Entry-Level Mac Pro Offers Comparable Pricing Versus OEM PCs, DIY Systems More Affordable

[vladi]

Talk about missing the mark completely. This is a workstation for professionals not some kind of gaming machine for kids to be playing on at home... You are comparing apples to oranges when you are starting to mix consumer grade hardware with workstation / server grade ones. It's like telling Amazon to start running their servers 24 / 7 on non-server hardware, or telling them to start using Belkin routers instead of Cisco Enterprise ones because they are cheaper and might be comparable in a performance only situation.

These are workstations tended for studios and professions, its something that upscale studios like Disney Pixar, WETA Digital and the like use to render their animations on, something that larger television networks are using for editing their content before its being broadcast.


For situations like this its often more expensive to have a few hours of unnecessary downtime due to software and hardware issues than its to pay the premium for workstation grade hardware. That's why we have workstation grade hardware in the first place, they are cherry picked by the manufacture, tested and verified to handle 24 / 7 usage without hiccups and large scale companies are willing to pay the price premium for this.


Starting to compare with consumer grade hardware is just silly, and you also include ECC registered memory even though the CPU you have chosen does not feature a ECC compatible memory controller.. And no company in their right mind would ever do any kind of serious workload on a system running non-ecc memory to begin with. You SSD isn't even running of SLC flash so it's basically useless for anything write heavy related workloads as those kinds of consumer SSD's are not design for this kind of workflow and would normally fail within the first year depending on how big the workload would end up being.

Your motherboard does not feature any kind of workstation grade chipset, doesn't come with any Thunderbolt ports and features dreadful Marvell chipset for the additional SATA ports which is as far from workstation grade as you'd get with this kind of thing.

You also behave like the R9 280x is anywhere near the computing and opencl peformance of a D700 which it's not by any stretch of the imagination. It's like saying a GeForce GT 620 is just as capable as a GTX 780 Ti to a gamer. You also include a display which is not featuring good enough calibration for the kind of work pro workstation like the Mac Pro is supposed to be handling.


Good luck next time is all I can say to this rubbish.

You so have no clue what you are talking about so I will have a field trip ripping apart your comment.

First of all you have no clue what is the difference between workstation and server. Server is the one that requires to run 24/7 while workstation requires performance first then durability. Since base Mac Pro is you typical "prosumer" PC and not a heavy duty workstation by any means that's exactly how I've speced a comparable PC.

i7 is Ivey Bridge E on LGA 2011 socket, reason why it supports ECC memory. As a matter of fact 4820K owns 1620 v2 when it comes to speed, single core or all four cores.

840 EVO uses TLC and SLC for secondary caching and in RAID0 it will give you comparable speed to PCIe SSD. I don't know what kind of workload you are talking about but I assume you are talking about video since that is that is the only workload that is stressful enough to kill the disks. Well guess what? With 250GB you will not be able to do any kind of heavy duty workflow there is just no room for such thing.

Thunderbolt? You don't need a Thunderbolt since you have actual SATAs. And nobody is forcing you to use Marvell if you don't need many drives inside your housing. No reason to spec Super Micro motherboard for prosumer workstation.

R9 280x will outperform D300 in single or dual mode no problem in OpenCL computations. Actually R9 280x outperforms FirePro W8000 by a small margin in OpenCL. Your only limitation might be the actual software that recognizes only FirePro or Quadro cards like SolidWorks, but there are hacks to get around it. And don't for a second believe that D300/D500/D700 are carbon copies of FirePro W series. They are most likely a customized 79** series silicon as both D700 and R9 280x are based of 7970.

And to conclude that you do not work in professional or studio environment, like you say, I will just let you google Eizo CG323W since you have no clue what it is.

This was way too easy.

