Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles › [Xbit] Apple May Dump High-End Mac Pro Desktops
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[Xbit] Apple May Dump High-End Mac Pro Desktops - Page 18

post #171 of 221
Quote:
Originally Posted by steelbom View Post
The bolded points are those I disagree with:

1) The cost for the base single processor Mac Pro is +$1000 over the competition, and it maintains that difference even when upgrading the CPU on both machines. The cost for the base dual processor Mac Pro is the ~same as the competition, and again remains about the same when upgrading the CPU on both machines. The markup would be similar to the competition, considering the specs are matched. I'm sure that markup is plenty though and yes I do agree that it would be because people aren't buying them.
Sure, but why would I spend $1,000 more than the competition in the first place? Secondly, the chip being used in that Mac Pro you're talking about is really a poor choice since SB was released. A 2600k is a far better CPU than a 2.4GHz Xeon.

Your only option for a better Mac than that, is to jam another CPU into it. This offers zero benefit for the applications the machine is used in. Not a hyperbolic zero, a literal zero.

Sometimes it just takes a few years for people to break their bad habits. Buying into Apple just because your studio works with Adobe's suite is a HUGE bad habit in the industry and costs your company dozens of thousands of dollars compared to what you could do. Finally people are coming around as they buy new hardware and rethink decisions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by steelbom View Post
2) I'd have to argue otherwise. The hardware on a PC isn't more optimised. In fact, it would be the other way around if anything.
Like I'd mentioned, with a PC you aren't locked into a poorly performing and outdated Xeon processor. In fact, you're not locked into Xeons at all. The hardware on a PC will always be more optimized because you actually have a say in it and don't need to pay through the nose to add options.

Quote:
Originally Posted by steelbom View Post
3) That's not so. You've got the iMac if you don't need that much power. You don't know that the people who buy them aren't using all the cores in the Mac Pro, either. And work such as 3D modelling, video rendering, intensive audio stuff, etc., can really need all those cores. And photoshop can make use of all cores can't it when say running a macro on a few hundred images and applying filters and other presets, etc.? I think it can.
Sure, but the iMac isn't a great compromise itself either. You're completely and utterly locked into that all-in-one platform and again, have no say on the matter of components.

If you were buying i7 2600k PCs for your studio, in a year you've got the option to go Ivy for example. You have the option of different video cards and most importantly...you aren't stuck with a 3.1GHz i5 without HT.

For the same $2k as the iMac, you could easily outfit yourself with a fantastic 2600k machine and a 27" IPS panel @ 2560 x 1440. You get to keep that panel no matter what once you've bought it and you get to keep the case, PSU, etc for future upgrades...with the iMac, in a couple years, your expensive IPS display is now being used by some production artist because the machine just doesn't have the power to do what the seniors would use. That's NOT a wise investment.

Photoshop uses more threads when running large batch operations with filters and a lot of junk going on, but the amount of times you ever do anything like that are so few in number that it's not worth considering other than benchmarking purposes. In fact I'd bet my life on the line that 9/10 Photoshop users don't even know how to set up automated batch commands like that, let alone have use for HEAVY automated filters on a day to day basis to justify spending $5,000 on a computer instead of $1,600.

Far as 3D work goes, again, you can't make a render farm with Apple and the 3D world is all about $/Cinebench. Apple REALLY falls short on that front. In fact, our studio's entire render farm is built out of stuff like this rather than insanely expensive blade systems: http://rackmount.com/Rackmt/ATXBladeS800.htm and we work on $80M+ movies, that's what the budgets are like. You need to be cost effective everywhere you can, especially in the case of computing where being cost effective and having great performance are NOT mutually exclusive if you know what you're doing.

