Seems like a speed bump for entry level mac pro. Don't need SSD since I don't bounce my towers around. What do you get better for $2499. Read the promos. It sounds like they just came out with this form factor for the first time.
SSD's are so much faster, would be good for a start up drive so you mac and apps will start soo much faster. My MBP has a SSD and start up times beats most others.
I can see the SSD option spawning many threads in future with people asking the best combination of SSDs and HDs to buy
Agreed, would like to see Apple support TRIM commands in their next OS upgrade that is backward compatible to the MBA and MBP that had the SSD option for some time now.
I recently bought a cr@ppy HP as a media centre and that had a Blu-Ray burner built in (so I could get my BR's on to a NAS). The the Mac Pro doesn't even have it as an option... it's 2010 and Apple still ignore HD optical drives. If Apple hate optical based media so much why do they even bother with the almost retro sounding SuperDrive (yes, 'Super' in 2004)? Becoming very long in the tooth especially if you work with HD video. As a general workhorse I think the refreshed iMac line up seems to offer better value...
It doesn't sound like he knows. I put a SSD drive into my 2006 Macbook and it really made it seem like a new computer! Boot time - 8 seconds. Programs launch immediately. SSD is a great option for a pro machine.
Yea, if you have a SSD, you have to love it for its speed. Hope that Apple will support SSD's in their next OS upgrade--you might see that I'm really pushing for this--ARE YOU READING THIS STEVE????
Yes indeed, although I wish there were an option for a smaller and less pricey SSD. As is common in group professional environments, we keep all working files on our server. Local storage is only for the system, applications and some scratch storage. My guys could easily manage with <100GB SSDs in their workstations, and aftermarket units in that sort of size go for $200-ish.
Of course there's nothing to stop us from adding a relatively inexpensive 80-100GB boot SSD and keeping the original HD for backup use. However Mac support for third party SSDs is incomplete at present (no TRIM...or have they added that now?) and people have reported being unable to install the OS directly to the SSD (clone from the HD instead).
The only current options are third party SSD's like
Is it necessary to get two 6-core processors initially or can I get one 6-core now and install a second if I need it?
I run a G5 PPC with a GeekBench of 1888 and looking for something at least 5 times more powerful. Would like to consider SSD in place of extra processors initially.
Been waiting and waiting for months .... putting off purchasing macs ..... recommending clients wait....
this is really disappointing .... a little bump on this or that spec for the MacPro .....
After 10 years of FireWire and longer for USB - Apple is still not ready to move to eSATA ( now old news ) or FireWire 3200 or USB3 or how about LightPeak .....
I don't need to use more power ( energy and oil ) and have the machine sit at 10% : all but idle waiting for data to transfer between this and that storage devices .......
I have TBs of data and still no way to move them fast enough to use the processing speed of a G5 or MacMini or iMac or even the MacPro....
Really disappointed and need a solution that is not over $1000 per device to use something like FiberChannel ( which is now old too ) which is not coming to a iMac, MacMini or other apple device anytime soon..... apparently.....
And it shows in the lack of time, energy and design that went into this "Sort-of" up-grade.
You know if it was the iPhone or iPad there would be one hell of a lot of difference in this unit, and ones made 6, 7 8 years ago.
He won't say it in public, but Steve must be saying to himself ? this is old school technology, and well, we just aren't going to waste any more time, energy or money on it folks. It's time for folks to step up to today's technology and that means "Buy" an iPhone / iPad, and your life will be complete.
Hey, if they don't sell many, their have only themselves to blame. Of course he'll then say, we're going the way of (X), as the numbers show, that desktop units are no longer popular or the way to go.
They are to big, heavy, costly ?
I wonder how long before they / he changes the name to Apple Communications Inc.?
Their chart suggests the performance of competing drives go to almost zero over time. That seems very dishonest, the figures I recall were a 25% drop without TRIM, certainly nothing like a 90% drop.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Park Seward
Apple shows it up to 2X faster. I don't see a price on the page.
"SSD I/O Performance. Up to 2x faster than 7200-rpm hard disk drive"
I recently bought a cr@ppy HP as a media centre and that had a Blu-Ray burner built in (so I could get my BR's on to a NAS). The the Mac Pro doesn't even have it as an option... it's 2010 and Apple still ignore HD optical drives. If Apple hate optical based media so much why do they even bother with the almost retro sounding SuperDrive (yes, 'Super' in 2004)? Becoming very long in the tooth especially if you work with HD video. As a general workhorse I think the refreshed iMac line up seems to offer better value...
