Mac Pro the terrible

[yadmonkey]

I said that at this current time, the Mac Pro is not worth it, and its best to build from a cost perspective. And, as I mentioned above, the Mac Pro is only worth its price within two-three months of launch.

Well I agree that it's not worth the cost right now from your perspective, but my point is that people like you and I don't necessarily represent Apple's target market demographic. Apple is expensive and slow to refresh their hardware, no question. It's part of why their company is economically healthy and I respect that.

We on this forum forget that we're not Apple's backbone customers to the extent that we like to think we are. I work with consumers and prosumers all day long - enough to know that we're the exception, not the rule. I got my MP early in its product cycle, but a typical consumer or even prosumer would buy a MP a day before the refresh and never even know or find out.

I won't complain about Apple's prices anymore because I understand why they have a good business model and and because I have a choice to build a hackintosh if I so desire. The MP is not a good value for you and I right now, but for most prosumers it's a good value any time because it simply gets them back to productivity quickly.

 

[hexonxonx]

The Mac Pro, at this time, is overpriced.

Apple is over priced, period. Last summer I sold my MacBook Pro and my MacBook. I went out and bought a HP laptop with 4GB ram and a 320GB HD, 15" dislay and Nvidia graphics for half the price of the MacBook. I'm typing on it right now.

I also didn't think twice about buying my MP or iMac. Both are very nice to use just as my HP laptop.

 

[jjahshik32]

Apple is over priced, period. Last summer I sold my MacBook Pro and my MacBook. I went out and bought a HP laptop with 4GB ram and a 320GB HD, 15" dislay and Nvidia graphics for half the price of the MacBook. I'm typing on it right now.

I also didn't think twice about buying my MP or iMac. Both are very nice to use just as my HP laptop.

HP should stand for "HORSE POO." But still a little better than Bull *****.

 

[m1stake]

HP should stand for "HORSE POO." But still a little better than Bull *****.

Don't be ridiculous, they make excellent computers. What separates the hardware of an Apple computer from a Dell or an HP? Nothing, except those "other" companies use desktop parts in their desktops. What a novel idea.

 

[jjahshik32]

Don't be ridiculous, they make excellent computers. What separates the hardware of an Apple computer from a Dell or an HP? Nothing, except those "other" companies use desktop parts in their desktops. What a novel idea.

Their ok computers for the money. I traded a iphone 2g (hacked) when no software hack was available.. took me 8 hours to jump that damn tiny ass trace board... for a hp 2710p tablet pc (only hp I've ever really owned) and it was really nice but I sold it on eBay for $1499 and just pocketed the money and bought a new macbook pro.

Other than that I'm not a huge fan of HP but their tablet pcs are nice.

 

[nanofrog]

Sever parts, consumer parts, meh. Its all the same. If Apple was aiming for 24/7 reliablility with the Mac Pro, they would not cut down on the cooling. It is unacceptable for the RAM and NB to be running as hot as they do in the Mac Pro.

And its also very easy to argue that consumer parts are superior to workstation parts in many aspects. They are cheaper, can run at much higher clocks/frequencies, there is more options for the parts, the warranties are easier to deal with, and upgrades are simpler and cheaper.

And just because a computer uses workstation/server grade CPUs and RAM does not always mean that it will be more reliable. Its more about the implementation of the components, like cooling, for example.

Unregistered DDR2 ram that is running at 30 degrees Celsius at full load will be more reliable in the long run that FB-DIMMs running at 50 degrees Celsius. Sure the FB-DIMMs can automatically correct errors, but its ability to do that over several years running at high temperatures slowly wears out.

Remember, that I am basing this on bang/buck. The Mac Pros are only worth the price within 2-3 months of their release. After that, its a rip-off because hardware prices fall while the cost of the machine remains the same.

Though I'm not exactly not a fan of high temps as a general rule, the workstation/server parts, including FB-DIMM, were designed to handle it. Keep in mind, they have to continue to function in small 1U enclosures. A very hot environment comparitivley speaking, and the MP is cooler than that.

If you don't have a need for a workstation/server features, don't worry about it. Buy what you want. OC it if you wish to eek out any extra performance possible.

Quite simple.

However, just because the MP won't suit your needs, doesn't mean it won't be perfect for others. If they need it, they need it. Up to that individual to determine what they buy. It doesn't make them foolish with their $$$. Ultimately, it's their money, and can spend it how they wish.

