These two things are not a like. Anyone half way competent with a screw driver can build a totally functional computer. Now, it might not be the best idea to use home-builds in certain situations, but the reasons for that generally have nothing to do with the quality and usability of the computer.
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.
iMac Pros With Custom Xeon Chips Possibly Appear on Geekbench Ahead of December Launch
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
These two things are not a like. Anyone half way competent with a screw driver can build a totally functional computer. Now, it might not be the best idea to use home-builds in certain situations, but the reasons for that generally have nothing to do with the quality and usability of the computer.
Ah! The proverbial car analogy. LOL
You actually believe a $160,000 Porche turbo sprinting from 0-60 in 3.5 seconds is actually faster and better than a $75,000 custom built car sprinting from 0-60 in 3.0 seconds.
Based on my experience driving and tuning hundreds of cars, yes. And your build is still inferior.
[doublepost=1508543317][/doublepost]
I never said building a computer was hard. I’ve been building rigs since the early 90’s.
My issue is substituting inferior components and claiming they’ll work just as good.
Lets say he went with a Amd Threadripper 1950x instead, for only $400 more than his original price. It supports ECC Ram too! Would his statement then be correct? From your prior responses, I would imagine 16 cores, 32 threads with a SC:4800 and MC:50k probably still wouldn't satisfy you...unless Apple chose it for you in a reconfigured package?
https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/3696775
Would Apple's choice of using a Xeon w2150B be superior to the Xeon w2155B, because Apple decided to use it instead?
This is not in reply to anyone. I'm just wondering about some things.
I'm not familiar with all the applications that take advantage of ECC memory... so forgive me.
But what stuck a nerve with me in this thread was the term "consumer grade" describing processors and memory. Maybe y'all can help me out.
I'm pretty sure there are plenty of "professionals" who are doing "professional" things with standard iMacs and Macbook Pros... neither of which have ECC memory support.
So what exactly does ECC memory provide? And if you need that kind of support... would you be using a Mac in the first place?
Seems like Dell and HP have amazing Xeon workstations with ECC support... along with things like on-site warranty replacement and other professional perks.
I dunno... I'm just spitballing here. Again... the term "consumer grade" made it sound like it's inferior to "workstation grade" parts.
I've been using "consumer grade" parts my entire life. And I make a living off those parts too.
Also... I can't think of a single example of my hardware "wearing out" because it was a consumer part and not a professional part.
I'm not familiar with all the applications that take advantage of ECC memory... so forgive me.
But what stuck a nerve with me in this thread was the term "consumer grade" describing processors and memory. Maybe y'all can help me out.
I'm pretty sure there are plenty of "professionals" who are doing "professional" things with standard iMacs and Macbook Pros... neither of which have ECC memory support.
So what exactly does ECC memory provide? And if you need that kind of support... would you be using a Mac in the first place?
Seems like Dell and HP have amazing Xeon workstations with ECC support... along with things like on-site warranty replacement and other professional perks.
I dunno... I'm just spitballing here. Again... the term "consumer grade" made it sound like it's inferior to "workstation grade" parts.
I've been using "consumer grade" parts my entire life. And I make a living off those parts too.
Also... I can't think of a single example of my hardware "wearing out" because it was a consumer part and not a professional part.
Last edited:
This is not in reply to anyone. I'm just wondering about some things.
I'm not familiar with all the applications that take advantage of ECC memory... so forgive me.
But what stuck a nerve with me in this thread was the term "consumer grade" describing processors and memory. Maybe y'all can help me out.
I'm pretty sure there are plenty of "professionals" who are doing "professional" things with standard iMacs and Macbook Pros... neither of which have ECC memory support.
So what exactly does ECC memory provide? And if you need that kind of support... would you be using a Mac in the first place?
Seems like Dell and HP have amazing Xeon workstations with ECC support... along with things like on-site warranty replacement and other perks.
I dunno... I'm just spitballing here. Again... the term "consumer grade" made it sound like it's inferior to "workstation grade" parts.
