Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
New 12-Core Mac Pros Now Available for Order
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I agree with your post. But a few people though, are comparing Mac Pros to Mac Pros, and thats where the "too expensive" noise seems to be coming from. I'd like to get one, but the sentiment I get from the MP boards is that the new ones aren't worth the money, unless you are a big time pro or need the computer now. Which is fine, it is a pro computer. And I agree.
Ebay for me!
It's my first post on these forums but I have been lurking for some time. Despite my post count I'm not a total noob. I've had computers in various guises for almost 30 years. Before switching to mac I used to build my own Windows PCs.
I'd like to begin by saying that I have been using Macs for 20 years and currently own an iMac myself. I need a Pro if I'm to stay with Apple (which I would very much like to do), as I now need a machine that can drive 6 displays. I can accept the 'Apple tax' and the lack of cutting edge technology (The CPUs are fine but the motherboard expansion possibilities, graphics cards etc are not). The benefits of a Mac tend to balance the negatives as far as I'm concerned.
The pricing of the standard Mac Pros is what I expected. However, I have to say that I am extremely disappointed with the price of the 6 core BTO machine which I had hoped to purchase. What does it have over the quad 2.8 W3530 barring a processor upgrade? I can buy a W3530 for £230 retail and a W3680 for £800 in the UK. The difference is £570, yet Apple want to charge £960. As I said, I don't mind 'Apple tax' but don't ask me to bend over and grab my ankles. The pricing isn't quite as bad in the USA (and I did allow for tax) but it still isn't good. I thought more people would be complaining about this.
I'd like to begin by saying that I have been using Macs for 20 years and currently own an iMac myself. I need a Pro if I'm to stay with Apple (which I would very much like to do), as I now need a machine that can drive 6 displays. I can accept the 'Apple tax' and the lack of cutting edge technology (The CPUs are fine but the motherboard expansion possibilities, graphics cards etc are not). The benefits of a Mac tend to balance the negatives as far as I'm concerned.
The pricing of the standard Mac Pros is what I expected. However, I have to say that I am extremely disappointed with the price of the 6 core BTO machine which I had hoped to purchase. What does it have over the quad 2.8 W3530 barring a processor upgrade? I can buy a W3530 for £230 retail and a W3680 for £800 in the UK. The difference is £570, yet Apple want to charge £960. As I said, I don't mind 'Apple tax' but don't ask me to bend over and grab my ankles. The pricing isn't quite as bad in the USA (and I did allow for tax) but it still isn't good. I thought more people would be complaining about this.
I didn't compare any 4 core prices, but I just configured a comparable 6 core workstation through dell and came out with a price of $3800, with a slightly lower clock speed. A quick look at HP had theirs at $3300. I used BOXX workstations at a post house, so I checked them out quickly as well and their base 6 core system started at $3800.
So unless I'm doing something wrong on the configuration, Apple doesn't seem completely out of line.
I think this is a favorable review of pricing. The price change has been from $200 to $500, depending on entry level or top-end. Yet the Benchmark score is a 5 to 7 X increase in performance. This is over 5 years for those pricing changes, with very substantial performance gains. Look at what a car, or airline ticket cost 5 years ago and you will see a similar percentage increase in cost. You can't only look at the CPU price to determine what a machine should cost. That is a small chunk of production costs. Wages for all employees increase, manufacturing plant construction/retooling, advertising, liability, insurance. The list is long. To assume that because a chip set is cheaper, the machine should cost less, is clear sign that people don't understand economics.
They are Mac Pros, Not "Mac Consumers" or "Mac Prosumes". If you aren't modeling degradation of nuclear stock piles and weapons, making the next Pixar flick, or some other business that easily justifies this type of investment, get an iMac. The name says it all. Anyone really using these for what they are intended for will scoff at the $1,000 or so premium everyone is complaining about. I would even bet these machines help "subsidize" what has become very competitive pricing for what is a very high quality and competitive product in the iMac.
R.I.P. off
The base model Xeon 3530 2.8 processor is the same price as the equivalent
I7 930 2.8! Found in a similarly configured pro audio pc for about £800 less!
