Quad iMac undercuts Quad Mac Pro

[Spanky Deluxe]

I see that the new iMac's are 27 inch LED 2560x1440 pixels, that means maybe the 30 inch LED for desktops may be coming soon hope so I'm tired of waiting or do you guys think Apple will discontinue the 30 inch al together and release a 27 inch LED for desktops?

It'll be a little while until the 30" is replaced yet. At the earliest I'd expect it with the next Mac Pro refresh which, at a guess will be early 2010. I'd also guess that they'll replace the 30" with a 32" or 33" display witha resolution beyond 2560x1600. Display Port can handle higher resolutions after all. 2560x1600 was the limit of Dual Link DVI. I'd expect a 16x9 res.

 

[goodcow]

I was under the impression the iMac is classed differently to the Mac Pro in regards to onsite support, from posts and anecdotes on here and other sites and 2nd hand stories relayed personally. A case of "you can move an iMac easily if you live near an Apple store".

It's been discussed here several times before that the iMac qualifies for on-site service as long as you're within 50 miles of an AASP (Apple Authorized Service Provider).

I work at a college doing digital video work, but for the few Macs we have in our student lab I'm "the Mac IT guy" and we've had Apple come on site to repair iMacs before. One of my co-workers has also had Apple come to his apartment to fix his iMac.

Even if you can "move an iMac easily," you really can't, because once you get rid of the box it'd be annoying to carefully move around and you could always just tell Apple you're invalid anyway. I live in Manhattan, I have a MacPro, but if I had an iMac I wouldn't want to bring it on the bus or subway anyway, even if I am a 15 minute walk from the Apple store.

 

[TheSilencer]

My thoughts exactly. You can even use the 27" iMac as a dedicated display for a Mac Pro. At $1699, it is $100 cheaper than the 30" ACD, plus it is a full computer that can be used for lots of purposes.

Sounds like a plan!

And I don´t regret buying an MP09 Quad 2.93GHz a month ago! The iMac is still a consumer system, a good one, yes, but it´s not a MP.

And please, no 16:9 displays to replace 16:10 ones, even they called cinema displays but cinemas using neither 16:9 or 16:10. 16:9 is just a TV format and I don´t watch TV while working!

 

[harcosparky]

What a bunch of whiners!


S-

The elitist are upset!

 

[gfhoward]

I bought a Mac Pro Quad this month and I'm not disappointed, even though I'm sure I overpaid for what it is. Here's why: When I spec out a 27" iMac Quad the way I would want it, with the 2.8 GHz i7 and bump to 8G of RAM, it costs $2400 before taxes. That's alot of dough to spend on a computer that is fixed, that you can't upgrade, and that is tied to a screen. When I spec out a Quad Mac Pro, with an upgrade to the ATI Radeon HD 4870 graphics card and bumping the RAM up to 6GB, it costs $2850 before taxes. That's a difference of $450, for upgrade-ability, expandability, more power, and a choice of screen. Even without all the other goodies already mentioned that you get with a Mac Pro over the iMac, the differences I've listed here would be worth $450 to me. Especially over the 5 years or more I will own the Mac Pro.

Now, if you're someone who is in love with the iMac screen (Apple's new glossy glass-like screens), then I can see wanting the iMac. Myself, I don't like them. Too much reflection. I like a matte screen with no glass in front of it. That's the main reason I went Mac Pro: choice of screen. So for me, you'd have to pay me more than $450 to get me to use one of those glossy screens for five years, and then have an obsolete computer.

The iMac Quad isn't priced that far under the current Mac Pro Quad if you look at what you're getting. Of course, if you're one of those people who like those new iMac screens, and don't already own a screen (i.e., you aren't upgrading from an older tower where you already invested in a nice screen) then I could see how the value equation changes when you look at the iMac.

My recommendation: If you want to get out of the consumer computer cycle, buy a nice screen that will last you ten years, then choose your computer based on its merits as well.

 

[Magaman]

As badly as I want/ sorta need a new desktop, and as great as the new iMacs sound they are missing a very important part many who need MPs need, expansion slots, I need to be able to drop capture cards and not into my machine.
Since I don't need it right this second, I have no problems waiting for the next update, but the part of me that just wants something new is dying.

