They don’t need to come out until December, so December.
Final Cut Pro and Aperture are used by a lot of people who will never own a Mac Pro. If they're not coming out until December it's because they're not ready, not because Apple is holding them back. Who knows, by the time I've posted this they might have appeared on the App Store.
Apple's MacBook Pros are out now with new lower starting prices of $1,299 for the 13-inch model and $1,999 for the 15-inch version. The company did not set a firm date for the Mac Pro's release, but pegged a base price at $2,999.
The new MBPs do have a lower starting price, but I think they achieved it by using a lower clocked CPU. I have the original (2012) high end rMBP and it had a 2.6GHz CPU, but the new one has a 2.3GHz CPU with the 2.6CHz a $200 upgrade. Maybe because of architectural improvements in Haswell they thought 2.3 was equivalent.
The computer was also being shown off running Final Cut Pro X on 4K displays made by Sharp, connected to one or more of the Mac Pro's six Thunderbolt 2 ports.
Did they confirm that the Mac Pro was powering the 4K display at 60Hz? I am trying to find out if the new rMBP can power a 4K display at 60Hz.
It can't through it's HDMI port: "Support for 3840-by-2160 resolution at 30Hz" http://www.apple.com/macbook-pro/specs-retina/ so that only leaves the TB2 ports. If the Mac Pro can do it through those maybe the rMBP can too, unless the mobile GPU is a limiting factor. It also says "Simultaneously supports full native resolution on the built-in display and up to 2560 by 1600 pixels on up to two external displays" but I'm not sure whether that's meant to be read as an overall display area upper limit or a per screen limit also.
If you select more cores, the speed of each declines:
* 4 cores at 3.7 GHz or
* 6 cores at 3.5 GHz or
* 8 cores at 3.0 GHz or
* 12 cores at 2.7 GHz
So to get 12 cores, you would REALLY need an environment where you are intensively using parallel processing ALL the time. Otherwise, the 12 core machine may actually be significantly slower than a 4 core.
I currently have a Mac Pro with 8 cores running at 2.8GHz ... and I suspect the optimal speed machine for my usage is either the 4 core at 3.7 GHz or the 6 core at 3.5 GHz.
If you select more cores, the speed of each declines:
* 4 cores at 3.7 GHz or
* 6 cores at 3.5 GHz or
* 8 cores at 3.0 GHz or
* 12 cores at 2.7 GHz
That's only if they're all going at once. If you have a 12 core CPU but are only using 4 of them, it shuts the other 8 off and increases the clock speed of the 4 left on.
Final Cut Pro and Aperture are used by a lot of people who will never own a Mac Pro. If they’re not coming out until December it’s because they’re not ready...
… Why do people who cannot possibly have a Mac Pro need Mac Pro-specific optimizations?
Aperture was updated today, but it’s not the one we’re talking about.
Comments
They don’t need to come out until December, so December.
Final Cut Pro and Aperture are used by a lot of people who will never own a Mac Pro. If they're not coming out until December it's because they're not ready, not because Apple is holding them back. Who knows, by the time I've posted this they might have appeared on the App Store.
Apple's MacBook Pros are out now with new lower starting prices of $1,299 for the 13-inch model and $1,999 for the 15-inch version. The company did not set a firm date for the Mac Pro's release, but pegged a base price at $2,999.
The new MBPs do have a lower starting price, but I think they achieved it by using a lower clocked CPU. I have the original (2012) high end rMBP and it had a 2.6GHz CPU, but the new one has a 2.3GHz CPU with the 2.6CHz a $200 upgrade. Maybe because of architectural improvements in Haswell they thought 2.3 was equivalent.
The computer was also being shown off running Final Cut Pro X on 4K displays made by Sharp, connected to one or more of the Mac Pro's six Thunderbolt 2 ports.
Did they confirm that the Mac Pro was powering the 4K display at 60Hz? I am trying to find out if the new rMBP can power a 4K display at 60Hz.
It can't through it's HDMI port: "Support for 3840-by-2160 resolution at 30Hz" http://www.apple.com/macbook-pro/specs-retina/ so that only leaves the TB2 ports. If the Mac Pro can do it through those maybe the rMBP can too, unless the mobile GPU is a limiting factor. It also says "Simultaneously supports full native resolution on the built-in display and up to 2560 by 1600 pixels on up to two external displays" but I'm not sure whether that's meant to be read as an overall display area upper limit or a per screen limit also.
If you select more cores, the speed of each declines:
* 4 cores at 3.7 GHz or
* 6 cores at 3.5 GHz or
* 8 cores at 3.0 GHz or
* 12 cores at 2.7 GHz
So to get 12 cores, you would REALLY need an environment where you are intensively using parallel processing ALL the time. Otherwise, the 12 core machine may actually be significantly slower than a 4 core.
I currently have a Mac Pro with 8 cores running at 2.8GHz ... and I suspect the optimal speed machine for my usage is either the 4 core at 3.7 GHz or the 6 core at 3.5 GHz.
If you select more cores, the speed of each declines:
* 4 cores at 3.7 GHz or
* 6 cores at 3.5 GHz or
* 8 cores at 3.0 GHz or
* 12 cores at 2.7 GHz
That's only if they're all going at once. If you have a 12 core CPU but are only using 4 of them, it shuts the other 8 off and increases the clock speed of the 4 left on.
That is a great feature now for the new Mac Pro to have.
… Why do people who cannot possibly have a Mac Pro need Mac Pro-specific optimizations?
Aperture was updated today, but it’s not the one we’re talking about.