or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Apple's cylindrical Mac Pro will debut in Dec. starting at $2,999
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple's cylindrical Mac Pro will debut in Dec. starting at $2,999 - Page 7

post #241 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by fixmdude View Post

The Mac Pro is conceptualized, designed, and built, to compete with PC Workstations. Comparing the two, good or bad, is the point of those discussing it. You should charge yourself for wasting your time reading this forum. Just stick to the CNN Tech page for the news.

Not when the goal is to get patted on the back for doing what a 12yo can technically achieve with the off-the-shelf parts and then (1) claim that Apple's stuff must be grossly overpriced, and (2) then imply they are better than all of Apple at engineering.


post #242 of 281
Quote:

Originally Posted by drblank View Post

 

 In fact, Apple RARELY shows benchmarks comparing their systems to others, they usually compare against a previous generation Apple product.  That's what they've been doing for many years now.

 

You may be a little disappointed in that regard if you're comparing similar price points on the basis of X86 performance. The old mac pro used a 6 core in the $3000 model. Sure it started higher, but that was when the cpu retailed for $1000. That is not the case with the new one, but the price rose to $4000, presumably to preserve the set margins with the other adjustments. On X86 specs alone, you are going to see a little dip from $3000 machine to $3000 machine, as the difference in architecture isn't enough to overcome the loss of 2 cores. It seems pretty obvious that the HP with added teslas is a hobby, and breaking even just makes it a less expensive hobby.

post #243 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post
 

 

You may be a little disappointed in that regard if you're comparing similar price points on the basis of X86 performance. The old mac pro used a 6 core in the $3000 model. Sure it started higher, but that was when the cpu retailed for $1000. That is not the case with the new one, but the price rose to $4000, presumably to preserve the set margins with the other adjustments. On X86 specs alone, you are going to see a little dip from $3000 machine to $3000 machine, as the difference in architecture isn't enough to overcome the loss of 2 cores. It seems pretty obvious that the HP with added teslas is a hobby, and breaking even just makes it a less expensive hobby.

 

I'm not just going to compare just the difference in JUST the CPU core performance.  The new models have the high speed SSD, which the old ones didn't.  Add another X to the price of the older computer, which by the way, is going bye bye.   That's going to improve performance in a lot of ways.  Plus, you have TWO GPU cards instead of only one. Plus you have 6 Thunderbolt 2 ports, which the old model doesn't have.  Plus you have HDMI port, which the old model didn't have.  Plus, you have 2 Gigabit ethernet which the older model didn't have, plus you don't have to have a big box if you don't need to add additional PCI cards.  Some specs are a LOT faster.  So far, we can only compare benchmarks on those that have been released.

 

I'm sure there will be more benchmarks provided by plenty of people when they ship in December.

post #244 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post
 

 

 

I'm sure there will be more benchmarks provided by plenty of people when they ship in December.

I did mention the restrictions in my comparison. It would interest me to see the performance improvements across comparable price tiers with something that is well tuned to make use of its performance. It's still all about OSX for me, until the day I switch everything to Linux and grow a beard. Do keep in mind that while you get more, 2 gpus was always an optional configuration. It actually still came out a bit less. The standard drives weren't that small, so the difference shouldn't be as much. Thunderbolt chips themselves don't add much to the cost, but implementation might. They no longer ship with a keyboard or mouse, and thunderbolt with lack of PCIe may mean additional costs in extra DAS or other peripheral items. If I had to configure the base model, I would be at least at $4-5k for a working configuration. I'm all for benchmarks, even if limited to Apple published applications as long as they don't just focus on the absolute top configuration.

post #245 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post
 

I did mention the restrictions in my comparison. It would interest me to see the performance improvements across comparable price tiers with something that is well tuned to make use of its performance. It's still all about OSX for me, until the day I switch everything to Linux and grow a beard. Do keep in mind that while you get more, 2 gpus was always an optional configuration. It actually still came out a bit less. The standard drives weren't that small, so the difference shouldn't be as much. Thunderbolt chips themselves don't add much to the cost, but implementation might. They no longer ship with a keyboard or mouse, and thunderbolt with lack of PCIe may mean additional costs in extra DAS or other peripheral items. If I had to configure the base model, I would be at least at $4-5k for a working configuration. I'm all for benchmarks, even if limited to Apple published applications as long as they don't just focus on the absolute top configuration.