 

[akadmon]

do you guys think Apple will discontinue the 30 inch al together and release a 27 inch LED for desktops?

Yeah, all 6 of them! Literally.

Face it guys, the MP is a niche products, and there is close to zero incentive for Apple to invest in its further development. I predict MP will die in as little as 5 years, 10 years max.

 

[Umbongo]

Yeah, all 6 of them! Literally.

Face it guys, the MP is a niche products, and there is close to zero incentive for Apple to invest in its further development. I predict MP will die in as little as 5 years, 10 years max.

The Mac Pro is a vital part of Apple's non-consumer ecosystem, which in turn has been a key part of its success. While the majority move to mobile computing or are happy with the iMac there will be a core section of developers and content creators that want power. If the most creative are forced to use iMacs and notebooks then Apple may lose them. I can't imagine that is something they really want. Not while they can make a profit from them anyway.

 

[sidewinder]

The Mac Pro is a vital part of Apple's non-consumer ecosystem, which in turn has been a key part of its success. While the majority move to mobile computing or are happy with the iMac there will be a core section of developers and content creators that want power. If the most creative are forced to use iMacs and notebooks then Apple may lose them. I can't imagine that is something they really want. Not while they can make a profit from them anyway.

You are absolutely spot on. Apple needs the Mac Pro even if they lose money selling it.

S-

 

[gugucom]

You are absolutely spot on. Apple needs the Mac Pro even if they lose money selling it.

S-

That would be the day.

 

[LouisBlack]

The issue here is that Apple has a staggered release cycle. That's just the way it is. In fact they are being much nicer to their customers in recent years because the upgrades are coming at fairly predictable times. Mac Pros are updated in or around January and iMacs every six months or so. The obvious solution here is to not buy a Mac Pro in the last months of the year. Once it is updated I am sure that the price difference will be justified.

Think yourself lucky they aren't doing what they did back in 07 when the iMac wasn't updated for a whole year without even a speed bump.

 

[madwolf]

The new 27" i5/i7 iMacs are the first Macs that have a comparable price to a PC desktop machine with the same specs. You lot, on the other hand, should visit a psychiatrist. "Oh no! They released a cheaper computer with the same specs as mine! Please make me feel better..." Computers are not to make people feel better, they are just tools. Probably some Mac users buy their Macs just to make them feel better than all the others and for that they are happy to buy overpriced hardware. A Mac that is not overpriced takes out the "exclusiveness", doesn't it? You don't feel so "elite" anymore...

 

[Bartman01]

The issue here is that Apple has a staggered release cycle. That's just the way it is. In fact they are being much nicer to their customers in recent years because the upgrades are coming at fairly predictable times. Mac Pros are updated in or around January and iMacs every six months or so. The obvious solution here is to not buy a Mac Pro in the last months of the year. Once it is updated I am sure that the price difference will be justified.

Think yourself lucky they aren't doing what they did back in 07 when the iMac wasn't updated for a whole year without even a speed bump.

No, the issue is that unlike the rest of the computer industry the Mac prices or cpu speeds don't adjust to stay in parity with the current market. Add to that the fact that the current Mac Pros were not good value for money from the start.

 

[jeenyusboy5]

I'm tempted to sell my 2008/2.8 Octo for an upgraded 27" iMac now. Bah.

I am thinking the same thing. That screen is enticing.

 

[Rt&Dzine]

I don't think you can argue that the Quad iMac undercuts the Mac Pro for many consumers. Not everyone, but those on the fence between the two. If I were in the market the glossy display would be the main problem for me. And the single ethernet. Followed by ease of replacement/expansion of hard drives/graphic cards.

 

[LouisBlack]

No, the issue is that unlike the rest of the computer industry the Mac prices or cpu speeds don't adjust to stay in parity with the current market. Add to that the fact that the current Mac Pros were not good value for money from the start.