So in this case it's just apple ripping us off!!
And another thing. US prices stay the same for the base model, but UK prices
go up by £59..
What a joke.......
The base model Xeon 3530 2.8 processor is the same price as the equivalent
I7 930 2.8! Found in a similarly configured pro audio pc for about £800 less!
So in this case it's just apple ripping us off!!
And another thing. US prices stay the same for the base model, but UK prices
go up by £59..
What a joke.......
It's simple. It's not priced for individuals any more than a fork lift is. It's priced for businesses which take tax deductions on them thereby their actual cost is lower than what they actually paid. Also Edu (that is schools, not students) get them for cut rate prices.
Price a 6-core Phenom computer with ECC. Yes, Intel will be faster, but how much more do you have to pay?
Future Proofing
I can honestly say that i may plop down a rather large chunk of money for a new mac pro next week.
The reason...my current dual G5 (2005) is still kickin ass. For what i do, Graphic design and prepress work, i really wouldn't need to upgrade if it weren't for Adobe not making a universal version of CS5.
The way i look at it, the software i use isn't the most processor intensive but it does require more than an imac can provide. Yes an imac will run CS5 but what about CS7.....Thats what i look at. I also have a mirror door 1ghz G4 (2003, btw cost was $1799 low end version at the time) runnin CS3 and it does just fine. i would rather over-buy my computer now so that it is still able to run future versions of the Adobe Creative Suite.
Basically making my computer last a very long time - I know "Futureproofing" is not 100% and companies can throw a wrench into my plans as apple and adobe have.
anyways my 2 cents.
I can honestly say that i may plop down a rather large chunk of money for a new mac pro next week.
The reason...my current dual G5 (2005) is still kickin ass. For what i do, Graphic design and prepress work, i really wouldn't need to upgrade if it weren't for Adobe not making a universal version of CS5.
The way i look at it, the software i use isn't the most processor intensive but it does require more than an imac can provide. Yes an imac will run CS5 but what about CS7.....Thats what i look at. I also have a mirror door 1ghz G4 (2003, btw cost was $1799 low end version at the time) runnin CS3 and it does just fine. i would rather over-buy my computer now so that it is still able to run future versions of the Adobe Creative Suite.
Basically making my computer last a very long time - I know "Futureproofing" is not 100% and companies can throw a wrench into my plans as apple and adobe have.
anyways my 2 cents.
At 8:20 am., US/Eastern, today, I ordered the following config:
Custom configuration
Ships: Aug 23
Delivers: Aug 26
Note the ship date! It still says 7-10 days if I go back and mock up another order.
In the past, I have been able to determine which item is constrained by toggling them one at a time, but in this case no matter which configuration items I choose, it still says it will ship in 7-10 days, which is OBVIOUSLY incorrect based on the ACTUAL estimated ship-date, above.
Custom configuration
Two 2.93GHz 6-Core Intel Xeon
16GB (8x2GB)
ATI Radeon HD 5870 1GB
Mac Pro RAID Card
1TB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s
1TB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s
1TB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s
1TB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s
One 18x SuperDrive
Magic Mouse.
Apple KB User's Guide.
COUNTRY KIT.
16GB (8x2GB)
ATI Radeon HD 5870 1GB
Mac Pro RAID Card
1TB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s
1TB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s
1TB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s
1TB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s
One 18x SuperDrive
Magic Mouse.
Apple KB User's Guide.
COUNTRY KIT.
Ships: Aug 23
Delivers: Aug 26
Note the ship date! It still says 7-10 days if I go back and mock up another order.
In the past, I have been able to determine which item is constrained by toggling them one at a time, but in this case no matter which configuration items I choose, it still says it will ship in 7-10 days, which is OBVIOUSLY incorrect based on the ACTUAL estimated ship-date, above.
The base model Xeon 3530 2.8 processor is the same price as the equivalent
I7 930 2.8!
So in this case it's just apple ripping us off!!
And another thing. US prices stay the same for the base model, but UK prices
go up by £59..
