Quad iMac undercuts Quad Mac Pro

[Bubba Satori]

What's really a shame is that Nvidia and ATI won't work on getting their drivers into OS X. Whether that's the fault of them or Apple not letting them do so, I am not sure.

I don't know either. I do know I can't invest $5K in a new workstation that only comes with two totally incapable video cards for large dual monitor work with HDR photography, 3D and motion video work. That and Apple's refusal to provide a complete line of up to date ACDs in a complete range of sizes. But that issue has been addressed in other threads.

Maybe things will change next year when the Gulftown systems come out.

 

[nanofrog]

I don't know either. I do know I can't invest $5K in a new workstation that only comes with two totally incapable video cards for large dual monitor work with HDR photography, 3D and motion video work. That and Apple's refusal to provide a complete line of up to date ACDs in a complete range of sizes. But that issue has been addressed in other threads.

Maybe things will change next year when the Gulftown systems come out.

But does your software actually support the professional cards if you had them (as the differences are maybe a bit more VRAM and different drivers to GPU's otherwise used in the consumer models)?

If not, there's no reason for the card makers to support OS X due to the lack of software. It's sort of a Catch-22. At least the Quadro 4800 is out, but I'm not sure how well it's supported in a Mac environment. I'm thinking it would work as a single card solution in a MP, but the card's additional features (drivers) would only benefit the Windows side, as there is software that can utilize the drivers for it. Any additional memory may not even be supported, as there still seems to be a VRAM limit in OS X (from posts on flashed or injected PC cards with 2GB installed).

I'm not aware of OS X based applications that actually support Quadro's (which there's only one model, and let alone any of the ATI FirePro's ).

Monitors are on Apple, but they're more interested in consumer gear these days anyway (far more units sold = profit potential). The issue of moving enough large screen units for pro's is a financial issue, and doesn't seem large enough to be viable (Apple wants margins, not break-even, and certainly not losses). So pro users are likely going to remain stuck with going 3rd party for large screens.

 

[justit]

Smaller Sweet Spot

Reading through these comments, I'm realizing that I'm no longer in the Mac Pro user base as I was a year ago when I bought my MP but was considering an iMac.

At that time I chose the MP because:
iMac last year no ram beyond 4GB --> Today 16 GB plenty
iMac last year no dual display support --> Today dual displays
iMac last year Duo Only --> Today Quad core i7
iMac last year mediocre Graphics Card --> Today ATI Radeon HD 4850
iMac last year only 1 hard drive --> Only 1 hard drive

People keep using the word "expandability" but for me that's not really relevant since I can sell my used MP for the price of a new iMac i7, and get a free 27" LED.

So unless I was in need to have multiple drives to run a RAID (which I'm not), why shouldn't I sell my MP today before the Jan refresh and get an i7 iMac?

 

[Dr.Pants]

People keep using the word "expandability" but for me that's not really relevant since I can sell my used MP for the price of a new iMac i7, and get a free 27" LED.

Since you don't have the needs that other people do (more then two monitors, port teaming, precision colour, RAID, or "upgradability" on the LGA1366 socket) then you're set, good sir. Just keep in mind that the 4850 will get old and there would be no way to replace it.

 

[nanofrog]

Reading through these comments, I'm realizing that I'm no longer in the Mac Pro user base as I was a year ago when I bought my MP but was considering an iMac.

At that time I chose the MP because:
iMac last year no ram beyond 4GB --> Today 16 GB plenty
iMac last year no dual display support --> Today dual displays
iMac last year Duo Only --> Today Quad core i7
iMac last year mediocre Graphics Card --> Today ATI Radeon HD 4850
iMac last year only 1 hard drive --> Only 1 hard drive

People keep using the word "expandability" but for me that's not really relevant since I can sell my used MP for the price of a new iMac i7, and get a free 27" LED.

So unless I was in need to have multiple drives to run a RAID (which I'm not), why shouldn't I sell my MP today before the Jan refresh and get an i7 iMac?

