First look: Apple's upcoming Mac Pro and new MacBook Pros with Retina display

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 48
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hmm View Post

     

    I am slightly (emphasis on slightly) surprised that they went with the quad cpu and still upped the price. It appears to be a v2 bump of an E5-1620 That is a logical choice for a base model. I just didn't expect it to hit $3k in that configuration.


    I was replying to someone who had implied that the new Pro could not be configured to meet the requirements of professionals, which I totally disagree with. But... high end computing doesn't come cheap even if you purchase parts and build it yourself like that other numb skull boasted. I'm not an expert on cutting edge hardware but I just spec'd out a top of the line iMac on the Apple store and it added up to $3,949.00. Sure, it included a monitor, obviously, but I doubt it is faster than the base Pro.

  • Reply 22 of 48
    drblankdrblank Posts: 3,383member
    Bitchin' technology!
  • Reply 23 of 48
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,505member
    I think this machine would be twice as fast as a ten year old CRAY. Are we even sure what we are talking about anymore in regards to "Super" computer? I think this thing does 2 teraflops compute and 72 graphics (yeah, I'm too lazy to look up the specs -- and that is a LUDICROUS amount of power which is why I vaguely remember it).

    So "super duper" computer will have to be a Petaflop now. You are NOT buying a Super Duper Computer, but yes, you in fact DO HAVE a Super Computer on your desktop. Or on your floor. Personally, I'd mount this on a lamp shade and disguise it as a lava lamp, just to keep everyone guessing how I'm pulling these mad hacks out of thin air!

    I'm thinking it will be great for keeping the coffee pot warm, maybe even hot. :)
  • Reply 24 of 48
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,505member
    mstone wrote: »
    I was replying to someone who had implied that the new Pro could not be configured to meet the requirements of professionals, which I totally disagree with. But... high end computing doesn't come cheap even if you purchase parts and build it yourself like that other numb skull boasted. I'm not an expert on cutting edge hardware but I just spec'd out a top of the line iMac on the Apple store and it added up to $3,949.00. Sure, it included a monitor, obviously, but I doubt it is faster than the base Pro.

    I have to believe you are correct, I bet the Mac Pro is faster, probably by a long way.

    I am thrilled to see RAM and SSD are user accessible and presumably upgradable, contrary to many rumors.

    Anyone know if an Apple LCD Monitor can be hooked up to the TB port? I seem to recall the answer is yes if it is at the end of a chain.
  • Reply 25 of 48
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,505member
    steven n. wrote: »
    I was hoping for a nice new monitor to push 4K display data to. I am tired of seeing pixels and frustrated an iPad has more pixels than my work monitor.

    I bet a 4K monitor will be announced with the 8 and 12 core versions.

    Edit: I take that back the 8 and 12 are already on the Apple Store web site. So no 4K display yet ... seems odd for sure.
  • Reply 26 of 48
    auxioauxio Posts: 2,517member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Fake_William_Shatner View Post

     

    I think this machine would be twice as fast as a ten year old CRAY. Are we even sure what we are talking about anymore in regards to "Super" computer? I think this thing does 2 teraflops compute and 72 graphics (yeah, I'm too lazy to look up the specs -- and that is a LUDICROUS amount of power which is why I vaguely remember it).


     

    Supercomputers evolve just the same as desktop computers.  For example, one installation of Blue Gene/P uses 250,000 processors.  So yeah, as powerful as the Mac Pro is, it's not quite at that level.

  • Reply 27 of 48
    So the professional looks at the D500 starting at $3999. Glad they have this option.

    Too bad there won't be a BTO option of upgrading to the D500 dual GPGPUs with the Quad Core Xeon.

    That's life.

    Studying the specs for the custom D500 line series of GPGPUs it appears they've taken a W9000 capabilities and spread it across dual D500s.

    That's nice.

    Hope the memory configurations offer 2x16 option otherwise you're tossing money out to upgrade to 4 x 16 which runs around $1k.
  • Reply 28 of 48
    Just wondering if I could plug a Mac Pro into my iMac, to create a fusion style setup?
  • Reply 29 of 48
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by nicwalmsley View Post



    Just wondering if I could plug a Mac Pro into my iMac, to create a fusion style setup?

     

    If you have a Thunderbolt equipped iMac you can use it as a display for your Mac Pro.

  • Reply 30 of 48
    hydrhydr Posts: 146member

    You heard it here first, this means Apple is holding another event before the year ends! An Apple TV event! 

     

    Mac Pro needs 4K. But it´ll be a 65" TV :D

  • Reply 31 of 48
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hydr View Post

     

    Mac Pro needs 4K. But it´ll be a 65" TV :D


    You do realize that sounds extremely stupid, right? Why would you hook up a MacPro to a 65" TV over something more sane like a couple of 32" 4k monitors that will likely be cheaper and not need a huge desk to hold them?