Talk to Apple Marketing's Phil Schiller about the benchmarks.  Most companies post the top of the line benchmarks and not the bottom of the line.    That's typical of MOST companies that I've run into, because it's how they market the product and it's potential.

post #246 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post
 

Talk to Apple Marketing's Phil Schiller about the benchmarks.  Most companies post the top of the line benchmarks and not the bottom of the line.    That's typical of MOST companies that I've run into, because it's how they market the product and it's potential.


Of course, but a relative comparison is still valid. The top spec might hit $8-10k. That is a different market than the $3k and $4k models. All you indicate is that they do not provide enough information because it might not look as nice on paper.

post #247 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post
 

But she's comparing a USED PC that was LAST year's model.

 

In the mean time, KISS MY ASS.

 

She went off topic.  and now YOU are wasting even MORE of my time.

 

Where does Apple compare their MacPro system to a PC workstation.  All of their benchmark tests were being compared to earlier versions of MacPros.  They didn't have any comparisons against PCs on their own web site.  In fact, Apple RARELY shows benchmarks comparing their systems to others, they usually compare against a previous generation Apple product.  That's what they've been doing for many years now.

 

Seriously, GROW UP.  If I want to discuss used HP Workstations off of eBay, then I'll find a site that discusses those, which I'm sure there aren't too many of.

 

You're so smart, too bad Chevy never thought of that.  All Chevy had to do is never mention Ford in any of their ads or comparisons, and *Poof* their competition magically doesn't exist anymore in imaginary la la land.  If you don't mention them in your ad, (or your chat forums), then they are no longer your competition.  Ingenious!

post #248 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post
 

 

You may be a little disappointed in that regard if you're comparing similar price points on the basis of X86 performance. The old mac pro used a 6 core in the $3000 model. Sure it started higher, but that was when the cpu retailed for $1000. That is not the case with the new one, but the price rose to $4000, presumably to preserve the set margins with the other adjustments. On X86 specs alone, you are going to see a little dip from $3000 machine to $3000 machine, as the difference in architecture isn't enough to overcome the loss of 2 cores. It seems pretty obvious that the HP with added teslas is a hobby, and breaking even just makes it a less expensive hobby.

The starting retail costs for the new XEON CPU is 460 dollars for the Quad core model, 300 if you buy it from eBay. It's a really fast chip though but so is the i7 at the same price range, actually faster. It's the mid level Mac Pro that I am interested in, I think that this is going to be the real sweet spot, the CPU for that starts at 750, about 500 on eBay, 300 if you buy the none v2 version which you only loose about 180 points on the CPU benchmarks test so really the same speed, both still crazy fast none the less. Actually the only CPU in this lineup that is really expensive is the 12 Core version which should fetch upwards of 1200 dollars. The problem with the MacPro is that it isn't a dual processor setup which is the only advantage of having a Xeon processor anymore nor are the chips they use any faster or more expensive then a top tier i7, actually there are quite a few i7 models above the Mac Pro Xeon's that are faster and much more expensive, like 400 dollars more expensive except for the 12 Core Variation of course which is nutty fast, insanely fast even, but who will be available to afford the price Apple charges for that monster. Check out how the first two CPU's stand out among the rest over at CPUbenchmarks.com, you'll see that they are a pretty standard affair and defiantly no where near the quickest in the bunch but that 12 core, holy crap!!!! It's like 100% percent faster, a score of 9,000 something for the quad core model vs. 21,000 for the 12 core model, &^%$ me that's insane!