If your needs aren't going to exceed what the iMac can do for you in say the next couple to three years, then you've answered your own question.

 

[justit]

If your needs aren't going to exceed what the iMac can do for you in say the next couple to three years, then you've answered your own question.

That's a kind of blanket answer don't you think?

The problem is that the smaller the sweat spot the more irrelevant the Mac Pro will get. If it becomes too small of a market segment then it could be either be discontinued or not supported as well in product innovation like the iMac. That's a tragedy for all of us.

I'd actually like to keep my MP and just get a nice display to atleast somewhat catchup with the iMac. As of today's post, we're not going to see a 27" LED display anytime soon either.

The entry level iMac even made the 24" cinema display obsolete since you get the same pixels in a 21.5" size screen.

 

[justit]

Since you don't have the needs that other people do (more then two monitors, port teaming, precision colour, RAID, or "upgradability" on the LGA1366 socket) then you're set, good sir. Just keep in mind that the 4850 will get old and there would be no way to replace it.

What is "precision colour" ? Does that mean the new 27" iMac displays have inferior color rendition?

 

[nanofrog]

That's a kind of blanket answer don't you think?

I was trying to be funny, but the simple answer is No. Not given the information you posted anyway (rather basic, but gives the impression you don't actually need a MP). You know your usage better than anyone, and haven't indicated that you need more than 4 cores or any features that may be missing in the iMac vs. the MP in your possesion.

The issue though, is you have the machine. But as you indicated you believe/actually can get enough from it's sale to purchase the iMac you're intersted in, it makes a little more sense to sell, if you want the additional screen real estate, and don't mind glossy screens. It would seem to fit your needs, so is a viable alternative given the financials will balance out.

The problem is that the smaller the sweat spot the more irrelevant the Mac Pro will get. If it becomes too small of a market segment then it could be either be discontinued or not supported as well in product innovation like the iMac. That's a tragedy for all of us.

I agree, and in the case of the MP line, the increase in prices aren't going to help either.

But then again, Apple is intersted in the consumer market. It seems they're milking the pro market for as long as they can, but intend to dump it in the near future. There's more on this in other threads.

I'd actually like to keep my MP and just get a nice display to atleast somewhat catchup with the iMac. As of today's post, we're not going to see a 27" LED display anytime soon either.

Personally, I'd hang on to the MP, as you can extend it's life potentially, by a few upgrades as time goes on, namely drives, memory, and graphics.

You can upgrade the screen if you need/want to, and you can avoid the glossy aspect if it's an issue to you. For me, it is. I much prefer matte.

 

[ChrisA]

What is "precision colour" ? Does that mean the new 27" iMac displays have inferior color rendition?

The iMac has a glossy screen. Glossy screens tend it exaggerate color contrast.

It depends on what you are doing with the computer. Now days many consumers are simply using the mac as an expensive media viewer or game console. Color accuracy does not matter for them. But if you doing video or photo post production or designing for print you want to see the real color I assume most people who'd want the Mac Pro would be in the second group.

 

[VirtualRain]

A good perspective on the iMac 27"...

http://www.marco.org/222434049

The more I think and learn about the curious pricing of the 27” iMac, the more bizarre and incredible it seems.

 

[Umbongo]

A good perspective on the iMac 27"...

http://www.marco.org/222434049

Not taking in to account that Apple are in it for the longhaul and they will probably maintain the same sort of margins they had on the previous iMacs over the lifetime of the new ones. Its like any major product revision or introduction. Also as nice as the 27" LED panel may be, there is no choice. The same hardware + 24" IPS display can be had for $1,200 and do just as good a job, it's not like the iMac is really amazingly priced.

 

[nanofrog]

Not taking in to account that Apple are in it for the longhaul and they will probably maintain the same sort of margins they had on the previous iMacs over the lifetime of the new ones. Its like any major product revision or introduction. Also as nice as the 27" LED panel may be, there is no choice. The same hardware + 24" IPS display can be had for $1,200 and do just as good a job, it's not like the iMac is really amazingly priced.

