Apple updated the Mac Pro

[kmeson]

Thanks for the OWC tip. What about a bigger hard disk? I assume the Mac Pro can take any SATA-3 hard drive, right?

No problem. I decided to wait a day to see if OWC was going to put out updated FB-DIMMs. Even with ADC discount Apple's premium on FB-DIMMs is unbearable by a factor of 3x.

You should be able to use any SATA drives. I plan on adding a 150gig Raptor and using the 320gig as a dedicated Time Machine drive.

 

[Narisatu]

Why exactly can't you game on these?

OS X does not have very many games out there that run on it, at least, compared to Windows. So you would have to load Windows on the machine anyway to play games, which, when you have people dissatisfied with Vista/Windows, you wont be pulling anyone from the Windows market just because you can game on a Mac Pro.

Mac Pro's are NOT gaming machines. They are development/testing machines designed for Software engineering (xcode tools comes with all OS X installs if you want to install it), and digital content creation. That is what they are designed for, and they sell pretty well in their market, considering similarly equipped dell workstations are more expensive.

The update im excited about is the xserve update. 8 cores in a 1u with 4 hard drives, 2 1gb ethernet ports, and the option for 2 quad channel fibre cards.. Finally i can replace my aging dual dual core dell rig and finally get onto OS X Server in my production environments. And i can get rid of my fibre switch that i was using for the pair of Xserve raids i just bought to connect to the dell rig, and I can use Xsan as well, finally.

 

[gramarye]

Ah they finally add SAS drives, the SATA was holding it back more than anything else was.

How does the SAS drives connect? I'm a bit confused since the logic motherboard has remained the same I believe...Can SAS connect to SATA ports?

An eSATA port upgrade would have been nice.

 

[D-EJ915]

How does the SAS drives connect? I'm a bit confused since the logic motherboard has remained the same I believe...Can SAS connect to SATA ports?

They use pretty much the same connector, you can connect SATA drives to SAS controllers. reference

 

[gramarye]

They use pretty much the same connector, you can connect SATA drives to SAS controllers. reference

So the Logic motherboard has a SAS Controller? since SAS cannot be connected to SATA (?)

 

[ntba]

SAS has the same connector as SATA the only difference is that SAS uses SCSI based commands while SATA does not. This is my over simplification of it, look it up on wikipedia.

 

[CHAoS_NiNJA]

Guys...to use the SAS drives you have to buy the RAID card which likely has the SAS controller chip on it. Take a second to actually look at the machine before making guesses.

 

[gramarye]

Guys...to use the SAS drives you have to buy the RAID card which likely has the SAS controller chip on it. Take a second to actually look at the machine before making guesses.

Thanks, it all makes sense. I understand everything now!

 

[Serpico]

Agree with the want for a mac desktop class machine that is not an all in one. And damit I would have taken that g4...

Anyway if I had the money to spend on one I would love to pickup one of these but I need to replace my notebook soon and want a nice ar15 for the range. I know the imac is a good all in one system but I already have dual 22 inch lcds on my desk along with a 19 inch that I use to work on client machines. I just don't have room for an all in one. Besides I want some expansion options. I wish they would make a mac pro tower that was just a single 775 based system that could hold 2 hard drives and 8 gigs of ram. You know a grand to 1500 dollar system. I don't want to built in screen and need better graphics then a mini has.

First off, that G4 was over five years old and LOUD. It still runs Final Cut great but no, time to go.

Secondly, that "built in screen" uses the same H-IPS panel as the 24" NEC 2490WUXi LCD, which is IMO the best 24" LCD on the market right now.

It is also $1200.

Believe it or not, that iMac is an excellent deal considering the amazing screen you're getting with it. Heck, ditch one of your current monitors and you'll be replacing it with something far superior, not to mention fast (video encoding and Final Cut Studio performance is awesome on this thing). I can't speak for games on it outside of what I've played on Gametap (I'm not dual booting on this machine), but considering that it has higher specs than the Macbook Pros from earlier this year on which I saw Team Fortress 2 and Call Of Duty 4 run perfectly on, I wouldn't worry too much about that aspect either. You'd probably run it at 1400x900 to maximize your framerate but I do that on my 24" with my PC anyways and it scales great.