 

[NT1440]

Apple is over priced, period. Last summer I sold my MacBook Pro and my MacBook. I went out and bought a HP laptop with 4GB ram and a 320GB HD, 15" dislay and Nvidia graphics for half the price of the MacBook. I'm typing on it right now.

I also didn't think twice about buying my MP or iMac. Both are very nice to use just as my HP laptop.

And how much of the resell value did your apple products have vs if you tried to sell that HP......

 

[imacdaddy]

And how much of the resell value did your apple products have vs if you tried to sell that HP......

Exactly what I was gonna say. Resell value must have been good.

 

[Syonidism]

if youre into recylcing and rpg's you can even make a shield out of the hatch of the mac pro.

and if you sharpen a side of the keyboard you can make a really lethal blade.

yeah. moneys worth i'd say.

i dont even want to go into what you can do with the 30" cinema display. Scary stuff.

 

[pwn247]

Apple's professional product line isn't expensive; it's high-end.

I've never come across a professional-based PC that has such a magnificent hardware layout as the Mac Pro.

 

[hexonxonx]

Exactly what I was gonna say. Resell value must have been good.

The black MacBook was only four months old with the warranty still in effect so I got $1450 for it plus shipping. Not sure why it sold for that much when others were going for about $1250 or so.

 

[nanofrog]

Apple's professional product line isn't expensive; it's high-end.

I've never come across a professional-based PC that has such a magnificent hardware layout as the Mac Pro.

It's not the worst by any means, but I've used systems that I liked better. Not necessarily the nicest exterior though.

If I have to sacrifice something, I prefer good internal layout, and cooling to aesthetics. I tend to tinker with the internals often enough.

 

[wetrix]

I think it's time to restart this thread and see how much value the 09 Mac Pro is.

 

[ericsthename]

I think it's time to restart this thread and see how much value the 09 Mac Pro is.

I agree... many of the expansion options have been thwarted, now you get 4 cores instead of 8 on the base config... I'll be interested to see benchmarks of the Nehalem, but I don't think that the Mac Pro had a great day today.

If there's one good point to todays announcements, with any luck there will be some Mac Pro 2008 deals on craigslist.

 

[nanofrog]

I think it's time to restart this thread and see how much value the 09 Mac Pro is.

Let's wait for benchmarks first though.

 

[MacFan27]

Solid machine.

 

[yadmonkey]

I agree... many of the expansion options have been thwarted, now you get 4 cores instead of 8 on the base config... I'll be interested to see benchmarks of the Nehalem, but I don't think that the Mac Pro had a great day today.

If there's one good point to todays announcements, with any luck there will be some Mac Pro 2008 deals on craigslist.

I found this move to a quad-core base unit to be pretty surprising, considering the direction things seem to be going with Grand Central. Is Nehalem really that expensive?

Can't wait to see some benchmarks.

 

[sedril]

What upsets me is they didn't use the 3.2

For the price of the 2.93 Octo we should have seen the 3.2 there instead

When they decide do do that, I'll buy...

 

[Tallest Skil]

What upsets me is they didn't use the 3.2

For the price of the 2.93 Octo we should have seen the 3.2 there instead

When they decide do do that, I'll buy...

Google Megahertz Myth.

Then when you realize that doesn't apply with machines of the same line, come back and I'll tell you that the PRICE would offset the COST in EVERY circumstance.

Did you read the Mac Pro information pages? The 2.93 will clock itself up to 3.33GHz if it needs the power.

 

[nanofrog]

What upsets me is they didn't use the 3.2

For the price of the 2.93 Octo we should have seen the 3.2 there instead

When they decide do do that, I'll buy...

If you're willing to cough up the retail price of a part that goes for almost $1600 in quantities of 1000, go for it.

At a retail of ~$3200 in CPU's alone, it would be out of reach by most. Especially at the list prices of the '09 MP. I'm not sure I could handle seeing the MSRP on that one.

But do keep in mind, that this time around, you can't directly compare clock speeds between the Harpertown and Gainestown parts. The architecture is different. In this case, despite how strange it may seem, lower frequencies are faster than higher clocks on older technology (Harpertown).

 

[sedril]

I understand that the "number factor" isn't the be all end all, but it certainly does make a difference... For the same reason I have my E8400 OC'd to 3.6 instead of the default 3.0 It's much faster in every sense at 3.6 Even though it's the same architecture obviously, since it's the same chip.

