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.
Is the Mac Pro WAY overpriced?
- Thread starter Hookflash
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Another "Macpro's are too expensive' thread.. yawn! If its too expensive then dont buy one, as i earn my living of these machines I NEED the best machine Apple has to offer. The Macpro in any of its configurations fits the bill perfectly, sure the initial outlay seems a lot as it did when i bought my G5 and the G3 before that but as the G5 proved it is well worth it. The machine lasted me for four years without any major problems allowing me to get on with my work (graphic design) and not worry about the problems that plague Windows machines.
Even after I upgraded the G5 after four years use to the very machine im typing this on now, Macpro Quad 2.8, I was able to sell the G5 enabling me to reduce the purchase price of the Macpro.
I have no doubt in my mind in three/four years time I will be able to get a good return on the Macpro which will enable me to purchase my new machine yet again, there is no way in hell this is possible with PC as people wont pay the prices initially for the new machine rendering them worthless in a few years time, not so when you buy a Mac!
Normally I ignore all these posts about it being over priced. but this time I will post something...
Look at the attached image. And keep in mind the dell has a older processor, less HD space, a slower graphics card, and less RAM. Plus it doesn't run the full version of vista. And you need anti virus on top of that. So that total (in cdn) is $3400 plus tax. The same Mac Pro starts at $2,899 cdn. So yes the Mac Pro is under priced.
Look at the attached image. And keep in mind the dell has a older processor, less HD space, a slower graphics card, and less RAM. Plus it doesn't run the full version of vista. And you need anti virus on top of that. So that total (in cdn) is $3400 plus tax. The same Mac Pro starts at $2,899 cdn. So yes the Mac Pro is under priced.
Attachments
The answer is simple.
Is the dual-socket Mac Pro overpriced? No.
Is the single-socket Mac Pro overpriced? Yes.
The single-socket Mac Pro is a poor piece of engineering, with its lack of cpu expansion and 4 dimm slots (4 dimm slots paired with a triple-channel chipset?). That makes the above poster's comparison to the Dell T7500 pointless, because that machine IS far more expandable - it doesn't have the crippled ram limitation of the single-socket Mac Pro and can also add another quad core xeon down the road.
To provide a closer comparison you'd need to use the Dell T3500 single-socket Nehalem workstation:
Xeon 3520 2.66ghz
3 GB ECC 1066 DDR3 Memory
hard drive: 320 Gb (dell) and 640 Gb (apple)
512mb Quadro FX 580 (dell) and 512mb Geforce GT120 (apple)
DVD burner
3 year warranty (stock dell, applecare upgrade)
Dell: $1,501 Apple: $2,748
Difference: $1,247
The T3500 has 6 dimm slots (proper # for the triple channel memory config of x58) for up to 24 GB ram. Apple will only sell you 8 GB of ram in the single socket mac pro. Is it just me or does Apple not offer workstation video cards? All the ones I saw are gaming cards.
Before the fanbois have a fit, remember that this is the single socket comparison only, the dual socket comparison is far closer in price.
Is the dual-socket Mac Pro overpriced? No.
Is the single-socket Mac Pro overpriced? Yes.
The single-socket Mac Pro is a poor piece of engineering, with its lack of cpu expansion and 4 dimm slots (4 dimm slots paired with a triple-channel chipset?). That makes the above poster's comparison to the Dell T7500 pointless, because that machine IS far more expandable - it doesn't have the crippled ram limitation of the single-socket Mac Pro and can also add another quad core xeon down the road.
To provide a closer comparison you'd need to use the Dell T3500 single-socket Nehalem workstation:
Xeon 3520 2.66ghz
3 GB ECC 1066 DDR3 Memory
hard drive: 320 Gb (dell) and 640 Gb (apple)
512mb Quadro FX 580 (dell) and 512mb Geforce GT120 (apple)
DVD burner
3 year warranty (stock dell, applecare upgrade)
Dell: $1,501 Apple: $2,748
Difference: $1,247
The T3500 has 6 dimm slots (proper # for the triple channel memory config of x58) for up to 24 GB ram. Apple will only sell you 8 GB of ram in the single socket mac pro. Is it just me or does Apple not offer workstation video cards? All the ones I saw are gaming cards.
