Thinking of canceling my order, but...

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by wildmac, Dec 31, 2013.

  1. wildmac macrumors 65816

    Jun 13, 2003
    So looking at the Anandtech review, the nMP is a dog on PS 5 and LR 3, but... the problem is those are old versions. He mentions a 6 second score for PS6, but, no comparison score for the iMac.

    So.. cancel the nMP order for an iMac? build my own hackintosh and deal with those headaches? go PC?

    Gaaah!!! I thought I had solved this already, but now a incomplete review is leaving me wondering.

    (If I owned a 4,1 or 5,1 I would just upgrade it and be done with it, but my rig is a 1,1, and I don't see that worth upgrading).

    I do, PS, LR, and WoW on this rig, so that's what I need to perform. I do a lot of web coding as well, but that doesn't exactly need horsepower...

    What I really need to see is the newest iMac vs the nMP on current versions of Adobe apps. Testing LR 3 and PS 5 is misleading.
  2. ytoyoda macrumors member

    Dec 14, 2013
    Is a few 10% difference of current version of Adobe apps important?

    I was shared this article from other member of this forum.
    Adobe is applying OpenCL to their apps, and it will bring huge difference.,3208.html

    In Open CL, D300 is 5 times faster than iMac. Please look at OpenCL bench result, the last graph.
  3. Celedral macrumors 6502


    May 29, 2008
    Los Angeles
    I only want to cancel mine since it's not in stock. Did you get the D500?
  4. ytoyoda macrumors member

    Dec 14, 2013
    I'm still waiting mine, 8 core, D700.
  5. theSeb macrumors 604


    Aug 10, 2010
    Poole, England
    Anandtech review is the 12 core. Did you order a 12 core? It should be no surprise that the 12 core is slower when running apps that cannot take advantage of all of the cores.
  6. Roykor macrumors 6502

    Oct 22, 2013
    PS is not only openCL, but also cpu horsepower. If u compair the maxed out imac vs the nMP, the imac wins. Simply because the nMP is in overall a bit faster, but cost 1400 euro more. I am on the same boat: what todo? i think that in the end, the diffrence in performance is just split seconds, not making the 1400 euro extra worth to invest.
  7. wildmac thread starter macrumors 65816

    Jun 13, 2003

    I ordered the Hex/D500/512SSD..

    The real problem is that Anandtech didn't test the current versions of the software, along with it being a test of the 12-core, as someone above mentioned. And... he didn't test the latest iMac either.

    I still really don't want an iMac... or to support a hackintosh (as a primary system).

    I really hope Barefeats gets a system and can do some tests soon.
  8. grouch macrumors member


    Sep 20, 2011
    wow will run on a mac mini for 10-man raiding, need a little more horsepower for 25-man, so no worries about that game *at all*
  9. wildmac thread starter macrumors 65816

    Jun 13, 2003
    I raid 25-man... :)

    But I also want the LR performance, as I'm shooting with a Nikon D800, and those raw files are huge.
  10. michaeljk macrumors member

    Dec 14, 2013
    As I've been reading your posts in various threads over the past couple of weeks, it looks like you and I are in roughly similar situations. We both need something new for our photography efforts (you have a D800, I have a D600), you do some gaming with WoW and I do some audio stuff with Logic, etc., and we both do not want an iMac (I already have a far better monitor than the iMac has). We have both ordered the same nMP for our similar needs (6-core, D500, 512GB SSD). The Anandtech review clearly shows that the nMP isn't quite as fast as a loaded 27" iMac for our purposes right now. For this reason, I too started to question my decision to buy a nMP. Here's the thing, though, even if he had reviewed PS 6 or CC, it might still show the nMP lagging. What's more important is that the iMac is not going to get any faster than it is right now, while PS, LR, Aperture, Logic, OS X and probably all currently evolving software will almost certainly get faster, and by looking at FCP X, much, much faster on the nMP. The nMP is not just a new computer, it is a new paradigm, as often stated in the Anandtech review and elsewhere. It is the clearest sign that Apple is hedging its bet that GPU, and more importantly, dual GPU parallel processing is the best way to increase processing power for the foreseeable future. For this reason, I think I would regret the 27" iMac route within a year because as additional software begins to take advantage of more cores on the CPU and the GPU, the speed difference between the iMac and nMP will reverse, and quickly escalate.

    If I didn't already have a monitor that is better than the iMac, I could see buying the iMac now as a holdover for a couple of years to see how the nMP paradigm of emphasizing dual workshop GPU pans out with software. On the other hand, I don't want to use an iMac monitor to review my photographs. I've owned several Apple monitors in the past and at least the LCD/LED options have never really been able to give me the color accuracy I need for printing or for accurately determining my camera's output. Besides, if I am wrong, and PS, Aperture and Logic don't really improve their performance that much, my nMP is still going to be way faster than just about anything else I could buy, not just because it has a faster CPU/GPU configuration, but because it has very fast memory, storage and IO architecture. That alone might be reason enough prefer the Mac Pro over the iMac--it can grow with my needs, while the iMac will not.
  11. wildmac thread starter macrumors 65816

    Jun 13, 2003
    Yep, pretty much what I've been tossing back and forth for all this time. My dual Dell 24" monitors are still quite fine.

    The real gamble is probably the adoption rate of OpenCL for the Adobe suite, and the growing use of the dual GPUs.

    Hopefully Barefeats will do some of the tests I really want to see prior to my Feb delivery date.. ;)
  12. arbitrage macrumors 6502a

    Mar 19, 2009
    I'm right there with you guys, I had the hex core, 512GB, 12GB D300s ordered but I have actually cancelled and will wait it out. Right now my 15"RMBP (original maxed version) handles my 5D3 and 1DX files decently, I just have to walk away while LR renders 1:1 previews on import and then come back and editing is no problem.