When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
post #249 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic View Post
 

The starting retail costs for the new XEON CPU is 460 dollars for the Quad core model, 300 if you buy it from eBay. It's a really fast chip though but so is the i7 at the same price range, actually faster. It's the mid level Mac Pro that I am interested in, I think that this is going to be the real sweet spot, the CPU for that starts at 750, about 500 on eBay, 300 if you buy the none v2 version which you only loose about 180 points on the CPU benchmarks test so really the same speed, both still crazy fast none the less. Actually the only CPU in this lineup that is really expensive is the 12 Core version which should fetch upwards of 1200 dollars. The problem with the MacPro is that it isn't a dual processor setup which is the only advantage of having a Xeon processor anymore nor are the chips they use any faster or more expensive then a top tier i7, actually there are quite a few i7 models above the Mac Pro Xeon's that are faster and much more expensive, like 400 dollars more expensive except for the 12 Core Variation of course which is nutty fast, insanely fast even, but who will be available to afford the price Apple charges for that monster. Check out how the first two CPU's stand out among the rest over at CPUbenchmarks.com, you'll see that they are a pretty standard affair and defiantly no where near the quickest in the bunch but that 12 core, holy crap!!!! It's like 100% percent faster, a score of 9,000 something for the quad core model vs. 21,000 for the 12 core model, &^%$ me that's insane!

Why are you so focused just on CPUs?  That seems VERY narrow minded.   What apps do you use max out the CPUs no matter how many you have?  The bottle neck is typically NOT the CPUs.  Depending on the app, sometimes it's the GPUs and sometimes is the storage HDD/SSD.  So, it's much better if you look at the total speed of the SYSTEM on different apps than just focusing on the CPUs.

post #250 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post
 


Of course, but a relative comparison is still valid. The top spec might hit $8-10k. That is a different market than the $3k and $4k models. All you indicate is that they do not provide enough information because it might not look as nice on paper.

It's not going to be as BIG of a gain, but there is also a risk of inundating the customer with too much information.  I've seen companies that flood people with information and it turns people off.  When the computers ship, there will be a LOT of people comparing them with various benchmark tests and real world app tests to keep us busy.

 

I think people should just sit back and wait and not get so wrapped up over things that will be trivial.  

post #251 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post
 

It's not going to be as BIG of a gain, but there is also a risk of inundating the customer with too much information.  I've seen companies that flood people with information and it turns people off.  When the computers ship, there will be a LOT of people comparing them with various benchmark tests and real world app tests to keep us busy.

 

And I plan to review all or most of that information once it becomes available. I won't be a day 1 buyer, but there may be a new mac pro in my future.

post #252 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic View Post
 

The problem with the MacPro is that it isn't a dual processor setup which is the only advantage of having a Xeon processor anymore nor are the chips they use any faster or more expensive then a top tier i7, actually there are quite a few i7 models above the Mac Pro Xeon's that are faster and much more expensive, like 400 dollars more expensive except for the 12 Core

  The Xeon has twice the RAM bandwidth, twice the pipes, and can support much more RAM (as a single processor.)  The i7 only supports 32GB RAM while a single XEON can support 128 GB each (though Apple is only advertising 64 GB in their first new model's launch.  In the past people have been able to put in 128GB successfully.)  Twice the PCIe pipes allows for the dual video cards and all of the Thunderbolt2 ports which take 2 pipes each.  My current limiter is that my RAM is maxed out on the i7, so the Mac Pro fixes that with the single Xeon.  Doubling the processor doesn't give you double the speed because the bus between them is slower than doubling the cores within the same processor.  I think they got it right by waiting for the 12 core to come out and then dropping their dual-processor model to produce a unique small package that's faster than all previous dual-processor XEONs.