BTW somebody mentioned ASUS 250GB PCIe SSD. It sounds good on paper but in real world usage its is slower than SATA 6 840 EVO unfortunately. Its not a good buy, just avoid it. If you crave for speed you can go with OCZ R4 but if you want the cream of the crop I think Micron P320h with some stupid 700K IOPs

 

[calaverasgrande]

The comparison with a DIY machine is not fair - it uses a SATA SSD which is half speed of the Mac Pro's storage. Were Anandtech to use a comparable enterprise-level PCI-e SSD, the price of the DIY machine would be MUCH closer to the MP.

I think the point is these are off the shelf systems. AFAIK HP doesn't offer PCIe SSDs on their workstations.

I'd also add that there is a lot more than just hardware at play. Ever opened up an HP? They have gotten much better, but they are still a PITA to deal with. Not as if the Apple has much for you to do when you open up theirs, but it's not confounding or difficult like the HP products often are.
I also have to point out that with HP you get lovely extras like Skyroom and CoolTools that duplicate what the OS already does, and which no professional ever uses. The Macs come with usefull bloatware like Mail and Notes.
It seems like a small point to make, but it has nagged me for a while. Why do Lenovo, Dell and HP insist on treating their business customers like consumers by loading gibberish on the hard drive?
I can have a Mac user up and running on a new machine by lunch if it came in this morning. A PC user will need to wait until it is imaged, updates are run and Enterprise AV is installed (unless it can be part of the image).
You just don't pull one of those HP's out of the box and get to work.

Call that part of the mythical "Apple Tax" if you like.

 

[linuxcooldude]

Since base Mac Pro is you typical "prosumer" PC and not a heavy duty workstation by any means that's exactly how I've speced a comparable PC.

There are grey lines into what is professional and prosumer and often are used interchangeably. The 2013 Mac Pro contains all workstation parts, so it IS a workstation.

Listing consumer grade parts and comparing it to a workstation is still far out of reach. Regardless of what jobs you use it for consumer/prosumer or professional.

And don't for a second believe that D300/D500/D700 are carbon copies of FirePro W series. They are most likely a customized 79** series silicon as both D700 and R9 280x are based of 7970.

Obviously they are not exactly the same versions of GPU as they are integrated into the circuit board. They are a modified version of their FirePro series. Most likely even the original PCIe FirePro cards are based on the consumer version except for changes in the drivers, support & hardware that make them a workstation card.

 

[el-John-o]

Everyone loses with analogies.

Hehehe. Okay, yeah- it was a poor analogy. But you get the point. The hardware in a Mac Pro is expensive hardware. Most people don't need that hardware, most people don't need Xeon CPU's and FirePro GPU's. For gaming or general productivity, consumer grade CPU's are cheaper and a better choice.

My point was, it's annoying to hear that "I can build it cheaper" when they are comparing a 4 or 6 core i7 rig to a 6-core Xeon workstation computer!

----------

The point being is that DIY builders can build a pc that does task x as fast or faster. You do realise that not everyone needs xeons or workstation GPU. Also high end gaming gear/enthusiast hardware is excellent.

If you need workstation grade , Mac Pro is an excellent choice. Don't judge DIY pc as cheap and crap. High end gaming PC, running upto 4xgpu have serious power .

I'm not. You're missing my point. I own a high(ish) end gaming PC myself and love it. Homebuilt. I'm just saying that it's not fair to say you can build an IDENTICAL machine for less, because there are advantages to Xeon grade CPU's, server memory and FirePro GPU's like in a Mac Pro.

My point is, if people don't know the difference between a Xeon class CPU and a Core i5/i7 class CPU, then they don't know enough to be bashing ANY particular workstation machine (from Apple or otherwise) for being overpriced. Those folks are looking at specs and nothing else. Clock speed, number of cores, quantity of RAM, etc. And that's just not the way the computer world works anymore!

So it comes down to people comparing a workstation computer to a consumer desktop and that's just not fair. Component for component, the Mac Pro is at least competitively priced. Though I will continue to be home-building my desktop PC's as it's far cheaper than Apples consumer grade PC's, AND does everything I need it to!