Apple has never been a player in the 3D world though on any real scale so these Mac Pro woes aren't due to the VFX industry pulling away from Apple. They are losing the creative world which is incredible and kind of restores my faith in humanity a little bit; people finally taking a stand against being gouged mercilessly.
Edited by kweechy - 11/3/11 at 12:17am
2P Workstation
(13 items)
 
  
CPUCPUMotherboardGraphics
Xeon E5 2699 v3 Xeon E5 2699 v3 ASUS Z10PE-D16 EVGA TITAN X 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveCooling
128GB Crucial DDR4 @ 2133MHz Intel 750 Series 1.2TB 4 x 4TB Constellation RAID5 2 x XSPC Raystorms 
CoolingCoolingMonitorMonitor
RS480 MCP655 Dell U3011 Dell U3011 
Case
Silverstone TJ07 
  hide details  
Reply
2P Workstation
(13 items)
 
  
CPUCPUMotherboardGraphics
Xeon E5 2699 v3 Xeon E5 2699 v3 ASUS Z10PE-D16 EVGA TITAN X 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveCooling
128GB Crucial DDR4 @ 2133MHz Intel 750 Series 1.2TB 4 x 4TB Constellation RAID5 2 x XSPC Raystorms 
CoolingCoolingMonitorMonitor
RS480 MCP655 Dell U3011 Dell U3011 
Case
Silverstone TJ07 
  hide details  
Reply
post #172 of 221
Quote:
Originally Posted by SprayN'Pray View Post
Now my desktop will be better than any Mac! YAY
lol it already is.
post #173 of 221
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2010rig View Post
What is your obsession with having to defend Apple in every Apple thread?

There hasn't been a single Apple thread on OCN where you haven't chimed in with your Pro Apple bias.
I've no obsession, I like Apple and I consequently am always in Apple related threads. Lately, I don't think there's been a thread where you've not chimed in hate. At least listen properly to what I have to say at the end of this reply.
Quote:
I"m not going to bother to reply to your 3 points, because it's redundant and has been covered in this thread numerous, and you still don't get it. I will point this out though.
No, it hasn't. Sigh.
Quote:
You think it can? Yet, you were just shown that it doesn't.

Plus, let me refresh your memory about key point where Apple just doesn't "provide optimal hardware options"
I was shown nothing, there are intensive filters and batch processing, macro's, etc. that uses a fair amount of cores.
Quote:
I don't know why the author chose to put this on Adobe, when it should've been directed at Apple's POOR hardware choices. Premiere's Mercury engine was built with CUDA, and so is their GPU acceleration.

At the very least GTX 5xx Nvidia cards should be optional, however, since this is a "workstation" Quadros should be standard in MacPro's, rather than measly 5770's.

You still have doubts?

Read this:
http://blogs.adobe.com/premiereprotr...miere-pro.html
There are third party cards offered and they are quite expensive. Dell, for example, has by a default a cheap FirePro card which costs about $75. The 5770 is a desktop card and costs more about $115.
Quote:
Now, why is Apple still sticking with a 5770?

There really is no justifiable reason to include 5770's on EVERY MacPro, except for low cost / high profit margin for Apple.

I can already hear your rebuttal coming that Premiere Pro is PC only.

Premiere Pro is based on Final Cut, and also, a lot of Adobe's Software is becoming more and more GPU accelerated ( Including Photoshop ), once again, this is where CUDA shines, not Radeon cores.
Apple is sticking with the 5770 because they've not updated the Mac Pro yet and they don't update graphics card availability until then. Third parties can though, yet there are only the Quadro FX 4800 for Mac and GTX 285 for Mac that I know of. The latter is a desktop card but it does support CUDA.

To be honest, 2010, I don't understand why you don't get it. I repeatedly say that the Mac Pro isn't more expensive than the competition (e.g, Dell) with the same base specs but with any upgraded CPU. Yet you continually say it is more expensive? Did you even check? What don't you get?

How is the Mac Pro more expensive as you've claimed over, and over, and over again when the dual X5670 2.93GHz six-core Mac Pro is $6k and the same from Dell is $6k? I've already agreed that the single processor Mac Pro costs more, yet you nonetheless rebut what I say about the dual processor Mac Pro and insist that the Mac Pro, specifically, is overpriced, despite the competition charging the same.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kweechy View Post
Sure, but why would I spend $1,000 more than the competition in the first place? Secondly, the chip being used in that Mac Pro you're talking about is really a poor choice since SB was released. A 2600k is a far better CPU than a 2.4GHz Xeon.

Your only option for a better Mac than that, is to jam another CPU into it. This offers zero benefit for the applications the machine is used in. Not a hyperbolic zero, a literal zero.

