Mac Pro or Macbook Pro

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by zoegreg, Dec 9, 2015.

  1. zoegreg macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2015
    #1
    Looking to purchase a new Mac in my office. I will be hooking it up to a 4K display so I am thinking my best options are a Mac Pro or a Macbook Pro. I can either get the base Mac Pro or loaded Macbook Pro 15 for the around the same price. I am not going to doing a lot of heavy duty photo or music editing.

    I was kind of set on a Mac Pro but then thought the Macbook Pro may give better performance, plus a lot of people seem down on the Mac Pro. I already have a Macbook Air so portability isn't an issue, whatever I purchase will stay on my desk 24/7.

    Which would go with or do you have a third option?

    Thanks for any advice!
     
  2. koyoot macrumors 601

    koyoot

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2012
  3. zoegreg thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2015
    #3
    I did check, I would like to stay around $2500.00. I have found new Mac Pro base models on Ebay for around $2499.00.
     
  4. mcnallym macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2008
    #4
    If what you are purchasing will stay on your desk 24/7 then have you considered a 27" 5K iMac?

    You have said that don't need the portability you have Macbook Air.
    You won't be doing heavy duty tasks on it,

    US Refurb has 2014 models with 4Ghz i7, 16Gb RAM, 512Gb SSD and R9 M280X 2Gb and 5K screen for $2509

    The people that are down on the nMP are people that want the following ( not in any particular order )

    1.) ability to change the cards for Nvidia so can run CUDA, upgrade and keep machine longer ( will this apply to you )
    2.) internal mass storage ( if looking at Macbook Pro then do you need to worry about this )
    3.) More CPU Cores ( same as above )
     
  5. zoegreg thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2015
    #5
    I would go with an iMac, however I need a larger display. I have a 40" 4K monitor that it will be hooked up to.
     
  6. thefredelement macrumors 65816

    thefredelement

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2012
    Location:
    New York
  7. zoegreg thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2015
    #7
    More on the office side, spread sheets, word processong, etc. Do a lot of online work and need to see multiple windows running at one time, that is why I need the larger display.Will also do some minor photo editing.

    Both are more than what I need, but are the only options to drive a 4K monitor.
     
  8. thefredelement macrumors 65816

    thefredelement

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2012
    Location:
    New York
    #8
    I have both, they are both great machines. The MBP heats up a bit faster and will spin it's fans to compensate under "heavy lifting" but not normal just browsing/spreadsheet stuff. Though it does heat up when I use Photos sometimes but what's the point of a computer if you're not going to stretch it's legs once in awhile :).

    They're both probably going to take care of your stated tasks around the same speed.

    With the Mac Pro you can expand on RAM and eventually hook up more displays, if you don't think that's what you'd want then I'd suggest whatever you can get for the least amount of money.
     
  9. zoegreg thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2015
    #9
    I will also do some gaming on it and if the 40" doesn't do the job I most likely will go to a multiple monitor setup, like 4 28" displays.
     
  10. zoegreg thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2015
    #10
    I guess maybe my concern is that the Macbook Pro will be the latest hardware, where the Mac Pro is a couple years old.
     
  11. thefredelement macrumors 65816

    thefredelement

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2012
    Location:
    New York
    #11
    Neither will rock your world with 4k gaming. I'd be more concerned with the D300s trying it than the MacBook though I don't think either is going to be a great experience...

    If you're thinking 4 4k screens I believe you rule out the MacBook Pro. Apple has a page for supported external displays that you can check out somewhere or ask them on chat.

    You have a valid concern. Personally I've recently bought the Mac Pro because I need it for work, if you can afford to hold out then maybe you should. I imagine/hope the next iteration of the Mac Pro will handle 4k display in regards to gaming much better than the 2013 model.
     
  12. koyoot macrumors 601

    koyoot

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2012
    #12
    I would not say that Macbook Hardware is brand new ;). Both CPU and GPU in Macbook Pro are already couple of years old right now, also ;).

    And no, don't be ridiculous with idea of 4k gaming on a M370X...
     
  13. zoegreg thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2015
    #13
    Yea the Macbook is still behind, just not as much as the Mac Pro. It would be a bummer to buy the Mac Pro and then have them come out with a new model in 2016. It seems like it is due for an upgrade.
     
  14. thefredelement macrumors 65816

    thefredelement

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2012
    Location:
    New York
    #14
    Like I said, if you can afford to wait then wait if not then get what you need now. That was the advice I was given here and it really helped :).
     
  15. whodatrr macrumors 6502a

    whodatrr

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    #15
    I have a somewhat similar workload as you, except that I occasionally need to do more intensive things like running lots of VMs in clusters, some medium creative work, etc.

    First off, I don't think a 40" 4k is the answer. You'll be closer to it than that display is probably designed for, and it may not buy you much productivity.

    Consider, instead, multiple display. My main system currently has three displays (2x27" 1440p and a 34" 3440x1440). I do also have a 27" 4k, currently on another system, but it doesn't buy me much over 1440p for MS Office and spreadsheets. Now, for photo editing it's cool, but I'm not a pro and I wouldn't call the difference mind-blowing. Cost of the display aside, your GPU will be able to push two 1440s more easily than it can one 4k.

