Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

New Mac Pro

How long have resellers not had old Mac Pros? Can't buy refurbished, new, etc. Sign that we are days away?
 
Elliott Balsley said:
Sorry, I didn't read the details of that page, I just went straight to HP's site to start configuring it. Did the same at Apple, trying to make them as similar as possible so I used the low end i5. Here is the comparison. The only advantage I see to the HP is a second hard drive bay, and it's easier to take apart.

[TABLE="class: outer_border, width: 500"]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]iMac = $1878[/TD]
[TD]HP Z1 = $2778[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]CPU[/TD]
[TD]3.2GHz quad core i5[/TD]
[TD]same[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]display[/TD]
[TD]27" 2560x1440[/TD]
[TD]same[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]GPU[/TD]
[TD]Nvidia GT 755M (1GB)[/TD]
[TD]Intel HD 2500[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Memory[/TD]
[TD]8GB 1600MHz[/TD]
[TD]same[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]storage[/TD]
[TD]1TB 7200rpm hard drive[/TD]
[TD]same[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]physical[/TD]
[TD]21 pounds[/TD]
[TD]47 pounds[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

I checked again today, this time comparing the high end models. In this configuration, the Xeon is nicer than the i7, and ECC memory demands a premium. The Quadro K4000 is arguably better, depending on what you use it for. iMac has Thunderbolt and HP costs 95% more.


[TABLE="class: outer_border, width: 500"]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]iMac = $3528[/TD]
[TD]HP Z1 = $6887[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]CPU[/TD]
[TD]3.5GHz quad core i7[/TD]
[TD]3.4GHz quad core Xeon[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]display[/TD]
[TD]27" 2560x1400[/TD]
[TD]same[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]GPU[/TD]
[TD]Nvidia GTX 780M (4GB)[/TD]
[TD]Nvidia Quadro K4000M (4GB)[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Memory[/TD]
[TD]32GB 1600MHz[/TD]
[TD]32GB 1600MHz ECC[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]storage[/TD]
[TD]512GB SSD[/TD]
[TD]same[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Click to expand...

My apologies again, when I mentioned this I was sure that I had sighted a lot lower prices on the HP site months ago, maybe now it has had such great reviews they are raising costs (or it is the American dollar). However Elliott, did you look into the 20% off offer (probably on the pre reconfigured price) and you should have compared the Xeon model with Nvidia pro card against a similar configured IMac i7 27 inch. However, we are talking about comparing to Mac Pro, which would be this discounted and configured against a base line Mac Pro. If I wanted something consumer like the IMac, I would buy the HP lay down touch i7 consumer model (screen resolution and small size is what stops me).

How come nobody is using a Haswell Xeon?

Still, they could have at least included one free wide PCIE card slot.

I'm actually considering if I should make my own All in One, by mounting a box on the back of anything I like display, rather than be restricted by manufacturers. Intel has a number of next generation case concepts, including a All in One that has been available for a while.
 
Thought I'd lend some input regarding TB2 vs TB1. I've had some great luck cranking out projects in both 4K/5K on a 2012 rMBP and ditching my tower with some stipulations. Here's my results and input:

The setup:
rMBP 2012 - 512 SSD, 16GB, 2.6 i7
TB Port 1 - Sonnet Echo Pro w/ Rocket
TB Port 2 - Promise R4 (~500-600MB/s)

Results:
- 4K in any flavor resolution up to 5:1 is smooth and realtime (both playback and transcoding).
- 5K on 2012 Model is only good to 5K HD 7:1 and MOS projects. Anything with sound that requires smooth 24FPS playback needs to be 5K HD 8:1 or higher compression. 5K FF chugs at 16-18FPS.

On my Mac Pro tower I can get realtime 5K FF 7:1 or higher with an internal raid (~250-300MB/s) and Rocket. So I've been attempting to test whether TB is the bottleneck or disk speed on a rMBP.

I've just received my Sonnet Echo III TB2 Chassis so next I'll test to see if it's quicker than the Echo Pro on a 2012 MBP and how it compares with 3 cards loaded. I've compared my Magma 3T to my Sonnet Pro and saw no change in transcoding or playback when comparably equipped. Yes, the Magma adds the ability to install a 3rd card, however the TB bus isn't actually throttled by the additional card unless you utilize it simultaneously with the others. For example, using a Rocket to play back footage off an ATTO R680 card (8 Drive SAS Raid) and a Decklink for playback (All inside Magma). The footage will chug along at 12-18FPS depending on project settings. However, remove the Decklink from output duties and the Magma will run equally as efficient as the Sonnet in realtime. In other words, it is nice to have an additional card pre-loaded and used for other purposes since it does not bog down the other two AS LONG AS it is not simultaneously performing computations in the same program (RCX, Premiere, etc).

Now the question is how much performance is lost when a TB1 accessory is on one TB Bus and TB2 accessories are on the other? Also, I've found dedicating a TB Port solely to the Sonnet/Magma Chassis (aka Rocket) is more reliable vs daisy chaining. This may sound obvious, but I've seen some users believe it doesn't matter port vs port and its all one single chain. I have found the opposite. I like to think of the TB ports as a pair of 10A edison plugs. You have 1200 Watts per plug and if you go over on your Watts you'll trip the breaker.
Rocket = 1000 Watts, Raid = 600-800 Watts, Lacie ESata Adapter = 250 Watts, Decklink = 400 Watts, TB Dock = 250 Watts
Just add them up and divide appropriately per port.