I've been using "consumer grade" parts my entire life. And I make a living off those parts too.
Also... I can't think of a single example of my hardware "wearing out" because it was a consumer part and not a professional part.
Taken straight from Google:
ECC (which stands for Error Correction Code) RAM is very popular in servers or other systems with high-value data as it protects against data corruption by automatically detecting and correcting memory errors. Standard RAM uses banks of eight memory chips in which data is stored and provided to the CPU on demand.
---
ECC RAM is many times less likely to fail over time vs non-ECC RAM, so you're working with something that simply isn't going to fail you over time - a great boon when working on projects that are super-important. Pair this with XEON chips, and you have a super-reliable professional workstation.
Interestingly, having ECC RAM actually downgrades your system by around 2% over non-ECC RAM, but that's a result of having more reliability and less system failures / application crashes.
To counteract your argument, I have been using a MacBook Pro for my business, and the GPU fried on it. Now, I now that's a fault with this particular model, but the 'pro' was certainly kicked out of its moniker when that failed on me.
Another example of times when I've paid extra for reliability is when I chose to place WD Red drives inside my server instead of cheaper drives. Ask people about their Seagate SD card failures and I'm sure they'd appreciate the reliability from more reliable systems, e.g. SanDisk, particuarly with wedding work where you can't re-do anything after the date.
As for the move across to Windows with HP et al, behave. This is a Mac forum and most people choosing to use a Mac are doing so because they love OS X and Apple's software. I would have to learn a whole new NLE when I moved system, and the software wouldn't be as fast as FCPX, and so would slow me down despite its internals being 'better'.
Again, it's the Android vs iOS argument for internal parts. We need to really put this iMac Pro into perspective: for some people, this is what we've been waiting for. It might not be the system that you want Apple to produce, but it's the one for some people.
Thanks! That helped.
Though I am curious how Apple has been able to sell standard iMacs for all this time... with standard memory that is "many times more likely to fail"
It sounds funny if you flip it like that.
Thanks! That helped.
Though I am curious how Apple has been able to sell standard iMacs for all this time... with standard memory that is "many times more likely to fail"
It sounds funny if you flip it like that.
You're welcome.
When you get down to how likely RAM is to fail, you're looking at roughly 1% failure rate for non-ECC RAM vs 0.25% with ECC RAM over a given period of time. When you consider those stats - given by one company who analysed their computers over a three year period - ECC RAM is 4x less likely for your RAM to die, and therefore, 4x less likely for any of your important data to become corrupt... which is a pretty significant difference that most professionals would want. After all, our data is our livelihood, you could argue quite easily. It's the same reason that I've spent thousands on hard drives and run two large RAID 5 servers / Thunderbolt external HDD through APC battery systems.
To add to your argument, there are studies showing the opposite findings to the company mentioned above, i.e. showing ECC RAM being more likely to fail. However, ECC RAM tends to be overloaded with applications 24/7 vs consumer RAM, which experiences much less stress overall when taking an average of the two and how they tend to be used. The fact that the company mentioned above found ECC RAM had so few failures under heavier loads is even more impressive than the 4x better reliability really shows.
With 1 in 100 computers being subjected to RAM failures over a long period of time, it's no surprise that Apple has had no problem selling consumer RAM in their Macs, as you rightly suggest. Despite this, how often do you see people at a Genius Bar saying they don't have a back up as their consumer Mac is now corrupt and in need of a complete re-install? It does happen. Their data could have also become corrupt as a result of their RAM module failing. I'm not saying ECC RAM would have stopped it from happening, but I'm not saying that in a few cases, it wouldn't have - they don't just make up its benefits. It does make an effort to protect your system, and just like when I set tests on my RAIDs to search for bad sector warnings... every little helps me to sleep better at night.
That’s not what modular means. It means that parts are easily accessible and can be upgraded. Obviously stuff like the CPU won’t be but he GPU and RAM will be. Just look at the old school Mac Pro. Go and Google modular computers.
