Sure. Computers and cars can’t be compared like that. There are some cars that cost more than the average house. It’s irrelevant.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
MP 7,1 Most won’t be able to afford a new Mac Pro
- Thread starter satchmo
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Because his real life example of how the new Mac Pro will benefit his business and how the pricing won’t deter him from purchasing one does not fit the narrative of the outrage mob.
Cannot wait to see how much Dell, HP, Lenovo, et al Tier 1 manufacturers charge for a similarly built workstation, not some guys home built parts hunting DIY machine.
That’s the thing. The people I pay attention to who actually have a use for the machine are not the ones complaining.
Like many I was surprised/not surprised by the new Mac Pro.
Surprised (pleasantly so) that Apple went back to a form that works: the cheesegrater. Also surprised at how they boosted the capabilities and power. This should be a good tool for those at the very high-end of the content creation industry.
Not surprised that Apple left me behind. I'm just a humble home-office graphic designer / illustrator who wants a headless system that will last 5+ years. One that I can upgrade if required. I can't justify a $6K investment on a computer that is essentially overkill for what I do.
I refuse to purchase iMacs because I don't want an all-in-one system. I've had issues with Apple displays in the past not being calibration-friendly and, fair or not, that forever turned me off to Apple displays, especially when attached to a computer.
I've been happy with my 4,1 --> 5,1 system (see below) and wish I could stick with it for another 5 years. But I'm certain Adobe will be cutting off support for Sierra soon. Not to mention other apps that might end support as well. Sierra is as high as I want to go with this system.
So when it comes time to get a new system I'll do what I did when the 2013 came out: buy the last model. Right now I can find tcMP's with 8-cores, 1TB SSD, 64GB, and Firepro 700's for around $2400 on eBay.
That's plenty for me.
Surprised (pleasantly so) that Apple went back to a form that works: the cheesegrater. Also surprised at how they boosted the capabilities and power. This should be a good tool for those at the very high-end of the content creation industry.
Not surprised that Apple left me behind. I'm just a humble home-office graphic designer / illustrator who wants a headless system that will last 5+ years. One that I can upgrade if required. I can't justify a $6K investment on a computer that is essentially overkill for what I do.
I refuse to purchase iMacs because I don't want an all-in-one system. I've had issues with Apple displays in the past not being calibration-friendly and, fair or not, that forever turned me off to Apple displays, especially when attached to a computer.
I've been happy with my 4,1 --> 5,1 system (see below) and wish I could stick with it for another 5 years. But I'm certain Adobe will be cutting off support for Sierra soon. Not to mention other apps that might end support as well. Sierra is as high as I want to go with this system.
So when it comes time to get a new system I'll do what I did when the 2013 came out: buy the last model. Right now I can find tcMP's with 8-cores, 1TB SSD, 64GB, and Firepro 700's for around $2400 on eBay.
That's plenty for me.
Legitimate question, not being a jerk here but what would stop you using a colour accurate display attached to an all in one system (iMac/laptop) besides your dislike of an all in one which is a personal preference thing. Many many people in colour accurate environments do just that. Multiple displays are very common these days.
I personally could happily use 3. But that’s because I am almost always doing multiple things at once on a computer.
I currently use 3-screens. All three are 1920 x 1080. Two Asus 23" monitors and a Wacom Cintiq 22HD. The Asus' are calibrated to roughly 93% Adobe RGB. The Cintiq is the poor stepchild and can only hit 83% Adobe RGB, but I keep it because I prefer it to a tablet.
This is a setup that works for me and has for many years without a hitch. I'm a bit of an old fart and my eyes aren't what they used to be, so retina screens don't really blow my skirt up.
But I do want every screen I use to be adjustable. Apple displays (at least in the past) haven't been very user friendly in this regard. I'll never trust Apple to do something that I'd rather do myself: judge color. Perhaps Apple has changed, but I haven't.