If your disappointed with the lack of Blu-ray, or eSATA, or USB 3.0, etc., please let apple actually know!
BS on the price points and BS on the fact that it is still the same case as 6 years ago!
It's a great looking case that acts as a giant heat-sink. Changing it simply for the sake of changing it just means that you should consider having your kool-aid checked.
will there be a decent graphics card upgrade path 3, 4, or 5 years down the line??
Unfortunately I was bit by upgrading to the 2006 Mac Pro, now left without any REAL graphics card upgrades.. The computer still runs great, but gaming sucks now..
""The new Mac Pro is the most powerful and configurable Mac we've ever made," said Philip Schiller"
Seems I heard the same thing when I bought mine.. pfft..
will there be a decent graphics card upgrade path 3, 4, or 5 years down the line??
Unfortunately I was bit by upgrading to the 2006 Mac Pro, now left without any REAL graphics card upgrades.. The computer still runs great, but gaming sucks now..
""The new Mac Pro is the most powerful and configurable Mac we've ever made," said Philip Schiller"
Seems I heard the same thing when I bought mine.. pfft..
They did quit offering upgrades for it pretty quickly. Fortunately, some of the newer cards are compatible. I bought Apple's ATI Radeon HD 4870 for my 2006 Mac Pro and it works fine, even though their page said it's not supported. The key thing is that it's compatible, but they might not be able to help you if something doesn't work.
Comments
Seems like a speed bump for entry level mac pro. Don't need SSD since I don't bounce my towers around. What do you get better for $2499. Read the promos. It sounds like they just came out with this form factor for the first time.
SSD's are so much faster, would be good for a start up drive so you mac and apps will start soo much faster. My MBP has a SSD and start up times beats most others.
24 hardware threads!
I can see the SSD option spawning many threads in future with people asking the best combination of SSDs and HDs to buy
Agreed, would like to see Apple support TRIM commands in their next OS upgrade that is backward compatible to the MBA and MBP that had the SSD option for some time now.
It doesn't sound like he knows. I put a SSD drive into my 2006 Macbook and it really made it seem like a new computer! Boot time - 8 seconds. Programs launch immediately. SSD is a great option for a pro machine.
Yea, if you have a SSD, you have to love it for its speed. Hope that Apple will support SSD's in their next OS upgrade--you might see that I'm really pushing for this--ARE YOU READING THIS STEVE????
Yes indeed, although I wish there were an option for a smaller and less pricey SSD. As is common in group professional environments, we keep all working files on our server. Local storage is only for the system, applications and some scratch storage. My guys could easily manage with <100GB SSDs in their workstations, and aftermarket units in that sort of size go for $200-ish.
Of course there's nothing to stop us from adding a relatively inexpensive 80-100GB boot SSD and keeping the original HD for backup use. However Mac support for third party SSDs is incomplete at present (no TRIM...or have they added that now?) and people have reported being unable to install the OS directly to the SSD (clone from the HD instead).
The only current options are third party SSD's like
http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/inter..._SSD_Sandforce
until Apple supports TRIM commands for SSD's.
I run a G5 PPC with a GeekBench of 1888 and looking for something at least 5 times more powerful. Would like to consider SSD in place of extra processors initially.
this is really disappointing .... a little bump on this or that spec for the MacPro .....
After 10 years of FireWire and longer for USB - Apple is still not ready to move to eSATA ( now old news ) or FireWire 3200 or USB3 or how about LightPeak .....
I don't need to use more power ( energy and oil ) and have the machine sit at 10% : all but idle waiting for data to transfer between this and that storage devices .......
I have TBs of data and still no way to move them fast enough to use the processing speed of a G5 or MacMini or iMac or even the MacPro....
Really disappointed and need a solution that is not over $1000 per device to use something like FiberChannel ( which is now old too ) which is not coming to a iMac, MacMini or other apple device anytime soon..... apparently.....
About 3 times faster for probably 10x as much.
Apple shows it up to 2X faster. I don't see a price on the page.
