-
New Mac Pro AND a FCP-X shout out. Happy now?
-
They specifically mentioned new versions of both FCPX and Aperture were coming in the MacPro section.
-
RAM and SSD.
-
Apparently the $2999 machine can be configured with 6 and 8 cores cpus, so I guess it works for people who thinks the entry levels gpus are good enough for them but they want the additional cores
-
[Herb Sevush] “I wouldn’t want the base model, but it leads me to believe that at around 4K there might be something I would want.”
I agree the 6-core with four-way memory interleaving looks like it will perform better but I may need to increase that 256GB flash storage to 512GB. My boot drive on the iMac (with 3 TB internal) is already more than 256GB so would hate to spend all that money and find out you are cramped for boot space (don’t want to boot from an external drive although I know that option works well).
Going to be $500 more than I had predicted a while back to join the party (was hoping for $2,499 entry, $3,499 mid-level, $4,999 high-end). A fully maxed out 12-core Mac Pro (like Apple uses for all those performance comparisons) looks like it might be just under five figures but we need to wait I suppose until December. The existing Mac Pro remains a value competitor given the price differences.
Rick Lang
iMac 27” 2.8GHz i7 16GB
-
If you just needed a new mac pro as a server that would be fine methinks.
John Davidson | President / Creative Director | Magic Feather Inc.
-
Could this be the death of the MacPro?
The system is smoking hot but the market just got smaller. Four $4k, you get a 6-core, 16 GB of RAM and 3GB of video ram. Still no monitor.
For $3,300 on the iMac side, Quad core, 32 gb of ram, 4gb video ram, monitor included.
I know there’s alot more under the hood of the new MacPro, but geez, my iMac will handle 99% of my needs. (of course I’m not doing 4k, but who its)
-
$2999 for the base model seems on the high side when you price out building something similar. That said, it will be a big huge PC case full of cards and loud fans.
I built a thunderbolt customac with the best processor an iMac has now. It’s amazingly fast and cost $1500 all in. But I bet the cheapest new mac pro will run circles around it with how integrated the hardware is. I will get one as the lack of thunderbolt was what caused me to build them in the first place.
The good news is that the ram and the ssd are user upgradeable which is good news. I never buy memory from apple if I can avoid it. It’s so much more expensive than getting the same thing from OWC.
-
[Darren Roark] “But I bet the cheapest new mac pro will run circles around it with how integrated the hardware is.”
The only thing it will be noticeably faster in is the PCIe-based storage, that you can always add later to your Hackintosh.
Seriously, if it was the “integration” that made it faster, then why wouldn’t an iMac also run circles around yours?
-
[Michael Hendrix] “Four $4k, you get a 6-core, 16 GB of RAM and 3GB of video ram. Still no monitor.”
That’s 3GB on each of the two GPUs so 6GB VRAM in total. Still your point is valid. If you are working in HD video, a high-end iMac appears to do the job just fine. If you plan to shoot in 4K, the DaVinci Resolve 10 Configuration guide suggests the high-end iMac can still be an option if you do your grading of the 4K video on a HD timeline. You would then render your completed project out to a 4K deliverable if you needed that. Going to be interesting when BMD upgrades the guide to include the new Mac Pros. Wonder what they’ll say for a full 4K workflow.
Rick Lang
iMac 27” 2.8GHz i7 16GB
-
[Gary Huff] “Seriously, if it was the “integration” that made it faster, then why wouldn’t an iMac also run circles around yours?”
Actually my tower has almost the same geekbench score as an iMac. Even though my tower technically has more muscle, the iMac I used on a freelance job felt snappier.
My retina MBP 15″ gets 13240 on geekbench with a 2.6ghz processor and 16gb vs a 3.5ghz and 32gb on my tower getting around 14800. Not much difference in performance with a big difference in specs.
The main benefit of the tower is the AMD 7950 that gives me much better FCP X performance in playback and rendering. AMD’s OpenCL capabilities are much stronger than Nvidia’s. (I have a 680 I swap out when I need to use Resolve which is a pain)
If this really is from a new 8-core mac pro it’s as fast as the 12-core current tower: https://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/86294
Apple are really good at squeezing as much performance out of their hardware. Me, not so much.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up