New 12-Core Mac Pros Now Available for Order

pianojoe

macrumors 6502
Jul 5, 2001
450
15
N 49.50121 E008.54558
Hexacore vs. Octocore?

The single CPU hexacore and the double CPU quadcore are equally priced (well, more or less). Which one should I get?

I'm doing Logic Studio, heavy stuff with NI Komplete 6 and lots of heavy sample libs. Right now I have a 1st gen Mac Pro 4 x 2.66 GHz, and it's barely pulling the weight. I need to run UAD-2 quads in PCI slots, so an i7 is not an option. Also, 16 GB of RAM will suffice.

Somehow I feel that the hexacore will be the better deal for me. At the least, it'll be running single threaded tasks with 3.33 GHz as opposed to 2.4 GHz.
 

gathart

macrumors regular
Feb 10, 2009
191
0
The difference in computational performance is negligible when you are comparing one core to another at the same clock speed. At similar prices between the two lines there are 2 more cores on the higher end processors (those in the $900+ region) and the lower end quad cores have more L3 cache because they are 6-core processors with 2 cores disabled, and come with a slightly faster clock speed (mostly just one more multiplier higher).
thanks! I think I will stick with my Macbookpro
 

Akula971

macrumors regular
Aug 25, 2006
164
0
Perfidious Albion
Way too expensive for me

I think that the 2008 Mac Pro was probably the best value for money. All the same I'd love to see some benchmarks of the Pro's from early 2008 to this these ones. Need to quantify bang for buck.
 

RoverTX

macrumors newbie
Aug 9, 2010
3
0
If I am doing video encoding would the One 3.33GHz 6-Core Intel Xeon “Westmere” or the Two 2.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon “Westmere” (8 cores) be better. I am guessing the 6-core just becuase of the higher base processing speed and because video encoding using something like x264 wouldn't use all the cores anyway correct?
 

kyleh613

macrumors regular
Apr 20, 2010
171
0
I so want to buy one of these but a 3rd mac in one year would be a bit ridiculous. Technically 4 really. Bought a Mac Mini, 2009 version but ended up selling it for something more powerful, which I got the brand new 27" imac. And a 2010 15" Macbook Pro when that came out. I have my eyes on the $2500 Mac Pro, but I don't know how I could justify it. Could afford it and its tempting but it would be overkill.

If I am doing video encoding would the One 3.33GHz 6-Core Intel Xeon “Westmere” or the Two 2.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon “Westmere” (8 cores) be better. I am guessing the 6-core just becuase of the higher base processing speed and because video encoding using something like x264 wouldn't use all the cores anyway correct?
Wouldn't it depend on the software as well supporting as many cores as possible? I am not familiar with video encoding software though.

Pricing gets crazier with each new revision, gone are the awesome days of the 2008 MP.
How much did the 2008 MP cost? The base model hasn't increased in price at least, and its hardware configuration seems like it has gotten a significant increase.
 

grooveattack

macrumors 6502a
Jan 9, 2008
511
1
If I am doing video encoding would the One 3.33GHz 6-Core Intel Xeon “Westmere” or the Two 2.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon “Westmere” (8 cores) be better. I am guessing the 6-core just becuase of the higher base processing speed and because video encoding using something like x264 wouldn't use all the cores anyway correct?
i am in exactly the same boat as you. 8 core but at 2.4ghz. more ram though and cheaper

or

6 core single processor at 3.33ghz with only 3GB ram

what one will be the faster machine?

hmmmmmm hard choices
 

DesmoPilot

macrumors 65816
Feb 18, 2008
1,146
0
How much did the 2008 MP cost? The base model hasn't increased in price at least, and its hardware configuration seems like it has gotten a significant increase.
Base model has increased $100 each revision in Canada since 2008.
 

Umbongo

macrumors 601
Sep 14, 2006
4,931
54
England
I so want to buy one of these but a 3rd mac in one year would be a bit ridiculous. Technically 4 really. Bought a Mac Mini, 2009 version but ended up selling it for something more powerful, which I got the brand new 27" imac. And a 2010 15" Macbook Pro when that came out. I have my eyes on the $2500 Mac Pro, but I don't know how I could justify it. Could afford it and its tempting but it would be overkill.



Wouldn't it depend on the software as well supporting as many cores as possible? I am not familiar with video encoding software though.