 

[driceman]

Hardware costs only. The big factor not included in OS X. That's where the true power comes from. So many people ignore that when determining the value of a system. Any Mac is far more valuable than any "comparable" PC.

Couldn't have said it better myself. My 2011 MacBook Pro has less RAM than my friend's 2013 Windows PC and a comparable processor, yet he's constantly complaining about his computer. The only problems I've ever had with my Mac is when my wifi network craps out on me, which isn't the computer's fault anyway. It's organized better, doesn't come with bloatware, and seems to be more power-efficient, too. People tend to say Apple is full of BS when they talk about how well their hardware and software work together, and yet that's exactly what my experience has been like. I actually enjoy using my iPhone, iPad, Mac, and Apple TV. My friend seems to think it's a chore to use his Android phone and Windows PC.

I know this sounds very much like a fanboy rant, but this is legitimately my personal experience. I haven't done much more than fiddle around with Android phones, but I like the organization of iOS better, and I have yet to have a particularly good experience with a Windows PC, regardless of which OS it was running. This Mac Pro isn't overpriced at all.

 

[pragmatous]

Ya it's not a bad price at all. Anyone know if you can add a second processor? For an E5 you should be able to. Hex cores should be plenty of CPU horsepower for most people. I wonder if server 2012 R2 is supported on this beast. When I upgrade my PC in 2015 I'm thinking of maybe getting a mac pro.

[url=http://cdn.macrumors.com/im/macrumorsthreadlogodarkd.png]Image[/url]


Anandtech today published its comprehensive review of the Mac Pro, including a price comparison between the Mac Pro and similar systems from competitors HP and Lenovo.

When comparing the entry-level 3.7GHz quad-core Mac Pro with dual AMD FirePro D300s to both the similarly specced HP Z420 and the Lenovo ThinkStation S30, Anandtech found the Mac Pro to be competitively priced at $3248 (priced with AppleCare) vs. $4490 for the HP and $4373 for the Lenovo.

While there are some important distinctions between the computers, such as the fact that the HP system only offers a single FirePro W7000 and supports more displays, the pricing experiment suggests that Apple's pricing is in line with other Ivy Bridge EP systems.

Image​

While Apple's pricing is competitive with similar PCs from HP and Lenovo, AnandTech found that building a comparative PC from individual parts was far less expensive, at least for lower-end systems. 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.

AnandTech did not price out a higher-end DIY system, but earlier this month, FutureLooks attempted to build a PC equal to the top-of-the-line 12-core Mac Pro with 64GB of RAM, 1TB of flash storage, and Dual AMD FirePro D700 GPUs. Using similar parts (several Mac Pro parts - like the FirePro GPUs - were built exclusively for Apple) a PC equivalent to the high-end Mac Pro was actually priced at $11530.54, far above Apple's asking price of $9599 for its professional workstation.

AnandTech's full review, which includes benchmarks comparing the Mac Pro to previous Mac Pros and other offerings from Apple as well as comments on 4K displays, is well worth reading.

Article Link: Entry-Level Mac Pro Offers Comparable Pricing Versus OEM PCs, DIY Systems More Affordable

----------

Ya if only apple sold a smaller cheaper computer. Something that's small and light. Yet fast enough to fit most users needs. Man I think if I invented that I would have called it the Mac mini! ya that's an awesome name.

ya mac pros are not for people who browse the web. They are for enthusiasts, people who use final cut pro, and photoshop. Or, something similar that requires CPU power.

Hehehe. Okay, yeah- it was a poor analogy. But you get the point. The hardware in a Mac Pro is expensive hardware. Most people don't need that hardware, most people don't need Xeon CPU's and FirePro GPU's. For gaming or general productivity, consumer grade CPU's are cheaper and a better choice.

My point was, it's annoying to hear that "I can build it cheaper" when they are comparing a 4 or 6 core i7 rig to a 6-core Xeon workstation computer!

