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: Simultaneous Real-Time 4K Effect Rendering, +900MB/s Read/Write
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Like I said earlier. Avid may go bankrupt and disappear but Media Composer, Pro Tools, and I'm sure several of there other products will still be here. I could see Blackmagic Design taking over Media Composer. I would love to see what they could do to it. If not them, then another company will take over. Media Composer and Pro Tools are used by too many professionals to just disappear, should Avid go under. Hopefully Avid will get their **** together and be able to continue to improve and develop there products. But if not, someone else will.
It kinda sucks that Avid can't make money selling their products... but the Hollywood films that use Avid make buttloads of money.
I can't wait until someone ACTUALLY mistakes it for a trashcan and throws their soda in it and walks away!! There just went $4,000.00 
haha "Mind if I use your..." - NOOOOO!!!!!
haha "Mind if I use your..." - NOOOOO!!!!!You know who you are if you are going to buy these PC's, Apple are not at all interested in in anyone seriously considering home build, or buying budget.
They are interested in Corporate or SME video editing studios, who don't want there creatives fafing about doing PC upgrades or playing COD in their breaks, they are interested in a platform where they know exactly who to call if it goes wrong, from a vendor they trust, and that will fit with there corporate image and keep there creatives feeling good about themselves.
What is a surprise is it seems pretty much only Apple can occupy this premium space, the rest of the desktop PC market works because its low profit high volume, accept that the volumes are going down now as well.
However Apple seriously wrong footed the professional market by screwing up the Final Cut upgrade and by the primary focus of the complany particularly in the Steve Jobs era switching almost exclusivly to Mobile
They are interested in Corporate or SME video editing studios, who don't want there creatives fafing about doing PC upgrades or playing COD in their breaks, they are interested in a platform where they know exactly who to call if it goes wrong, from a vendor they trust, and that will fit with there corporate image and keep there creatives feeling good about themselves.
What is a surprise is it seems pretty much only Apple can occupy this premium space, the rest of the desktop PC market works because its low profit high volume, accept that the volumes are going down now as well.
However Apple seriously wrong footed the professional market by screwing up the Final Cut upgrade and by the primary focus of the complany particularly in the Steve Jobs era switching almost exclusivly to Mobile
Last edited:
Wrong. Whenever I have tried to make the argument against the "workstation" cards and saying the "consumer" cards are better, it comes down to two things.
1. The available memory on the cards. Generally the workstation cards come with a lot more memory, forcing workstation users to fork up the big bucks.
2. The drivers are much more expensive.
I have made the argument that the W9000 is worse than a 290X card in every aspect except for memory and apparently the one difference is the quality and stability of the drivers, or so I'm told. To me you are getting a 400$ card and then spend the extra 2600$ for a bit more memory and the "workstation"-class drivers.
Could it be so that Apple are writing the drivers for these cards? And in doing so the can buy the consumer chips but still get the performance characteristics of a workstation card? They do share the GPU, there is no difference in GPU. The crippling nVidia does to limit their GeForce-range is done after the GPU is produced and as far as I know, AMD doesn't even cripple their consumer range.
Last edited:
iMac it is then
Sorry but I didn't know that these days writing an article actually requires that much. You are right, when it comes to this I still live in the 80s as I can only see the typewriter
)Wrong on many levels.
1) Video RAM is expensive but not that expensive. Nor is software cert. is that expensive (although nobody actually said against what the W9000 drivers and such are certified, if it is just the Windows platform, there's barely anything more than putting the code through Microsoft's funky, yet very useful, static analyser for drivers)...
2) You really think that Apple would have let some unstable a$$ drivers onto their flagship money-shaker?
3) I seriously doubt AMD would've opened its spec to Apple to allow the latter to write drivers (and potentially pave the way for fabbing their own chips).
4) W9000 and 290X are not based on the same chip - the former is Tahiti, the latter is Hawaii. Neither Nvidia's nor AMD's drivers for the latest video cards were stable/performed to full capacity from the first "batch"- it's simply impossible for them to test it against all possible scenarios.
5) Are you also saying that Mac Pro does not come with "workstation"-class video drivers?
6) Back in the day when ATI was making cards for Apple, they did not radically change the "consumer facing side" of the card designation, there's no reason for AMD to start doing so now. So I'd not kid myself that D700 is anywhere close to W9000 unless and until Apple or AMD came out and say that themselves.
Here's a thought: why don't you email Apple sales and ask them how D700 compares to W9000?
----------
Certification against what? Running on a Windows box?
Even if someone can build a PC that matches the performance of the Mac Pro for cheaper than $3999, no one can ever build a computer this small. That's a fact.
I hope the next Mac Pro is faster and the size of a soda can. Smaller is always better. Didn't your girl tell you that? LOL
I wonder how many pros have waited aeons for this device, only to end up buying a tricked-out 27-inch iMac.
The early and late 2013 top-end iMacs are some of the best value macs ever made. This costs a ton more, offers very little additional expansion and not much by way of performance gains.
I was all for this machine when the pictures came out. I told everyone to wait and see what the pricing was like before condemning it, but Apple just seem to have amplified what was wrong with the pro line, without massively improving performance, whilst making the iMac continually more powerful.
It is all well and good talking about the cost of a PC equivalent, the size, the infinite possibilities of a Thunderbolt bus etc. Most pros don't buy those PC workstations, they buy high-end desktops because they're much better value. Pros are not interested in small machines, especially if it forces them to buy tons of external accessories.
