New 12-Core Mac Pros Now Available for Order

[kazmac]

I almost considered the 4 core tower this morning

Until I realized it was the Nehalem chip in the base...I thought the 2010s would all have the Westemere chips inside.

I don't need this type of power not by a long shot (really hope the mini Tower/xMac becomes a reality in the next couple of years)...but I love the upgradability of these...

Back to figuring out which iMac I'll get.

 

[314631]

Wow, no flirting with the idea of upgrading my 2.66 09 MP at these prices.

I'd really like the software to catch up with all these crazy cores - I still feel like my MP has way further power to draw from but the software can't hack it right now.

3 more years and I'll upgrade perhaps!

For the types of user who will be buying these machines, the software does exist to take advantage of all the power already.

 

[CrAkD]

I live vicariously thru you guys cause I can't afford these but most of you guys are bawking at the cost as well haha. I wish apple would release a normal desktop cause I'd buy an i7 but I already have 2 19" monitors so I don't want an iMac. Looks like my next upgrade will be a 6 core hackintosh

 

[EricTheRed71]

The problem is that the 2008 Mac Pro was way too cheap.

The current Mac Pro (in the 8/12 core version at least) is price competitive with similar spec PCs from Dell or HP but because the "value" is so much worse than the 2008s everyone is feeling ripped off.

 

[cube]

More importantly, those are barebones server kits - with NO PROCESSORS.

And as I showed, 32 2GHz cores cost about $1100.

 

[kyleh613]

In this thread = a bunch of babies that can't afford the new Mac Pro so they have to twist logic around by comparing a workstation computer to a low end consumer PC that you can find in Best Buy.

Sorry you scrubs are poor but don't blame that on Apple. The Mac Pro isn't expensive and its hardware is pretty incredible for what you are getting, compared to other workstation computers around the same price.

 

[macusersince5]

this is bull crap the new 2.4 ghz 8 core can't even use the 1333 mhz memory. But the 6 core and 12 core can. Thats bull s***. They are all westmere processors they should use the same memory. Iget the base model 1066 but come on give us a break here.

 

[Umbongo]

this is bull crap the new 2.4 ghz 8 core can't even use the 1333 mhz memory. But the 6 core and 12 core can. Thats bull s***. They are all westmere processors they should use the same memory. Iget the base model 1066 but come on give us a break here.

Those processors don't support 1333MHz memory speeds.

 

[adjuster]

How to save money

For all of you complaining about the price, join www.macreate.com for $100/yr. You will be entitled to receive discounts from Apple that are almost as good as the education discount.

Or, buy a refurbished Mac Pro for a better deal.

Please stop wining. It is counterproductive and will not change anything. I just want to know what is the best Mac Pro for me: Aperture and Final Cut Express user. It is a bit difficult to cut through all the offerings to get the best bang for my money.

Where do I find data on whether Aperture/Final Cut uses graphics memory and cores?

 

[Butts M Biggilo]

Pricing was similar 20 years ago.

Mac IIvx

IIvx introduced 1992.10.19 at $2,949 (4/80), $3,319 (4/230), and $3,219

(5/60/CD); prices slashed on 1993.02.10 with introduction of Centris 650; discontinued 1993.10.21
requires System 7.1 to 7.6.1
CPU: 32 MHz 68030
FPU: 32 MHz 68882
performance, IIvx: 2.7, relative to SE; 7.5, Speedometer 3; 0.44, Speedometer 4; 7.0 MIPS
performance, Performa 600: 5.8, Speedometer 3; 0.44, Speedometer 4; 6.5 MIPS
ROM: 1 MB
RAM: 4 MB on motherboard, expandable to 68 MB using lone 4-SIMM bank of 80ns 30-pin memory; can use 256 KB, 1 MB, 2 MB, 4 MB, and 16 MB SIMMs
L2 cache: 32 KB
built-in 8-bit video with 512 KB VRAM, supports 512 x 384 at 16-bits, 640 x 480 at 8-bits, and portrait monitor (640 x 870) at 4-bits
video port: DB-15
PDS slot supports L2 cache only in IIvx, accelerator card in both models
ADB: 2 ports for keyboard and mouse
serial ports: 2 DIN-8 RS-422 on back of computer
SCSI: DB-25 connector on back of computer
hard drive: 40, 160, or 400 MB
NuBus slots: 3
size (HxWxD): 6.0" x 13.0" x 16.5"
weight: 25 lbs.
PRAM battery: 3.6V half-AA
power supply: 230W
Gestalt ID: 48
model no.: M1350
addressing: 24-bit or 32-bit