But that is what Apple is all about. The prices don't flucuate (that much) and the hardware is generally more expensive than competing PC hardware. You are paying for the extra R&D that goes into Apple products (whether you think it's justified or not is irelevant) and obviously the Apple tax.

That has always been the way and it will always be the way. If you don't like it build a Hackintosh or use Linux or Windows.

 

[VirtualRain]

The new i7 iMac is appealing from a few perspectives....

1. With Turbo clocks of 3.46GHz it's the fastest Apple computer at single-threaded tasks
2. The i7 has four cores with hyperthreading at 2.8GHz which by any standard is a multi-threaded beast
3. It has just as much RAM capacity as the Mac Pro Quad
4. For slightly less than the cost of a 30" ACD, you get a similar res display (with LED back lighting) AND a kick-ass computer... consider that if Apple sold the 27" display on it's own, it would likely be priced at $1500 alone!

For nearly every workload that doesn't require some unusual expansion card, this thing is a great solution and amazing value.

 

[CaptainChunk]

I'm tempted to sell my 2008/2.8 Octo for an upgraded 27" iMac now. Bah.

Huh? So, basically you'd be willing to forgo all the upgrades (hard drive space, multiple video cards, etc., according to your sig) that you're currently enjoying that you CAN'T have on an iMac - all in the name of a CPU that would be faster on some things, but not others?

I don't know about you, but I'm gonna hold onto my 2008 Octo. For me, I wouldn't be willing to take the hits on internal storage capabilities and video rendering speeds.

 

[KG2002]

Can you help me inderstand my options?

Guys, can you help me out with what kind of upgrades are possible with Mac Pro? I never had one.

I am on the market for a powerful Mac for my wife. She needs something to handle 3D rendering + some really (really!!!) heavy Photoshop and Illustrator work. For the 3D rendering she will need 3D Max and I plan to use Boot camp for that.

As you can imagine, the choices now are: i7 iMac or 2.93 Quad Core Mac Pro (I have no budget for 8 core Mac Pro). I have read all possible performance reviews for the CPU/Memory and etc. I expect i7 to be comparable with 2.93 for most of the apps I need:

- Xeon 3540 is about 10% faster than i7 860. HT helps 860 but this particular Xeon still should be a bit faster.
- 3 channel memory does not help much, PS and 3D Max/Maya do not care.
- ECC is only going to slow things, as far as I can see.

I know about glossy display and in essence a laptop architecture of iMac, understood. It seams it all come down to usability and potential upgrade capabilities of Mac Pro. I have an old iMac now and all I can do with it - pass it on to my son. So, what can I do with Mac Pro?

In PC World, Xeon uses the same LGA1366 platform as i7 9xx series (i7 8xx uses LGA1156 which is a cheaper yet not worse version). In PC World, I can take out Xeon and plug in top of the line i7 975 Extream CPU and double the performance. Can it be done in Mac Pro world? Not as a standard Apple supported option of course, but let's say a couple of years from now when I am out of warranty and when 975s are cheaper. Would it work or I am going to be limited to whatever Apple puts inside the case?

 

[KG2002]

Huh? So, basically you'd be willing to forgo all the upgrades (hard drive space, multiple video cards, etc., according to your sig)

- Do you use more than 2T of internal HD space on a DAILY basis? Wouldn't 2T internal and unlimited external backup work? I agree, internal drives are good to have. Yet not that many people would need more than 2T on a daily basis I would assume.

- I believe iMac supports 2 displays. Why would you need more video cards? Of course if you do not like iMac's glossy display it is a no go in the first place. I personally don't but well, it is not my call

- can you help me with "etc."? As I just posted, I need some help to understand what I am getting in Mac Pro. I am not familiar with the architecture and do not really understand what is upgradable there.

 

[maven8]

Guys, can you help me out with what kind of upgrades are possible with Mac Pro? I never had one.