Yep.

If it's exceptionally expensive, they wouldn't be using it. And as you indicate, users are stuck with it (size, resolution), and have to compromise if they wanted a matte finish (though can be mitgated with a matte film product at additional cost via 3rd party if Apple isn't offering it). Then there's the classic issue with any AIO; if the monitor breaks, you're without a computer while you wait on a repair or replacement system.

 

[Eidorian]

Then there's the classic issue with any AIO; if the monitor breaks, you're without a computer while you wait on a repair or replacement system.

This reason alone is why I don't and am not allowed to order iMacs.

 

[KG2002]

All these discussions will end if Apple drops the price for the existing Mac Pro lineup until the new one arrives. Price is the only thing that stops me from getting Mac Pro. It is kind of stupid to pay $2.5K for i7 920 (~$250) equivalent machine. Especially when there is one out there with similar performance and a free display. Well, free display is useless for me since it is glossy.

My prediction is that there going to be a big drop is Mac Pro sales until we see the new ones or until/if Apple drops the price.

 

[VirtualRain]

Yep.

Then there's the classic issue with any AIO; if the monitor breaks, you're without a computer while you wait on a repair or replacement system.

Just like a laptop?

 

[nanofrog]

Just like a laptop?

Exactly. AIO's are a little worse though, as it's "chained to the wall" for power.

At least with a laptop you get portability to offset the aggravation incurred if it's ever sent in.

 

[nanofrog]

This reason alone is why I don't and am not allowed to order iMacs.

I don't think there's any corporation that would deal with using AIO's. They need the ability to keep users working, even if it means keeping a spare monitor or two when one breaks. The systems are typically covered by warranty/service plans anyway, as they're willing to pay for such things.

BTW, sorry I missed your post earlier.

 

[Eidorian]

I don't think there's any corporation that would deal with using AIO's. They need the ability to keep users working, even if it means keeping a spare monitor or two when one breaks. The systems are typically covered by warranty/service plans anyway, as they're willing to pay for such things.

BTW, sorry I missed your post earlier.

Yeah, if we're going to order any Macs it's the mini + one of the Dells displays we buy by the dozens.

I'm surprised Dell offers an all-in-one Vostro. Not to mention there's the quad core Dell Studio 15 for $999.

 

[justit]

For me, it is. I much prefer matte.

The iMac has a glossy screen. Glossy screens tend it exaggerate color contrast.

That's a great point. But for everyone here that doesn't want glossy, the iMac for the first time supports an additonal monitor. So you can still use your matte display to view those color corrected photos and video tracks.

 

[nanofrog]

I'm surprised Dell offers an all-in-one Vostro. Not to mention there's the quad core Dell Studio 15 for $999.

I was keeping it to the enterprise market, as that was the inference I had from your post.

The Vostro AIO would make sense in SOHO, or maybe in a visible desk/office, such as a receptionist desk. It's much nicer and space efficient solution when it's visible to the public/clients. Systems in the cubicles that are only seen by employees, who cares. Cheap & easy wins everytime.

That's a great point. But for everyone here that doesn't want glossy, the iMac for the first time supports an additonal monitor. So you can still use your matte display to view those color corrected photos and video tracks.

The film is much less expensive than another monitor. That's a real waste of funds at that point.

 

[PaulD-UK]

...Apple are in it for the longhaul and they will probably maintain the same sort of margins they had...

My prediction is that there going to be a big drop is Mac Pro sales until we see the new ones or until/if Apple drops the price.

Hi
As a freelance broadcast video editor I too am in it for the longhaul.
At the top end, since 1993. A long list of Quadras 950/840AV, my Radius 8100/Power Macs 9150/9500/9600, my B&W G3 400, G4 DP450/MDD DP1.25, then various Dual G5s 2GHZ/2.5GHz...