 

[res1233]

€5000

OMFGG!

That's ridiculous.

There are people who would pay even more for the power of dual hexacore CPUs + hyperthreading. It's called a workstation. Go to dell.com and look up their workstations, the prices there tend to go even higher than the Mac Pro does. So as far as workstations go, the price is actually quite decent. A significant portion of the price comes from the xeon and ECC RAM, which people who use workstations would have a use for, but the average user would not. For average people, Apple doesn't make a tower.

EDIT: Oh yah, and dell.com gives you about as many options as there are stars in the sky... For workstations anyway... GL with that...

 

[mike5411]

did no one else notice the typo?

"Configure your Mac Pro with high-performance PCI Express graphics cards from AMD. The ATI Radeon HD 5770 is up to 5x faster than the previous-generation standard graphics card. Or select the ATI Radeon HD 4870 for even more advanced graphics work. Configure your Mac Pro with two cards to power up to six displays simultaneously for visualization projects and large display walls. 
"

shouldn't it be the 5870... lol

 

[knello]

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.

The Intel Xeon processors are not designed for server work? Someone better tell Intel about this mistake on their website, then:

http://www.intel.com/p/en_US/products/server/processor

 

[J Radical]

For all those who think the MacPro is too expensive. The MacPro is not in the same class as a PC. It is in fact, a high-end workstation. It's using XEON processors which are server/workstation class CPU's.

Let's compare Apples and Oranges for a minute, but keep in mind, these are in the same class of Workstation.

- Lenovo ThinkStation C20, Dual Intel E5630 Xeon's (Same as MacPro 6-core - 12 Core config), 16GB's of RAM, NVIDIA Quadro FX 1800 768MB (closest I could get), a 250GB hard disk with a 1TB hard disk, DVD Burner, no Bluetooth nor WiFi, single ethernet port. No monitor. - $6,334.00

- Apple MacPro 12-Core, 16GB's or RAM, ATI Radeon HD 5870 1GB DDR5, SuperDrive, 2 - 1TB hard disks, AppleCare, 802.11n + Bluetooth 2.1, FireWire 800, Optical digital audio, MiniDisplay Ports, Dual Ethernet, 2 extra drive bays, fully PCI Express capable. Quality Aluminum case with no visible cables, completely environmentally friendly and recyclable. - $6,348.00

Notice they are very close in price! However, the Lenovo ThinkStation C20 comes with Windows 7 64bit, only has 2 drive bays and you cannot buy 2 - 1TB drives. You cannot exceed 16GB's of RAM. It's not as easy to take the case apart and work on it when you have to. It only offers the Quadro line of video cards which may not be as fast, although good for 3D CAD.

I am not even going to list HP. Their workstations are much more expensive for the same hardware.

So do not confuse the MacPro as a PC Tower, it is not a PC but a highend workstation and if you shop for the same thing in the PC world, you have to select the workstation class machines. The prices are competitive. You get more bang for your buck with a MacPro in most instances.

Now the only way I can see to get cheaper then a MacPro is to build your own but you have to do all the engineering and good luck calling anyone for support or warranty.

Plus, the number one reason to buy a MacPro is Snow Leopard 64bit! Which you cannot run effectively on anything else. Yeah, you can hackintosh it but there are issues such as unsupported hardware, etc.

There is truth in this at the extreme, 12 core end. Comparable Dell towers, while ugly, are competitively priced.