What a joke.......
Your angry post makes me laugh. How can any company rip anyone off unless the customer buys? At that point it's the customer's fault for not being a smart shopper, not the company's.
Ok, let me switch gears.
None of my 1800 current Mac Pro users will be upgrading anytime soon.
Exactly. And my Apple Care Protection plan for the Mac Pro is supposed to cover the monitor, but I had to order it without. :-(
I am going to raise a big stink with Apple...they should cover my 27" on the Mac Pro's Apple Care, when I order the 27" in September.
Wow...$5000 for a Dual X5650 Mac Pro!!!!
I built a 2x Xeon X5650 (6-core Westmere) with 12 GB DDR3 ECC, supermicro workstation motherboard and server case for $2300!!!
Either Apple branded components are gold platted or you pay for a nice aluminum case.
LE: Mention that the CPUs have been purchased with an employee discount but still...
I built a 2x Xeon X5650 (6-core Westmere) with 12 GB DDR3 ECC, supermicro workstation motherboard and server case for $2300!!!
Either Apple branded components are gold platted or you pay for a nice aluminum case.
LE: Mention that the CPUs have been purchased with an employee discount but still...
Woot! Now I can write a paper while watching a 1080p youtube video, with Mail and iCal in the background!!!
It's only $24,000
It's only $24,000
Fair enough, I get that.
I was just comparing similar workstations from competitors since it seemed like the sentiment in here was "Apple is raping us with pricing." Their prices all seem to be in the same ballpark. Then again, this is a Mac board and we're talking about the Mac Pro.
For those wondering about core usage this site is photo oriented and interesting.
How about a link to where you bought your machine?
How about a link to where you bought your machine?
I ordered mine!
Pulled the trigger on the 6-core. Cost just a fraction less than my 3GHz dual Xeon 2006 Mac Pro, which this box will replace. That box had only 1GB RAM standard, 667 MHz memory, and an ATI Radeon card that was defective (replaced under Apple Care, though).
I've found that higher clock speed and better memory bandwidth trumps more cores for most of the apps I run, so the upgrade to the Westmere chips offer better overall bandwidth.
As to whether the current lineup represents "value" is a personal opinion. If you get 3-5 years out of a computer before refreshing it, then you are doing well. My experience with Macs is that I can easily expect that kind of lifespan (and still sell the old box for a decent price).
If there is a beef with the Mac Pro, it is that it remains the only "tower" option Mac users have, but it doesn't have the tremendously expandable architecture (RAM slots, PCI slots) that the truly top-end users require. That forces people like me (photographers) to pay a premium just to get the case configuration that I want, or for the top-end users to not have the configuration that they need.
I don't need 16 RAM slots or 8 PCIe slots. But it would be nice if such a machine were offered by Apple, primarily to cater to the 1% of users who really require such features.
The reality is that we all want to take pride in being Mac users, and we want to aspire to have the top model (even if it is just a pipe-dream). As such, when the "top model" appears to lack "features" (even though it is more computer than 99.5% of us would ever need), we gripe. Fair enough. I've been happy with my 2006 MP, and I can't wait to get my hands on the 2010 model.
Pulled the trigger on the 6-core. Cost just a fraction less than my 3GHz dual Xeon 2006 Mac Pro, which this box will replace. That box had only 1GB RAM standard, 667 MHz memory, and an ATI Radeon card that was defective (replaced under Apple Care, though).
I've found that higher clock speed and better memory bandwidth trumps more cores for most of the apps I run, so the upgrade to the Westmere chips offer better overall bandwidth.
As to whether the current lineup represents "value" is a personal opinion. If you get 3-5 years out of a computer before refreshing it, then you are doing well. My experience with Macs is that I can easily expect that kind of lifespan (and still sell the old box for a decent price).
If there is a beef with the Mac Pro, it is that it remains the only "tower" option Mac users have, but it doesn't have the tremendously expandable architecture (RAM slots, PCI slots) that the truly top-end users require. That forces people like me (photographers) to pay a premium just to get the case configuration that I want, or for the top-end users to not have the configuration that they need.
