and even the 'hollywood/pro' market is gonna balk at the price of that monitor. seriously. it's a bit... flagrant.
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 Mac Pro Nearing Release as Apple Advises Technicians How to Place Computer in DFU Mode
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
and even the 'hollywood/pro' market is gonna balk at the price of that monitor. seriously. it's a bit... flagrant.
You think $6000US for a paltry 256gb storage, 8 core CPU & last gen graphics is a "beast".
Last edited by a moderator:
The cuts were in the W-2200 series that will be in the iMac Pro refresh (which will hopefully be announced along with the Mac Pro). The pricing of the W-3200 series hasn’t changed since its launch a few months ago.
But yeah, between that, RAM and flash price decreases, I think there will at least be higher base configs for iMac Pro... maybe GPU and RAM, FaceID would be nice. Not sure about a base model price decrease but you never know
All these defensive comments about the the new Pro remind me of my friend who justifies a Chanel white t-shirt that costs $400... it's all the same logic adapted from clothes->desktops... but Apple is the Hermes of machines (very high quality and an even higher price). I have the trashcan Mac Pro... I got lucky and found a display model for 50% off ($5k for a 12-core, 64gb model) and I've gotten good (not great) value from it... the new Mac Pro is IMO even lower on the value curve.
It'll probably just disappear. The regular iMac is already nipping at its heels. What could they cut out to drop the price by a full $2,000 which wouldn't just make it a regular 27"? I doubt they could even squeeze a Xeon into that sort of budget, that's the best part of a grand by itself to the customer according to Apple's pricing ideology.
The base model is more like 1” long.
The beast config is the 28-core, 1.5TB RAM, 4TB SSD, 2x Radeon Pro Vega II Duo GPUs, and the Afterburner FPGA video stream accelerator. The 1.4kW power supply has plenty of capacity, and twelve Thunderbolt 3 ports and dual 10 GbE ports provide sufficient I/O, but there are additional open PCIe slots if you need them. Nice and cool, and quiet. All from a $6,000 platform, with pros buying whichever upgrades they need.
That amount of beastliness is about 1,440 inches long.
Is there a link to what the heck "DFU Mode" is? I mean, I'll google it, but you would think that would be part of the article.
Gotta spend money to make money. These make total sense for the right business. My 2019 MBP was $5,000, my friends freaked out when I told them - but I need this thing to render content, and render it fast as I do piece work for clients. It was a business decision.
Ah, the good ol' 20k "beast" config a.k.a. massive cash grab. The 2k ipad pro is another "beast" sure.. for kids.
I'm a Mac guy, but building a PC is insanely easy and I hate when people use this argument for why it's such a "hassel" to build your own PC. Go to PC Part Picker.com, choose your parts, and it tells you at the top if there's a compatibility issue. Or just copy any build that other users have posted.
A PC is literally like 8 pieces, pretty damn easy to build.
I see the rage wars are going strong in the comments...
Just a reminder this machine isn't for most of us, it's for actual "Pro" users, though I know we've all been desensitized to that moniker being on everything.
And yes, it's important to have in the product stack not only for the few users who actually will buy one but because it's a halo product that will draw people to other products in the line-up.
Ford doesn't make the GT because they think they're going to sell a ton of them, they make it to attract people and then sell them a mustang; or more accurately in today's market some SUV crossover thing.
Just a reminder this machine isn't for most of us, it's for actual "Pro" users, though I know we've all been desensitized to that moniker being on everything.
And yes, it's important to have in the product stack not only for the few users who actually will buy one but because it's a halo product that will draw people to other products in the line-up.
Ford doesn't make the GT because they think they're going to sell a ton of them, they make it to attract people and then sell them a mustang; or more accurately in today's market some SUV crossover thing.
If Apple are going to start using ARM in their desktops & laptops next year - then won't this beast already be obsolete ?
New AirPods, MacBook Pro refresh, tile trackers, and a release date for the Mac Pro? That sounds like a lot on paper, but in the grand scheme of things, these are all pretty minor product upgrades and introductions.