How much did the 2008 MP cost? The base model hasn't increased in price at least, and its hardware configuration seems like it has gotten a significant increase.
$2,799 with two $800 processors. Now it's $2,499 with one $300 processor or $3,499 with two $400 processors. None of the other component differences will increase the manufacturing cost more than a few hundred to Apple. So you certainly got more for your money pre 09.
 

kyleh613

macrumors regular
Apr 20, 2010
171
0
$2,799 with two $800 processors. Now it's $2,499 with one $300 processor or $3,499 with two $400 processors. None of the other component differences will increase the manufacturing cost more than a couple of hundred to Apple. So you certainly got more for your money pre 09.
I don't know if I agree with that, but I admit I would rather wait for someone with more knowledge of the processor of this one and the 2008 model to comment.

However, I can't imagine that the CPU in the 2010 Mac Pro doesn't just absolutely smoke whatever the 2008 Mac Pro used. Sure it was 2 CPUs, but that doesn't mean its performance even compares. Processors have gotten a lot more powerful in that time.
 

cube

Suspended
May 10, 2004
16,983
4,962
You can get a 48-core (64-core next year) barebones 2U server for less than $2000:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=40000008 600009055&IsNodeId=1&Description=supermicro&name=Four AMD Opteron

If you limit yourself to 4x 8-core 2GHz CPUs, you can get them for less than $300 each:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=100008494 50001028&IsNodeId=1&bop=And&Order=PRICE&PageSize=20

You can also just get the motherboard and a different SWTX chassis:

http://www.acmemicro.com/estore/ShowProduct.aspx?pid=7947
 

Zoowatch

macrumors 6502
Jan 6, 2004
348
0
Sheffield, UK
In terms of value for money...

2008 Mac Pro > 2009 Mac Pro >>> 2010 Mac Pro

I suspect the 2011 Mac Pro would be a bigger rip-off than this.

Mac 'RipOff' Pro
 

kyleh613

macrumors regular
Apr 20, 2010
171
0
You can get a 48-core (64-core next year) barebones 2U server for less than $2000:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=40000008 600009055&IsNodeId=1&Description=supermicro&name=Four AMD Opteron

If you limit yourself to 4x 8-core 2GHz CPUs, you can get them for less than $300 each:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=100008494 50001028&IsNodeId=1&bop=And&Order=PRICE&PageSize=20

You can also just get the motherboard and a different SWTX chassis:

http://www.acmemicro.com/estore/ShowProduct.aspx?pid=7947
Those are server computers. You can't even compare them. They don't even have the same CPU and serve completely different purposes. The Mac Pro is not for server work, its CPU is designed for completely different tasks.

There are a lot of you in this thread that really don't know anything at all about hardware that are commenting and really shouldn't be.

In terms of value for money...

2008 Mac Pro > 2009 Mac Pro >>> 2010 Mac Pro

I suspect the 2011 Mac Pro would be a bigger rip-off than this.

Mac 'RipOff' Pro
I would like to be proven wrong but I somehow doubt I will be. If you want to explain why the 2008 Mac Pro is far more powerful still then i'm all ears. I'm curious as to why Apple would bother making a computer with newer technology then if its no where near as fast. You seem to know better then Apple. I wonder why you haven't taken over their company yet. You seem like you could be the next Steve Jobs if you can make 2008 hardware perform better then 2010 hardware.
 

Bernard SG

macrumors 65816
Jul 3, 2010
1,354
3
This is a real question, no irony or sarcasm underlying:

What kind of usage would request a 12 Core Mac Pro?
 

THX1139

macrumors 68000
Mar 4, 2006
1,928
0
Good job Apple! With that pricing you've successfully locked out most prosumers and quite a few professionals. You have to be living in your mom's basement with no bills, or have a lot of high-end projects to justify spending 6K on a machine that is worth less.

With those prices, I think they are trying to kill off the Mac Pro line. Six months from now, Steve will look at the numbers and use that as a justification to stop making Mac Pros. Seriously, I wonder if they will sell enough of these to make it worth their while? I bet there is a spike in iMac sales after this.
 

cube

Suspended
May 10, 2004
16,983
4,962
Those are server computers. You can't even compare them. They don't even have the same CPU and serve completely different purposes. The Mac Pro is not for server work, its CPU is designed for completely different tasks.

There are a lot of you in this thread that really don't know anything at all about hardware that are commenting and really shouldn't be.
The motherboard has PCI Express x16 slots.