I'm sure I could handle doing it the way you suggest, but like I said, I'm old and set in my ways. I've had an iMac or two in the past, and they simply don't suit me very well.
But thanks for asking. You didn't sound like a jerk at all.
Yeah, but capital equipment buys are un-fun and you don't even get to open the box ,as the receiving clerk takes care of that stuff . LOL a2
No, they’re too busy working! LOL! And they take time out to make a relevant comment every so often, for which I am grateful. It brings some sanity back to the discussion.
I don’t do post production, but what I do doesn’t require a 2019 Mac Pro, regardless. I believe I am reaching the point where my 2016 15” MacBook Pro (2.9GHz,16GB, 1TB SSD) is beginning to slow down my workflow, but I cannot be absolutely sure until I examine what can be done to alleviate the bottleneck, probably different external storage.
If I look for a solution and the best one is “Buy a new Mac”, I will evaluate my needs rationally and decide if a well spec’d iMac is best or if a base iMac Pro and it’s room to grow (CPU, DRAM and “SSD”) are a better value. Possibly the new 2019 MacBook Pro can do the job as well.
Would I like a new 2019 Mac Pro? Sure, who wouldn’t? Do I need one? No! Will I ever have a need for one? I don’t know, maybe, probably not, if I am honest...in the meantime, the outrage over the pricing seems to be a lot of people pissed that Apple put it out of their reach. Do they really need a workstation or not? If so, why didn’t they buy a Dell or an HP a while ago and move to Windows, because continuing to use that old Mac Pro is costing them lost revenue. Answer: Their workflow probably isn’t demanding enough or profitable enough to make the above question of critical importance to them. I know they feel like they were delighted after waiting so long, but @nerdynerdynerdy ‘s post put that in perspective...
I find it more concerning that Apple waited until their back was literally against the wall before they decided to fix the issues the 2013 Mac Pro caused for their Pro users. Even if the answer had been to simply update the internals of the 2009-2012 Mac Pro and continue selling that system with FireWire and eventually, USB 3.0 and PCIe 3.0, they could have added Thunderbolt 1/2 via a PCIe card (oh, the irony of the 2019 Mac Pro) but the lack of ANY updates to the 2013 Mac Pro (CPU, GPU, chipset, cooling system, PCIe bandwidth, SSD, 10GbE) during its six year lifespan just drives me absolutely bonkers.
The mini I get - low margin consumer, but the Pro, a halo product for the Mac line, ugh...low volume doesn’t mean not important. Just my 2¢, thanks for reading!
Last edited:
I LOVE BUSINESS EXPENSES!! Haha. I get excited about buying office supplies.
I love work, I love business, I love doing my own thing.
I personally own both machines, the cMP 5,1 and the nMP 6,1.
As long as you don't need TB2 support for peripherals the 8C nMP 6,1 won't be noticeably faster.
Single core perfomance is a little better and you might see faster results in rendering.
But real time performance is usually better on my cMP 5,1 (2 x 3,46 GHz 6C).
And my 6,1 has a 10C 3 GHz E5.
I like the 6,1 a lot and I can't complain about it at all, it's much better then its reputation but just macOS upgrade-ability and Thunderbolt 2 support might not be worth a 2400$ investment.
Edit: I just saw that you're still on 10.12, so you have at least 2 more macOS's to go with your 5,1. 10.13 and 10.14 run perfectly fine on a 5,1 and since you own a GTX 680 there is nothing to worry when it comes to Mojave.
Last edited:
When I was a 3D jocky at my previous job, I lived in Cinema 4D all day & all night for years. At the time, I had a 12 core cMP with a good graphics card and a mini render farm at work. I remember thinking very often (like every day) that there is, and never will be a computer fast enough to keep up with what I needed to accomplish. If I had a mythical workstation with 180 cores and 12 GPUs (which doesn't exist) I'd still be waiting on crap.