I think the problem is the chasm between the Top iMac and lowest Mac Pro. The single 6-core option is nearly $1000 more than a comparative dell. But more significantly, there are a lot of prosumers (and people who are just wealthy) with a money to spend on a high-spec personal computer.

The iMac would do the job if it had decent graphics or was upgradable or cheaper! The only place left to go from there is the very high pricing of the Mac Pro. I never used to be a 'headless iMac' desperate, but recent events have changed my view.

The other major factor that has changed is Windows. By most accounts Windows 7 is a good operating system. I love OSX, but the 'downgrade' doesn't seem nearly as scary anymore.

 

[res1233]

There is truth in this at the extreme, 12 core end. Comparable Dell towers, while ugly, are competitively priced.

I think the problem is the chasm between the Top iMac and lowest Mac Pro. The single 6-core option is nearly $1000 more than a comparative dell. But more significantly, there are a lot of prosumers (and people who are just wealthy) with a money to spend on a high-spec personal computer.

The iMac would do the job if it had decent graphics or was upgradable or cheaper! The only place left to go from there is the very high pricing of the Mac Pro. I never used to be a 'headless iMac' desperate, but recent events have changed my view.

The other major factor that has changed is Windows. By most accounts Windows 7 is a good operating system. I love OSX, but the 'downgrade' doesn't seem nearly as scary anymore.

Did you not read the post you quoted? He just told you that the pricing is in fact competitive for the market it's in. It's a workstation, and yes, other companies charge far more for the same deal. Do you not understand why apple puts Xeon processors and ECC ram in the Mac Pro? I can tell you that it isn't to appeal to the average consumer. It's for people who need workstations, not a PC to play games on. For those people, Apple has no tower.

 

[ilmolto]

For most people, I would say 98% of Mac users, they are better off with the top of the line iMac and spend the savings on a second 27 inch display with more Ram and SSD and a drobo for backup.

All of this combined will provide a far better user experience than having a gazillion cores.

Exactly what I've decided to do! I have been waiting for a Mac Pro refresh for about a year. Now that they're finally here, I've decided to go for the Core i7 iMac with a lot of RAM and an external FireWire hard drive for digital media. A lot more value in my opinion than a ridiculously expensive Mac Pro.

 

[andrew086]

wtf 6x1GB sticks of RAM across the board? You can get a computer that's under $800 with more RAM than that.

 

[res1233]

wtf 6x1GB sticks of RAM across the board? You can get a computer that's under $800 with more RAM than that.

I'm sorry, but I feel like I'm fighting a losing battle. There are components in this computer such as the Xeon processor and the ECC RAM which increase the price by a lot. This computer is not designed like those $800 machines that you are talking about. Those 800$ computers are good for gamers. This computer is for people who need workstation-class components, which costs. I don't get why someone would EVER get a mac pro for games. It is ridiculously priced if that's what you intend to buy it for. But like I said, that isn't its purpose, so stop saying it's overpriced. The iMac is probably the best deal you're going to get from Apple in terms of a gaming machine. Apple does not make a gaming tower. They just don't.

 

[Umbongo]

Did you not read the post you quoted? He just told you that the pricing is in fact competitive for the market it's in. It's a workstation, and yes, other companies charge far more for the same deal. Do you not understand why apple puts Xeon processors and ECC ram in the Mac Pro? I can tell you that it isn't to appeal to the average consumer. It's for people who need workstations, not a PC to play games on. For those people, Apple has no tower.

This is only true for the dual processor model. Single processor workstations from other companies are around $1,000 cheaper than Apple charge for the single processor Mac Pro. A Dell Precision T3500 workstation, for example, is $1,250 for a 2.8Ghz quad core. Using single socket Xeons and 1 and 2GB ECC DIMMs over consumer processors and non-ECC memory doesn't significantly increase the cost to the sellers.

 

[Thermonuclear]

Back in 2006 I bought a new Mac Pro for US$2,500. It had two 2.66 GHz Xeon Woodcrest processors, each with two real cores. For the time, it offered a very good value for the money. It had four SATA drive bays (just like the new model) and could be expanded to 32 GB RAM (also just like the new model). The housing and nearly all of the internals are the same as the new model. I still have it and am using it right now.