[automerge]1571924819[/automerge]
You can probably put a Wi-Fi 6 card in it. That's the point, you can upgrade it over time.
I don't think ARM can out perform the XEON.
Doubt you will see ARM in their desktops except maybe the IMAC.
Doubt you will see ARM in their desktops except maybe the IMAC.
I would agree, it is a long road to get ARM's to replace Intel processors. It would be more likey that Apple would use a AMD processor because the X86 code from the Intel would work on the AMD processor.
You’re severely misinformed and I cannot believe that people continue to perpetuate this nonsense. If the CPU dips below it’s advertised base clock speed then that could be construed as throttling, but needs to be divided into heat or electrically-related at that point and indicates a possible issue with either the cooling or the voltage being supplied.
If Intel meant for these CPUs to all run at their Turbo Boost frequencies, then that would have be advertised as the base frequency. But it’s not, and Intel has even built a special version of the i9 (9900KS) - https://www.extremetech.com/computing/297858-intel-core-i9-9900ks-5ghz-all-core-boost-cascade-lake-x - that can sustain boost longer, but not indefinitely.
Intel has three different technologies in play here (emphasis mine)-
Max Turbo Frequency - Max turbo frequency is the maximum single core frequency at which the processor is capable of operating using Intel® Turbo Boost Technology and, if present, Intel® Thermal Velocity Boost. Frequency is measured in gigahertz (GHz), or billion cycles per second.
Turbo Boost - Intel® Turbo Boost Technology dynamically increases the processor's frequency as needed by taking advantage of thermal and power headroom to give you a burst of speed when you need it, and increased energy efficiency when you don’t.
Thermal Velocity Boost - Intel® Thermal Velocity Boost (Intel® TVB) is a feature that opportunistically and automatically increases clock frequency above single-core and multi-core Intel® Turbo Boost Technology frequencies based on how much the processor is operating below its maximum temperature and whether turbo power budget is available. The frequency gain and duration is dependent on the workload, capabilities of the processor and the processor cooling solution.
In that ExtremeTech article they admit as much concerning Turbo Boost, “A sustained all-core 5GHz clock speed would be substantially higher than the Core i9-9900K we have here at ET — but Intel CPU no longer hold their full clocks under sustained load. Our Core i9-9900K will turbo up to high clocks for 20-30 seconds, depending on the workload, before falling back to speeds in the lower 4GHz range when run on our Asus Z390 motherboard.”
There is nothing about sustaining Turbo Boost frequencies indefinitely and anyone trying to argue this point about any Mac or PC is simply not dealing in reality. Intel hasn’t helped matters, with it’s marketing speak and lack of clarity about how many cores operate at what Turbo Frequency. The fact remains that any CPU maintaining it’s base frequency 24x7x365 is doing it’s job and anything extra is gravy and should not be depended on to define performance.
The new MP already feels a bit out of date with its use PCI-e 3. Version 4 is already being implemented by AMD and version 5 is just around the corner.
I also don’t understand Apple’s use of Intel’s CPUs, unless they are getting special pricing or kickbacks from Intel. AMD is offering better performance and lower cost than Intel on all desktop and server CPUs.
The funny part is that some people think this is actually aimed to "pros".
Apple has been a long term partner with Intel way back when then replaced the PowerPC RISC processor with the Intel X-86 processor. The relationship with AMD is newer and not as long. They did work with ATI before AMD bought them some so there was some old relationship. And yes 6 months ago i sold my Nvidia 1080TI for my old Mac Pro tower and got a AMD Vega 64 card in trade.
You are doing your renders on a laptop instead of a desktop machine?
I think on the high end Vega II makes sense. I don't think two 5700 XTs on a single board could manage the memory bandwidth (HBM2 vs GDDR6) or the total teraflops perf. Also I've heard that Vega (and Vega II) is heavily optimized for Metal so I think that makes sense even though perf per watt it's quite behind Navi.