Sometimes it just takes a few years for people to break their bad habits. Buying into Apple just because your studio works with Adobe's suite is a HUGE bad habit in the industry and costs your company dozens of thousands of dollars compared to what you could do. Finally people are coming around as they buy new hardware and rethink decisions.
You wouldn't, unless you absolutely needed or wanted Mac OS X. The i7 2600K is more powerful than a 2.8GHz quad-core W3530, yes, but it also isn't a workstation grade CPU. Apple has the iMac for those kinds of options.
Quote:
Like I'd mentioned, with a PC you aren't locked into a poorly performing and outdated Xeon processor. In fact, you're not locked into Xeons at all. The hardware on a PC will always be more optimized because you actually have a say in it and don't need to pay through the nose to add options.
I don't know about "optimised" about I do agree that you certainly have more flexibility. You can customise it however you want, specific for your needs and even build it yourself and save yourself a bucket load of cash.
Quote:
Sure, but the iMac isn't a great compromise itself either. You're completely and utterly locked into that all-in-one platform and again, have no say on the matter of components.

If you were buying i7 2600k PCs for your studio, in a year you've got the option to go Ivy for example. You have the option of different video cards and most importantly...you aren't stuck with a 3.1GHz i5 without HT.
That's true you lack flexibility but if you intend to keep the machines for several years that isn't as much of a problem. (Although, failing hardware could be a problem.) I'm planning on selling my iMac when the newer model is released next year and I'll essentially "upgrade" to significantly better hardware for a few hundred.

The bottom line is you don't buy a Mac in the first place if you want to upgrade anything but the RAM and HDDs and a rare exception to the occasional GPU in the Mac Pro. (FX 4800 for Mac, GTX 285, etc.)
Quote:
For the same $2k as the iMac, you could easily outfit yourself with a fantastic 2600k machine and a 27" IPS panel @ 2560 x 1440. You get to keep that panel no matter what once you've bought it and you get to keep the case, PSU, etc for future upgrades...with the iMac, in a couple years, your expensive IPS display is now being used by some production artist because the machine just doesn't have the power to do what the seniors would use. That's NOT a wise investment.
I suggested the iMacs for those who didn't need the power of a workstation, not as a possible alternative to someone who does.
Quote:
Photoshop uses more threads when running large batch operations with filters and a lot of junk going on, but the amount of times you ever do anything like that are so few in number that it's not worth considering other than benchmarking purposes. In fact I'd bet my life on the line that 9/10 Photoshop users don't even know how to set up automated batch commands like that, let alone have use for HEAVY automated filters on a day to day basis to justify spending $5,000 on a computer instead of $1,600.
That might be true but I'd bet there's a nine times more casual photoshop users than there are true professionals and I really doubt the former would fork out $5k+ for a Mac Pro, that's even if they use Mac. It's a reasonably regular occurrence here (batch processing and filters and such), but I may be the exception not the rule.
Quote:
Far as 3D work goes, again, you can't make a render farm with Apple and the 3D world is all about $/Cinebench. Apple REALLY falls short on that front. In fact, our studio's entire render farm is built out of stuff like this rather than insanely expensive blade systems: http://rackmount.com/Rackmt/ATXBladeS800.htm and we work on $80M+ movies, that's what the budgets are like. You need to be cost effective everywhere you can, especially in the case of computing where being cost effective and having great performance are NOT mutually exclusive if you know what you're doing.

Apple has never been a player in the 3D world though on any real scale so these Mac Pro woes aren't due to the VFX industry pulling away from Apple. They are losing the creative world which is incredible and kind of restores my faith in humanity a little bit; people finally taking a stand against being gouged mercilessly.
Ah right, you can't do a render farm without rack mountable servers. It'll be interesting to see if Apple actually ends up doing a complete redesign, they need it...
Kasuf
(9 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i5 6600K ASRock Z170 Pro4 ASUS Radeon RX 480 ROG Strix Corsair Vengeance LPX 32GB 3000MHz 
Hard DriveCoolingMonitorPower
Samsung 850 EVO Noctua NH-D15 LG 34" Ultrawide (LG34UC98) Corsair HX750i 
Case
Silverstone FT05B-W 
  hide details  
Reply
Kasuf
(9 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i5 6600K ASRock Z170 Pro4 ASUS Radeon RX 480 ROG Strix Corsair Vengeance LPX 32GB 3000MHz 
Hard DriveCoolingMonitorPower
Samsung 850 EVO Noctua NH-D15 LG 34" Ultrawide (LG34UC98) Corsair HX750i 
Case
Silverstone FT05B-W 
  hide details  
Reply
post #174 of 221
Quote:
Originally Posted by steelbom View Post
Apple is sticking with the 5770 because they've not updated the Mac Pro yet and they don't update graphics card availability until then.
The 5770 had no place in an expensive workstation from Day 1. The 5770 is a very obsolete card now, upon its release it was a midrange card at best. Not just a midrange card, it's a gaming card. In a workstation, people want Quadros and FireGL cards. Those products are much different than consumer cards and focus on highly parallel workloads, and have features like ECC VRAM. Try rendering something any more complex than an animated GIF on a 5770, and you're going to be in for an unpleasant surprise.