But since 2006, each successor Mac Pro model seems to offer a poorer value/price ratio. For many, if not most buyers, a quad core new iMac would be a better deal. And those with lots of cash to burn might be better off with one or more rackmount servers running 64 bit Ubuntu Linux as there's plenty of decent and free software available with more coming every week.

I'll pass on this one and you should too.

 

[res1233]

This is only true for the dual processor model. Single processor workstations from other companies are around $1,000 cheaper than Apple charge for the single processor Mac Pro. A Dell Precision T3500 workstation, for example, is $1,250 for a 2.8Ghz quad core. Using single socket Xeons and 1 and 2GB ECC DIMMs over consumer processors and non-ECC memory doesn't significantly increase the cost to the sellers.

Yes, but, people who buy workstations would most likely not configure their computers like that. People who buy workstations most likely will need the extra power of a dual hexacore computer and the reliability of Xeon + ECC RAM, which, does cost more.

EDIT: Also, it's a mac, and with that comes great customer support, a truckload of apps in Mac OS X that make your life easier, and a case that's designed to be easy to open and mess with, so IMO, you get what you pay for, if your market is workstation-class computers.

 

[Chupa Chupa]

Mac IIvx

IIvx introduced 1992.10.19 at $2,949 (4/80), $3,319 (4/230), and $3,219

Appreciate your point, but probably not the best computer to use by example given the flop the IIvx was -- because it was seen as overpriced and underpowered. I bought a IIvx for $999 when CompUSA was clearancing them out. Awesome upgrade from my lowly LC II, but for those who paid full boat, not so much.

OTOH my first Mac, a Mac SE/30 was $2500 too in 1988. That's like $4500 in 2009 dollars.

For many, if not most buyers, a quad core new iMac would be a better deal.

I'll pass on this one and you should too.

That is really a fallacy. The iMac and MP are distinct product lines. iMacs are great for their target market, and even as secondary machines for pros. However, for many pros the iMac's lack of expandability is a non-starter.

Also, don't be so narcissistic and suggest people should pass on this year's MPs just b/c they don't interest you. Ridiculous.

 

[PeterQVenkman]

I'm sorry, but I feel like I'm fighting a losing battle. There are components in this computer such as the Xeon processor and the ECC RAM which increase the price by a lot. This computer is for people who need workstation-class components, which costs.

What guarantee do we have that this computer will last longer or perform better? None. You have to buy that guarantee with Applecare, similar to a warranty you buy from anyone else.

But like I said, that isn't its purpose, so stop saying it's overpriced.don't.

$3700 for a six core machine, with 4 ram slots - 3 of them taken up with 1 GB chips is very expensive.

$2500 for a 2.8 Ghz 4 core machine with 3 GB of Ram is insulting.


I will concede that the dual quads and dual hex cores are competitive, but still - six 1 GB ram chips in a $5000 computer? Bah. At least make it 3 x 2GB chips so I feel a little less violated.

 

[cube]

I'm sorry, but I feel like I'm fighting a losing battle. There are components in this computer such as the Xeon processor and the ECC RAM which increase the price by a lot. This computer is not designed like those $800 machines that you are talking about. Those 800$ computers are good for gamers. This computer is for people who need workstation-class components, which costs. I don't get why someone would EVER get a mac pro for games. It is ridiculously priced if that's what you intend to buy it for. But like I said, that isn't its purpose, so stop saying it's overpriced. The iMac is probably the best deal you're going to get from Apple in terms of a gaming machine. Apple does not make a gaming tower. They just don't.

You can build a Phenom machine with ECC RAM. Heck, you can make an Athlon computer with ECC RAM.

 

[h1r0ll3r]

Wow....full spec on this is around $20k. Hmm....new desktop or down payment on a mortgage? Decisions Decisions. Can't imagine someone plopping down $20k for a friggin desktop.