Mac Pro 12 core 3.06

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by tony3d, Jun 22, 2012.

  1. tony3d macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2006
    #1
    Anyone receive this machine yet? If so what are your thoughts? Is it worth the asking price?
     
  2. kromekat macrumors member

    kromekat

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    #2
    I haven't, although I just bought the 2.66. My feeling is no, not really - its a considerably higher price for a very minor speed bump over the middle one. I have bought the very highest spec machine before (2,1 and 3,1) but their prices weren't so blatantly higher at the time, and I've since realised that the middle ground often has the best bang for buck for me.

    Adam ;)
     
  3. 24Frames macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2012
    #3
    I think that it is very expensive for what it is.

    For 3D/VFX one option would be to buy the 6-Core, in the UK that would be 2449 GBP. Then when the Mac Mini Server gets updated, which will most likely be when Mountain Lion is released towards the end of next month, buy one or two Mac Mini Servers, upgrade them to 16GB and use them as render nodes.

    That might give a combined CINEBENCH 11.5 CPU score of around 19 (9 + 5 + 5). Advantages are very good single core CPU performance, reasonable preview render performance, and very good render performance in a lower cost and more flexible configuration than could be obtained by buying the 12-Core 3.06GHz BTO for 5019.
     
  4. kromekat macrumors member

    kromekat

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    #4
    Thats not a bad plan!

    Why Mac Mini Servers over standard Minis though!?

    Equally, picking up one of the refurbs (same machines as 'new' ones, just cheaper, you can get the 2.66 for £3.4k with a CB of 14

     
  5. 24Frames macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2012
    #5
    The main reason that I prefer the Mac Mini Server is that it has the Quad Core i7 instead of the Dual Core i5 found in the standard minis. The result is that it gives you a CINEBENCH 11.5 score of 4.1 (4.35 if upgraded to 8GB according one of my sources who did the upgrade) instead of 3.1 for the standard model.

    http://www.barefeats.com/mini11_01.html

    The Server also comes with RAID 0 configured dual 7200 RPM HDDs, which gives very good disk performance.
    Also the server doesn't have a discrete GPU, which is arguably pointless in a render node.
     
  6. Jethryn Freyman macrumors 68020

    Jethryn Freyman

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2007
    Location:
    Australia
    #6
    I wouldn't be paying 2010 prices for 2010 tech in mid 2012...
     
  7. robbie12345 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2011
    Location:
    United States
    #7
    i think it is very stupid that anyone would buy a mac pro at this point, the 2010 xeons were just a rerelease of the 2009 eons with higher clock speeds. this is the reason why if you upgrade the firmware on the 2009's, you are able to put the 2010 processors in them. So really is it 2012 and you are paying big bucks for 3 year old hardware. This is the reason why every computer now that apple sells, even at the same price point of the 2500 dollar mac pro will be more powerful than it. The 5770 is a 2 year old graphics card so even the new mobile ones beat it.
     
  8. tony3d thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2006
    #8
    I really don't have much choice.
     
  9. twietee macrumors 603

    twietee

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2012
    #9
    In that case, they really should update those good ol' fashioned geekbench scores!

    Great idea! That could be a fine solution on several layers..one question though, is it important to max out those mini's with a, let's say 32gb ram macpro as a main machine?
     
  10. tony3d thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2006
    #10
    I really don't have much choice.
     
  11. 24Frames macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2012
    #11
    16GB should be sufficient for both the render nodes and main workstation in most situations. It is also arguably the sweet spot in terms of price.

    Whether you need more on the Mac Pro depends which 3D application(s) and what you are doing.

    In addition can get the NVidia Quadro 4000 for Mac, which gives you a GPU solution that benefits some 3D software. So for some people buying the stock GPU 6-Core configuration and adding a Quadro 4000 will be a reasonably cost effective way to go. The NVidia workstation cards also come with 3 year swap out.

    Finally, we can only buy what Apple have to sell. If you research all the options including Windows 7 workstations from Dell and decide to go with the Mac Pro even though it is 2010 technology that is a considered decision, not a stupid decision.
     
  12. twietee macrumors 603

    twietee

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2012
    #12
    Thank's a lot 24frames...don't want to hijack here though.

