Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Hardware - Troubleshooting and Discussion > Mac Desktops > They didn't forget the Pros today...

They didn't forget the Pros today...
Thread Tools
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 27, 2010, 10:09 AM
 
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 27, 2010, 10:11 AM
 
And a new 27 incher is coming soon...
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, Washington
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 27, 2010, 10:15 AM
 
If you buy the 27" Cinema Display, you need to be examined mentally.

OTOH, this is a great update for the Mac Pro, but I can't help thinking that it's gonna be around too long again.
     
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 27, 2010, 10:49 AM
 
How the balls is this a great update? New CPUs and new graphics - upgrades that only went so far as industry advancements since the last revision necessitated.
I like chicken
I like liver
Meow Mix, Meow Mix
Please de-liv-er
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, Washington
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 27, 2010, 12:10 PM
 
How is that not a great update? 12 cores? Yeah, that doesn't mean anything...
     
Administrator
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Land of the Easily Amused
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 27, 2010, 01:44 PM
 
Maybe one day we'll be able to purchase that Radeon 5870 separately so us older Mac Pro users can have some sort of upgrade.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Nashua NH, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 27, 2010, 04:16 PM
 
Maybe one day we'll be able to purchase a graphics card for our Mac Pro that uses a chip less than a year old.
     
Administrator
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Land of the Easily Amused
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 27, 2010, 04:29 PM
 
I'm hoping the presence of Steam on the Mac will prompt companies to get their act together in that regard.
     
Senior User
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Bay Area, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 27, 2010, 06:24 PM
 
The iMac or the Mac Pro? Which one reigns supreme?

I've been waiting since the last update, which was underwhelming, and you guys said I should run with the iMac on the last round.
Now I know, and knowing is half the battle!
     
cgc
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Down by the river
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 27, 2010, 07:22 PM
 
Originally Posted by kentuckyfried View Post
The iMac or the Mac Pro? Which one reigns supreme?

I've been waiting since the last update, which was underwhelming, and you guys said I should run with the iMac on the last round.
Lowest model MacPro is still faster than the top of the line iMac but it should be negligible for most home users.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, Washington
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 27, 2010, 07:32 PM
 
Originally Posted by kentuckyfried View Post
The iMac or the Mac Pro? Which one reigns supreme?

I've been waiting since the last update, which was underwhelming, and you guys said I should run with the iMac on the last round.
Unless you're gonna be editing TRON: Legacy, I'd go for the iMac.
     
Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: North Muncietucky
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 27, 2010, 07:45 PM
 
Honestly, I sort of wonder who, outside of hard-core video production, is the market for the MacPro anymore. The designers and artists I know are rapidly moving over to the iMac. Even before this update, the current generation of iMacs packed plenty of power for graphic design and illustration. Even Photoshop runs perfectly well on an iMac.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 27, 2010, 08:15 PM
 
*Cue some snob ranting about the glossy screen.*
     
Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: North Muncietucky
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 27, 2010, 09:11 PM
 
Not snobbery. Before I got my iMac, I was using a 24" Cinema Display with my G5. I miss that matte screen every day.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, Washington
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 27, 2010, 09:12 PM
 
Originally Posted by Thorzdad View Post
Honestly, I sort of wonder who, outside of hard-core video production, is the market for the MacPro anymore. The designers and artists I know are rapidly moving over to the iMac. Even before this update, the current generation of iMacs packed plenty of power for graphic design and illustration. Even Photoshop runs perfectly well on an iMac.
Couldn't agree with you more.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 27, 2010, 11:32 PM
 
Note that the new 27" Display replaces all previous displays from Apple. No more 30" Display.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Automatic
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 27, 2010, 11:41 PM
 
Originally Posted by Thorzdad View Post
Not snobbery. Before I got my iMac, I was using a 24" Cinema Display with my G5. I miss that matte screen every day.
Nitpicking… so it actually was the 23" ADC - willing to avoid any confusion-.
     
Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: North Muncietucky
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 28, 2010, 12:21 AM
 
Originally Posted by angelmb View Post
Nitpicking… so it actually was the 23" ADC - willing to avoid any confusion-.
Yeah. Sorry. The 23" Cinema HD Display. Great screen.
     
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 28, 2010, 12:53 AM
 
Originally Posted by imitchellg5 View Post
How is that not a great update? 12 cores? Yeah, that doesn't mean anything...
Swapping out CPUs does not constitute a great update for a machine that's configurable towards the price of a car. You don't think it's about time for some new I/O? USB 3, FireWire 1600/3200, Light Peak...