Before the fanbois have a fit, remember that this is the single socket comparison only, the dual socket comparison is far closer in price.
Agreed. The dual cpu Mac Pro is a fabulous machine and great value. The single cpu Mac Pro is a terrible performance value compared to better speced quad core i7 computers. Seriously,$2,400 for a tower with 3GB of memory ? It's a joke.
As other posters have said, the single socket Mac Pro is much more expensive than the single socket Dell (T3500) whilst the dual socket is much closer to the Dell T7500. (I found that in the UK Dell were willing to match the Apple student discount price which is 17% below the Apple retail price on the octos.)
I have a UK perspective where Apple have upped their prices at a point when the UK pound was at its lowest so their products are even more expensive in the UK than they are in the US.
Also Apple do have a restricted number of RAM slots which makes getting more ram expensive (if you need to go to 4GB sticks). Apple also don't allow registered ram or faster ram even where the chip (such as the 2.66GHz octo 5550s) would allow it.
Apple does not provide a range of Quadro cards (only the 4800 which is very expensive) but I think this is because, for OS X there is little point as the main cost of such cards is in the drivers and these are all Windows based (I get the impression that the OS X drivers are not well optimised).
BUT
The single socket Mac Pro has mostly the same parts as the dual socket machine (I think) ie a 1kW power supply etc and the same case whilst Dell has desgined a single socket machine (T3500) with only a 525W supply and a smaller case. So to some extent you get more with the Apple but it is more of what you don't actually need (given that Apple don't encourage upgrading of the processor board etc).
If you're not using software that requires a Quadro type card (or are prepared to fit a card and run it only under Windows) then the octo Mac Pros are on a par with Dell and probably much cheaper than HP. They are relatively much more expensive than the 08 model which was a bargain.
I have a UK perspective where Apple have upped their prices at a point when the UK pound was at its lowest so their products are even more expensive in the UK than they are in the US.
Also Apple do have a restricted number of RAM slots which makes getting more ram expensive (if you need to go to 4GB sticks). Apple also don't allow registered ram or faster ram even where the chip (such as the 2.66GHz octo 5550s) would allow it.
Apple does not provide a range of Quadro cards (only the 4800 which is very expensive) but I think this is because, for OS X there is little point as the main cost of such cards is in the drivers and these are all Windows based (I get the impression that the OS X drivers are not well optimised).
BUT
The single socket Mac Pro has mostly the same parts as the dual socket machine (I think) ie a 1kW power supply etc and the same case whilst Dell has desgined a single socket machine (T3500) with only a 525W supply and a smaller case. So to some extent you get more with the Apple but it is more of what you don't actually need (given that Apple don't encourage upgrading of the processor board etc).
If you're not using software that requires a Quadro type card (or are prepared to fit a card and run it only under Windows) then the octo Mac Pros are on a par with Dell and probably much cheaper than HP. They are relatively much more expensive than the 08 model which was a bargain.
Comparing vs Dell
I've price compared various apple products vs dell products over the past two years. I've noticed one striking thing:
As the "power" of the computers increase, Mac gets more and more competitive, even to the point of being cheaper than a comparative dell system.
This has been true for Macbook pros and mac pros.
EG.
a 2.26(8) nehalem mac is about $500 more expensive than a similarly decked out dell..
However the 2.66(8) mehalem mac is about $300 cheaper than its dell competition. and the 2.93 is about $500 cheaper.
When I bought my macbook pro 2 years ago it was about $100 cheaper than a similar dell system.
The "problem" with apple computers is that people are usually thinking of their "low range" products which are overpriced compared to competition. But if you are looking for some serious horsepower, Mac is the best value in the market.
I've price compared various apple products vs dell products over the past two years. I've noticed one striking thing:
As the "power" of the computers increase, Mac gets more and more competitive, even to the point of being cheaper than a comparative dell system.