My maxed out setup was:
TB Port 1 - Magma 3T with Rocket, R680, QIO > Belkin TB Dock (Ethernet for Avid Artist Color Panel)
TB Port 2 - Promise R4 > Decklink 3D (Inside Sonnet Echo) > Ultrastudio 3D > Lacie ESata Adapter
I could still transcode in realtime. Playback varied depending on project (5K HD was 18-22FPS). It seems unless I was dumping a card, while transcoding, and playing back from the SAS Raid that it would bog heavily. For the record, there's no way I could ever possibly host that many devices on a Tower, while using two displays (HDMI and Retina).

I'll report back once I get some numbers behind the new Sonnet. Hopefully my Echo 15 will come soon and I can test how it fares as an ESata adapter (ditching the Lacie) and an SSD RAID (Pair).
 
Those results point more to latency than bandwidth. If the latency gets to high for the player from adding devices to a chassis that has to moderate traffic when device is initialized or chaining devices which definitely add's latency then the playback will stutter or just crash. The results really depend on the player and how long it will wait for data to arrive or a hardware device's ability to accept and sync to data stream. The problems with TB will be latency related far quicker than bandwidth related.
 
Here is Intel's Adaptive All in one PC formfactor. Unfortunately it is a bit too light weight as of the date of this page:

http://www.intel.ie/content/www/ie/...stomize-integrate-thin-mini-itx-platform.html

body-customise-640x640-1x1.png.rendition.cq5dam.webintel.640.640.png
 
Jason, I avoid the rocket thing, I'm looking forward to seeing what can be achieved by the GPU (hopefully better and cheaper).
 
Wayne Morellini said:
Why shouldn't they because you don't want them too,? Their desktop sales have been in the toilet for years, this model will change things around out of fashion, and fanboyism, at least temporarily. But in the end they must pay the Piper, and offer better designed value or lower prices. However they decide to setup things, if it is not effective enough it is their responsibility.
Click to expand...

I had to remember this quote from you when I read an article today.

It seems Apple is going just fine when talking about desktops:
http://www.macrumors.com/2013/12/05/apple-tops-dell-as-most-sought-after-desktop-computers/

Allright, it's a market survey, but it doesn't suggest that everyone thinks Apple's desktops are so overpriced...
 
Looks like these are hitting the streets in about two weeks give or take some delays.
 
Many people like the Mac Design and product line but still wont buy because of the price to performance or performance requirement. The real question is the overall sales numbers and I think Dell wins there hands down.
 
Read the link. The article was about what Companies products are sought after more. Supposedly Apple based on a generic poll is preferred more by consumers. The point I was making is simply consumers can prefer to have a Apple product but that doesn't mean the sales numbers support they actually will buy 1. Since this article was reflecting number of consumers, then yes Dell wins hands down in sales numbers as does Go Pro over Red Cameras. This doesn't mean they would not rather have the more expensive solution. It means their purchase was their final decision regardless of the reason.
 
Last edited:
Mathieu Ghekiere said:
I had to remember this quote from you when I read an article today.

It seems Apple is going just fine when talking about desktops:
http://www.macrumors.com/2013/12/05/apple-tops-dell-as-most-sought-after-desktop-computers/

Allright, it's a market survey, but it doesn't suggest that everyone thinks Apple's desktops are so overpriced...
Click to expand...



Indeed, look back in their archive about the rise and fall of sales numbers. If Apple is achieving a turn around in popularity that is good for them, around 4 or 5 years ago it was getting so bad there was talk of Apple de-emphasizing the desktop, and there was some sales issues nearly a year ago I think. Maybe people are starting to take to the new shape, or screen, but for how long. I see a number of systems with better shape and in so many things than Apple, and it shouldn't have been. unfortunately the consumer electronics industry has stuffed up the release of 4k, and we don't have 4k all in one skate computers, so we have to wait (by the crimson projector might be just about out ).
 
This comment was at the bottom of the Macrumors story:

mrtravel123
9 hours ago at 09:48 pm
Prices are already falling drastically.

The first Mac Pro sold last month was $977,000.00.

Today they're down to about $9,500.00.

... and people say that Apple never reduces their prices much. Hogwash.

 
Some people thought this new MP was going to be a bargain. That was 100% speculation and 100% wrong.
 
D Anderson said:
Some people thought this new MP was going to be a bargain. That was 100% speculation and 100% wrong.
Click to expand...
Traditionally, Apple has never tried to appeal to what I would call "cost-conscious buyers." But they do increase price/performance every year or two. My fear is that they're quickly becoming more of a consumer product company that sells computers as a small sideline, rather than a computer company that makes a lot of money with cell phones. I'm concerned about their long-term commitment to pro users.
 
D Anderson said:
Some people thought this new MP was going to be a bargain. That was 100% speculation and 100% wrong.
Click to expand...

If you look at what people quoted on forums as the introduction price for the base model, we often heard a lot of higher quotes then what Apple announced. When pricing was finally announced, a lot of people said it was cheaper then they had expected. (I heard 4000 dollars to 5000 dollars for the base model).
Then people talked about having a 15.000 dollar maxed out price. It seems like the maxed out price will be closer to 10.000 dollars.

When someone online tried to make a hackintosh that resembled the new Mac Pro, he came to a higher price and it was in an ugly box, and if I'm not mistaken, it did not have Thunderbolt 2.
The price of the current Mac Pro is just the same as it has always been (yes the base price has gone up, true, but not a lot of people bought the lowest base model).

Ow, and don't forget. You guys are buying a computer that is being made in the US! It's something to be proud of, like RED that has their manufacturing in the US.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top