Edited by fixmdude - 11/9/13 at 4:54am
post #253 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by fixmdude View Post
 

  The Xeon has twice the RAM bandwidth, twice the pipes, and can support much more RAM (as a single processor.)  The i7 only supports 32GB RAM while a single XEON can support 128 GB each (though Apple is only advertising 64 GB in their first new model's launch.  In the past people have been able to put in 128GB successfully.)  Twice the PCIe pipes allows for the dual video cards and all of the Thunderbolt2 ports which take 2 pipes each.  My current limiter is that my RAM is maxed out on the i7, so the Mac Pro fixes that with the single Xeon.  Doubling the processor doesn't give you double the speed because the bus between them is slower than doubling the cores within the same processor.  I think they got it right by waiting for the 12 core to come out and then dropping their dual-processor model to produce a unique small package that's faster than all previous dual-processor XEONs.

Thanks for the info that's very interesting. The newer i7's can now support and utilize 64GB installed on a motherboard that supports it. Socket must be a LGA2011, here is a list of motherboards that support 64GB. I recently helped one of my cyber friends acquire a Intel DX79SR board, their hard to find and kind of expensive but I know a dealer who got me a deal. I would have preferred an Asus Rampage IV Black Edition for the price but he's kind of a purist, Intel CPU, Intel branded motherboard, if it was possible for a motherboard to be sexy the Rampage would be it.  Anyway he's a Photoshop guru that works for an add agency and wanted to see what 64GB would do for him, since memory isn't so outrageous anymore why not. I fully realize that doubling the CPU doesn't mean doubling the speed but it defiantly has it's advantages, here is the outrageously expensive Xeon E5-2687W when in a single configuration and here is it when paired with an additional CPU as you can see the advantages are quite clear, the speed isn't doubled but it's a huge bump none the less. Motherboard manufactures wouldn't build dual or quad CPU boards if there wan't a clear advantage. Plus you can always start with just one processor and then add an additional one when needed, thus future proofing your rig. I would have loved to seen a motherboard replacement kit for the current Mac Pro that would support multi CPU and multi CPU configurations, it's a shame that Sonnet no longer makes upgrade boards for macs.

When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
post #254 of 281

Hope you get what you want eventually.

post #255 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by marvfox View Post
 

Hope you get what you want eventually.

I really just want a few more years with my families. As far a computers are concern I like having just an iPad and a Thinkpad Lenovo 2 for the moment. The two tablets back each others weakness's and strengths very nicely. If I was to survive, I would continue this great chemistry but replace the Thinkpad Tablet 2 with a Surface 2 or similar spec's machine, the Atom in the Thinkpad is not the best CPU for using Photoshop and I would love to use Abelton Live on tablet. It runs everything else pretty quickly so I can just imagine what an i5 based model would be like. I  wish Lenovo made a model with that CPU as I absolutly adore the design and feel of it, oh much as the my new iPad Air.

When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
post #256 of 281

Lenovo is a good tech company and eventually they will start to make the CPU compared to Apple .Lenovo has excellent quality control to.

post #257 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by marvfox View Post
 

Lenovo is a good tech company and eventually they will start to make the CPU compared to Apple .Lenovo has excellent quality control to.

Oh no doubt, I have never gone wrong with them, if you want to use Linux, BSD, Windows or any other OS for that matter a Lenovo Thinkpad is defiantly the way to go. I still have a Thinkpad X61 that looks and operates like the day I bought it, I still keep it around because it's the perfect test bed for my mad scientist whims.

When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
post #258 of 281

Lenovo beats the hell out of HP that is for sure and it is economical also.Personally speaking I think Apple is way overpriced for what you are getting.

post #259 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by marvfox View Post
 

Lenovo beats the hell out of HP that is for sure and it is economical also.Personally speaking I think Apple is way overpriced for what you are getting.

Based on what models/configurations?

 

Please list the entire configuration for each model you are trying to compare, I'm sure there is an explanation as to why it's priced the way it is.


