Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Updated Mac Pro Benchmarks and Video of Internals

Umbongo said:
But it is those with geeky needs who mostly are discussing this, or do they have no right to voice their opinion?
Click to expand...

There are two basic types of Mac users: those who view the Mac as a tool and those who few it as a religion. Trust me, you will never win with those who few it as a religion, so save yourself years of frustration and don't try to reason with them, just ignore them. The only fact they will accept is that Apple did it and therefore it is correct. You can never beat dogma.
 
Flavioparentiq said:
You are questioning everything, mac pro, apple care, apple's marketing, apple itself. What's the point? The thread's title is: "Updated Mac Pro Benchmarks and Video of Internals". Not Mac vs. Pc.
Click to expand...

Thread titles are irrelevent in this subforum as every one will go offtopic. Mac Pro threads especially have a history of being ridden offtrack quickly.

BRLawyer is right when he suggests this forum is full of those who question everything Apple and its users do but I don't think that a bad thing. No one is really suffering because the content of this forum isn't all pro-Apple or on topic.
 
diamond.g said:
If we order any more for our site here, it will be 128GB, 24+ Core as fast as we can buy.... I actually had support for taking my little network here all Mac, but lack of decent server hardware kinda killed that dream.
Click to expand...

Just a note that you are almost certainly better off getting more, smaller servers, rather than fewer, bigger ones (for multiple reasons - cost, redundancy, "splash damage"). This is particularly true when comparing dual-CPU to quad-CPU hardware (the latter tends to be disproportionately expensive).

IMHO, you're mad to buy a quad-socket machine if you have a requirement that can be equally well met by a pair of dual-socket machines, especially when the latter are routinely capable of holding 64G of RAM these days.

EDIT: Our power draw has gone down since we started consolidating the servers.
Click to expand...

Undoubtedly. I've just been doing the numbers for replacing and virtualising a bunch of our old PE750s/850s/etc (few dozen of them). A quartet of Dell M600 blades with 8 cores and 64G of RAM each will comfortably replace ~30 old servers (could probably handle 3-4x that) and reduce power draw by roughly an order of magnitude (that's before even considering the lower power draw of the Nehalem servers we'll actually end up with once this project is concluded). If you're virtualising, it's hard to go past a Bladecentre+SAN combo (even with something low-end like an MD3000i). Then there's the massive savings to be made from the better manageability and physical resource usage of the blades.

Even if you're not, it's still good to replace old hardware if power consumption is a concern. I was expecting an improvement, but jaw-droppingly amazed to see the difference in power usage for one of our old quad-CPU IBM xSeries 260s when compared to a new 4-core blade (+ some SAN disk) was a factor of 5 !

(Apologies for going off-topic.)
 
BRLawyer said:
I am glad Apple doesn't see things this way, as a company DRIVEN by design, not profit; otherwise we would be participating in DellRumors now. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

If Apple were "driven by design", they'd be dropping some awesomely designed products into a few of the gaping holes in their hardware lineup (like a good business-class laptop and a mid-range desktop), the profit hits these would entail (particularly the latter) be damned.
 
Flavioparentiq said:
From when the individual components reflects the FULL cost of a computer system? What about the build engineering, the primary material costs, the shipping cost (related to fuel), in a word, the derivative cost. You can't say an item is overpriced looking only the individual components and not the full drawing...
Click to expand...

They are a good estimate. Think about it, each little retail component is made by a separate company with:
  1. Shipping - Have to ship each component individually, from different manufacturer->wholesaler->retailer->consumer
  2. Packaging - All components I bought come in big flashy boxes with CDs and extra cables etc.
  3. Profit - Retail components are not sold at cost, not like Gigabyte, LG et al are charities, plus there is the profit from wholesaler and retailer as well!
  4. Customer Support - Yes all little retail components have their own customer support, even more over head per product then an integrated one from Apple.
  5. R&D

Apple has 1 integrated solution, they buy all their parts at whole sale prices with huge buying powers, there is no huge over head for each component.