It would have made sense if it was cheap enough, if the necessary accessories didn't end up breaking the budget. But by the time you buy a fibre adaptor, broadcast monitor breakout box or whatever else you might need for your pro needs and to connect this to your network, this machine costs a fortune. All of those peripherals can just as easily be added to an iMac and yield performance that's almost as high for a fraction of the price. Plus, when you come to upgrade, you can still use it as a monitor.
Even though most video pros won't want the built-in display, the iMac will seem much more appealing than this device to 95% of FCP/Smoke/Nuke/AFX users.
The early and late 2013 top-end iMacs are some of the best value macs ever made. This costs a ton more, offers very little additional expansion and not much by way of performance gains.
I was all for this machine when the pictures came out. I told everyone to wait and see what the pricing was like before condemning it, but Apple just seem to have amplified what was wrong with the pro line, without massively improving performance, whilst making the iMac continually more powerful.
It is all well and good talking about the cost of a PC equivalent, the size, the infinite possibilities of a Thunderbolt bus etc. Most pros don't buy those PC workstations, they buy high-end desktops because they're much better value. Pros are not interested in small machines, especially if it forces them to buy tons of external accessories.
It would have made sense if it was cheap enough, if the necessary accessories didn't end up breaking the budget. But by the time you buy a fibre adaptor, broadcast monitor breakout box or whatever else you might need for your pro needs and to connect this to your network, this machine costs a fortune. All of those peripherals can just as easily be added to an iMac and yield performance that's almost as high for a fraction of the price. Plus, when you come to upgrade, you can still use it as a monitor.
Even though most video pros won't want the built-in display, the iMac will seem much more appealing than this device to 95% of FCP/Smoke/Nuke/AFX users.
I have upgraded just about every Mac you can think of over the last 20 years. I am a former repair technician. While I have not had my hands on one of the new Mac Pros in order to actually take it apart, I have viewed all the the available photos ect. I can tell you right now without the slightest doubt a MacMini is far more difficult to upgrade than this new MacPro at least in terms of taking it apart and getting to the parts you want to upgrade. Once you take off the cover of this new MacPro everything is readily available. Of course in order to upgrade it you have to have parts to upgrade it with. This Macpro is a unique and original feat of engineering. If you enjoy upgrading all the components of your computers over a period of years then buy a PC or build a Hackintosh. This is a great little machine and will serve millions of customers very well.
Fanboyism is a hell of a drug. If there was a similar Windows machine I'd bet my shoes you'd be laughing at how terrible it was.
And is anyone going to discuss if this IS as good as similarly priced competitors? No? Ok.
huh? that's been discussed to death.. one such thread:
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1678850/
turns out, you can't buy a similarly equipped workstation for less than the nmp..
Yeah, it's sad. Maybe, if Avid can't pull it together, the Studios, Directors, Producers, or other Executives will bail them out: they've relied on Avid since the early 90s.
Ah, thanks. That makes sense-- up to some transfer size cache writes are faster, but reads are always limited by the underlying medium. Wonder what the cache size is...
Avid used to be a hardware company too. They used to make external processors (mojo, adrenalin, nitris) to handle real time effects, decks and video capture.
In the last 5-7 years computers haven't needed those external boxes and so Avids revenue has dropped. They are still the industry standard and any film student not learning avid will have a hard time finding employment.
Avid isn't going anywhere on a hurry - certainly not overnight like apple's support for FCP7. Avid is still a reliable, consistent, long term investment for any post house.
It appears you are rather limited in your knowledge and appreciation of computers. I have built many computers over the years. These include many Windows PC's. I have a deep understanding of how everything works together, what the strengths and weaknesses are, and how the different OS solutions compare. Because I say that the New MacPro will be a great piece of hardware for some people you think this makes me a Mac Fanboy? You are hilarious. It depends on what you need. For some people this is their perfect solution, for others it is a bad solution. This is not a contest between Macs and PC's. Open your mind a little my friend, things are not as black and white as you seem to think. Grow up.
There is also fact that the creative industry is almost 100% Mac. I've been in the recording industry since I was 18 years old now I'm 43 I've never seen anything other than an Apple computer in a studio. Even the artists and producers that are not on the professional level in the music industry it's still hundred percent exclusively Mac.
----------
But you have to understand this Mac enthusiasts don't go comparing PCs. they not at all interested in PCs they don't go on to PC forums. Most people in the creative industry and Mac enthusiasts would not even be able to tell you what the equivalent of the Mac Pro is in a PC.
"pro" in this context means "a computer for someone who needs a lot more computer power than an average person". Usually people who need this much power are doing something at a professional level. Would you rather they had called it a "Mac Super Duper"? I don't know why some people are so hurt that they don't do anything on their job that needs this kind of computer. It doesn't make you any less of a "pro" in your career so you can relax. Be glad you can buy a cheaper Mac. Or go ahead and buy a MacPro and shut up about what it costs because you know you're buying a bigger computer than you really need just because you want one. Millions of people buy SUVs even though they never carry more than two people and never drive off road. freedom!
Last edited:
I can't wait until someone ACTUALLY mistakes it for a trashcan and throws their soda in it and walks away!! There just went $4,000.00
Considering it's not that much bigger than a soda can it would be a pretty stupid person who does that.
----------
Exactly correct. I could not care less about Windows-based computers and I have no interest in trolling a PC forum. Only Apple haters participate in this exercise. Why, I have no idea.
I'm psyched that machines this powerful are small enough for me to take on the road with me so I can easily edit my motion graphics in my hotel room. I've limped along with my MacBook Pro but rendering will be light years faster with this machine and I can get out of my hotel room for a change.
Last edited:
Like WordStar, WordPerfect, DBase and a thousand other programs?
----------
Avid is anything but a reliable long term investment at the rate they are bleeding money.