With the MacPro, you aren't getting some inexpensive HDD as standard, you are getting high speed SSD (1250MBps).  In addition, you are getting 6 Thunderbolt 2 ports (also used to connect monitors).  I'm sure with the HP and Lenovo, you aren't getting any.  HP and Lenovo, as far as I know, don't have the high speed SSD, so you would have to buy a 3rd party product which obviously wouldn't be covered under the HP/Lenovo warranty/support contract, and there aren't any Thunderbolt 2 ports for XEON based mother board, which probably won't happen until sometime next year.

 

PCs are cheaper because they are giving you less of something that you can't easily rectify without spending more money.  Obviously, you didn't factor that in.

 

Lenovno and HP are probably fairly equal with their workstations, both aren't doing anything that different from one another.   Both are making tall space heaters that also work as a computer.

 

We don't know how much the 12 core Apple MacPro is at this time, HP has one listed for $9,995, but it doesn't come with any GPU (that's extra), it lists 240GB of SSD, but it doesn't mention the speed rating and it doesn't come with Thunderbolt 2 ports, they give you 2 older Firewire 400 1394a and 5 USB 2 ports instead with no HDMI port.  


Edited by drblank - 11/18/13 at 5:32am
post #260 of 281

Google it you are better off than me telling you about it.

post #261 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post
 

Based on what models/configurations?

 

Please list the entire configuration for each model you are trying to compare, I'm sure there is an explanation as to why it's priced the way it is.


With the MacPro, you aren't getting some inexpensive HDD as standard, you are getting high speed SSD (1250MBps).  In addition, you are getting 6 Thunderbolt 2 ports (also used to connect monitors).  I'm sure with the HP and Lenovo, you aren't getting any.  HP and Lenovo, as far as I know, don't have the high speed SSD, so you would have to buy a 3rd party product which obviously wouldn't be covered under the HP/Lenovo warranty/support contract, and there aren't any Thunderbolt 2 ports for XEON based mother board, which probably won't happen until sometime next year.

 

PCs are cheaper because they are giving you less of something that you can't easily rectify without spending more money.  Obviously, you didn't factor that in.

 

Lenovno and HP are probably fairly equal with their workstations, both aren't doing anything that different from one another.   Both are making tall space heaters that also work as a computer.

 

We don't know how much the 12 core Apple MacPro is at this time, HP has one listed for $9,995, but it doesn't come with any GPU (that's extra), it lists 240GB of SSD, but it doesn't mention the speed rating and it doesn't come with Thunderbolt 2 ports, they give you 2 older Firewire 400 1394a and 5 USB 2 ports instead with no HDMI port.  


With the HP, Dell , Lenovno and others you are getting at least few HDD bays, some systems even have build in HARDWARE RAID.

 

apple mac pro 256GB base 1TB MAX

 

no need for $300+ Expansion Chassis just to use a pci-e card at an MAX speed of PCI-E 2.0 X4 shared over the full TB bus. I think the Mac pro has 3 TB buses but with out an block map I don't know how the pci-e channels feeding them are setup.

 

With the HP, Dell , Lenovno and others. You can use pci-e SSD cards and HDD's off of the build in SATA / SAS ports all in one case.

 

post #262 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeB View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

 
Based on what models/configurations?

Please list the entire configuration for each model you are trying to compare, I'm sure there is an explanation as to why it's priced the way it is.


With the MacPro, you aren't getting some inexpensive HDD as standard, you are getting high speed SSD (1250MBps).  In addition, you are getting 6 Thunderbolt 2 ports (also used to connect monitors).  I'm sure with the HP and Lenovo, you aren't getting any.  HP and Lenovo, as far as I know, don't have the high speed SSD, so you would have to buy a 3rd party product which obviously wouldn't be covered under the HP/Lenovo warranty/support contract, and there aren't any Thunderbolt 2 ports for XEON based mother board, which probably won't happen until sometime next year.