Oh what's this... Dell do sell the i7 920 2.66GHz too (Just like a Xeon Mac Pro 2.66GHz minus ECC RAM)! http://www1.ap.dell.com/content/pro...top-studioxps-435mt?c=au&cs=audhs1&l=en&s=dhs Starting from AU$1599 vs Apples AU$4499. Dell's system is cheaper than mine (AU$1653) because the system doesn't have the over heads of the list above!
 
awulf said:
They are a good estimate. Think about it, each little retail component is made by a separate company with:
  1. Shipping - Have to ship each component individually, from different manufacturer->wholesaler->retailer->consumer
  2. Packaging - All components I bought come in big flashy boxes with CDs and extra cables etc.
  3. Profit - Retail components are not sold at cost, not like Gigabyte, LG et al are charities, plus there is the profit from wholesaler and retailer as well!
  4. Customer Support - Yes all little retail components have their own customer support, even more over head per product then an integrated one from Apple.
  5. R&D

Apple has 1 integrated solution, they buy all their parts at whole sale prices with huge buying powers, there is no huge over head for each component.

Oh what's this... Dell do sell the i7 920 2.66GHz too (Just like a Xeon Mac Pro 2.66GHz minus ECC RAM)! http://www1.ap.dell.com/content/pro...top-studioxps-435mt?c=au&cs=audhs1&l=en&s=dhs Starting from AU$1599 vs Apples AU$4499. Dell's system is cheaper than mine (AU$1653) because the system doesn't have the over heads of the list above!
Click to expand...

Get a dell then.
 
drsmithy said:
If Apple were "driven by design", they'd be dropping some awesomely designed products into a few of the gaping holes in their hardware lineup (like a good business-class laptop and a mid-range desktop), the profit hits these would entail (particularly the latter) be damned.
Click to expand...

Believe me, I was there when Apple went that route back in the 90s...on paper, they seemed to make everyone happy...xMacs galore, headless, AIOs, laptops, notebooks, subnotebooks, accessories to everything, market segmentation to the max...downside is, they tried to cater to every geek out there with end-to-end solutions that created only confusion and unnecessary production lines...instead of ingeniously anticipating and creating demand with a tight-run inventory, as they do nowadays.

Needless to say, they are BY FAR the most successful computer company in the world, even as the U.S. economy bases itself on little more than faith these days.

Sculley screwed up, not SJ.
 
Doc69 said:
It doesn't make any sense for Apple to release a new Mac Pro model that has the same speed as last years model and is almost 20% more expensive. Because of that, there has to be plenty of advantages with the Nehalem processor that will make it much faster than the previous model when Snow Leopard is out and when other software is updated to take advantage of the Nehalems.

For this reason I'll probably buy a 2.26 over the old 2.8, even if it's $500 more. But I'm as bummed out as anyone that the clock frequency of the core model is only 2.26. If it was 2.66, everyone would probably be very happy, even with the $500 increase. My expectations for the new Mac Pros were that the clock frequencies and price would stay the same, just a new and faster generation of processors. In other words, a 2.66GHz Nehalem Mac Pro for 2799. I guess Intel screwed this one up for Apple with the Nehalem pricing.
Click to expand...

Don't forget the Turbo effect that can clock the processor up in three increments of 0.133 GHz when other cores run idle.

This means the 2.26 GHz can jump up to a 2.659 GHz speed :D
 
Tallest Skil said:
But the Mac Pro's board doesn't, correct?

Tylersburg itself has 12 slots, but since Apple put half the board on a daughter card, they cut out four RAM slots in the design process of their board, right?
Click to expand...

Technically Tylersburg doesn't support any memory as the memory controller is now on die. Nehalem's memory controller supports up to 9 DIMMs per CPU (18 in a dual CPU setup), but 6 is most common. The Mac Pro has 4 because of case limitations and the engineering department did an amazing job (as usual) fitting those in.
 