    I thought about the Quadro4000 as well and use a Rhino/Maxwell/PS combo + ArchiCAD/Vektor Works. I do was afraid about the performance of a 2.4 12-core
    model (and about the upgrade prices:eek:). No experience with setting nodes, but that won't be witchcraft. As those works are semi-pro right now (weekends), it shouldn't cost too much but should be considerable fast enough for some mid-end renderings with large scenes - hence the ram - waiting during your spare-time is ****.

    The mini(s) could be a nice htpc at the same time...you seriously made my day!

    Do you mean 16GB on each machine? I thought you would need a lot of ram for setting a scene (MacPro) and a lot of cores for the render-process (MacPro+Minis)?
     
  13. kromekat macrumors member

    kromekat

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    #13
    Even if you did, its not stupid if you can utilise the power of the machine now, which is something I can. Some people will wait around for whatever the latest, greatest, might appear sometime, new Pro Mac solution is or might be if we are lucky!. some of us will be making those current machines earn their keep and beyond for the interim :)
     
  14. tony3d thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2006
    #14
    Yes, I do 3d modeling, and animation in Lightwave, and need all the horsepower I can get forum a Mac. I refuse to go to Windows, just been on Macs to long, and have to much software. This thing will blow away my 2008 dual quad. Should arrive Monday. Have a total of 24 gigs of ram to install. Bought it with the 5870.
    Just wondering if anyone else received theirs.
     
  15. Worthy.Of.Ed macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2008
    #15
    I'm in the same boat. I really don't have much of a choice. And can utilize the power of the machine now.

    Mine should be arriving on Tuesday. Also with the 5870. Would have been sooner, but the shipment was delayed by Apple, due to "unforeseen circumstances."

    Looking forward to Tuesday, anyways.
     
  16. tony3d thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2006
    #16
    Mine should be here Monday. DId you get the 3.06?
     
  17. thekev macrumors 604

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #17
    If you're going to 16GB per machine, I could see the server. If not, the base minis might be a better value when everything is worked out depending on if render nodes incur an additional node license fee. You may not need 16GB for a node.



    The cinebench score loooks good. The disks shouldn't be a severe bottleneck on a node. Your interconnect is not going to over-saturate one of them.

    That really does suck. I expected them to release an appropriate update rather than this. I had figured summer, but I didn't think it would be a re-release of the prior models given that HP and Dell are starting to ship units.

    I can understand this, especially with an abrupt transition. Windows isn't so bad, but a gradual transition where you get to test things before using them on an actual job is a lot better.
     
  18. Tutor macrumors 65816

    Tutor

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2009
    Location:
    Home of the Birmingham Civil Rights Institute
    #18
    More like 16.-- for top of the line 2012.
     
  19. 24Frames macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2012
    #19
    Activity Monitor on your current setup should allow you to estimate what you need.

    What I should have mentioned is that with the 6-Core CPUs and triple channel memory architecture the optimal memory configurations are in multiple of 6, 6GB, 12GB, 24GB, and 48GB. If you put in 32GB, the last 8GB will be accessed at 1/3 of the speed of the rest of the RAM.

    What I don't know is whether OS X will utilise the triple channel memory first and the additional 8GB once that is used. One would expect it to work like this.

    For rendering animations the render nodes are loading the whole scene to render their frames.
     
  20. zzzachi macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2012
    #20
    I was in the Situation that i had to buy, too

    i didnt want to invest too much, so i took the (dual-6) 2.4ghz model + 5870
    then 24gb of kingston ram for $200 instead of the $500+ apple price
    plus a samsung 830 512gb

    the mac pro will be sold if apple releases something decent in 2013
    if you sell your computer soon, the loss is not that big.

    i am playing w the thought of building my own test machine as a 2nd computer
    and slowly moving to windows, that i have some software and knowledge if apple fails in 2013.

    ... you other buyers...
    my pro was tagged "In Transit to Customer - Shipment on Schedule" on june 22th...
    how long did it take for you to get it? (central europe)
     
  21. DYP macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2008
    #21
    Do you have a documentation to support this claim?
     
  22. Inconsequential macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2007
    #22
    He is partially correct.

    3/6 sticks = triple channel operation
    4/8 sticks = dual channel operation

    Performance hit in reality: Very small (~1-2%, if that)
    Performance gain if run out of memory: Very big (100%+)
     

Share This Page