For Apple, modular could easily mean the ability swap modules for BTO machine and updating machines, not necessarily "user upgradable components".
Considering Apple's current path of proprietary designed components and closed systems, I would tend to believe the only component that might be user upgradable is the memory.
Thanks! That helped.
Though I am curious how Apple has been able to sell standard iMacs for all this time... with standard memory that is "many times more likely to fail"
It sounds funny if you flip it like that.
for most users, it won't be noticeable. however in some professional cases, especially with large number crunching scenarios, it's important. for 95% of us? nah, ECC is an unneeded expense. Combine in most of us frequently save to disk, rather than leaving data memory resident for months/years, the benefits of ECC are moot.
Lol!! I think i just got coffee on my desk because of you haha.
LOL, I know the classic definition of modular. You need to translate "modular" into Apple's own language. Apple has done everything in their power to ensure that Mac users cannot upgrade components in their computers because that eats into profit margins. Even the Mac Mini was sealed shut years ago. The Mac Pro towers must really keep Apple executives awake at night because users still upgrade them and resell them on ebay.
Apple's modular Mac Pro will be two or three boxes interconnected with what is likely a proprietary connector. The GPU box will definitely use a proprietary board to prevent users from upgrading their video cards in any way other than buying a new Apple GPU box at obscenely inflated prices. Maybe the CPU and RAM will be upgradable but Apple will throw down plenty of caltrops on that upgrade path. At the least they'll use some whacked out security screws to seal the boxes.
They may even use a low power Xeon variant to foil significant upgrades. Because of course Professional users are upset that the Mac Tube isn't thin enough.
Imagine a really amazing Mac Pro no thicker than a Mac Mini...it would be magical!
This.
The fact that they have to 'think' what is next for the Mac Pro, when every other user knows what they need to do, shows that a truly modular Mac Pro is long gone. Whatever they come up with, it won't be the perfect answer, but it will be enough to please their target audience enough to stay on with Apple.
Make no mistake - the apology showed that they were shook and DO care about the Mac and need the pro users, which is what I liked most about that meeting.
Yep! It seems most Mac Pro users just want Apple to bring back the old cheesegrater Mac Pro. Funny how the other OEMs are still using the tower form-factor. It works.
Meanwhile... Apple is working on the thinnest Mac Pro ever with the finest chamfered edges...
Yes, that's what I mean. But I wasn't discussing built PCs vs Macs for work, just Hackintoshes. You might be confusing me with the other people having a separate discussion.
Yep! It seems most Mac Pro users just want Apple to bring back the old cheesegrater Mac Pro. Funny how the other OEMs are still using the tower form-factor. It works.
Meanwhile... Apple is working on the thinnest Mac Pro ever with the finest chamfered edges...
Voiceover w/British accent:
"The uncompromising Mac Pro has the most luxurious finish of any desktop computer..."
Seriously, how could Apple have learned nothing from the colossal flop that was the Power Mac G4 Cube? The Mac Pro tube is just another PMG4 cube except even less upgradable (IIRC, a few special form factor video card upgrades were released for the cube).
Except for the iMac, Apple's desktop lineup is retarded. The Mini? For the love of the FSM, WTF would Apple build a headless low-end laptop? The whole point of a desktop is higher limits on power consumption!
The Mac Pro's idiocy is well known...but the form factor actually would work exceptionally well for a headless iMac, which is what the Mini should be. Just use cheaper materials for the case and it's the perfect headless iMac (except use a damn desktop GPU). Broaden the specs so it can fill the market space of the Mini and up to $2K.
Then offer a Mac Pro Mini-Tower. There's no longer a need for ODD or HDD bays but it should have two SSD slots and four PCI slots. If users upgrade them then so what? Anyone who owns a Mac Pro is likely to buy a Macbook and an iPhone. More professionals using Macs is always a good thing, even if Apple's amortized R&D costs make the Mini Tower a low margin product. Apple should think of it as a halo product.
Ok, I'll just go to the bathroom to finish off my fantasy...
Last edited:
Amen.