In my opinion, a maxed out 2019 mMP is STILL a slow dog for 3D jockeys and fast forwarding 20 years from now, the next Mac Pro loaded to the gills will STILL be slow. (for 3D stuff).
Thankfully I'm no longer a slave to that software or 3D content creation, but having lived in that world, I can say with utter conviction, that no computer, present or future will be "fast enough" to rip through a big project effortlessly. The waiting will always exist.
In my opinion, a maxed out 2019 mMP is STILL a slow dog for 3D jockeys and fast forwarding 20 years from now, the next Mac Pro loaded to the gills will STILL be slow. (for 3D stuff).
Thankfully I'm no longer a slave to that software or 3D content creation, but having lived in that world, I can say with utter conviction, that no computer, present or future will be "fast enough" to rip through a big project effortlessly. The waiting will always exist.
I'll start with that at least this argument is better then calling everyone poor, saying that this is no longer the product for people who bought the same product, comparing the prices to old macs, or comparing the mac with its anemic 580x or even Vega 2 to a sgi workstation. With that said...
Okay then, why does he need to spend $45,000+ to do something that building your own xeon yourself could be had for cheaper? At what point does the core count outweigh productivity?
You know that company overspendature is the quickest way to company death? How did Telltale Games die again? Buying too many companies too quickly and lower quality.
You guys wanna act like spending $45,000+ is going to automatically give you some sort of net benefit without any kind of drawback, but then shout down anyone else who simply wanted an Apple desktop. Running a business doesn't work like that. If it did millionaires could easily become billionaires overnight.
Anyway, I'd love to know how many of you defending Apple and making these crazy comparisons were actually planning on buying this? 5 of you? 10? Because I certainly could considering I have an 18 core processor I recently bought:
https://imgur.com/UMmbhYX
A lot of people telling the “whiners” to be quiet are ones who have never needed a use for this product.
In general, the Mac Pro wasn’t purchased by users like you, which it would have been a wasted purchase.
Great, well done, your MBP works for your flow. It doesn’t work for mine nor the other MP potential customers.
Exactly. I REALLY wanna know how many of the people making lame excuses for the mac pro were actually going to buy one.
I believe @nerdynerdynerdy estimate closer to $20,000 but the amount was for comparison versus revenue expected over three years. To answer your question...it doesn’t matter if he spends $20,000 or $45,000, it’s his decision to make and his risk for reward. Your opinion or mine are completely irrelevant. In other words, don’t tell him how to spend his money.
Building his own Xeon precludes him from running macOS and that’s not a compromise he’s willing to make. Still his choice.
Are you telling him how to run his business or that he doesn’t know how much he should spend on his workflow? That’s presumptuous to say the least.
Telltale died because the CEO got too greedy and pushed his staff to do too much too fast to meet unrealistic deadlines without regard to the quality of storytelling which is still important to gamers. Again, not my business, not my decisions.
I am not under the impression that the OP thinks a $45,000 workstation guarantees him anything. If he saw the demo, he saw something worth it to his workflow...perhaps three 8K streams playing at once clinched it for him. If it gets the job done for him and he’s fine spending $20K, more power to him!
Simply wanted an Apple Desktop? The “Waiting for Mac Pro 7,1” thread wanted a Mac Pro and that is what they got...anything less than a Mac Pro is a different beast and not germane to the conversation. Apple is not into wish fulfillment...we’re lucky we got a new Mac mini AND a new Mac Pro the way things had been going.
I am not buying a 2019 Mac Pro, as I have stated pretty honestly in my previous post. If my workload changes and I hit a brick wall that a Core i9 iMac or an iMac Pro can’t break through, then that’s a different story. An 8 to 18-core iMac Pro can go really far in my line of work.
Why are you showing me a picture of an 18-core CPU? Build it and get some work done!
Last edited:
Yeah they got a Mac pro... at double the cost of the 2013 one. Which is something people were not expecting or wanting. Maybe have a little more understanding for them.