PCs are cheaper because they are giving you less of something that you can't easily rectify without spending more money.  Obviously, you didn't factor that in.

Lenovno and HP are probably fairly equal with their workstations, both aren't doing anything that different from one another.   Both are making tall space heaters that also work as a computer.

We don't know how much the 12 core Apple MacPro is at this time, HP has one listed for $9,995, but it doesn't come with any GPU (that's extra), it lists 240GB of SSD, but it doesn't mention the speed rating and it doesn't come with Thunderbolt 2 ports, they give you 2 older Firewire 400 1394a and 5 USB 2 ports instead with no HDMI port.  


With the HP, Dell , Lenovno and others you are getting at least few HDD bays, some systems even have build in HARDWARE RAID.

apple mac pro 256GB base 1TB MAX

no need for $300+ Expansion Chassis just to use a pci-e card at an MAX speed of PCI-E 2.0 X4 shared over the full TB bus. I think the Mac pro has 3 TB buses but with out an block map I don't know how the pci-e channels feeding them are setup.

With the HP, Dell , Lenovno and others. You can use pci-e SSD cards and HDD's off of the build in SATA / SAS ports all in one case.

 



The world has moved on from BYO -- you might want to try and catch up...
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
post #263 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeB View Post


With the HP, Dell , Lenovno and others you are getting at least few HDD bays, some systems even have build in HARDWARE RAID.

apple mac pro 256GB base 1TB MAX

no need for $300+ Expansion Chassis just to use a pci-e card at an MAX speed of PCI-E 2.0 X4 shared over the full TB bus. I think the Mac pro has 3 TB buses but with out an block map I don't know how the pci-e channels feeding them are setup.

With the HP, Dell , Lenovno and others. You can use pci-e SSD cards and HDD's off of the build in SATA / SAS ports all in one case.

 


Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeB View Post


With the HP, Dell , Lenovno and others you are getting at least few HDD bays, some systems even have build in HARDWARE RAID.

apple mac pro 256GB base 1TB MAX

no need for $300+ Expansion Chassis just to use a pci-e card at an MAX speed of PCI-E 2.0 X4 shared over the full TB bus. I think the Mac pro has 3 TB buses but with out an block map I don't know how the pci-e channels feeding them are setup.

With the HP, Dell , Lenovno and others. You can use pci-e SSD cards and HDD's off of the build in SATA / SAS ports all in one case.

 




And all of the PCIe cards cost money. See the problems with all of these internal drives, PCI cards is they need fans, power supplies, what happens is that big box becomes an expensive space heater and when you change out for a new base unit, you have to waste a lot of time/money yanking out a lot of things you wouldn't have to do. If you want storage, etc., you just add a TB box and keep it for the next unit, so you aren't constantly paying for slots, cages, power supplies, fans every time when you don't have to. And at the end of the day you still aren't running OS X and OS X based apps on any of these PC clones, which you have to pay extra for TB2 cards, which also take slots.
post #264 of 281

You cannot have everything in life . Sometimes we a have to sacrifice a little.

post #265 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by marvfox View Post
 

You cannot have everything in life . Sometimes we a have to sacrifice a little.

Wel, there are some people out there that seem to get whatever they want. , even though they have no integrity, but that would be an entirely different subject.

post #266 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeB View Post
 


With the HP, Dell , Lenovno and others you are getting at least few HDD bays, some systems even have build in HARDWARE RAID.

 

apple mac pro 256GB base 1TB MAX

 

no need for $300+ Expansion Chassis just to use a pci-e card at an MAX speed of PCI-E 2.0 X4 shared over the full TB bus. I think the Mac pro has 3 TB buses but with out an block map I don't know how the pci-e channels feeding them are setup.

 

With the HP, Dell , Lenovno and others. You can use pci-e SSD cards and HDD's off of the build in SATA / SAS ports all in one case.

