Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
Think of the possibilities: Buy a dozen, or so, high-end Mac Pros and use them as a render farm from your Mac Mini or iMac... Now, that's Jazz!
That isn't terribly cost effective. Companies tend to use some of the more costly cpus (not necessarily the most expensive ones) in render farms due to software licensing terms, limited space, etc. These would be obscenely expensive for that kind of workload. You would most likely be better off with a string of minis if you aren't dealing with GB of texture data where available memory and access to drive space would be constrained. These are definitely designed as single user workstations.
Of course the minis also run into the software licensing cost issue that I mentioned, but I can't think of any macs that people would buy specifically to build a render farm. You don't need them to be macs simply because your primary workstation is one.
Originally Posted by iCarbon
that's like 3K less than I was expecting. wow.
How many would they really sell if the entry level was $6k? There is typically some amount of stratification. A shop might purchase several mac pros without them all using identical configurations. I don't see how locking it to such a high entry point would help the line. As it is they are likely positioning it as a lower volume product, although that works as long as the line is sustainable.
Originally Posted by GTR
That price is amazing.
How do you guys figure? These are definitively entry level specs for the type of machine offered. Don't get me wrong. I fully expected them to either make use of the lower tier firepro cards and entry level quad Xeons to control costs or raise the price. I didn't really expect both.
Originally Posted by Relic
Both MATLAB and Cadence support OpenCL but CUDA is a lot more mature. Give it time, if these new Mac's take off so will OpenCL. I still prefer CUDA though, as a programmer, there are a whole lot more code examples out there for CUDA over OpenCL.
What is CUDA like in terms of raw features?
Originally Posted by Relic
Here is a list of XEON CPU's, I don't see the 3.7Ghz one, the performance should be fairly close to the Xeon E5-2637 v2 though. Anyway, here is a performance chart to go with them. It will give you some idea. The CPU that most interests me is the Xeon E5-2650 v2, price, performance, power ration is off the charts.
That's because it's a 1600 variant. They did the same thing 2009-2012. It isn't a bad way of cutting costs, but it doesn't look like a great offering for $3k, especially with possible indirect costs of updated peripherals and things.
Edited by hmm - 10/23/13 at 10:36am