I, personally, am not telling anyone to be quiet...but I get sick of the people claiming they can build something at half the cost and it will be more powerful...don’t say it, just go ****ing do it and chuckle to yourself about the fools being screwed over by Apple. Unless you were wrong and it isn’t really faster, just half the price... then you should shut it because you are going to get dunked on hard if you do, and deservedly so.
I have purchased, well...leased, plenty of Mac Pros, when speccing systems for the designers I managed, but thanks for the subtle condescensions.
Yes, my MBP works for me...for now. When I hit its limit, I will upgrade. I still have the iMac or iMac Pro to work through first before a Mac Pro is in my future.
You have a choices, as do others, buy the Mac Pro that Apple is offering or buy something else. It’s as simple as that...either it is of value to you or it isn’t. If it isn’t, then you still have choices and Apple loses your business, which is their loss.
[doublepost=1560048370][/doublepost]
Anyone expecting Apple to give them a $3000 Mac Pro in 2019 is living in fantasy land and/or hasn’t been paying attention to Apple for the past 8 years. After the iMac Pro. I expected at least $5K to start off...$6K was a mild shock, but not completely unexpected. The number of people who deluded themselves into thinking that Apple would offer it at $2499 or even $1999 just staggered me. Apple charges $1749 for an iPad Pro and people think Apple is going to sell them a Mac Pro for only $250 more?! That’s either wishful thinking or willful ignorance.
Well, I was going to buy one, but some guy in California cashed in the winning ticket in the powerball, so...
Oh my... goodness. For the last 6-8 years, people waited for Mac Pro. People were mocking apple because they haven’t built a proper mac pro. They lost sight due to emojis and idevices...and now people are arguing because people are being priced out? I sworn myself that i will buy my last mac pro regardless of the price. The price is very very steep for me..still i want to last another 7-10 years. I will not buy imac type of crap where I can’t expand my ssd, memories or hopefully custom upgrade cpu and gpus.
We’ll, uh, no. The whole point was that the discussion was put forth as if it were a foregone conclusion. Yes, Apple has since unveiled a super-expensive new Mac Pro. But at the time of discussion, there was no guarantee there would even *be* a Mac Pro again...never mind affordability.
Releasing a seemingly overpriced replacement for the already-six-years-old and overpriced Mac Pro 2013 was the “second stupidest” thing I think Apple could have done, ensuring very low sales for a new model. The “first stupidest” thing they could have done was not produce a replacement at all, ensuring very NO sales for a new model.
But still, prior to announcement, there was no guarantee that most wouldn’t be able to afford it...mainly (to me) because I wasn’t convinced we’d even see a new one.
Last edited:
I'm not in the market for a Mac Pro right now, it's far out of my price range. But I think that in a year or two, once there are some on the used market, it'll be a decent buy because of the upgradability.
As with the other poster I replied to, I think you’re missing the point I was making. Yes, Apple did SAY that...TWO YEARS ago. And then said...nothing. At all. For a long-ass time in the computer world. The engineering on the new machine looks pretty great, but still, taking FOUR YEARS to admit they screwed up, then TWO MORE years pass without so much as a follow-up mention— when something quick and barely more than a Hackintosh would’ve thrilled most “waiters” — it’s NOT confidence-inspiring. It’s kinda like the phone support person telling you they’d be back after a brief hold, then 14 min later you’re like, “Uh, are you still there?” You know what they SAID, but you can’t help but wonder if the call has been dropped, or if their shift ended and you didn’t get picked up by someone else...
It’s possible that apple might charge people a lot upfront because they know they won’t make much money once people buy alternative components to upgrade.
I don't know how many people on here know cameras but I was just watching an old video from back in the day which gave me a surprising reminder. I had completely forgotten but back when Nikon released their first high resolution camera back in late 2008 which was the D3X it was $8000 that was back when high resolution full frame was a whopping 24 megapixels.
I had completely forgotten how much that was.
I had completely forgotten how much that was.