    I will wait and see what the next mini offers and what the next versions of LR enable in terms of taking advantage of the nMPs GPUs. I have a 2010 iMac and told myself never again and I'm sticking to that for now.

    Hopefully I will find reason for a nMP in the next year but I've decided to spend the money on the Canon 200-400 f/4 with 1.4TC instead:D
  13. keigo macrumors regular

    Nov 6, 2006
    Same for me. But the only think I'm still not decided yet is since photography does not rely too much on the GPU. So will there be any different going for D300 or D500?

    There are talk on D300 vs D500 but no conclusive answer.
  14. wildmac thread starter macrumors 65816

    Jun 13, 2003
    I went with the D500 due to the big increase in ram and other specs as compared to the D300, and for some future-proofing.
  15. FredT2 macrumors 6502a

    Mar 18, 2009
    I love my 2012 Mini, but it has this little problem of getting really noisy when it works hard. Unless Apple does a major redesign, I don't think a replacement is going to solve that problem. And I doubt that it'll ever match the iMac for processors or graphics.
    Now THAT is something I'd love to be able to justify buying!
  16. Spinland macrumors 6502


    Jul 16, 2011
    Utica, NY, USA
    My needs that the nMP are expected to fill are somewhat similar: I do not want another monitor--my workbench doesn't really have room for it--and I want more than four CPU cores. Everything else was secondary.

    The first need eliminates the iMac, and the second rules out a new Mini. I could conceivably add two maxed-out Minis (see what I did there?) and add eight i7 cores for a lot less scratch, and I gave that some serious thought, but I decided I wanted the interactive workstation power as well, not just more render beef.

    A "hackintosh" never entered into the equation; the care and feeding and risk of something like that for my primary workstation is simply out of the question. Go back to PCs? No. I abandoned that paradigm with no regrets and I never want to go back to dealing with Windows stuff again, nor with trying to make it play well with my existing OS X based infrastructure. IT drudgery is to be avoided at all costs in my book.

    What's left? Tah-dah! Now nothing left to do but wait--and post here. :cool:
  17. wildmac thread starter macrumors 65816

    Jun 13, 2003
    Yep, and check Barefeats 6 times a day... :D
  18. Roykor macrumors 6502

    Oct 22, 2013
    An interesting development is the Haswel-E cpu that will be launched mid 2014. A 6 and 8-core i7 with HT. Put that in a iMac, and things really are going to kick ass. Not that u guys where in a race for a iMac, i am in the middle. nMP / iMac.. And so far the iMac is winning a little bit.
  19. Donar macrumors 6502


    Jul 12, 2008
    I heard several times that people want to buy an iMac for CPU/GPU intensive tasks. I owned a iMac (27" i7 2.8GHz quadcore) and this thing got quite loud and hot under load. So i Wonder if that is no concern? Or maybe the newer iMacs will not get so loud an hot when stressed.

    So why not buy a used 4,1 or 5,1?
  20. MH01 Suspended


    Feb 11, 2008
    I'm not sure if everyone considers that acceptable "playing" performance. I've tried an iMac mini for laughes and thought it was horrible , to what I am used to ( gaming PC)
  21. Roykor, Jan 2, 2014
    Last edited: Jan 2, 2014

    Roykor macrumors 6502

    Oct 22, 2013

    I am using an iMac 2011 with i5 3,1ghz / 12gb / SSD and pushing the machine to its max when i draw in Photoshop. Mostly drawing on 4K res with 150dpi / CMYK. It starts fine, but later on, when I keep creating layers and the file size goes to 800+ mb, my iMac is in trouble. This is a 3 year old machine, and the newest i7 is a very fast 4 core with HT so i think that the new iMac can do the job much better. I am not sure if a 1500+ euro more machine on top of the iMac can do this much much better. (and if possible, can run BF4 in my spare time)
  22. spaz8 macrumors 6502

    Mar 3, 2007
    I think it depends on how many years you want to get out of the purchase.

    The iMac is probably a good choice for your workload for the next 2 to 3 years. Then replace with a new iMac.

    If you are hoping to get 4 years or more out of this purchase I think the nMP is your only choice.

    If upgrades for the GPU and/or the CPU come to fruition I'm sure you could get 6 yrs out of the nMP.
  23. wildmac thread starter macrumors 65816

    Jun 13, 2003
    The prices for decent ones are north of $2k, so by the time you add the other upgrades, ram, video, USB3, you are likely over $3k.

    It's still a consideration if I found a good enough price, but I would also want it to be local (which isn't totally out of possibility since I'm in LA).
  24. Donar macrumors 6502


    Jul 12, 2008
    What do you mean with decent one? One that is already equipped with e.g. 3.33 HexCore, SSD and so on? Then you would not have to upgrade...

    If you can do the upgrades yourself, look out for a 4.1 2,66 Quadcore with lowest Ram and maybe GT 120 or something and then add the parts. I think you get one way below 2k.
  25. calaverasgrande macrumors 65816


    Oct 18, 2010
    Brooklyn, New York.
    the other variable is that right now, only the nMP has TB2.
    So buying the iMac would be akin to buying the old Mac model with only FW400 right after the FW800 model came out.
    When was that, when the Cheese grater G5 came out? I forget.

    Personally I just buy the best computer I can afford every 3 years or so. It's always a bit of a crunch, but I'd rather eat beans and rice for a while to have decent tools then be a penny pincher and limp along on the cheap option.

Share This Page