I'm so sick of reading accolades every time Apple slip out another turd of a hardware update, let alone one that took a year and a half.
I like chicken
I like liver
Meow Mix, Meow Mix
Please de-liv-er
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, Washington
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 28, 2010, 01:12 AM
 
Well, how many computers on the market today have LightPeak? FireWire 1600/3200? USB 3? I see where you are coming from, but the people who use these machines don't really need a computer that's overhauled every 6 months.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Vancouver B.C.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 28, 2010, 01:13 AM
 
I have a first gen Mac Pro 3GB RAM 1900XT and I had scheduled to replace it spring, 2011, but honestly I don't see the need, instead I will add 2x4GB RAM and the Radeon 5870 1GB to my Mac Pro, that should get me through to summer 2012 min without feeling any slowness in this Mac. Last resort will be a 256GB SSD (to replace my 250GB drive this came with). Hopefully I can get some support work to pay for the "Life extension" of my Mac Pro.
Get busy living or get busy dying
--Stephen King
     
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 28, 2010, 06:06 AM
 
Originally Posted by imitchellg5 View Post
Well, how many computers on the market today have LightPeak? FireWire 1600/3200? USB 3? I see where you are coming from, but the people who use these machines don't really need a computer that's overhauled every 6 months.
The Mac Pro is the flagship machine from company who's entire computer platform has thrived on catering to the needs of industry professionals. And new technology, almost without exception, is proliferated in the high end of the market before entering the mainstream. If Apple ignores this kind of stuff then it'll only stifle adoption of it and, in turn, stifle the loyalty with which 'industry professionals' look to Apple's pro hardware.

So, yeah... Silly update. If they were going to stop at dropping in a new CPU and graphics card (something 'Pimply Billy' next door could do) then there sure as hell better be updates every 6 months. But the Mac Pro has been stagnant for so long (arguably since its inception) that debuting anything less than warp drive in this revision is a slap in the face to any indudivual or company that has been waiting.
I like chicken
I like liver
Meow Mix, Meow Mix
Please de-liv-er
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: here
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 28, 2010, 01:39 PM
 
Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
Swapping out CPUs does not constitute a great update for a machine that's configurable towards the price of a car. You don't think it's about time for some new I/O? USB 3, FireWire 1600/3200, Light Peak...

I'm so sick of reading accolades every time Apple slip out another turd of a hardware update, let alone one that took a year and a half.
I'm disappointed with the upgrade as well.

And: will the 4-Core be the same ridiculous Mac Pro with a 16Gb low RAM ceiling?

Which would make the Mac Pro start at $3500.

PS: the I/O controller, integrated into the Nehalem and Westmere processors is not a serious improvement?
( Last edited by Veltliner; Jul 28, 2010 at 01:50 PM. )
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: here
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 28, 2010, 01:46 PM
 
Originally Posted by MacinTommy View Post
And a new 27 incher is coming soon...
Not interested in that display. I'd rather go with a NEC.

Originally Posted by imitchellg5 View Post
If you buy the 27" Cinema Display, you need to be examined mentally.
I can still feel some restraint in this.



Originally Posted by lpkmckenna View Post
Note that the new 27" Display replaces all previous displays from Apple. No more 30" Display.
I was hoping for a nice 30" display that could match the quality of the NECs and the Eizos. Who in their right mind throws his money away for that 27" display? I can only imagine people buying it as a second monitor to their iMac.
     
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Northern Ireland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 28, 2010, 04:27 PM
 
$5000. That is all.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 28, 2010, 05:54 PM
 
Originally Posted by Thorzdad View Post
Honestly, I sort of wonder who, outside of hard-core video production, is the market for the MacPro anymore. The designers and artists I know are rapidly moving over to the iMac. Even before this update, the current generation of iMacs packed plenty of power for graphic design and illustration. Even Photoshop runs perfectly well on an iMac.
Yeah, I sure don't need the power of 2 CPUs with 6 cores each.

I probably could buy the Single 3.33 6-core Mac Pro and it would beat the pants off of my current Mac Pro. But I think I may wait another update. My current Mac Pro is doing fine.
Mac Pro Dual 3.0 Dual-Core
MacBook Pro
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Minneapolis, MN USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 28, 2010, 06:09 PM
 
Shrug. I don't feel like I missed out buying a corei7 imac last month. It geekbenches about what a low end Mac Pro does presently.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, Washington
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 28, 2010, 07:35 PM
 
Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
The Mac Pro is the flagship machine from company who's entire computer platform has thrived on catering to the needs of industry professionals. And new technology, almost without exception, is proliferated in the high end of the market before entering the mainstream. If Apple ignores this kind of stuff then it'll only stifle adoption of it and, in turn, stifle the loyalty with which 'industry professionals' look to Apple's pro hardware.
So then they should just drop stuff in that's not even on the market really yet outside of a select few drives, or in the case of LightPeak, nothing? Who knows, is LightPeak even ready for mainstream yet?
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Truckee, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 28, 2010, 08:20 PM
 
Originally Posted by Thorzdad View Post
Honestly, I sort of wonder who, outside of hard-core video production, is the market for the MacPro anymore. The designers and artists I know are rapidly moving over to the iMac. Even before this update, the current generation of iMacs packed plenty of power for graphic design and illustration. Even Photoshop runs perfectly well on an iMac.
Correct, an iMac, MacBook or a Mini will drive PS today from a processor-strength standpoint. It has been years since Photoshop used for basic graphic design and illustration has been "demanding" relative to the generally available CPU power of Macs.

The reason folks like me and other heavy graphics users (e.g. Aperture) do best with tower setups is because of the need for multi-drive mass storage, RAID, images data transfer, RAM availability (hugely important moving forward into the life cycle of any new box), etc. more so than simplistic processor power. Note that the size and volume of images that digital image pros handle continues to grow, with a typical pro photo shoot today in the 5-10 GB range - - but still growing.

As to the glossy display issue, it is not snobbery. Just the fact that most but not all still images pros prefer not to have a glossy display adding "pop" to their images, just like in film days we shot people-pix with Portra rather than with Kodachrome. A simple matter of choice, but to many images pros a very big deal.

-Allen
( Last edited by SierraDragon; Jul 28, 2010 at 08:32 PM. )
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Southern California
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 28, 2010, 09:20 PM
 
Originally Posted by imitchellg5 View Post
So then they should just drop stuff in that's not even on the market really yet outside of a select few drives, or in the case of LightPeak, nothing? Who knows, is LightPeak even ready for mainstream yet?
2015, according to Gizmodo.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, Washington
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 28, 2010, 09:22 PM
 
Well, then I guess it's not gonna show up on a 2010 revision of the Mac Pro.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Southern California
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 28, 2010, 09:31 PM
 
Nope.
     
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Kyoto, Japan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 28, 2010, 09:52 PM
 
Originally Posted by SierraDragon View Post
As to the glossy display issue, it is not snobbery. Just the fact that most but not all still images pros prefer not to have a glossy display adding "pop" to their images, just like in film days we shot people-pix with Portra rather than with Kodachrome. A simple matter of choice, but to many images pros a very big deal.
I am an image pro, and the iMac screen is impossible. I can't live with reflections of my own head on the screen, nor does the exaggerated contrast help get images ready for print. Thanks goodness, I have the ACD 30 inch... other it would be hello Eizo. I can't believe the folks at pixar will be happy with the 27" inch, if for no other reason than the loss of 3", which leads me to believe an even larger pro monitor will be coming soon. I heard a rumor that Apple is planning a 50 inch monitor. If so, I will be the first in line.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: here
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 29, 2010, 02:20 AM
 
Just wonder what would be the better choice: a single 6-core or a dual 4-core?

Is it generally better to have more cores in one processor, or in two separate processors?
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: here
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 29, 2010, 02:26 AM
 
Originally Posted by Veltliner View Post

PS: the I/O controller, integrated into the Nehalem and Westmere processors is not a serious improvement?
Anybody know about this?
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: here
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 29, 2010, 02:27 AM
 
Great thing that you can get an SSD drive as your main hard drive, which should speed things up.

The price of a 512GB SSD though...
     
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 29, 2010, 08:45 AM
 
You can get high-performance 512 GB SSDs for 1,200~1,500 €. Does anyone know how much Apple charges for the SSD upgrade in Mac Pros?
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Truckee, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 29, 2010, 03:42 PM
 
Originally Posted by Veltliner View Post
Is it generally better to have more cores in one processor, or in two separate processors?
one.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Nashua NH, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 29, 2010, 03:52 PM
 
Originally Posted by Veltliner View Post
Is it generally better to have more cores in one processor, or in two separate processors?
On a per watt basis, one. Otherwise its a memory bandwidth issue.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 29, 2010, 04:02 PM
 
Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
The Mac Pro is the flagship machine from company who's entire computer platform has thrived on catering to the needs of industry professionals.
Ah, no. Not in twenty years, and it certainly wasn't *intended* that way.

In fact, the entire computer platform LANGUISHED on catering to the needs of industry professionals.

It didn't start *thriving* again until it focused on catering to the needs of consumers.

And the loyalty argument may be valid ("but us graphics pros saved the company back in the late 90s!"), but after ten years of consumer market growth saving the company, it's growing really really tired.

The rest of your post, I take no issue with.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 29, 2010, 05:25 PM
 
Originally Posted by Veltliner View Post
Just wonder what would be the better choice: a single 6-core or a dual 4-core?

Is it generally better to have more cores in one processor, or in two separate processors?
Two sockets gives you more memory capacity and bandwidth, I'd take the dual quads.
     
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jul 2010
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 30, 2010, 05:18 PM
 
I'm really excited about the new release. So, I guess that I'm one of those designers who needs one. You just can't pack that much RAM into an iMac (16GB max vs. 64GB in the Mac Pro), and the Mac Pro is the only game in town for multiple large monitors.

Speaking of monitors, Apple:... 27" is the largest monitor you sell? Seriously? We demand better from you.
     
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jul 2010
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 31, 2010, 06:17 PM
 
12 cores thats crazy! Thats for like file editors or scientist or something because I could see my self needing that much cores any time soon.
     
cgc
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Down by the river
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 31, 2010, 11:25 PM
 
Originally Posted by smithjohnson159 View Post
12 cores thats crazy! Thats for like file editors or scientist or something because I could see my self needing that much cores any time soon.
What's a "like file editor"?
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: here
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 1, 2010, 12:12 AM
 
The ATI 5770 as the new standard graphics card is great.

Finally no more lame duck graphics cards in Apple workstations.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Automatic
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 1, 2010, 03:05 AM
 
Originally Posted by cgc View Post
What's a "like file editor"?
I guess film editors.
     
cgc
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Down by the river
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 1, 2010, 06:34 AM
 
Originally Posted by Veltliner View Post
The ATI 5770 as the new standard graphics card is great.

Finally no more lame duck graphics cards in Apple workstations.
The ATI 5770 was released 13 October 2009...while this is a great GPU, I'd hardly get excited and say the days of crap GPUs are over. Apple really should put a better GPU in a $2500 (USD) desktop. Of course,l wouldn't mind upgrading my 2006 MacPro's nVidia 8800GT with this...


Originally Posted by angelmb View Post
I guess film editors.
I actually think it's just, like, totally, a teen way of saying something. It's annoying to hear but this may mark the first time I'v seen it in writing...
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 1, 2010, 01:20 PM
 
Originally Posted by cgc View Post
The ATI 5770 was released 13 October 2009...while this is a great GPU, I'd hardly get excited and say the days of crap GPUs are over. Apple really should put a better GPU in a $2500 (USD) desktop.
Which ATi card released after October 13, 2009 wouöd you rather like as the baseline?

It's the latest generation, there hasn't been any after it. nVidia has made updates to match, but they're no better, and a GTX 460 (which would be the equivalent) has just barely been released.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 1, 2010, 01:28 PM
 
Originally Posted by Veltliner View Post
(Integrated I/O)

Anybody know about this?
If you want to be picky, I/O isn't integrated. By Intel's defintion, I/O is what is handled by the old ICH, what everyone else calls a southbridge, and those functions are not integrated in the CPU. What is integrated is the memory controller, most of the old northbridge. Integrating the MC is a HUGE improvement (and the reason I keep saying that a new Core i7 iMac will beat one of the old FSB-based Mac Pros on most things), but that improvement came with Nehalem in the last update. This update brought nothing new there. You can now get newer GPUs, the base GPU is no longer embarassing, and you can get 12 cores, that's it.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
cgc
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Down by the river
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 1, 2010, 06:27 PM
 
Originally Posted by P View Post
Which ATi card released after October 13, 2009 wouöd you rather like as the baseline?

It's the latest generation, there hasn't been any after it. nVidia has made updates to match, but they're no better, and a GTX 460 (which would be the equivalent) has just barely been released.
Well, I looked at the other ATI offering (Radeon HD 5870) and it's a lot faster then the 5770 (according to PassMark), but it was also released Oct 2009. I guess the GPU market has slowed a little.
( Last edited by cgc; Aug 1, 2010 at 06:36 PM. )
     
 
Thread Tools
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:17 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2015 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2