Mostly, though, I haven't been a direct customer of Apple, since I source them from demo stock or second user.
Ironically this year I HAVE to replace the stalwart G5s as their rendering speed is increasingly unacceptable

I've even got the money sitting in the bank to buy new - from Apple this time
But I haven't. I'm a self-employed buyer who needs to get 'value for money'.
If I could buy an edit-capable Mac Pro octocore at last year's prices I would be in there without hesitation.

But I think Apple have worked out that, whilst they are in it to sell Mac Pros to professionals for the longhaul. there are less and less people who NEED a full-on Mac Pro rig.
So to retain overall profitability (of the Mac Pro range) from last March Apple decided they needed to ramp up the prices by 25% or whatever the figure is (more maybe in the UK or Oz).

Intel's Xeon prices don't help either, and the possibility of better chip yields of faster chips leading to a speed ramp across the range or lower prices to the end consumer seems to have evaporated, Anyway Intel seems to have accelerated development of their 32nm chip production, I guess because it brings some quantifiable production cost benefit which will help profitability?

So will this lowering of future production costs get passed on to Apple, and will Apple pass any of it on to us when the new Mac Pros arrive?
That's the $64,000 question...

If there is some sort of price lowering of the mid/upper spec Mac Pros then I will go out and buy one, and a nice 27" i7 iMac would be very affordable as a tasty 2nd screen, and maybe its ethernet could be configured to give it some useful content-creation connectivity....

 

[MWPULSE]

i dont think they are going to be discontinuing the MP line anytime soon, i mean everyone was complaining/worried that the mini line was gonna become defunct but now its back stronger than ever and it would seem that it has more practical uses in the line up of machines that apple has. It fills a gap, no matter if the gap is small!! lol- put it that way eh?

Also until you can get a reasonably well performing computer that can handle 5/6 different convolution reverbs at max, with 60-100 tracks of full on 96khz/48bit audio in protools, while running sync to a whole host of different outboard crap via midi on an ethernet cable, and then sync for final cut via wordclock on a PCI-e. Your not gonna be having anything less than a mac pro in your recording studio /end of story.

It will be interesting to see how apple manage the processor lineup next year. Im guessing that the mac pro will be seeing the gulftown in both 6 n 12 core versions. but will they keep the octo? or will the gulftown be faster than the 8 core anyways. Then what happens this time next year? The imac gets quadcore across more of the models n bigger bumps in processor speed. Then everyone gets onto MR to tap away furiously about how everything has gone to pot again?

I just find it funny some people are complaining cos apple have upgraded their line-up n made it a lil better, if more expensive in some areas. The machine that you have at the moment is still perfectly powerful enough to do what you need to do, else you wouldnt of bought it right?

For the record i do think that the MP is over priced looking at the figures n specs it would be hard to think otherwise, but the mac pro is mid-cycle n apple dont tend to bother changing/messing things up mid-cycle right? although one could argue the macbook/pro line up needs a rejig fo sho.

I dont tend to get my hopes up in regard to upgrades n computer specs. i look, watch, analyse, n then decide that i cant afford it anyways cos i have no money. So thus go back to enjoying the machines i have already.

computer love

PTP

 

[lemonade-maker]

That's a great point. But for everyone here that doesn't want glossy, the iMac for the first time supports an additonal monitor. So you can still use your matte display to view those color corrected photos and video tracks.

I have a 2006 20inch intel imac with a 24 inch additional monitor attached, works great.

 

[justit]

I have a 2006 20inch intel imac with a 24 inch additional monitor attached, works great.

My mistake, I thought this was the first year as I never payed close attention to iMac specs. Another great point for the iMac though.

 

[Dr.Pants]

What is "precision colour" ? Does that mean the new 27" iMac displays have inferior color rendition?

Not at all. It will surpass may panels out there today. Its just going to be an extra thousand or so to roll out for monitor that is meant to have colour-work done on it. Not to mention over the flaky MDP port, which I wouldn't trust.