----------




I'm not. You're missing my point. I own a high(ish) end gaming PC myself and love it. Homebuilt. I'm just saying that it's not fair to say you can build an IDENTICAL machine for less, because there are advantages to Xeon grade CPU's, server memory and FirePro GPU's like in a Mac Pro.

My point is, if people don't know the difference between a Xeon class CPU and a Core i5/i7 class CPU, then they don't know enough to be bashing ANY particular workstation machine (from Apple or otherwise) for being overpriced. Those folks are looking at specs and nothing else. Clock speed, number of cores, quantity of RAM, etc. And that's just not the way the computer world works anymore!

So it comes down to people comparing a workstation computer to a consumer desktop and that's just not fair. Component for component, the Mac Pro is at least competitively priced. Though I will continue to be home-building my desktop PC's as it's far cheaper than Apples consumer grade PC's, AND does everything I need it to!

 

[pragmatous]

Meh I don't like the fact that you cannot replace the video card or add more storage. It's kind of limiting. That's where you get your cost savings. I can't tell you how many times I've had a GPU go bad and had to RMA the video card. What happens if a GPU goes bad? Is the entire thing junk now? Lots of questions are raising in my head. Oh well .. hopefully the mac pro of 2015 won't have that limitation.

 

[Exhale]

(Which is wrong because the Mac Pro benchmarks are 950Mb/s not 95Mb/s)

Uh no. Read the 4kb benchmark - its 95MB/s.

SSDs and hard drives do not read all types of data equally. Data that is not in order takes longer to read. HDDs are particularly penalised in random (small) data reads, but SSDs are as well.

The 950 figure is when you're reading everything in a nice tidy order, such as a single large movie file. The 95mb figure is more in line with what you'll get when actually opening and using software.

 

[fmaxwell]

The purpose of ECC is to guard against potential bit errors slipping into a very long calculation chain.

ECC RAM exists to correct bit errors that can affect any critical system, from a server to a high-end workstation. The errors can appear anywhere -- in data areas, the operating system, or the executing software. They can change instructions, addresses, or program data. The result could be anything from corrupted files to a system crash.

The primary cause of bit errors is cosmic rays. While the Earth shields us somewhat, enough get through to make ECC RAM very advisable for mission-critical systems.

But for typical use, including shorter project (and media) - such errors are going to be undetectable. In addition, if the error does cause some form of problem - then it can easily be remedied by a rerun. But more often than not, the error is simply overrun, inconsequential, or handled by the software anyway.

Sometimes it will be detected and other times it will not. Sure, if the system crashes, then you know it. But what if the problem is subtle and not easily seen?

The people who buy workstation class machines aren't going to consider a Core i7 to be equivalent to a Xeon. And it's not.

 

[fmaxwell]

Here is some comparable build to base new Mac Pro

Not even close. First off, many high-end workstation titles won't even run on a gamer GPU card. Not even a little bit. How is it "comparable" when it won't even start the software? How is it comparable when the SSD is attached to a SATA III port while the SSD in the Mac Pro moves data at up to double the speed of a SATA III port?

You act like all you're paying for with the Mac Pro is the hardware bits. You don't include the system integration, testing, Apple warranty, AppleCare support, over-the-counter repair availability, or the cost to subsidize the development of OS X (so that it can be "free").

 

[Wildblood]

Gaming Performance

Wow, the heat is on about this topic!
I think Anandtech did a cool job writing a review like that.
But does anyone know what is happening on the comment below?

"Metro is the one outlier in our test suite. Although CrossFire is clearly working under Windows, under Metro the D700 behaves as if it wasn't. I'm not sure what's going on here, but this does serve as a reminder that relying on multi-GPU setups to increase performance does come with a handful of these weird cases - particularly if you're using non-standard GPU configurations."

It's pretty much the oblivion here...