This has been true for Macbook pros and mac pros.
EG.
a 2.26(8) nehalem mac is about $500 more expensive than a similarly decked out dell..
However the 2.66(8) mehalem mac is about $300 cheaper than its dell competition. and the 2.93 is about $500 cheaper.
When I bought my macbook pro 2 years ago it was about $100 cheaper than a similar dell system.
The "problem" with apple computers is that people are usually thinking of their "low range" products which are overpriced compared to competition. But if you are looking for some serious horsepower, Mac is the best value in the market.
Even if it was overpriced as a machine, it wouldn't be overpriced as a computer. And a computer is what matters (Computer = Machine + OS)
My 2009 Quad is very overpriced but I couldn't justify another $700 for 2x slower processors on the Octo so I didn't really have much of a choice. (I use Photoshop/Illustrator mostly so the Octo wouldn't have done me much good). Plus they don't make another desktop so what choice do we really have? (iMacs and Mini don't count since they are non-upgradable)
That said you can build a Xeon system for about $600 less or an i7 system with a faster processor/12GB Ram/4x Hard drives for $900 cheaper than the Quad MP. You can even get a Dell/Lenovo Quad for less. (With 3rd party upgrades like you would do for your Apple) And I've never 'felt' the difference between a homebrew windows box vs a workstation with xeon chips in it. It's called 'marketing'.
The only reason I ate the cost is because I have too much Mac related hardware/software and I still prefer OSX over Vista or Win7.
That said you can build a Xeon system for about $600 less or an i7 system with a faster processor/12GB Ram/4x Hard drives for $900 cheaper than the Quad MP. You can even get a Dell/Lenovo Quad for less. (With 3rd party upgrades like you would do for your Apple) And I've never 'felt' the difference between a homebrew windows box vs a workstation with xeon chips in it. It's called 'marketing'.
The only reason I ate the cost is because I have too much Mac related hardware/software and I still prefer OSX over Vista or Win7.
Thank you for your post. This issue about ECC memory is something that people tend to overlook.... but you're absolutely right. When running these computations, the need to have built-in error correction is crucial. Computers aren't perfect, but the ECC memory sure helps when you are concerned about such imperfections.
"Peace of mind" is priceless, and ECC memory contributes toward that. (Of course, it never hurts to have a second tier program that checks for errors in such 24/7 programs too!)
I have an 8 core, 2008 Mac Pro. I was waffling over whether I needed it or not - considering the price. I like to buy my systems to last 5 years or so, and knew that the amortized cost was not outrageous. And that the Mac Pro would do me for 5 years..... but, it was an expensive machine. Then George Ou at ZDNet did a detailed analysis, and he concluded that at that time the 8 core Mac Pro was the best workstation value out there, hands down. Up until then he generally thought that Macs were overpriced, and he would build his own systems to show how much less he could spend on the same components. Except for the plywood. He built his version of the iMac into a plywood enclosure. Good Heavens, it was ugly! But the actual components were a fraction of Apple's iMac price. So, when he recommended the Mac Pro, I bought mine with no regrets.
Its a year and a bit later.... I have 12 Gigs of RAM now, and I couldn't be happier with a system. Its quiet, fast, stable. Its going to get faster when Snow Leopard comes out. I know that I have no single application that takes advantage of 8 cores, but I can run 8 apps all at once with limited impact on the processing. That Mac Pro is going to get faster still as developers take advantage of Grand Central.
If you already invested in the Apple, and if you have hefty computing needs, then a 2008 Mac Pro is a good deal. If you are looking to switch, then the cost of a Mac Pro on top of the switching costs may be too much. Get a Mini and see if you like the Apple universe. If you do, then you can switch easily. If you don't like the Apple way of doing things, you aren't out too much - and can sell the Mini for a good portion of what you bought it for.
Good Luck.
