side, the sheer openess of windows makes for some intresting configuration and customizability options unavailable in OSx. And Linux... well.. Customizability out the wazoo, if you dont mind fiddling with config files
this sort of thing is standard fare though. However none of them make one "the most advanced operating system in the world". what it makes it, is its own operating system.
IN the end, it comes down to user comfort and familiarity and knowing what your intended use scenarios are.
but we diverge from the point. I was just refering tot he known fanboys attempt to claim that any price premium is OK cause he's getting the most advanced operating system in the world and OSx is easily worth hundreds of dollars more than windows
Well we are almost there and so far all the news is good news. We have the breakdown/upgradeability angle explored, the pricing angle explored. The only question I have left is how the entry level nMP stacks up against the other Mac Models with respect to performance.
I'll bide my time….
I'll bide my time….
Extra Value of Mac Pro compared to i7
"Pricing out an option with an Ivy Bridge E Core i7 PC with 12GB of RAM, two FirePro W7000 GPUs, and a fast SATA SSD came to $2730, a good bit less than the approximately $3499 a similar lower-end Mac Pro would cost from Apple."
Would this system also need to add the price of:
1. 6 thunderbolt 2 ports
2. Extra cooling to allow the 130 TDP to do its thing in sustaining the same clock speeds as the Xeons in the Mac Pro?
3. PCIe SSD (A fast SATA SSD is still going to top out at around 600MB/sec compared to the 900MB/sec+ of the PCIe SSD in the Mac Pro, no?)
"Pricing out an option with an Ivy Bridge E Core i7 PC with 12GB of RAM, two FirePro W7000 GPUs, and a fast SATA SSD came to $2730, a good bit less than the approximately $3499 a similar lower-end Mac Pro would cost from Apple."
Would this system also need to add the price of:
1. 6 thunderbolt 2 ports
2. Extra cooling to allow the 130 TDP to do its thing in sustaining the same clock speeds as the Xeons in the Mac Pro?
3. PCIe SSD (A fast SATA SSD is still going to top out at around 600MB/sec compared to the 900MB/sec+ of the PCIe SSD in the Mac Pro, no?)
As soon as you allow it to have any form-factor, for people who couldn't care less about graphics, there's a dual boot, water-cooled overclocked hex-core i7 Hackintosh system build on YouTube that has faster CPU scores than any Mac Pro or PC based on that Xeon CPU and it has dual 128Gb SSDs in a RAID 0 config for equal or better I/O. Not only that, it offers PCIe slots and plenty of drive bays.
It's based on a rediculous 1000W PSU so I'm sure with some component alternatives, it could be built even cheaper or with more RAM for the same cost: -
http://youtu.be/Wm4jH01Sluc
15811 geekbench too.
It's based on a rediculous 1000W PSU so I'm sure with some component alternatives, it could be built even cheaper or with more RAM for the same cost: -
http://youtu.be/Wm4jH01Sluc
15811 geekbench too.
Last edited:
My gaming PC is based on the LGA2011 socket/X79 platform, and it's got 8 x USB 3.0 and 2 x USB 2.0 on the back, 2 of each on the front.
I'd rather have all of those than Thunderbolt ports, but I don't have any pro peripherals, of course!
You also need to look at your software needs.
Even if you could buy a "cheaper" workstation from another vendor... that won't help you if you use Mac software.
Even if you could buy a "cheaper" workstation from another vendor... that won't help you if you use Mac software.
I would like to know more. Perhaps I have been enchanted by Apple's marketing of OpenCL. I know that AMD leverages such for their APU marketing.
You could just as easily use a dual SSD PCie card with enterprise SSDs. There's plenty of existing solutions like that for the older Mac Pro that offers equal or better Mbytes/s than the PCIe SSDs the 2013 Mac Pro comes with.
I know you want exact, like for like but that doesn't mean there isn't alternatives that offer the same speed benefits and in either case, you're paying a lot for a small PCIe SSD blade instead of a larger equivalent PCIe card.
Adobe Premiere seems to be an example.
all the initial reviews put premiere running like crap in Comparison to FCPx because of the GPU's. initial thoughts were that Premiere just wasn't using OpenCL and using those cards.
however, (i'll see if i can refind the quote), Adobe has said that Premiere IS openCL powered.
So if it is capable of using the OpenCL standard, which is what we all expected to be the core API for this device, Why is Adobe software not seeing the same type of benefits?
You're wrong. Apple charges only 100 bucks for the 12 to 16 gb ram upgrade which is fair.
$100 is fair
When i priced it out on first few days, on the Canadian website, it was $400, now is $100.
Looks like they goofed and fixed it.
I remember pricing it out and going "NO WAY THIS IS RIGHT OR MAKES ANY BLOODY SENSE!"