 

[brdeveloper]

Since nMP's gpu ram isn't ECC, it's not suitable for serious OpenCL jobs. Basically the new Mac Pro is a workstation for graphic designers, photographers and video makers. You can't use the GPUs for heavy math processing. The HP workstation, on the other hand, CAN be used for this task. So the HP machine is an order of seriousness higher than the new Mac Pro.

 

[barkmonster]

There was no backtracking considering you still failed to explain to me how you know Apple is using two raided SATA based SSD's. You can't & won't answer the question because you don't know.

You seem to be putting up a huge smokescreen in an attempt to hide that fact.

I was simply (for everyone apart from you apparently) explaining that to achieve the speeds of PCIe SSDs, the only alternative is to RAID several SATA 6Gb/s SSDs together and that means either a hardware RAID card with dual 2.5" SATA 6Gb/s channels and 2 SSDs or 2 SSDs on 2 onboard SATA 6Gb/s channels. Nothing more, nothing less.

To give you some idea of the "Apple" innovation of the Mac Pro SSDs, just look at this page for the "Samsung" SSDs that are actually used in the Mac Pro:

http://www.thessdreview.com/our-rev...-0-worlds-smallest-ssd-combination-hits-2gbs/

I saw what he originally posted.
What he said was the equivalent of saying "the PCIe SSDs that Apple uses." In any case, your comments were pretty uncalled for.

They were splitting hairs over the wording, parroting the same demand for "proof" that apple were using dual SSDs instead of reading for comprehension and then repeating themselves tediously.

Uh no. Read the 4kb benchmark - its 95MB/s.

SSDs and hard drives do not read all types of data equally. Data that is not in order takes longer to read. HDDs are particularly penalised in random (small) data reads, but SSDs are as well.

The 950 figure is when you're reading everything in a nice tidy order, such as a single large movie file. The 95mb figure is more in line with what you'll get when actually opening and using software.

That's impressive! I honestly thought it was a typo because it didn't seem realistic.

The difference between the SSD in my Mac Mini and a HDD is night and day and yet due to the fact I only have a Vertex 2 and didn't enable TRIM till quite recently, it performs terribly compared with modern SSDs and that's irrespective of the limitations of SATA 3Gb/s vs 6Gb/s.

Based on Xbench, the 4K random read speeds of the Vertex 2 in my Mac has dropped from 21Mb/s new to only 11Mb/s and the 256K sequential speeds have dropped from over 200Mb/s to 185Mb/s yet my Mac still feels much snappier running off the SSD than any HDD I've ever booted from and I tend to go for the 7200rpm, 32/64Mb cache variety.

 

[DesterWallaboo]

Since nMP's gpu ram isn't ECC, it's not suitable for serious OpenCL jobs. Basically the new Mac Pro is a workstation for graphic designers, photographers and video makers. You can't use the GPUs for heavy math processing. The HP workstation, on the other hand, CAN be used for this task. So the HP machine is an order of seriousness higher than the new Mac Pro.

You've convinced all of us. We're canceling our orders now.

 

[chirpie]

You've convinced all of us. We're canceling our orders now.

Not sure I'd throw him under the bus that fast.

In fact, I find it kind of odd that Apple goes the high road on ECC for one side of the configuration (CPU/RAM) and not the other (Dual GPUs.)

It's more conflating considering I was under the impression that Apple's MO going forward was a much more integrated mixed overall approach making sure both sides of the coin were maximized to take advantage of speed gains wherever they may come from.

Maybe I missed reading something that shows Apple has something roughly comparative in place for dealing with this on the GPU side, but I haven't seen it yet.

 

[DesterWallaboo]

Not sure I'd throw him under the bus that fast.

In fact, I find it kind of odd that Apple goes the high road on ECC for one side of the configuration (CPU/RAM) and not the other (Dual GPUs.)

It's more conflating considering I was under the impression that Apple's MO going forward was a much more integrated mixed overall approach making sure both sides of the coin were maximized to take advantage of speed gains wherever they may come from.