BRLawyer said:
Believe me, I was there when Apple went that route back in the 90s...on paper, they seemed to make everyone happy...xMacs galore, headless, AIOs, laptops, notebooks, subnotebooks, accessories to everything, market segmentation to the max...downside is, they tried to cater to every geek out there with end-to-end solutions that created only confusion and unnecessary production lines...instead of ingeniously anticipating and creating demand with a tight-run inventory, as they do nowadays.
Click to expand...

This is a false dichotomy. There is a middle path between the two extremes. I don't particularly want Apple to become Dell, but I *do* think there is value for them in addressing some of their more obviously lacking options (EDIT: mainly because, of course, they are the sort of hardware I and the people I work with are interested in :) ).
 
awulf said:
I already have an i7 system as you can see in page 3 of this thread, a Hackintosh just as fast as the Mac Pro Quad 2.66GHz.
Click to expand...

So you are posting to convince us to do like you? What do you do with your hackintosh? You work with it? Is your job related (dependent) to the hardware you use? If yes, how much money do you invest in your hardware compared to the incomes it makes (in percentage)?
 
Flavioparentiq said:
So you are posting to convince us to do like you? What do you do with your hackintosh? You work with it? Is your job related (dependent) to the hardware you use? If yes, how much money do you invest in your hardware compared to the incomes it makes (in percentage)?
Click to expand...

No its not a work computer, although I do web designs with it on the side. Its main purpose is a personal computer. Even if I did need a dedicated work computer I would use this, its not like couple of hundred dollars savings, the savings are whopping $AU2500!. It is a completely stable system, no less stable than my old Power Mac G4 1GHz or Macbook Pro 2.2GHz.

Now if I were a millionaire, I'd buy the Mac Pro, just because it looks nicer, no other reason. Also the if you need super speeds the top end dual CPU Mac Pro is the fastest around.
 
awulf said:
Now if I were a millionaire, I'd buy the Mac Pro, just because it looks nicer, no other reason. Also the if you need super speeds the top end dual CPU Mac Pro is the fastest around.
Click to expand...

No you wouldn't. No millionaire got to be one by being a fool with his money! The don't become fools after either. If you ever become a millionaire it will be because you think like this! Maximizing value and minimizing cost! :)
 
Tesselator said:
No you wouldn't. No millionaire got to be one by being a fool with his money! The don't become fools after either. If you ever become a millionaire it will be because you think like this! Maximizing value and minimizing cost! :)
Click to expand...

"many millionaires are mainly the janitors of their possessions"

So sad.. life is one, enjoy it. But if you don't want to, maximize the value of your life and minimize the cost of it!

You'll be happy.
Oh yeah.
Super happy.
Happy like an hippo.
 
AidenShaw said:
When you do, you may reconsider ;) !
Click to expand...

yes i possibly may, but im a nerd and would most likely sacrifice some other power hungry device (like a fridge :p )



add USB drives at 1.5 TB per....

I wonder if the G4 still has the original 40GB ATA-66 drives in it.
Click to expand...

no thanks, USB is too slow for my needs, FireWire--maybe. but the main reason for me buying a mini would be as a TV viewing device e.g.home theatre. i dont particularly want a billion hard drives sitting around the TV lol thats just silly. id just use my storage devices that are connected to my MBP and network them together :)

simple, easy and clean. lucky i put all those gigabit ethernet cables in eh>? :p
 
Umbongo said:
Are we forbidden from using the retail cost of individual components for comparison then?
Click to expand...

You can do whatever you want, but it's just not a valid comparison in my opinion. It just depends on how you look at things.

If it costs me $500 in component costs to build a a computer that my competition is selling for $5,000, I will sell mine for $4,750 and make a great profit. It's all about what the competition is charging.

So, what is the competition charging for a Nehalem system. Anyone?
 
AZREOSpecialist said:
You can do whatever you want, but it's just not a valid comparison in my opinion. It just depends on how you look at things.

If it costs me $500 in component costs to build a a computer that my competition is selling for $5,000, I will sell mine for $4,750 and make a great profit. It's all about what the competition is charging.

So, what is the competition charging for a Nehalem system. Anyone?
Click to expand...

excellent point, are there even any competitors atm?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back