Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I'm curious to see what the BTO options cost...
prob millions lmao
[doublepost=1559606156][/doublepost]
I'm just seeing the spec page and in the 24 and 28 core part it says 'Support for up to 2TB' but in the memory part it says 'up to 1.5TB'. I wonder witch one is right, not that I'm getting any of them, just wondering. lol.


View attachment 840539
I suppose the CPU supports 2TB, which might need 16 slots, and the mac pro provides 12 slots due to design issues
 
I am curious why the base model Mac Pro is $1,000 more than the base model iMac Pro which has also has an 8-core Xeon and 32GB of RAM but the base model iMac Pro has 4x as much SSD space, a much more powerful GPU, and a 5k display to boot. I get that you are paying for expandibility but the initial price seems high or else the iMac Pro now looks like a screaming good deal.

can’t you buy an iMac pro and a thunderbolt expansion chassis and forgo the Mac pro
 
Once again, an outrageous price for a “premium” product. Not sure why the frickin’ display needs to be so damn expensive. I’m sure it’ll be nice to look at in the apple store.
I love the fact Apple made this Mac Pro. I just wish they had a cheaper entry level option at $3/4K price with 1TB/64GB RAM.
The prices are just too insane high.
The display is incredible, but $7k with stand and nano tech is ridiculous. They could have an option @ 5K display at $2500 with stand/nano.


Not really, not for the people it's intended for.
 
Seems like an awesome machine. It's everything people have been shouting about wanting, and now that, what was wanted has arrived, I hear people crying about the price. The price isn't bad in my opinion. If I made my green on computing power, it would be trivial even.

It's more than I personally need, but many ACTUAL PRO's do need this kind of power, and will gladly pay the price. Seriously, my MP51 cost me well over $3K in 2013 (Yes, I bought brand new, Mid-2012 MP51 in 2013) and it's been worth every penny to me. I've invested just as much or more in various upgrades over the years, with no regrets. If my current MP weren't up to the tasks I throw at it now, I'd have no qualms about buying the 7,1 base model (well, I might upgrade something on it, so it might not be EXACTLY base). Given the technology upgrades over the 5,1, and the potential upgrades over it's own base, it's a good deal (in my opinion).

If you need to upgrade your current machine, but don't want (or need) this much machine, there are other options. Let's face it. Apple is finally bringing a heavy-hitter up to bat, and if you want him on your team, you have to pay for his abilities.
 
To enter, it costs more than the entry level iMac Pro without a display.

Entry level Mac Pro has 1/4 the SSD, and a graphics card from 2016 with 1/2 the teraflops.
This is a "Pro" product, Apple. Save us the marketing dance. Give us Vega 56 / 64, and 1TB SSD for $6K!

Otherwise, given the many BTO, the machine is an absolute beast!
 
People say it's ugly, but ya gotta expect we'll soon see other makers of desktops and peripherals offer similar "lattice" designs. Personally, it first struck me as rather odd, but it's growing on me. Definitely has a striking look. Using the outer case of the MacPro and new display as a heat sink seems a pretty efficient use of materials and weight. At least it's a move back to function over form, whereas the trashcan Mac seemed the opposite.
 
To enter, it costs more than the entry level iMac Pro without a display.

Entry level Mac Pro has 1/4 the SSD, and a graphics card from 2016 with 1/2 the teraflops.
This is a "Pro" product, Apple. Save us the marketing dance. Give us Vega 56 / 64, and 1TB SSD for $6K!

Otherwise, given the many BTO, the machine is an absolute beast!

Yeah, I wish the low-end model was more affordable for smaller one-person studios that want the upgradability investment that you don't get with iMac.
 
Apple should really sell a version of the Mac Pro with high-end consumer chips. The Xeon/ECC premium puts these machines out of reach for many people who would instantly buy one for $3500-4000.

The iMac is no tower replacement. It has its place since many value the small footprint. Maybe the numbers just aren’t there? Most people moved to notebooks a decade ago and towers are really only needed by two sorts of costumers: professional content creators and gamers. But I’m sure many gamers would love a powerful Mac Pro with an i9-9900k dual booting macOS and Windows.
 
If somebody had put this design on Steve Jobs’s desk, they would be fired.

Oh come on man! I've seen you been critical A LOT on these forums and often it was justified. But now?! This thing looks freaking cool, but more importantly it's crazy impressive. With this machine, it's not even about the looks, it's about getting serious work done. But Apple still did great and designed something that can get any computing task done, looks awesome, has great cooling AND is super practical, letting users upgrade parts.

So this time, it really wouldn't hurt you to give them a 'attaboy'.
 
I can’t wait to set this up for a rich client that must have the very best for their web browsing.
I am in no way irresponsible with my money, but frankly one of my goals in life is to be so wealthy I could buy stuff like that without flinching. Half the fun would be freaking the salesman out.

"And YES I need the full 4TB SSD, I dont care how fast my internet connection is I will be downloading lots of movies"
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.