So yeah, don't get too hung up on the whole tower thing. This and two backup external drives, I'm set.

 

[oddlycalm]

From where I sit the new Mac Pro makes a compelling argument against building or buying another PC. As other have pointed out, nobody with a working brain orders memory and drives with the system anyway. Those bitching about price aren't looking at other quad core Xeon systems I think. My only reservation sight unseen would be noise which is a deal breaker for me. I'm real happy with the iMacs I've got and Boot Camp allows easy access to windoze only apps.

I don't game and this isn't a gaming box. Many games aren't optimized for multi-processors so 8 cores would be wasted, And, for anything requiring consumer level video horsepower most people are looking seriously at SLI options. The Mac Pro will allow you to run a lot of monitors, but not particularly fast.

oc

 

[gramarye]

From where I sit the new Mac Pro makes a compelling argument against building or buying another PC. As other have pointed out, nobody with a working brain orders memory and drives with the system anyway. Those bitching about price aren't looking at other quad core Xeon systems I think. My only reservation sight unseen would be noise which is a deal breaker for me. I'm real happy with the iMacs I've got and Boot Camp allows easy access to windoze only apps.

I don't game and this isn't a gaming box. Many games aren't optimized for multi-processors so 8 cores would be wasted, And, for anything requiring consumer level video horsepower most people are looking seriously at SLI options. The Mac Pro will allow you to run a lot of monitors, but not particularly fast.

oc

There may not be SLI for Macs, but you can certainly run up to 4 Graphics cards! In my opinion, the Mac Pro Logic Motherboard along is a head of its time, it's such a powerful workstation, a fast and strong server, eveything combined, I've realized I've spent over thousand or maybe two thousand to try to make the perfect PC to match a Mac Pro, and I still have to admit, after these couple of years, the Mac Pro still surpasses everything.

A lot of what we are seeing in the skulltrail motherboards released by Intel look very similar to the the Logic Mac Pro Motherboard.

 

[Lack]

There may not be SLI for Macs, but you can certainly run up to 4 Graphics cards! In my opinion, the Mac Pro Logic Motherboard along is a head of its time, it's such a powerful workstation, a fast and strong server, eveything combined, I've realized I've spent over thousand or maybe two thousand to try to make the perfect PC to match a Mac Pro, and I still have to admit, after these couple of years, the Mac Pro still surpasses everything.

The regular PC motherboard competition offers SLI and SAS support out of the box. How can a system with less features be ahead of its time?
I don't really get the meaing of the second part - you've spent less money then a MP costs and complain that its less powerfull after a couple of years (althought the MP is avaliable for less the 1.5 year)?

A lot of what we are seeing in the skulltrail motherboards released by Intel look very similar to the the Logic Mac Pro Motherboard.

Maybe thats becouse the Mac Pro uses standard Intel technology?

 

[gramarye]

The regular PC motherboard competition offers SLI and SAS support out of the box. How can a system with less features be ahead of its time?
I don't really get the meaing of the second part - you've spent less money then a MP costs and complain that its less powerfull after a couple of years (althought the MP is avaliable for less the 1.5 year)?

Yes.

Maybe thats becouse the Mac Pro uses standard Intel technology?

Yes.