To answer your last question, it looks like swapping the processor in the quad is no problem. If you take a look there are several treads on this subject. It was found that the core i7 nehalem had problems sleeping as I recall, but the xeons worked perfectly fine.
This actually swayed me to the new mac pro more then anything. I previously had an 8 core 2007 clovertown machine, but it turned out to be an end of line product, swapping processors would be possible but nothing faster came along for that platform. The new 2009 macs are theoretically compatible with future 6 core processors, though it remains to be seen whether it will work. Swapping in a 3.33ghz xeon will be no problem however. Also the new mac pros use a daughter card design for the processor and memory, which hypothetically means it may be possible to stick a dual processor board into it, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

Mainly your advantage is swapping graphics cards (for windows any pc card will work, and now that photoshop takes advantage of the gpu it should make a difference). You also get more ports, and the ability to add raid functionality etc. Don't forget that you can also have two DVD drives or perhaps bluray drives, useful for copying from one to another. (can be done externally, but wouldn't be as elegant).

My workload is similar to your needs, I run maya/photoshop/aftereffects. Having been stuck with an older imac at work (photoshop mostly), I'd say don't do it. it's a jack of all trades machine that doesn't do anything particularly well. Worse yet, thanks to their compromise design they tend to develop all sorts of issues you won't see in a tower, many probably caused by overheating (like drive failures, and video artifacts).

 

[RebootD]

Fair enough on the dual channel. Shame they're limiting it on that front.

Yeah I realise they're aimed at different markets but there's still virtually no reason for someone to get a quad core Mac Pro instead of a quad core iMac.

For me there was a very good reason. I have a NEC 2690WUXi2 wide gamut MATTE LCD that I wouldn't trade for a shine-box even if you paid me to do so.

 

[Gonk42]

In PC World, I can take out Xeon and plug in top of the line i7 975 Extream CPU and double the performance. Can it be done in Mac Pro world? Not as a standard Apple supported option of course, but let's say a couple of years from now when I am out of warranty and when 975s are cheaper. Would it work or I am going to be limited to whatever Apple puts inside the case?

Just to answer this point, yes it can in the Mac Pro Quad - there has been a thread on it in these forums. The Mac Pro Quad has a standard socket for the processor. You would not double the performance though, just increase the clock speed from 2.93 to 3.33 GHz. Also, the price of the processor may not decrease much. Intel tend to discontinue processors without reducing prices much (though they did reduce the price of the core 2 quads such as the 9650 by 40%).

Doing anything with the iMac would be much more difficult and at present there is only the 870 processor that would provide a possible upgrade.

The Mac Pro will be more upgradable than the iMac (which is basically a fixed machine) but my own experience has been (in the pc world) that when I come to upgrade it is never as easy or as economical as I thought it would be.

If the prices were similar then the quad Mac Pro would be worth getting just in case you want to upgrade. But the Pro is at least 50% more expensive (in the UK at least) for a similar spec and the overall cost of buying an iMac now and replacing it in 3 years time with a new iMac may well be less than buying a Mac Pro now and keeping it for five or six years and spending money on a new processor after three years.

 

[lemonade-maker]

Shouldn't this thread and all the "Apple is ripping me off", "Mac Pro price is outrageous" and similar threads be moved to the Buying Tips, Advice and Discussion forum? Seems like that is its purpose.

 

[VirtualRain]

Guys, can you help me out with what kind of upgrades are possible with Mac Pro? I never had one.

The things you can upgrade include:

Storage: 5 internal bays on a Mac Pro (4HD + 1Optical). You would need an external enclosure like this for the equivalent in an iMac. With a MP you can also add an eSATA card for additional external storage. Finally, you can swap the optical drive or add a second one if you like on the MP. While it might be possible to update the iMac slot loading drive down the road, it may not be practical.

Memory: 4 DIMM slots in both the MP and iMac with up to 16GB capacity.

Graphics: Graphics card choices are limited for both a MP and an iMac. You have the GT120, ATI 4870, and GTX285 for the MP and can add multiple cards if you want to run more than 2 monitors. I believe you have just the 4850 for the top iMac but can drive two displays from the included card.

Processor: The processor can definitely be upgraded in the MP. It's highly likely it will also be upgradable in the iMac (although with a bit more effort). However, the processor in the iMac is pretty damn good.

Display: Of course with the MP, you can change displays on a whim... not the case with the iMac... however, you are basically getting the display for free with the iMac.