What happens if you're a professional but you don't find the 5770, the 5870, or the 4800 suitable? What if you want a few of these or a few of these? You go with Windows.

Quote:
Originally Posted by steelbom View Post
Third parties can though, yet there are only the Quadro FX 4800 for Mac and GTX 285 for Mac that I know of. The latter is a desktop card but it does support CUDA.
They actually can't, because Apple doesn't allow NVIDIA or AMD to write graphics drivers for OS X, Apple writes their own drivers. That's why new graphics options for the Mac Pro are only released with new Mac Pro refreshes.

The limited GPU selection is part of the reason people who know what they're doing avoid the Mac Pro. Why would you go with a Mac when you could take your pick of options from here, suited exactly to your needs?
post #175 of 221
One 2.8GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon "Nehalem" processor
ATI Radeon HD 5770 with 1GB GDDR5
$2,500

Fail..
The Little Li
(18 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i5 2500K @ 4.7 Ghz ASUS Maximus IV GENE-Z MSI 1080ti Gaming X 16 GB PNY Anarchy 1866 Mhz 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Crucial 250 GB M200 1 TB 7200 RPM WD Black 3 TB WD Red Pioneer Blu-Ray Burner 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Noctua NH-C14S | 120mm Noctua Reduxes Windows 10 64 Bit Samsung 34" 21:9 CF791 CM Storm QuickFire MX-Browns 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Corsair HX850 Lian Li A04B Logitech G602 Onboard 
Other
Phillips Fidelio X2 | Klipsch ProMedia 2.1's 
  hide details  
Reply
The Little Li
(18 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i5 2500K @ 4.7 Ghz ASUS Maximus IV GENE-Z MSI 1080ti Gaming X 16 GB PNY Anarchy 1866 Mhz 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Crucial 250 GB M200 1 TB 7200 RPM WD Black 3 TB WD Red Pioneer Blu-Ray Burner 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Noctua NH-C14S | 120mm Noctua Reduxes Windows 10 64 Bit Samsung 34" 21:9 CF791 CM Storm QuickFire MX-Browns 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Corsair HX850 Lian Li A04B Logitech G602 Onboard 
Other
Phillips Fidelio X2 | Klipsch ProMedia 2.1's 
  hide details  
Reply
post #176 of 221
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malcolm View Post
The 5770 had no place in an expensive workstation from Day 1. The 5770 is a very obsolete card now, upon its release it was a midrange card at best. Not just a midrange card, it's a gaming card. In a workstation, people want Quadros and FireGL cards. Those products are much different than consumer cards and focus on highly parallel workloads, and have features like ECC VRAM. Try rendering something any more complex than an animated GIF on a 5770, and you're going to be in for an unpleasant surprise.

What happens if you're a professional but you don't find the 5770, the 5870, or the 4800 suitable? What if you want a few of these or a few of these? You go with Windows.
There's just too many varieties for Apple to have produced. They need to support EFI and BIOS emulation and they need to have drivers for these too, either written by Apple or the company. You simply can't do that for so many. You have to pick a few cards that will be ideal. The 2008 Mac Pro came with an 8800 GT but offered the Quadro FX 5600 or 5800 for Mac. Apple seems to have shifted to AMD and are now offering a (reasonably cheap) gaming GPU.

The 2009 Mac Pro was released and the GTX 285 came out a few months or so later and then the FX 4600 or 4800 as well at the same time or a bit later.

An equivalent Dell starts off with a cheap $75 FireGL GPU which if you are buying an expensive workstation you probably wouldn't get that card. You'd fork out another $1,000 or $1,500, for a powerful card.

To me it makes sense, anyone who is going to buy a five thousand plus workstation for intensive work isn't going to use a $75 GPU. They're going to upgrade to one of the good ones, like a $1,500 or maybe even more. With the Mac Pro, you've only got that one option which suits anyone who is serious. You could pickup a 285 too, if you needed to I suppose.
Quote:
They actually can't, because Apple doesn't allow NVIDIA or AMD to write graphics drivers for OS X, Apple writes their own drivers. That's why new graphics options for the Mac Pro are only released with new Mac Pro refreshes.

The limited GPU selection is part of the reason people who know what they're doing avoid the Mac Pro. Why would you go with a Mac when you could take your pick of options from here, suited exactly to your needs?
Indeed, Apple indeeds to increase how many GPUs are available although I'm not sure it's their fault. I'm thinking it's possibly AMD/NVidia just aren't interested in producing cards for the Mac Pro, especially since it is one model which is probably not selling so great, or maybe Apple doesn't want to spend the funds to get them to do it.

Also, that's not the reason why new GPUs are only released with the Mac Pro. The Quadro FX 4800 or 4600 I can't remember which, and the GTX 285, came out after the 2009 model Mac Pro. But that's usually only how Apple offers them. I'm not so sure about the drivers, either. IIRC AMD or NVidia wrote their own drivers, although I can't remember which. They'd just get distributed through Apple.
Kasuf
(9 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i5 6600K ASRock Z170 Pro4 ASUS Radeon RX 480 ROG Strix Corsair Vengeance LPX 32GB 3000MHz 
Hard DriveCoolingMonitorPower
Samsung 850 EVO Noctua NH-D15 LG 34" Ultrawide (LG34UC98) Corsair HX750i 
Case
Silverstone FT05B-W 
  hide details  
Reply
Kasuf
(9 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i5 6600K ASRock Z170 Pro4 ASUS Radeon RX 480 ROG Strix Corsair Vengeance LPX 32GB 3000MHz 
Hard DriveCoolingMonitorPower
Samsung 850 EVO Noctua NH-D15 LG 34" Ultrawide (LG34UC98) Corsair HX750i 
Case
Silverstone FT05B-W 
  hide details  
Reply
post #177 of 221
Steel, I'm not sure how you're really arguing this one still. You can't ignore the facts highlighted by the article here no matter how you might personally feel about the value in the Apple products.

If they're pulling out of the market due to lack of interest and sales, they clearly failed on several fronts consdering they had a large, built in customer based from the PowerPC days. They not only have failed to get new customers, their old customers are withdrawing support as well. No argument in Apple's favor has a leg to stand on based on all the information presented.

1) The prices are way too steep. This is not an opinion if they are losing loyal customers.
2) The hardware is NOT optimized for the end use at all.
3) If you want to add features, you get ripped off even further unless you want to buy them 3rd part and spend hours REconfiguring all the pro-workstations you bought for your company...totally defeats the purpose of an out of the box solution.

If you want to get gouged on pro workstations, at least get gouged by Boxx on their 4.5GHz 2600k systems. You're not throwing away thousands of dollars on a 2nd CPU that won't ever get put to use and the CPU that DOES get used is nicely overclocked with full service and support with a speed approximately 200-300% faster than the quad core Mac Pro.
2P Workstation
(13 items)
 
  
CPUCPUMotherboardGraphics
Xeon E5 2699 v3 Xeon E5 2699 v3 ASUS Z10PE-D16 EVGA TITAN X 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveCooling
128GB Crucial DDR4 @ 2133MHz Intel 750 Series 1.2TB 4 x 4TB Constellation RAID5 2 x XSPC Raystorms 
CoolingCoolingMonitorMonitor
RS480 MCP655 Dell U3011 Dell U3011 
Case
Silverstone TJ07 
  hide details  
Reply
2P Workstation
(13 items)
 
  
CPUCPUMotherboardGraphics
Xeon E5 2699 v3 Xeon E5 2699 v3 ASUS Z10PE-D16 EVGA TITAN X 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveCooling
128GB Crucial DDR4 @ 2133MHz Intel 750 Series 1.2TB 4 x 4TB Constellation RAID5 2 x XSPC Raystorms 
CoolingCoolingMonitorMonitor
RS480 MCP655 Dell U3011 Dell U3011 
Case
Silverstone TJ07 
  hide details  
Reply
post #178 of 221
Wow. I took the time to read this entire thread.