My personal experiences, that's all. Of course there is SLI and SAS support on PC motherboards. We can go for an Intel Xeon Server board for the SAS or a simple expensive RAID care, and an nforce board for the SLI. There's endless possibilities, and please don't think I'm doubting anything. 4-way (or quad) graphics card (ati and nvidia cards can be used) has existed in the Mac Pro for quite a awhile now (the logic motherboard hasn't been updated for over a year, maybe 2 or 3?), I haven't found a Dual Socket Xeon w/ eight cores (yes intel, not amd, since i've found a few dual and quads available) motherboard with the support of 4 graphics cards. But I could be being too particular. The skulltrail looks like a great matchup having these "V8" features, but most end users are anticipating an expensive price. But anything nice with the latest technologies is going to come with a price


*Apparently the Mac Pros had PCI-Express 2.0 before x38 motherboards released.

 

[Mike Armstrong]

Sorry, but I honestly dont understand why Macs are poor gaming machines. If you could take a PC and match it as close as possible to a Mac or visa versa, both running the same game that had versions for both OS's, the PC would still outperform the Mac?

I thought for sure the new monster Mac Pro would easily be competitive with a PC when it comes to gaming. What in particular is meant by saying the Mac's aren't built for gaming? Just trying to understand why such a powerful machine like the new Mac Pro 'still' cant compete with the PC. Thanks


Mike

 

[Martyr]

Sorry, but I honestly dont understand why Macs are poor gaming machines. If you could take a PC and match it as close as possible to a Mac, both running the same game that had versions for both OS's, the PC would still outperform the Mac?

I thought for sure the new monster Mac Pro would easily be competitive with a PC when it comes to gaming. What is it in particular is meant by saying the Mac's arent built for gaming? Just trying to understand why such apowerful machine like the new Mac Pro 'still' cant compete with the PC when it comes to gaming. thanks


Mike

because you are paying for a workstation. can build a great gaming computer for 1k. its about value.

 

[KaosDG]

Sorry, but I honestly dont understand why Macs are poor gaming machines. If you could take a PC and match it as close as possible to a Mac, both running the same game that had versions for both OS's, the PC would still outperform the Mac?

I thought for sure the new monster Mac Pro would easily be competitive with a PC when it comes to gaming. What is it in particular is meant by saying the Mac's arent built for gaming? Just trying to understand why such apowerful machine like the new Mac Pro 'still' cant compete with the PC when it comes to gaming. thanks


Mike

The problem isn't the hardware, it's the underlying software in the OS.

If we are talking Comparing OS X gaming vs Windows Gaming, with the *same* hardware, and the same game (something cross platform... which there aren't many)

The windows system will probably win. Games are more optimized and tweaked for DirectX compared to OpenGL. And even the hardware is more geared towards directx.

If you ran XP/Vista on a Mac Pro, it would be the same as running it on a PC... since it's all the same hardware underneath

 

[gramarye]

The problem isn't the hardware, it's the underlying software in the OS.

If we are talking Comparing OS X gaming vs Windows Gaming, with the *same* hardware, and the same game (something cross platform... which there aren't many)

The windows system will probably win. Games are more optimized and tweaked for DirectX compared to OpenGL. And even the hardware is more geared towards directx.

If you ran XP/Vista on a Mac Pro, it would be the same as running it on a PC... since it's all the same hardware underneath

+1

I think we will see some better compatibility in the future since I believe Apple is hoping to expand in that genre quite soon.

 

[Lack]

4-way (or quad) graphics card (ati and nvidia cards can be used) has existed in the Mac Pro for quite a awhile now (the logic motherboard hasn't been updated for over a year, maybe 2 or 3?), I haven't found a Dual Socket Xeon w/ eight cores (yes intel, not amd, since i've found a few dual and quads available) motherboard with the support of 4 graphics cards. But I could be being too particular. The skulltrail looks like a great matchup having these "V8" features, but most end users are anticipating an expensive price. But anything nice with the latest technologies is going to come with a price

There are seven PCI/-e/-X slots on Dells Mac Pro direct competition. That means you can instal up to 7 graphic cards.
I believe workstation target user will be more interested in having dual FX5600 then four 2600XT.

 

[Narisatu]

You can put 4 FX5600s in the Mac Pro if you want to, its just not a standard customization option, so you would have to call to get four of them installed.

And quit talking about Quad graphics like they are going to be running together in SLI. they are terrible in quad SLI, more buggy than vista. The only reason for quad graphics is to run 8 monitors, and you really dont need high end Quadro's for all the monitors, unless your spanning one project over them all, and that one project requires the power of a quadro for each part of the screen. Doubtful though. If you need the rendering power, thats what the Tesla stations are for.

And as for Mac Gaming. Once games start using more OpenGL graphics, we might see gaming take off on the mac. I know EA is now releasing for both the mac and the PC from now on (started with C&C 3, Need For Speed Carbon, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, and two sports games. And I think Rockband will be being released for the Mac as well. So Mac Gaming may change, but for the moment, Gaming is best done on Windows. (Thats what skulltrail is for )

 

[Finkus]

I guess it's not now but in 6 months time that the problem is. With the PC I can just whack in nvidia's next flagship card and get a massive performance boost in games.

If I thought that nvidia would bring out their next flagship card this summer and you could just whack that in the new MacPro's to replace the 8800GT then I'd be all over one in a heartbeat. I've never been a fan of SLI anyway. Been there, done that, not convinced it's anything but a marketing ploy. Too little of a boost in too few situations for it to be worth the cost imo.

It's not the OS or game support that is the problem because bootcamp covers that and the OS X lineup is beginning to incorporate most of the big releases anyway (CoD4 and Spore were just announced, for instance, which shows that Apple are making an effort to court the publishers, as well as id's new Tech5 and all the games that eventually licence it).

 

[MrGuvernment]

it is apple being almost a year behind in certain areas of hardware - video cards...

i dont see why they cant keep up, but if they did then they would have nothing to temp people with into biuya WHOLE new rig from them, as opposed to one or 2 parts.

 

[Lack]

You can put 4 FX5600s in the Mac Pro if you want to, its just not a standard customization option, so you would have to call to get four of them installed.

Will they come with and external power brick? Couse I don't think Mac Pro can provide enought juice (if it would they'd probably have it on the front page).

And quit talking about Quad graphics like they are going to be running together in SLI. they are terrible in quad SLI, more buggy than vista. The only reason for quad graphics is to run 8 monitors, and you really dont need high end Quadro's for all the monitors, unless your spanning one project over them all, and that one project requires the power of a quadro for each part of the screen. Doubtful though. If you need the rendering power, thats what the Tesla stations are for.

Agreed.

And as for Mac Gaming. Once games start using more OpenGL graphics, we might see gaming take off on the mac. I know EA is now releasing for both the mac and the PC from now on (started with C&C 3, Need For Speed Carbon, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, and two sports games. And I think Rockband will be being released for the Mac as well. So Mac Gaming may change, but for the moment, Gaming is best done on Windows. (Thats what skulltrail is for )

CoD4 and Spore should come along this year.
Still, most Macs are lacking the video power to drive the most graphic intensive games in their native screen res and high detail.

 

[Velocities]

8 Cores, but what good it is do when none of the games today or application really used it. The slow ram speed, and you still have to buy their Graphic Card when it break down. They want almost $400 for the 8800GT 548MB version? That's a rip! Man, I wish it wouldn't cost almost 3K for the machine. I'm still waiting for it to drop down to $1,800 but knowing Apple, that will never happen.

 

[jmackay]

8 Cores, but what good it is do when none of the games today or application really used it. The slow ram speed, and you still have to buy their Graphic Card when it break down. They want almost $400 for the 8800GT 548MB version? That's a rip! Man, I wish it wouldn't cost almost 3K for the machine. I'm still waiting for it to drop down to $1,800 but knowing Apple, that will never happen.

These are rendering/workstation computers, not your average desktop. Modeling / Movie / Audio software will take advantage of those cores.

Also it uses FBDIMMS for stability vs speed. For servers / rendering boxes you don't want bad data.

http://www.ocforums.com/showthread.php?t=440042 for more info on the ram.

