|
Any new news on the 2013 Mac Pros? (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| tehlord |
| The reality is I don't really want to switch to a platform I can't or won't upgrade in 3-4 years. Say all the Mini's and iMacs become non upgradable and there's no real Mac Pro, there's little point in me making a full switch. |
|
|
| simonbostock |
| Thing is with the Mini is that when you decide to upgrade in a few years, it would make a handy pc for the lounge with your huge super 3d hd telly. |
|
|
| fluxburn |
| You can get a new iMac with an 3.4 GHZ icore7 and 27 inch screen. That is enough for most folks indeed. |
|
|
| DJ RANN |
To paraphrase Warren G, time to regulate.
So clearing up the bull, here's the deal.
The new super slim Imacs - only the 27 inchers have user upgradeable RAM (up to 32gb). The 21.5 inch come with 8gb or 16gb and the only thing you can swap is the drive.
Does it matter? no. I still run 4gb on my imac and that's plenty. 8gb or 16gb is more than enough.
MacPros being discontinued?
No. They will however be very different from previous incantations. Expect to see complete thunderbolt bus speeds, and a new gen of intel processors. I have a feeling there will be only two models to choose from but within those a fair amount of upgrade options.
I will say though, these may be the last of mac pro range, and if not, expect to wait another 3-5 years before another update.
The uptake on them is going to be HUGE. Apple have been waiting on purpose; The sheer number of studios waiting for a new mac pro is ridiculous, then all the video people, then all the people with more money than sense etc. |
|
|
| fluxburn |
It's funny how Apple's Marketing Team makes the products seem so epic. As an IT geek for decades, I can say Apples hardware really isn't any better, except for the screens then other offerings. All the "engineering" and all that is just marketing hype. Kinda like TV commercials between car insurance; no Progressive is best, no State Farm, no Geico.
Kinda like HP vs Dell vs Apple. For your money you are better off just buying a PC, and if the display really matters, then buy an Apple display second hand. Now that's like spending $4,000 on a Moog Voyager vs buying an Access Virus for example. Yah, no crap the Moog Voyager walks over the Access Virus, just like Apples displays makes a laughing joke of Dell's premier monitors.
It's pretty funny how Apple is the only one to offer multiple CPU's on the high end. Running a DAW on Windows Server 2012 support multiple CPU's though. You could buy a $4,000 server, put in a room for computers and have performance faster then a Mac Pro.
Honestly I got an Apple just like I paid for Progressive Insurance for one reason, Advertising. Manipulation of the brain, hypnosis. In reality Apple Products really aren't better, except the monitor is pretty damn nice. But the hardware? Just some intel processors and a motherboard by the same people and same facility as HP, DELL, etc. etc.
I guess your willing to pay more since Apple brainwashes you. I paid $2,700 for a laptop from Apple that cost what, $200 to make. Peace. |
|
|
| tehlord |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ RANN
To paraphrase Warren G, time to regulate.
So clearing up the bull, here's the deal.
The new super slim Imacs - only the 27 inchers have user upgradeable RAM (up to 32gb). The 21.5 inch come with 8gb or 16gb and the only thing you can swap is the drive.
Does it matter? no. I still run 4gb on my imac and that's plenty. 8gb or 16gb is more than enough.
MacPros being discontinued?
No. They will however be very different from previous incantations. Expect to see complete thunderbolt bus speeds, and a new gen of intel processors. I have a feeling there will be only two models to choose from but within those a fair amount of upgrade options.
I will say though, these may be the last of mac pro range, and if not, expect to wait another 3-5 years before another update.
The uptake on them is going to be HUGE. Apple have been waiting on purpose; The sheer number of studios waiting for a new mac pro is ridiculous, then all the video people, then all the people with more money than sense etc. |
This is the crux of me making the post really. I'm just trying to accurately judge what might be without having to wait too long.
I've pretty much decided that I'm making the switch, although oddly it's the ease of making tutorial videos that's swung it for me more than anything else. It's just a pig to do on PC. I do like the idea of Applecare too as more of my income comes from music/content in its various incarnations. |
|
|
| Anakratis |
The 2013 Mac Pro has basically been confirmed. In an response email from Cook written to "Franz", he promised a professional computer planned for release next year.
Because the new Ivy Bridge-E CPUs, using LGA 2011, are planned to be released Q1 or Q2 of 2013, it's safe to assume that there will be a version of the Mac Pro that includes one of those Ivy Bridge-E CPUs. We should also see the Boxboro-EX, Romley-EP, and Bromolow platforms of the upcoming Xeon CPUs, so that may be an option as well. |
|
|
| tehlord |
| There's no actual confirmed designs or specs though is there? |
|
|
| DJ RANN |
| quote: | Originally posted by tehlord
There's no actual confirmed designs or specs though is there? |
Nowt. What we do know is that there will certainly be a Mac Pro, and it will be far faster than anything they've put out.
The main reasons for this are the big jump in transmission speed that Thunderbolt will bring, and the new CPU's. The rest is all speculation.
I seriously doubt the system will go modular - the way apple is going is less modular and less user configurable. I cuts costs and resources on trying to make this compatible and improves stability and mortality of devices from a warranty perspective.
I don't think it will be revolutionary, in terms of anything groundbreaking (i.e. something we've never seen before) but it will be a monster in terms of performance. I'm thinking 64gb, maybe even 128gb RAM, crazy video card capability and shipping with large SSD's as standard. |
|
|
| Looney4Clooney |
The only guys begging for this are video and big studios. Thunderbolt solved the hardrive issue which made them kinda necessary in the past.
And since logic doesn't really do multi core well, just get an iMac. Do what ran says. |
|
|
| fluxburn |
| quote: | Originally posted by Looney4Clooney
The only guys begging for this are video and big studios. Thunderbolt solved the hardrive issue which made them kinda necessary in the past.
And since logic doesn't really do multi core well, just get an iMac. Do what ran says. |
I use Logic on my 2010 Macbook Pro in 64 bit mode with 8 GB of ram and I installed a really nice OCZ SSD 256 GB for the main drive, took out the optical drive and put the 500 GB in that spot. It has a 2.53 GHZ Intel Icore5.
I can say that compared to previous experience with Cubase on Windows 7 with a Intel Core 2 Duo at 2.4 GHZ and 8 GB of ram and a super fast 10,000K Sata drive, the Mac is faster and seems to handle a lot more with the new 64 bit mode. I'm not sure if Cubase has 64 bit mode, but Logic does.
I can make songs with 40-50 tracks, compressors, eq on every track, just have to bounce the soft synths occasionally or freeze them, the heavy cpu ones. