-
iMac Pro or next year’s Mac Pro?
So the new iMac Pro should be available in the next couple of weeks, is anyone thinking of getting one? I’m very interested but also intrigued by next year’s Mac Pro as well
\”Traditional NLEs have timelines. FCPX has storylines\” W.Soyka
-
147 Replies
-
Have yet to see what the new Mac Pro looks like, if it even exists.
-
A production company I freelance at is looking at the new iMac Pros. Even the base model will be more powerful than previous Macs. We would replace a couple of old towers and maybe one underpowered iMac. Who know when the next Mac Pro will be released. I doubt it will be 2018 and right now there seem to be Apple supply chain issues (HomePod). I suspect Apple will weigh the sales of and response to the iMac Pro before getting too deep into the Mac Pro. That being said, the 2013 Mac Pro is still a good purchase today, if you need a new machine and don’t need an all-in-one.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com
-
I struggle to comprehend what a new MacPro in today’s Apple, eGPU, and the power of commodity hardware, would even look like, and more importantly what it would cost and to what benefit? The only thing it would add is a modicum of “upgradeability” which starts to make sense after the computer is 4-5 years old, and user added display monitors.
The iMac Pro at 18cores, 128GB of Ram, 16GBs of GPU memory, 4TB SSD, 10Gb Ethernet, Thunderbolt 3, is a tried and true snazzlecore, and approaches sizzlecore levels.
If and when the MacPro comes out, will it even be worth it for what I imagine is going to be a hefty price tag?
-
All I know is I will be getting a Coffee Lake 6 Core i7 8700K in a couple of months for about $370.00 and a 300 series chipset motherboard for about $100.00. Add about $120.00 for RAM and I will have an awesome system for less than $1,000 even when you include my GTX 1060 GPU.
On a side note will the newer Xeons support Intel’s Quick Sync? If not the basic iMac might be a better option depending on what type of video files you edit.
-
disclaimer –
I have NEVER build a Hackintosh, and I know this is a FCP X forum (so dare I mention anything that is not FCP X related) –
but –
https://9to5mac.com/2017/06/13/maxed-out-imac-pro-cost/
potentially a blown out iMac Pro will cost $17,000 (the starting price $4999 won’t do much for a power machine).I read the Davinci Resolve 14 specs for building a Win 10 PC (which of course can run Premiere, Media Composer, etc.) with the ASUS X99 Delux motherboard. So while many people are now saying “#1, I am not building a computer, and #2 it won’t run FCP-X” – you are going to want the Vega 64 (or some GPU card) and a lot of RAM and a fast processor (and if you say “why would I need that ” – then keep using your Thunderbolt 3 iMac that you bought last week !). So if a powerhouse iMac Pro will cost this much HOW MUCH is Apple planning on charging for a 2019 killer Mac Pro (compared to a HP Z840 with NVidia, Dell Precision or ASUS home made system).
At some point, Apple has to say “there is no way we can charge 20 grand for a computer, no matter what it does”.
Maybe I am wrong.Bob Zelin
Bob Zelin
Rescue 1, Inc.
bobzelin@icloud.com -
I DID build a Hackintosh…and I can tell you I am very spoiled with having 5 internal drives (with room for 4 more)…two slots for ANY compatible GPU I want to put in there. With having everything (except my IO box and my RAID) contained in a small area, not strewn about and connected by squid-like tentacles. It is so nice to have it all in one place.
So while the iMac pro is tempting me, I’m waiting to see what Apple deems we need with the new MacPro…see if they are right, or like last time, very very wrong.
The main use for this computer, should I get it, would be Resolve, and the need to deal with and deliver 4K, so as nice as the iMacs specs might be, I’m concerned about GPU power, and heat issues. And I’d really like a bigger machine that allows stuff to be put inside it rather than a small machine with peripherals all over the place. Not sure how “feng shui” that really is.
Although really, the only thing keeping me running Apple is the damned ProRes deliverable. That and it is an easier OS to deal with, but really, it’s the ProRes deliverable.
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
[Shane Ross] “Although really, the only thing keeping me running Apple is the damned ProRes deliverable. That and it is an easier OS to deal with, but really, it’s the ProRes deliverable.”
The fact that Fusion 9 delivered real ProRes rendering on a WIN machine is interesting to me. I’m expecting Resolve on Win to include real ProRes any day as well. If Blackmagic can do this in Fusion, then I’m not sure why not in Resolve too.
I’m also finding more and more that Dnx is an acceptable deliverable. If not I make the Dnx masters and use Cinec to then render ProRes versions. But more and more DNx is fine. As for OS, most of the time I am in the software and the OS makes little difference.
-
Lately I’ve been delivering OP-1A MXF and it’s surprisingly simple, and low file size. 20GB for 46 min, 8 tracks of audio…very simple output. And yes, one network did relent and say they would take DNxHD as a deliverable, but I have four others who still insist on ProRes.
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
“Lately I’ve been delivering OP-1A MXF..”
Yes me too and it is simple. I always give the client a master file to archive or make other smaller files for web etc which is now DNx based.
-
I built many Hackintosh for fun but I would never do a serious job on them. All it takes is a driver and you can be without machine for days
Gabriele – California
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up