 

[bahula03]

They want almost $400 for the 8800GT 548MB version? That's a rip!

If you're in the U.S., which I assume you are since you used the dollar sign, the 8800GT option is $200...I have no idea how you get "almost $400" from that

 

[kmeson]

8 Cores, but what good it is do when none of the games today or application really used it.

'None' is a bit strong. There are plenty of applications that will utilize those cores. The fact you don't see the need or have application that will doesn't preclude the need for others.

What matters to me is the application I use most gains significantly with each additional core and that is Xcode. More specifically X instances of gcc. Being able to compile 8 source files simultaneously will give me grins from ear to ear and will certainly lighten my mood under tight deadlines.

The slow ram speed

When I learned FBDIMM were going to be used for the Mac Pro, early 2007, I was disappointed. They have more latency and benchmarks show low throughput, especially compared to their theoretical limit. However as stated here and elsewhere, greater reliability and allow for higher capacity. It's a trade off. According to an early benchmark memory throughput has increased quite a bit.

Again more importantly for me is reliability. Having 4gig on my Vista machine give up the ghost and subsequently corrupting my hard drive wasn't pleasant. A day lost of productivity costs me much more than the price of ram.

They want almost $400 for the 8800GT 548MB version?

Now you're talking smack. It's $349 for the non-BTO kit and $200 for those with the fortitude to wait for the BTO to ship. Both have 512MB ram. Yes 50-100 more expensive than the PC equivalent.

Man, I wish it wouldn't cost almost 3K for the machine.

I wish it were free along with the speakers and car I want. Oh and while were wishing, I wish for world peace and the stock market to reverse its downward trend.

 

[PenaltyShot]

Now you're talking smack. It's $349 for the non-BTO kit and $200 for those with the fortitude to wait for the BTO to ship. Both have 512MB ram. Yes 50-100 more expensive than the PC equivalent.

It's actually $349 either way.

The baseline card is the ATI Radeon 2600 XT, which is $149. That cost is already calculated and built into the total Mac Pro price.

Then if you want an 8800GT, it adds $200 to that baseline price. So you are paying $349 for that 8800GT no matter whether you buy it separately or as part of the BTO configuration.

The PC version of the 8800GT 512MB is averaging about $270-280 on Newegg. So the delta is about $79-89.

 

[danman]

8 Cores, but what good it is do when none of the games today or application really used it. The slow ram speed, and you still have to buy their Graphic Card when it break down. They want almost $400 for the 8800GT 548MB version? That's a rip! Man, I wish it wouldn't cost almost 3K for the machine. I'm still waiting for it to drop down to $1,800 but knowing Apple, that will never happen.

People that buy Macs don't give a shit about games. And there are a ton of apps that can utilize 8 cores. Every try to render a video or use photoshop to its potential?

More cores = more apps that you can use at one to their potential. I can multitask like a madman with 8 cores. Rendering video, playing music, downloading files, using firefox, all at the same time and it runs like butter.

You dont buy a workstation class computer with the sole intention of playing games.

 

[MrGuvernment]

^^ it gets annoying when people think the ONLY thing a computer is for is gaming!, wait until you move out of your mommy's house and use a computer for more useful things instead of rotting away 24/7 playing video games (i play games but it makes up MAYBE %10-15 of my weekly computer usage)

 

[danman]

I hear ya, but it's Hardforum. Where the young 'uns hang out.

 

[bahula03]

I was a good bit younger when I first started posting on this forum

 

[Grentz]

^^ it gets annoying when people think the ONLY thing a computer is for is gaming!, wait until you move out of your mommy's house and use a computer for more useful things instead of rotting away 24/7 playing video games (i play games but it makes up MAYBE %10-15 of my weekly computer usage)

lol, I agree with ya

I barely use my system for gaming at all anymore (use my 360 mostly for that), and my systems still get PLENTY of use all day everyday