    Though I do have a 4k, my current favorite is teh Dell curved 34" 3440x1440. I love the one I have so much that I just ordered a mate for it, which is on sale today at the MS store for $699. These things are amazing! For me, multiple displays is a lot better than one. My typical setup is:
    • Consumption on the Left (tech docs, source docs, work websites, etc.),
    • Production in the center (the documents I'm actually producing),
    • Communications on the Right (Outlook, Skype, forums, etc.). Trick is to spend most of your time in the center... LOL
    Not saying this is the be all end all, but having some system with dedicated work-spaces does help me keep things straight. I even use this system when I'm travelling with my little 12" rMB, though that's using virtual desktops.

    Regarding your choice of Mac systems, I'd agree with some prior posters that you sound like an iMac candidate. I think a mac Pro would be overkill for you, as you don't sound like you need the power. I MacBook Pro might also be the wrong tool for you, as you don't need portability. Also, a higher end iMac is still more powerful than a high end rMB. I briefly tried to replace my iMac with an rMBP, using the screen setup that I run, and the 15" rMB fans started kicking up so badly that I knew is wasn't for me. Then again, if you do choose the route of using just one 4K display, an rMB is overkill for you, and would do just fine. Whether it's a 21" 4k display or a 100foot 4k theatre, it's the same number of pixels.... and even the integrated graphics in the 13" rMB will run it just fine.

    But again, I'd reevaluate the idea of one 40" 4K panel. YMMV.



     
  16. whodatrr, Dec 9, 2015
    Last edited: Dec 9, 2015

    whodatrr macrumors 6502a

    whodatrr

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    #16
    Missed this post earlier...

    3 displays is easy, and the latest 27" 5k iMac has your back. Four displays is another issue. Four displays isn't supported by the iMac, though I haven't tried daisy-chaining. Still, no-way you'll get 4x4/5k, because the iMac GPU won't take you there, is my guess. Again, only 3 are officially supported.

    I did get four displays running on a maxed out new 15" rMBP, but that was: 2x27" 1440p (Mini-D), one 1080p (HDMI), and the rMBP's own display. But I'll say that that little rMBP's fans started howling too fiercely for my liking. I wasn't doing anything too intensive, just my normal workload, but I didn't get the sense that it was happy.

    But 4 displays, especially if they're 4k, is Mac Pro country. I would advise you, however, to get a better feel for what 4 displays is like, before jumping on it. My workspace was built for screen real-estate (as in I built a shed/home office in my back-yard), and I do run 7-8 large displays in a very wide U-shaped area. But I have a couple systems going there. I'd say that practically, three large displays is about what my eyes can deal with, though 4 is close. And I am about to transition to 4 on my main system, though the far-right display is likely to be special-purpose. In other words, I'll have to slide my chair to the 4th display in order to really use it, and it will need its own keyboard. Again, this screen will be for special-purpose tasks, though it will be on the same system.

    Another thing is that with three displays, you can arrange them in a U-shape. The effect of having the two side displays angled into you is that your face is always somewhat near the screen. WIth four displays, you tend to have to be somewhat flat, which means that one or two displays will be pretty far form your face.

    As a fellow pixel/screen real-estate whore, all I'm saying is get a sense for what the workspace will be like, before investing money. It might sound goofy, but cut out a few pieces of cardboard to get a feel for what working with all of that will be like. This, because the difference between three and four displays, especially in the Apple world, is a big jump.


     
  17. h9826790 macrumors 604

    h9826790

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2014
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    #17
    For your workflow, I will prefer 4x28" display than a single 4K 40". But that's because I love to to put the apps on full screen. Multiple display allow me to work in multiple full screen. In this case, the Mac Pro is the obvious choice.
     
  18. zoegreg thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2015
    #18
    Those are some great points. Last night I hooked the 40" 4K to my PC, and I am about 3 feet away. My first impressions was that it was too big and much more real estate than I needed.

    But then after using it more last night and this morning, I think I'm hooked. It's just so nice to be able to spread multiple windows on one dispay with room to spare.

    At this point I am thinking that multiple display are not in my future. If anyone is on the fence about a larger display, definitely give it a try. I don't think you will be disappointed.
     
  19. nigelbb macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2012
    #19
    I have been sat in front of a 30" HP LP3065 2560x1600 for the over seven years. When I get a 4K monitor I would like it to be at least as big & the 40" looks like a nice upgrade without the fonts & icons getting too teeny. I am not sure that a 27" would work for me even if it did have more pixels than my 30". It's one thing that has deterred me from replacing me old Mac Pro 3,1 with a 5K iMac that the screen is too small.
     
  20. zoegreg thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2015
    #20
    The more I use it the more I like it. Icons & fonts don't look too small, and the picture is bright with great colors. I think I am going to stick with this set up and go with a Macbook Pro 15, more power than I need, but I believe the best option.
     
  21. ixxx69 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2009
    Location:
    United States
    #21
    This is really kind of a fascinating take on using a 4K display. You're essentially using the 4K real estate "natively" as equivalent to 4 x 1080p screens glued together as a single giant display, rather than as traditionally used to increase the sharpness of what's displayed on screen, i.e. OS X's scaled resolutions.
     
  22. zoegreg thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2015
    #22
    Yea I wasn't sure how I would like it, but after using the past few days I can't see any reason to switch to multiple displays. No borders to deal with and everything operates so smoothly. So I decided to go with a new MacBook Pro 15. I figured both are more tahn I need, but ar least I ahve a laptop in case I need one.
     

Share This Page