 

 

The problem with SATA RAID is that you are limited to the speed of the SATA controller no matter how many drives you connect to it.  6 Gbit = 750 MBytes/sec

 

The problem with using more than one PCI-E card in a PC case is that they already have RAID onboard to get their own speed and you can't RAID two of them together.

 

That leaves you with only 1 option for getting a high speed 1.25 GByte/Sec drive into a PC:  Buy a single high-speed PCI-E SSD card and probably pay more for it to have its own card, heat sync, and cooling fan onboard compared to buying the drive that comes integrated into the new Mac Pro.  The PC will be larger, and louder, but not better.  You could buy the server PCI-e cards that are faster, but those are thousands more per card and can cost more than the entire Mac Pro.


Edited by fixmdude - 11/21/13 at 11:28am
post #267 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by fixmdude View Post
 

 

That leaves you with only 1 option for getting a high speed 1.25 GByte/Sec drive into a PC:  Buy a single high-speed PCI-E SSD card and probably pay more for it to have its own card, heat sync, and cooling fan onboard compared to buying the drive that comes integrated into the new Mac Pro.  The PC will be larger, and louder, but not better.  You could buy the server PCI-e cards that are faster, but those are thousands more per card and can cost more than the entire Mac Pro.

 

That's not really if you're adding PCIe hardware. You can get beyond that using an internal roc, and most workstations aren't terribly noisy. This whole discussion seems to have taken a weird turn with people highlighting its size. Apple presents it that way, because it's striking. It doesn't all translate into extra functional space, especially if you kept the old mac pro under your desk.

post #268 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by fixmdude View Post
 

 

The problem with SATA RAID is that you are limited to the speed of the SATA controller no matter how many drives you connect to it.  6 Gbit = 750 MBytes/sec

 

The problem with using more than one PCI-E card in a PC case is that they already have RAID onboard to get their own speed and you can't RAID two of them together.

 

That leaves you with only 1 option for getting a high speed 1.25 GByte/Sec drive into a PC:  Buy a single high-speed PCI-E SSD card and probably pay more for it to have its own card, heat sync, and cooling fan onboard compared to buying the drive that comes integrated into the new Mac Pro.  The PC will be larger, and louder, but not better.  You could buy the server PCI-e cards that are faster, but those are thousands more per card and can cost more than the entire Mac Pro.

you can have spanning raid arrays across cards also raid is not just about speed.

 

And some people may want an fast os + app drive with maybe some working space and an bigger storage drive in the same box.

post #269 of 281

The Thinkpad X-61 was an excellent laptop for t he money.

post #270 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeB View Post

you can have spanning raid arrays across cards also raid is not just about speed.

 

And some people may want an fast os + app drive with maybe some working space and an bigger storage drive in the same box.

 



If you RAID across PCI-e cards, you lose TRIM support, drivers don't support it yet.

I'd rather have the working space and bigger storage be external so it can easily be moved between computers when needed. The OS and Apps aren't movable so those go on the internal fast drive. The external TB2 SSD drive can be powered by the TB2 bus and is fast enough to not notice a difference as with slow USB or Firewire. This also gives those who don't need a big box a small computer. Only those who need more, have to make room for more. A huge box is like salting everyone's food when not everyone wants salt, it only caters to those who have more to put in it and inconveniences the rest.
Edited by fixmdude - 11/23/13 at 4:21am
post #271 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post

 

That's not really if you're adding PCIe hardware. You can get beyond that using an internal roc, and most workstations aren't terribly noisy. This whole discussion seems to have taken a weird turn with people highlighting its size. Apple presents it that way, because it's striking. It doesn't all translate into extra functional space, especially if you kept the old mac pro under your desk.