Having owned Macs since 2007 (a MacBook Black, a MacBook Air and a 17" MacBook Pro); an iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4, iPhone 4S and iPhone 5 and soon, an iPhone X. I have also owned a 64GB iPad (original), iPad 3, iPad Mini 2, an Apple TV, an iPod Nano, iPod Shuffle and probably other Apple products that I can no longer recollect. Most importantly, I've sold many people on moving to Mac since before 2007 - two friends, my mum, two friends of my mum, as well as selling many people on moving to iPhone and iPad, and challenged my school to upgrade to iPads instead of NetBooks - we had 70+ iPads in school by the time I left to pursue videography, and we were using Apple's Playgrounds App to teach code.
In all, I've probably made them £50K, which they probably don't appreciate now that they're running the world. I am - as I bet every other forum member is here - well respected for my understanding of the market for a number of electronic products and I can usually do a decent job of explaining things and the reasons why certain things need to bought etc. If not, I go off and research it until I know the answer.
Therefore, I actually complained yesterday to an Apple worker when I spent 25 minutes or so waiting for someone to swap an Apple Watch strap for me, as I was interested in purchasing one and wanted to see which strap and face I should buy. One Apple employee was running around trying to figure out how to refund someone for their iPhone - she passed us no less than six times, apologising to the man, as she didn't know how to do it - whilst another person was talking and talking and talking to someone about something that they didn't seem that interested in and were making steps towards the doorway as he continued to talk to them for the entire duration of time that we were there. I should add that that customer was behind me in the queue, and he didn't seem aware of us as he had his back to us the entire time - so no one was selling Apple Watches. The customer who came after us moved towards him, instead of waiting as I did. After twenty+ minutes of waiting and not being served, asking someone else for help who wasn't designated to do sales - 'She's our Watch sales person', I was informed - the same person who couldn't do a refund. I complained to another statue who was standing by the door with her iPad. I explained the situation to her and she actually accepted the complaint, but then proceeded to tell me that I wasn't in an electronic queue to be sold an Apple Watch. The same employee then wanted to add me to a list so I could join the queue and be sold an Apple Watch... Apple seems to love the fact that they have the most popular watch in the world, but if I go into ANY other jewellers, I can guarantee that I'll be with someone in seconds, not standing around and waiting for nearly 30 minutes, as half of the Apple employees seem to do instead of selling and being helpful.
Service like this really blows. It's no wonder they're turning everyone towards the Apple Store app. I told the Apple lady that I didn't have the time to wait any longer, and that I'd be leaving and not buying the Watch. I actually think that I'll forego the product now, as I really don't see the point in buying something when the sale service is so shoddy. Seems like if you don't have an appointment, they don't want to sell you anything, which is vastly different to my experience over ten years ago in an Apple Store.
Anywho, my point is, Apple is definitely weaker now in their new position of power. They're losing the knowledgeable heads like us, who are already moving other customers towards Windows... they need to get it sorted.
I'll still be getting the iMac Pro and iPhone X though, so no lessons will be learned.
Fair enough, as I missed the Hackintosh part. But there are people who use Hackintosh for pro work (likely not in the thousands and thousands of users), but only because they prefer the mac OS (even the older versions) but are sick of waiting for Apple to update their hardware.
The cool thing is, it sounds like the x299 chipset is good-to-go for a Hack build. ...which I might consider.
We really need to see these in the wild prior to assuming anything about their performance. The cylindrical mac pro throttled, and a lot of software couldn't fully utilize it. Apple's own APIs can be a little wacky in this regard, given the lack of support for standards like OpenMP (which I have grumbled about many times), lack of CUDA due to AMD gpus, and lack of high level APIs that could be used to leverage some of that power without writing a lot of low level code that is specific to OSX.
Interestingly enough, that build goes far above and beyond what any iMac can offer at that price with 4 internal drives, a 16 core CPU, BR/DVD/CD writer.
When the Mac Pro comes out, instead of spending $3,785, Apple will charge $10,000-$12,000.