First off, I hate Apple. Within reason. Well not Apple. The Apple "Parents"...who baby their little overpriced pretty machines.

At work, I got into an argument with an OSX dev. I argued why a 1TB HDD cost $550 (at the time) while the same part (with same serial number) cost only $89.99 for a PC.

We literally almost got into a fight.

Some points I want to make:

I posted this a few years ago

http://forums.ngemu.com/showthread.php?t=129922

6 Mac Pro's came to 124,000. Ridiculous.


Apple overpriced all products, plain and simple.

Now do I think they were wrong?

Heck no.

The Mac Pro had nothing to do with market penetration. It has EVERYTHING to do with cachet.

A Mac Pro is the equivalent of a Ferrari F430. A PC is a Corvette Z06. The Z06 2ill embarrass the Ferrari, in any performance measure. But it does not have the cachet, while the Ferrari has loads of it.

The Mac Pro is simply an image builder. It may scream over priced, but it has Apple NAME, and it's not entirely a pile of ****. It's basically a more expensive PC, which is Apple's goal.

You see, Apple is not stupid. Far from it.

They know the market. We are going mobile. if you like it or not. So they really do not care if the Mac Pro does not sell, it simply adds to the high class image.

So it confuses me to see so many people bashing Apple. I hate them as well....but to be honest, I actually admire them for being able to keep the charade up.

Name any company that can stand toe to toe with Apple with Brand image. Anyone. Sony? Has Been. Samsung? Who cares.

Apple dominates the public mind when it comes to "profitable tech". They do not cater to the enthusiast. The enthusiast class does not bring money. And they are in it for the MONEY, not the scene.

And now they are mentioned in the same breath as Exxon Mobile....from a little tech company.

I hate Apple. But I will never say they are stupid. They know the market, they know the product, they know EXACTLY what they are doing. Which is why they are dominant in the public sector. ISheep, the buyers are. But remember....for every wolf, there is a herd of sheep. On every Iphone launch, you see millions of them, lining up for the slaughter. If you are in it to make money, which do you go after? The know it all enthusiast who knows how to build on the cheap, or the affluent sheep who will pay ANYTHING for your name?

Simple people. We are not Apple's demographic. It's sad to see the Mac Pro go, if it does. I like the looks of it, if not the price.

Apple is playing a dangerous game.....the method they are using usually only works for small companies, but if you get it right (and they have), you will literally be floating in money. Which they are.

But now perhaps they will drop in price, and I can go stop sending emails to people posting 6 year old G5 Mac's on CL for $1000, now that just pisses me off to no end.
Main System
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II 560 @ 4.00Ghz Asus EVO USB3.0 GTX 670 8 GB 1600 Corsair 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 830 128GB, 80GB Raptor, 1 TB 7200 RPM, ... LG Zalman CNPS 9700 Windows 7 Home Premium 64Bit 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell U2311H 23" HP ZR30w Razer Black Widow Ultimate Edition Corsair TX650w 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Corsair 600T Special Edition (White) Razer Imperator 4G Absent Asus Xonar DS, Sony STR-DH720 Reciever , Sennhi... 
  hide details  
Reply
Main System
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II 560 @ 4.00Ghz Asus EVO USB3.0 GTX 670 8 GB 1600 Corsair 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 830 128GB, 80GB Raptor, 1 TB 7200 RPM, ... LG Zalman CNPS 9700 Windows 7 Home Premium 64Bit 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell U2311H 23" HP ZR30w Razer Black Widow Ultimate Edition Corsair TX650w 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Corsair 600T Special Edition (White) Razer Imperator 4G Absent Asus Xonar DS, Sony STR-DH720 Reciever , Sennhi... 
  hide details  
Reply
post #179 of 221
@Steelbom - Say what? I'm not showing any Apple hate, I'm simply demonstrating the weaknesses in the MacPro's, with factual evidence, there's a difference.