 



Using an internal ROC and numerous slower SATA SSDs makes for a larger total expense and bundle of wires hassle compared to a single module that has it all built in. The discussion is focused on size because those who care about size are excited about the new Mac Pro and are here to discuss it. My home-built PC was in my living room next to my recliner. Big box moving air, collecting large amounts of carpet dust on the vents, humming noises while watching TV, hard to reach to turn on or to plug in USB devices to sync my phone or camera. I switched to a Macbook Pro for the size and quiet but don't have enough RAM now.

Everyone has different needs. This new product serves a niche that was never served before: Lots of power in a small quiet case, while still allowing more devices fast connections for those who want them.
Edited by fixmdude - 11/22/13 at 8:40am
post #272 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by marvfox View Post
 

The Thinkpad X-61 was an excellent laptop for t he money.


Are you sure you're on the right website?  I think you need to be on this website instead....http://forums.lenovo.com

post #273 of 281

Everyone has an opinion in life. Apple is not the cat's meow always.

post #274 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by marvfox View Post
 

Everyone has an opinion in life. Apple is not the cat's meow always.

 

Well, they've been more than they've not been.  They have a much higher level of consistency and their direction is pretty clear and consistent.

 

At least they always manage to come out with products that are actually exciting instead of the same boring stuff that's just a "me too" product.  Some of us don't want to spend our spare time trying to configure a system that ends up just being a a bunch of parts thrown together.   A hodgepodge computer isn't always the best.  It usually produces negative results by being more complicated than it really needs to be.

post #275 of 281
Originally Posted by marvfox View Post
Everyone has an opinion in life.

 

Most of them are wrong.

 
Apple is not the cat's meow always.

 

Cats shouldn’t have citrus, anyway.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #276 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

Most of them are wrong.

 

Cats shouldn’t have citrus, anyway.

Don't even bother with marvfox, he obviously needs to post on Lenovo's site instead of here.    I think he/she might be confused about this site..  He/she thinks it's the Thinkpad Insider or like we actually care about a older Thinkpad model.

post #277 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by fixmdude View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeB View Post
 

you can have spanning raid arrays across cards also raid is not just about speed.

 

And some people may want an fast os + app drive with maybe some working space and an bigger storage drive in the same box.

 



If you RAID across PCI-e cards, you lose TRIM support, drivers don't support it yet.

I'd rather have the working space and bigger storage be external so it can easily be moved between computers when needed. The OS and Apps aren't movable so those go on the internal fast drive. The external TB2 SSD drive can be powered by the TB2 bus and is fast enough to not notice a difference as with slow USB or Firewire. This also gives those who don't need a big box a small computer. Only those who need more, have to make room for more. A huge box is like salting everyone's food when not everyone wants salt, it only caters to those who have more to put in it and inconveniences the rest.

I'm planning on someday going with external SSD on a TB port since it won't conflict with my USB DAC.  My DAC is only one direction, but with an external drive, I'll need to do stream data off it and move things back and forth at the same time, which TB is designed to do.  I'm just looking at what options there are and trying to figure out if I would rather go with SSD (it doesn't have to be RAID), or a RAID box.  I could go with a  RAID HDD, but I would need at least 3 or more drives to do RAID 5 so I wouldn't really need Time Machine in that instance.  So, right now, i'm just looking at my options and pricing and see when I can afford to do what I feel will be the most reliable, best performance that's hopefully compact and within my budget.  Right now, I am just using internal Fusion drive and an external USB Time Machine drive on a separate USB bus so it doesn't conflict with the USB DAC.

 

I would LOVE to get my hands on a new MacPro, but right now I can only dream of having one, maybe next year I can afford one and use it the way it's intended.  

post #278 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

Most of them are wrong.

 

Cats shouldn’t have citrus, anyway.

 

Apples aren't citrus. I guess your second point proves the first <grin>.

post #279 of 281
Originally Posted by OldCodger73 View Post

Apples aren't citrus.

 

They have ~21mg citric acid.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #280 of 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

They have ~21mg citric acid.
Still doesn't make them citrus.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Apple's cylindrical Mac Pro will debut in Dec. starting at $2,999