  • Reply 32 of 48
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,505member
    hydr wrote: »
    You heard it here first, this means Apple is holding another event before the year ends! An Apple TV event! 

    Mac Pro needs 4K. But it´ll be a 65" TV :D

    Jeez that's a f*****g big screen to sit right in from of! But I want one! Hell two! :D
  • Reply 33 of 48
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,505member
    mikejones wrote: »
    You do realize that sounds extremely stupid, right? Why would you hook up a MacPro to a 65" TV over something more sane like a couple of 32" 4k monitors that will likely be cheaper and not need a huge desk to hold them?

    I think it was a jest.

    BTW do you have links for the monitors you describe that have Thunderbolt 2?
  • Reply 34 of 48
    hmmhmm Posts: 3,405member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mstone View Post

     

    I was replying to someone who had implied that the new Pro could not be configured to meet the requirements of professionals, which I totally disagree with. But... high end computing doesn't come cheap even if you purchase parts and build it yourself like that other numb skull boasted. I'm not an expert on cutting edge hardware but I just spec'd out a top of the line iMac on the Apple store and it added up to $3,949.00. Sure, it included a monitor, obviously, but I doubt it is faster than the base Pro.


    I know. I wasn't arguing over that. If we're talking about X86 core performance, the main jumps in the past couple cycles have come from core count increases. CTO configurations can be a little misleading as the markups on things like ram and large ssds are huge. They seem to be pushing the fact that it has dual gpus. I am still interested in seeing how it fares in real world use.

     

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Fake_William_Shatner View Post

     

     

    Well I think you are going to see a huge speed bump with the base config over something with a similar spec'd CPU. The data channel here is wide and fast. I think I remember dual channels to the storage. They've gotten rid of a lot of bottlenecks especially in the graphics pipeline where most of the processing is going on these days. With ultrafast access to video, storage and all peripherals, what are you needing so much more CPU for? Other than non-optimized 3D apps, what's going to wear out  this CPU? JavaScript hacks? Word?


     

    That varies from application to application. I am keeping an eye on this, but I won't exactly be a day 1 buyer.

  • Reply 35 of 48

    Does anyone think the graphics in the new macbook pro (discrete) are worth the upgrade from the 650M chipset?  (I play a bit of starcraft, seems like a expensive upgrade to just slightly better graphics)

  • Reply 36 of 48
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,505member
    hmm wrote: »
    I know. I wasn't arguing over that. If we're talking about X86 core performance, the main jumps in the past couple cycles have come from core count increases. CTO configurations can be a little misleading as the markups on things like ram and large ssds are huge. They seem to be pushing the fact that it has dual gpus. I am still interested in seeing how it fares in real world use.


    That varies from application to application. I am keeping an eye on this, but I won't exactly be a day 1 buyer.

    Released so close to end of tax year darn it!
  • Reply 37 of 48
    hmmhmm Posts: 3,405member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post





    Released so close to end of tax year darn it!



    Still not doing it. Sadly I am not in need of writeoffs at the moment.

  • Reply 38 of 48
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post



    So the professional looks at the D500 starting at $3999. Glad they have this option.



    Too bad there won't be a BTO option of upgrading to the D500 dual GPGPUs with the Quad Core Xeon.



    That's life.



    Studying the specs for the custom D500 line series of GPGPUs it appears they've taken a W9000 capabilities and spread it across dual D500s.



    That's nice.



    Hope the memory configurations offer 2x16 option otherwise you're tossing money out to upgrade to 4 x 16 which runs around $1k.

    Actually if you look at apples website it says that you can put dual d500s in the quad core.

     

    Quote:

     
     









    Configurable to dual AMD FirePro D500, each with 3GB GDDR5 VRAM, 1526 stream processors, 384-bit-wide memory bus, 240GB/s memory bandwidth, and 2.2 teraflops performance; or dual AMD FirePro D700, each with 6GB of GDDR5 VRAM, 2048 stream processors, 384-bit-wide memory bus, 264GB/s memory bandwidth, and 3.5 teraflops performance





  • Reply 39 of 48

    I'm wondering when we're going to hear about the new versions of Final Cut X and Aperture applications that were mentioned by Phil during the Mac Pro announcement. Am I the only one who heard him say that and wondered about them?

  • Reply 40 of 48
    Originally Posted by sportyguy209 View Post

    I'm wondering when we're going to hear about the new versions of Final Cut X and Aperture applications that were mentioned by Phil during the Mac Pro announcement. Am I the only one who heard him say that and wondered about them?

     

    They don’t need to come out until December, so December.

Sign In or Register to comment.