Not once have I said "I think" it works this way. You on the other hand...
Quote:
Originally Posted by steelbom View Post
And photoshop can make use of all cores can't it when say running a macro on a few hundred images and applying filters and other presets, etc.? I think it can.
I guess you didn't read this, did you?
http://arstechnica.com/apple/reviews...a-review.ars/8

Configure this, and please show me where a MacPro is the SAME price, for COMPARABLE all around performance. Better yet, let's play a game you build a MacPro with a $10,000 budget, and I'll build a Dell for $10K as well, afterwards we'll compare and see who did better.
http://configure.us.dell.com/dellsto...recision-t7500

At the end of the day, MacPros still come with redundant 5770's which are useless for "workstations" The only GPU options are a 2nd 5770, or a 5870. As has been shown, these are in no way, shape or form ideal GPU solutions for workstations. I showed you clear evidence of this already.

The Dell's include Quadros ( Optional firepros ) plus a 250GB SSD standard.

The MacPro's ONLY SSD option is a 512GB for $1400.

The MacPro's will never be comparable due to their limited KEY hardware options, even if they miraculously came in at the same price for the Dual 6 Core Xeon's. The Dell would still be the better choice since you're getting a Quadro or Firepro, depending on your preference.

Quote:
Originally Posted by steelbom View Post
To me it makes sense, anyone who is going to buy a five thousand plus workstation for intensive work isn't going to use a $75 GPU. They're going to upgrade to one of the good ones, like a $1,500 or maybe even more. With the Mac Pro, you've only got that one option which suits anyone who is serious. You could pickup a 285 too, if you needed to I suppose.
Are you oblivious as to how you contradict yourself? A 5770 is not suited for anyone buying a $5000 workstation, nor are they given options to upgrade to "one of the good ones".
Edited by 2010rig - 11/3/11 at 2:52am
2010rig
(14 items)
 
Galaxy S3
(8 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
X5660 @ 4.5  ASUS P6X58D-E 980TI? 12GB OCZ Platinum - 7-7-7-21 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
1 80GB SSD x25m - 3TB F3 + F4 NH-D14 Windows 7 Ultimate LG 47LH55 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Natural Wireless Keyboard Corsair 750HX CM 690 II Advanced MX 518 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Snapdragon S4 Dual core 1500mhz Adreno 225 Samsung 2GB 16GB Onboard Flash 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Android 4.4.2 - CM11 4.8" AMOLED 1280x720 2100 mAh battery Otterbox Defender 
  hide details  
Reply
2010rig
(14 items)
 
Galaxy S3
(8 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
X5660 @ 4.5  ASUS P6X58D-E 980TI? 12GB OCZ Platinum - 7-7-7-21 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
1 80GB SSD x25m - 3TB F3 + F4 NH-D14 Windows 7 Ultimate LG 47LH55 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Natural Wireless Keyboard Corsair 750HX CM 690 II Advanced MX 518 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Snapdragon S4 Dual core 1500mhz Adreno 225 Samsung 2GB 16GB Onboard Flash 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Android 4.4.2 - CM11 4.8" AMOLED 1280x720 2100 mAh battery Otterbox Defender 
  hide details  
Reply
post #180 of 221

Will they still maintain the same image when the design studios can no longer use Mac? That's how they got where they are today, they had a high end image because big shiny firms were using their workstations.

When that's no longer the case...what happens? Are they in a position now to just ride out the mobile sector and gouge the less savvy folk that don't know better?

I just don't understand their end game.

2P Workstation
(13 items)
 
  
CPUCPUMotherboardGraphics
Xeon E5 2699 v3 Xeon E5 2699 v3 ASUS Z10PE-D16 EVGA TITAN X 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveCooling
128GB Crucial DDR4 @ 2133MHz Intel 750 Series 1.2TB 4 x 4TB Constellation RAID5 2 x XSPC Raystorms 
CoolingCoolingMonitorMonitor
RS480 MCP655 Dell U3011 Dell U3011 
Case
Silverstone TJ07 
  hide details  
Reply
2P Workstation
(13 items)
 
  
CPUCPUMotherboardGraphics
Xeon E5 2699 v3 Xeon E5 2699 v3 ASUS Z10PE-D16 EVGA TITAN X 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveCooling
128GB Crucial DDR4 @ 2133MHz Intel 750 Series 1.2TB 4 x 4TB Constellation RAID5 2 x XSPC Raystorms 
CoolingCoolingMonitorMonitor
RS480 MCP655 Dell U3011 Dell U3011 
Case
Silverstone TJ07 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles › [Xbit] Apple May Dump High-End Mac Pro Desktops