Maybe I missed reading something that shows Apple has something roughly comparative in place for dealing with this on the GPU side, but I haven't seen it yet.

Are you aware of any GPU's using ECC?.... I'm not.

 

[chirpie]

Are you aware of any GPU's using ECC?.... I'm not.

From Anand's review...

"Despite the FirePro brand, these GPUs have at least some features in common with their desktop Radeon counterparts. FirePro GPUs ship with ECC memory, however in the case of the FirePro D300/D500/D700, ECC isn’t enabled on the GPU memories. Similarly, CrossFire X isn’t supported by FirePro (instead you get CrossFire Pro) but in the case of the Dx00 cards you do get CrossFire X support under Windows."

Apologies if I interpreted something wrong.

 

[DesterWallaboo]

From Anand's review...

"Despite the FirePro brand, these GPUs have at least some features in common with their desktop Radeon counterparts. FirePro GPUs ship with ECC memory, however in the case of the FirePro D300/D500/D700, ECC isn’t enabled on the GPU memories. Similarly, CrossFire X isn’t supported by FirePro (instead you get CrossFire Pro) but in the case of the Dx00 cards you do get CrossFire X support under Windows."

There we have it.

 

[Juventas]

Try harder Anand

I generally respect Anand's articles. Regarding pricing, he says, "I poked around...". So yeah, his effort was a little lacking here.

Lenovo uses Quadro, not FirePro. There is no direct equivalent. We already know a D300 is a W7000 with half the RAM, so let's use those.

A Lenovo ThinkStation S30 (part# 4352H2U) includes a E5-1620 v2, a single 4 GB DDR3 ECC, and a 256 GB SSD. We'll add a couple more Lenovo sticks and a couple AMD FirePro W7000's.

Lenovo 4352H2U $1487
Lenovo 0A65732 $110 (x2)
AMD 100-505634 $725 (x2)

CDW is an official reseller, albeit with high advertised prices (organizations with accounts get significant discounts). Their total is $3157, and this includes the 3-year warranty. I shopped around a bit, and got this down to $2965. This is way more similar hardware and a far cry from Anand's $4373.

 

[devinci99]

Image[/center]While Apple's pricing is competitive with similar PCs from HP and Lenovo, AnandTech found that building a comparative PC from individual parts was far less expensive, at least for lower-end systems. 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.

This is misleading! A desktop-grade system is always cheaper than a workstation-class system. Even the top-of-the-line desktop-grade system cannot really be compared with a workstation system.

It's not a clear-cut comparison. Try to build a DIY workstation using the same XEON systems and compatible ECC-buffered RAM and I want to see how the price compares.

It gives readers the wrong impression that you can do DIY workstation-class system for far less than the workstation; when you can't really. What you can do is build a really powerful desktop that can almost do the same work as a workstation but never call it a workstation.

It's like a doctor who can't tell the difference between a flu and a cold.

 

[LordVic]

----------

[/COLOR]Ya if only apple sold a smaller cheaper computer. Something that's small and light. Yet fast enough to fit most users needs. Man I think if I invented that I would have called it the Mac mini! ya that's an awesome name.

ya mac pros are not for people who browse the web. They are for enthusiasts, people who use final cut pro, and photoshop. Or, something similar that requires CPU power.

Mac Mini is still a "low end" computer by performance standards. it uses Laptop grade components to make a very small and sleek looking device.

Don't get me wrong, its a great computer for its use. But it is not a real replacement for a traditional desktop for anyone looking for good performance.

I WOULD recommend a mini to my mother who just uses facebook, copies her photos off her P&S camera for facebook and emailing. Even the occasional movie watching.

But I couldn't in good faith recommend it to my father who spends his time scanning thousands of old photographs, digitally touching them up and then cataloguing and storing them. Then making HD Blue Rays of those photos and home movies to give to family and friends as gifts (if i have to sit through another disney vacation blue ray).