Its a year and a bit later.... I have 12 Gigs of RAM now, and I couldn't be happier with a system. Its quiet, fast, stable. Its going to get faster when Snow Leopard comes out. I know that I have no single application that takes advantage of 8 cores, but I can run 8 apps all at once with limited impact on the processing. That Mac Pro is going to get faster still as developers take advantage of Grand Central.
If you already invested in the Apple, and if you have hefty computing needs, then a 2008 Mac Pro is a good deal. If you are looking to switch, then the cost of a Mac Pro on top of the switching costs may be too much. Get a Mini and see if you like the Apple universe. If you do, then you can switch easily. If you don't like the Apple way of doing things, you aren't out too much - and can sell the Mini for a good portion of what you bought it for.
Good Luck.
No, the Mac Pro is not 'way overpriced' for the workstation it is.
It costs more than a desktop computer because it's not a desktop computer.
Unfortunately Apple doesn't offer a desktop configuration, because with the Intel conversion an open architecture Mac would be a dream machine for hackers and hobbyists. And this Apple corporation does not want.
Thus the sealed, heavily modified laptops offered as consumer 'desktops'.
It costs more than a desktop computer because it's not a desktop computer.
Unfortunately Apple doesn't offer a desktop configuration, because with the Intel conversion an open architecture Mac would be a dream machine for hackers and hobbyists. And this Apple corporation does not want.
Thus the sealed, heavily modified laptops offered as consumer 'desktops'.
Completely disagree!
The chips used in the quad core models are the W3500 series and are identical to the desktop versions known commonly as Corei7. A good Corei7 box on par to a Mac Pro (parts, feature, and build quality) is about $1,000.
So the answers to both are "Hell Yes!" respectively.
2009 marks the year that Apple Intel went from Reasonably priced HQ systems to: Almost twice the DYI build price in every instance.
MP's went from being "a good and fair deal" to almost a complete rip-off.
I know this because I have a shinny new calculator and I know how to use it. <ain't I spiffy!>
And that has what to do with the dual-socket Mac Pro?Completely disagree!
The chips used in the quad core models are the W3500 series and are identical to the desktop versions known commonly as Corei7. A good Corei7 box on par to a Mac Pro (parts, feature, and build quality) is about $1,000.
So the answers to both are "Hell Yes!" respectively.
Completely disagree!
The chips used in the quad core models are the W3500 series and are identical to the desktop versions known commonly as Corei7. A good Corei7 box on par to a Mac Pro (parts, feature, and build quality) is about $1,000.
So the answers to both are "Hell Yes!" respectively.
2009 marks the year that Apple Intel went from Reasonably priced HQ systems to: Almost twice the DYI build price in every instance.
MP's went from being "a good and fair deal" to almost a complete rip-off.
I know this because I have a shinny new calculator and I know how to use it. <ain't I spiffy!>
Did you even read the post you replied to? It said the single socket price was too high, and the dual was not. You disagreed and argued that the single socket price was too high.
I thought the W3500 series diferred from standard i7 processors as it was capable of using ECC RAM. Correct me if I'm wrong, but considering the above statements, but this could be an issue to some people - including one of my brother's "interesting" professors, who are using a single-socket computer for calculations. I don't KNOW the calculations, but I am assuming that they are not that parallel.
You are correct. I think the point being made was a financial/cost one. The Xeon 3500 series have exactly the same price (on Intel's price lists for 1000 off) as the corresponding core i7 parts as they are identical in almost every way except for the use of ECC RAM.
What frustrates me, though it is off topic, is that in the UK at least it seems impossible for consumers to buy the W3500 parts (unlike the 5500 Xeons). I guess Apple/Dell/HP/Lenovo/Sun etc consume almost all of Intel's output.
unfortunately, apple has decided to use the highest end CPU to justify a higher price. Honestly, who here would have an issue using regular DDR3 triple channeled ram, an ATI 4890, and a core i7 processor; even that could be obtained for a little over $1000 on the PC side..roughly 1/3 the price of a mac pro. For what? A server processor and a pretty case with nice cable management? Yes..and OSX. That's it. It's a shame we don't get the option to build a desktop instead of only a workstation or an imac.
