If you check the accessories list on bottom of the Mac Pro page.. There’s a 32TB MPX card option for storage.
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.
Roundup: First-Look Impressions of the New Mac Pro
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If you check the accessories list on bottom of the Mac Pro page.. There’s a 32TB MPX card option for storage.
They do when the internal SSD RAID is twice as fast as the best available external SSD RAID.
For those complaining about storage options, the devil is in the details (per the Mac Pro - Technical Specifications page as an available option):
- Promise Pegasus R4i 32TB RAID MPX Module Kit
This Mac Pro does exactly as intended, it provides an excellent workstation option for professionals while keeping enthusiasts away. This is inline with their closed echo system philosophy.
I gonna buy it 4 gaming and maybe some day learn about 3d studio dude that’s the future but gaming it’s the present so i need thiz cheese thing with wheels
Since these are workstations, I totally agree macOS is preferable for many varying reasons. Even the terminal emulator and the copy-paste. I've relegated my workplace-supplied desktop to SSH-accessible tasks only and use my laptop as a head for it.Multiphysics, unstructured-mesh, finite element simulation software. Doing that with GPUs is still mostly research at this point (although, depending on the physics, we can sometimes use GPUs a bit for acceleration).
This isn’t our “server farm” though: just our personal workstations. We currently have two clusters: 20k cores in one and 35k cores in the other (both Intel based for now). This fall we’re buying a 100k+ core cluster
Our software can scale to use all 100k of those cores...
We choose to use OSX for our workstations simply because it’s the nicest Unix-based OS out there. It’s great to be able to use Word and Emacs side-by-side
Also: Linux on laptops still sucks... so it’s great to be able to have the same environment on our workstations and laptops by using Mac Pros and MacBooks. For the foreseeable future we’ll now do Linux workstations... but we’ll stick with Macbooks for a long time yet...
[doublepost=1559622207][/doublepost]
Facebook browsing is actually egregiously CPU heavy. Ofc any small laptop can handle it, but it's still way slower than it should be.Facebook browsing of course requires 28 cores
This new Mac Pro seems to be replacing more the server needs than the Mac Pro users.
Apple should have done a smaller Mac Pro version Around $3600 with less RAM and 1 eGPU support.
Mac Pro users that spent $2400.00 will be left in limbo due to the high end obscene pricing.
A fully loaded Mac Pro with the monitor, estimate (according to 9to5) costs around $50.000.
Really??
I rather buy a Tesla.
Apple should have done a smaller Mac Pro version Around $3600 with less RAM and 1 eGPU support.
Mac Pro users that spent $2400.00 will be left in limbo due to the high end obscene pricing.
A fully loaded Mac Pro with the monitor, estimate (according to 9to5) costs around $50.000.
Really??
I rather buy a Tesla.
It's not really possible to compare because there is no set value to MacOS. If we got two identical computers how much more is the MacOS worth. Is it a flat value like 200$ or a percentage like 5% since we can't come up with a cake for the one thing that makes those computers different it is impossible to really compare
It would be a completely different computer without the Xeon CPUs. Intel i5 and i7 seem very limited in PCIe lanes (16) and 128 GB RAM (looking at 8700K, 9600K, and 9700K specs). A mid-range AMD Threadripper Mac Pro would be much more interesting, wtih 64 PCIe lanes and 2 TB RAM but a possible loss of Thunderbolt connectivity. Apple is probably contractually limited in options.
THe problem is that Apple made a mistake of confusing the Mac Pro with the workstation/server customers.
Apple used to have the Mac Pro and the servers.
There are many customers that needed maybe a lower version of the just released Mac Pro (Less RAM maybe 1egpu). The old Mac Pro users do NOT need neither want a workstation level machine.
They just wanted an upgraded version of the old Mac Pro, that is user upgradeable. Something what the old Mac Pro used to be, a middle of the pack in between the server and the iMac.
Write now, there is nothing. YOu have the Mac Mini and iMac in one side and then the new Mac Pro on the other. A complete overkill for many users.
The HP Z4 Workstation has been used for comparison, which seems fair to me. Getting close to the base configuration of the new Mac Pro is about the same price. I came out to $5700. Others came out to the low $6000 range. As much as I miss having a mid-range offering in that form factor, I can't fault Apple for pricing it as the workstation class hardware that it is. The Mac Pro is superior to the Z4 in several ways (beefier power supply, MPX modules, more accessible chassis).
But, I'll have to admire this excellent hardware from afar. I'll probably play with the BTO options when it's released just for the thrill (terror) of seeing large numbers.
Keeping the stand separate makes sense. No need to include engineering works of art in a box if they’ll never be used. It’s wasteful, seeing as many professionals mount their displays, but this option would be sweet.
Charging for the stand makes sense (maybe not $1k). The mechanism likely took forever for R&D. The finish looks impeccable, I bet it feels amazing, and I’m sure it’s a privilege to look at. Apple still knows how to make a, “perfect,” product.
Well beyond my needs, but what a machine. This is a 7-10 year chassis.
I’m unimpressed with the entry price. I was expecting a base Pro package around $5-6000k with a monitor, such as the previous-gen paired with LG’s 5k monitor.
With the ultra-high-end level this, “Pro,” machine is at, I think the next logical step would be to release a, “Mac.” Hahaha, the cycle never stops.
Gorgeous setup. *drools*
Charging for the stand makes sense (maybe not $1k). The mechanism likely took forever for R&D. The finish looks impeccable, I bet it feels amazing, and I’m sure it’s a privilege to look at. Apple still knows how to make a, “perfect,” product.
Well beyond my needs, but what a machine. This is a 7-10 year chassis.
I’m unimpressed with the entry price. I was expecting a base Pro package around $5-6000k with a monitor, such as the previous-gen paired with LG’s 5k monitor.
With the ultra-high-end level this, “Pro,” machine is at, I think the next logical step would be to release a, “Mac.” Hahaha, the cycle never stops.
Gorgeous setup. *drools*
Last edited:
Do those Boxx computers run macOS? There's no way I'd let saving $1,500 for a computer that would last me 4+ years cause me to abandon macOS and Apple's ecosystem. In the larger scheme of things, that $1,500 is mice nuts.
I never understood this fascination with comparing look alike stuff.
Literally, everything that has ever been designed and not designed you could easily compare it to other stuff that does already exist. Find me anything in this world and I would be able to find something else that looks just like it. What's the point?
Luckily that machine is aimed at people who are more focused inside and on what it does, rather than what it looks like.
Bingo! Those complaining the loudest are romanticizing their projections of what they believe high-performance computing is about.
I wouldn't either, but technically you're not paying for the OS. I was a little confused as to the original poster's intent.
+1. Of course, they could announce such a thing after the Mac Pro is released and on the market for a while. They would also need a "mid-range" 5K monitor that slots in as the true TB Monitor replacement at $1500+.
I would have to agree. A little surprised since space gray is supposedly their pro look now.