"SSD I/O Performance. Up to 2x faster than 7200-rpm hard disk drive"
http://www.apple.com/macpro/performance.html
You know if it was the iPhone or iPad there would be one hell of a lot of difference in this unit, and ones made 6, 7 8 years ago.
He won't say it in public, but Steve must be saying to himself ? this is old school technology, and well, we just aren't going to waste any more time, energy or money on it folks. It's time for folks to step up to today's technology and that means "Buy" an iPhone / iPad, and your life will be complete.
Hey, if they don't sell many, their have only themselves to blame. Of course he'll then say, we're going the way of (X), as the numbers show, that desktop units are no longer popular or the way to go.
They are to big, heavy, costly ?
I wonder how long before they / he changes the name to Apple Communications Inc.?
Skip
Well, I guess it's always been an option but nice to see them in the front seat again.
The only current options are third party SSD's like
http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/inter..._SSD_Sandforce
Their chart suggests the performance of competing drives go to almost zero over time. That seems very dishonest, the figures I recall were a 25% drop without TRIM, certainly nothing like a 90% drop.
Apple shows it up to 2X faster. I don't see a price on the page.
"SSD I/O Performance. Up to 2x faster than 7200-rpm hard disk drive"
http://www.apple.com/macpro/performance.html
I was guessing on the price difference. A good 500GB SSD starts at $1400 on Newegg, I would be surprised if Apple hits below $999.
You're right, I didn't read the numbers.
I recently bought a cr@ppy HP as a media centre and that had a Blu-Ray burner built in (so I could get my BR's on to a NAS). The the Mac Pro doesn't even have it as an option... it's 2010 and Apple still ignore HD optical drives. If Apple hate optical based media so much why do they even bother with the almost retro sounding SuperDrive (yes, 'Super' in 2004)? Becoming very long in the tooth especially if you work with HD video. As a general workhorse I think the refreshed iMac line up seems to offer better value...
If your disappointed with the lack of Blu-ray, or eSATA, or USB 3.0, etc., please let apple actually know!
http://www.apple.com/feedback/
They are coming out in August.
BS on the price points and BS on the fact that it is still the same case as 6 years ago!
It's a great looking case that acts as a giant heat-sink. Changing it simply for the sake of changing it just means that you should consider having your kool-aid checked.
http://www.everythingusb.com/asus-u3...ess-18307.html
But it doesn't have Mac drivers, yet.
eSATA cards are available.
http://www.sonnettech.com/product/tempo-x_esata8.html
http://www.sonnettech.com/product/tempo_sata_e4p.html
Unfortunately I was bit by upgrading to the 2006 Mac Pro, now left without any REAL graphics card upgrades.. The computer still runs great, but gaming sucks now..
""The new Mac Pro is the most powerful and configurable Mac we've ever made," said Philip Schiller"
Seems I heard the same thing when I bought mine.. pfft..
will there be a decent graphics card upgrade path 3, 4, or 5 years down the line??
Unfortunately I was bit by upgrading to the 2006 Mac Pro, now left without any REAL graphics card upgrades.. The computer still runs great, but gaming sucks now..
""The new Mac Pro is the most powerful and configurable Mac we've ever made," said Philip Schiller"
Seems I heard the same thing when I bought mine.. pfft..
They did quit offering upgrades for it pretty quickly. Fortunately, some of the newer cards are compatible. I bought Apple's ATI Radeon HD 4870 for my 2006 Mac Pro and it works fine, even though their page said it's not supported. The key thing is that it's compatible, but they might not be able to help you if something doesn't work.
Sooo.... the rules are that the Apple Haters post first? Is that it?
Well, to be fair, it takes a while for the Apple Butt-Boys have to pull their heads out of their asses before they can post...
I did that last fall. Blew away the base MP then and looks like it will easily blow away the new base model. And the six ram slots are nice too.
You built a hackintosh last fall. BS.
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html
The 3.2GHz AMD X6 1090T scores 6,080 (22% faster) and costs $295.
Maybe the Intel one is more efficient though. Performance per watt is more important to Apple than raw performance and I wouldn't criticize that.
It's good to see a bump in the entry GPU for the same price, 3DMark scores are:
GT120 = 5431
R5770 = 7604
No double floating point precision support in the 5770 though.
Totally expected update, no innovation, no redesign, no real thought put into it whatsoever and still high pricing.