However, The Mac Pro is not what he needs in power either. its too much.

So, whats the middle ground here? Apple has a gap in their linup. They think the iMac is that gap, but it's an All in one. All in Ones are not suitable replacements for a traditional desktop. People want the ability to bring their own displays to their workflow and have easy access to expand storage without being forced into external devices.

 

[CodeJingle]

NO only 3 Thunderbolt buses in the new mac pro.

Thanks for feedback. To clarify your correction - Mac Pro has 3 physical chips as Thunderbolt 2 controllers. The three physical 'Thunderbolt 2' chips in the Mac Pro are 'Intel DSL5520', which supports twice as many channels as 'Intel DSL5320'.

So even though the number of physical Thunderbolt 2 controller chips in the Mac Pro is 3, Apple is using the chips with double the number of simultaneous channels, making each 5520 chip the equivalent of two 5320 chips. Apple is using 3 double controllers instead of 6 single controllers. So in a manner of speaking still 6 controllers even though it is only 3 controller chips.

It is part of the Thunderbolt standard that each host post have its own 'controller'. Also Apple explicitly stated during the WWDC that the 6 Thunderbolt 2 ports of the Mac Pro do not share bandwidth.

http://ark.intel.com/products/series/79640/Thunderbolt-2-Controllers

 

[pragmatous]

Ya I agree with that.

Mac Mini is still a "low end" computer by performance standards. it uses Laptop grade components to make a very small and sleek looking device.

Don't get me wrong, its a great computer for its use. But it is not a real replacement for a traditional desktop for anyone looking for good performance.

I WOULD recommend a mini to my mother who just uses facebook, copies her photos off her P&S camera for facebook and emailing. Even the occasional movie watching.

But I couldn't in good faith recommend it to my father who spends his time scanning thousands of old photographs, digitally touching them up and then cataloguing and storing them. Then making HD Blue Rays of those photos and home movies to give to family and friends as gifts (if i have to sit through another disney vacation blue ray).

However, The Mac Pro is not what he needs in power either. its too much.

So, whats the middle ground here? Apple has a gap in their linup. They think the iMac is that gap, but it's an All in one. All in Ones are not suitable replacements for a traditional desktop. People want the ability to bring their own displays to their workflow and have easy access to expand storage without being forced into external devices.

 

[fourthtunz]

Mac Mini is still a "low end" computer by performance standards. it uses Laptop grade components to make a very small and sleek looking device.

Don't get me wrong, its a great computer for its use. But it is not a real replacement for a traditional desktop for anyone looking for good performance.

I WOULD recommend a mini to my mother who just uses facebook, copies her photos off her P&S camera for facebook and emailing. Even the occasional movie watching.

But I couldn't in good faith recommend it to my father who spends his time scanning thousands of old photographs, digitally touching them up and then cataloguing and storing them. Then making HD Blue Rays of those photos and home movies to give to family and friends as gifts (if i have to sit through another disney vacation blue ray).

However, The Mac Pro is not what he needs in power either. its too much.

So, whats the middle ground here? Apple has a gap in their linup. They think the iMac is that gap, but it's an All in one. All in Ones are not suitable replacements for a traditional desktop. People want the ability to bring their own displays to their workflow and have easy access to expand storage without being forced into external devices.

How long has it been since you've used a Mac?
Here's what I'm going to get pretty soon:
http://store.apple.com/us/product/F...ith-lion-server-20ghz-quad-core-intel-core-i7
This thing will kick but for what you're talking about.
Really good bang for the buck.

 

[Eidorian]

How long has it been since you've used a Mac?
Here's what I'm going to get pretty soon:
http://store.apple.com/us/product/F...ith-lion-server-20ghz-quad-core-intel-core-i7
This thing will kick but for what you're talking about.
Really good bang for the buck.

It's a mobile Sandy Bridge quad core from 2011. I know you are going to enjoy it. I guess.