I don't need 16 RAM slots or 8 PCIe slots. But it would be nice if such a machine were offered by Apple, primarily to cater to the 1% of users who really require such features.
The reality is that we all want to take pride in being Mac users, and we want to aspire to have the top model (even if it is just a pipe-dream). As such, when the "top model" appears to lack "features" (even though it is more computer than 99.5% of us would ever need), we gripe. Fair enough. I've been happy with my 2006 MP, and I can't wait to get my hands on the 2010 model.
In my experience with Final Cut and an 8 core 27" iMac, all the cores do get used when transcoding, even with H.264...in fact doesn't seem to matter which codec, all the cores get used.
http://www.apple.com/macpro/performance.html
The disk layout really is just as important. I went with the HW RAID and 4 x 1 TB internal drives, which I will use in a RAID 5 config -- almost as fast as a 4 drive stripe, therefore, nearly twice as fast as a single SSD disk. Of course with all 4 drives flailing away at all times, having a spare drive on hand is a must, since with RAID 5 if you lose a drive you need to replace it immediately or risk losing all data if a second drive fails before the resync.
In other "news" read the fine-print on the ATI HD 5870 -- they will support Open CL with a driver update circa end of 2010. If only Final Cut would use Open CL, then this beast would REALLY scream!
http://www.amd.com/us/products/desk.../Pages/ati-radeon-hd-5870-specifications.aspx
Imagine 12-cores of traditional CPU + the 5870 GPU all cranking on your transcoding at the same time!!! These GPU specs are insane!
# Engine clock speed: 850 MHz
# Processing power (single precision): 2.72 TeraFLOPS
# Processing power (double precision): 544 GigaFLOPS
# Polygon throughput: 850M polygons/sec
# Data fetch rate (32-bit): 272 billion fetches/sec
# Texel fill rate (bilinear filtered): 68 Gigatexels/sec
# Pixel fill rate: 27.2 Gigapixels/sec
# Anti-aliased pixel fill rate: 108.8 Gigasamples/sec
# Memory clock speed: 1.2 GHz
# Memory data rate: 4.8 Gbps
# Memory bandwidth: 153.6 GB/sec
I'll be VERY VERY surprised if Final Cut gets an Open CL upgrade before the new 5870 driver comes out. Apple is SOOOOO slow about adopting their own technology...and Open CL was a big deliverable for Leopard. How many years later and we STILL don't have a version of FCP+Compressor that uses it? Pshaaaww!
Your angry post makes me laugh. How can any company rip anyone off unless the customer buys? At that point it's the customer's fault for not being a smart shopper, not the company's.
Most people who could make use of a Mac Pro are locked into the mac platform by at least one piece of software:
Logic
FCP
Shake
Smoke
etc.
Most of them have been using macs professionally for long enough never to want to go to a whole new OS and learn it inside and out, let alone learn Avid/Premiere/Pro Tools/Qbase/Reason/Nuke etc.
Save your "Jobs can do no wrong", "if you don't like it buy a Dell" sort of comments for a thread that ponders why Apple charges $999 for a consumer laptop with no GFX card.
The lack of a headless iMac has left professionals procrastinating Mac Pro updates for many years now and having to time these purchases to maximise value, only to get price hikes with every successive update is a bit disheartening to those who need these machines (or rather any machine more powerful than the next step down, which unfortunately Apple willfully cripples so as to flog more of these behemoths) to earn their livelihood.
Most of our editors both Video and Graphical are moving to the i7 iMacs. We ran trials on them and the users love them. Say they are just as fast and the smaller foot print is nicer.
I already know and use Avid Media Composer on a PC. I prefer using Final Cut and working on a Mac, though, for several reasons.
So much for your theory.
I'm guessing you configured a dual processor system with just one processor.
HP's Z400 and Dell T3500 with the 3.33GHz 6-core W3680 start at $2,500. You can make them similar to the Mac Pro in memory, storage and graphics for $500 from a 3rd party, or slightly more from HP/Dell. They also come with 3 years of warranty and onsite service.