My main point was that yesterday, I could spec out the top of the line 3.2 octo for about 5k.... while today I spec out the same 2.93 for 6500 with mostly the same everything else.... That's quite a jump and my point was that for 1500 more, it should have been the 3.2 The 3.2 will probably turbo boost itself to 3.6 or so when needed... I'm betting it's noticeably faster than the 2.93

I'm just going to try and hold off as long as I can and hope / pray that they speed bump somewhere down the line and possibly even add in a decent GPU for once in their life.... (I know, big dreamer) Boggles my mind why they can't offer a decent GPU, but that one's been beat to death by now so I'll let it rest and deal with it I guess...

 

[nanofrog]

I understand that the "number factor" isn't the be all end all, but it certainly does make a difference... For the same reason I have my E8400 OC'd to 3.6 instead of the default 3.0 It's much faster in every sense at 3.6 Even though it's the same architecture obviously, since it's the same chip.

My main point was that yesterday, I could spec out the top of the line 3.2 octo for about 5k.... while today I spec out the same 2.93 for 6500 with mostly the same everything else.... That's quite a jump and my point was that for 1500 more, it should have been the 3.2 The 3.2 will probably turbo boost itself to 3.6 or so when needed... I'm betting it's noticeably faster than the 2.93

I'm just going to try and hold off as long as I can and hope / pray that they speed bump somewhere down the line and possibly even add in a decent GPU for once in their life.... (I know, big dreamer) Boggles my mind why they can't offer a decent GPU, but that one's been beat to death by now so I'll let it rest and deal with it I guess...

Comparing the same architecture is relatively easy. It's just the '09 MP vs. the '08 MP isn't quite so easy. The 2.93 E5560 would beat the 3.2 GHz Harpertown, and I think even when it TB's.

But I agree the $1500 is a hard pill to swallow. At least the graphics card situation may get better shortly. At least the HD4870 finding it's way into an '08 MP or two.

 

[m1stake]

I agree... many of the expansion options have been thwarted, now you get 4 cores instead of 8 on the base config... I'll be interested to see benchmarks of the Nehalem, but I don't think that the Mac Pro had a great day today.

If there's one good point to todays announcements, with any luck there will be some Mac Pro 2008 deals on craigslist.

You should have posted this thread today, the irony is just too much. While the 08 Mac Pro certainly has an Apple tax on it, I'm OK with it. The 09 model on the other hand... I don't even want to think about it anymore.

 

[Fomaphone]

I understand that the "number factor" isn't the be all end all, but it certainly does make a difference... For the same reason I have my E8400 OC'd to 3.6 instead of the default 3.0 It's much faster in every sense at 3.6 Even though it's the same architecture obviously, since it's the same chip.

My main point was that yesterday, I could spec out the top of the line 3.2 octo for about 5k.... while today I spec out the same 2.93 for 6500 with mostly the same everything else.... That's quite a jump and my point was that for 1500 more, it should have been the 3.2 The 3.2 will probably turbo boost itself to 3.6 or so when needed... I'm betting it's noticeably faster than the 2.93

I'm just going to try and hold off as long as I can and hope / pray that they speed bump somewhere down the line and possibly even add in a decent GPU for once in their life.... (I know, big dreamer) Boggles my mind why they can't offer a decent GPU, but that one's been beat to death by now so I'll let it rest and deal with it I guess...

how long are you willing to wait? the 32nm machines will smoke this line and cost the same.

i hoped to get more for my money-- i wanted at least a 2.93 or a RAID card-- i know that it sucks that they're expensive. that being said, i feel that i invested in a good, solid tool. consider buying now if you've been waiting and eat a loss of a few hundred bucks selling it to upgrade on the next bump-- it's not unlike dropping $500 on more RAM or multiple GPU's in the future.

 

[-hh]

I think it's time to restart this thread and see how much value the 09 Mac Pro is.

Won't really know for another month or two, when the Dell equivalents ship, and benchmarks from others-than-Apple become available.

Of course, then the next question that will be asked is how easy can the CPUs be replaced on the dual CPU configuration...there will invariably be those who will want to buy the 2.27GHz with the intention of upgunning the chips once they drop in price...IIRC, that's how the first dual-quads got made.


-hh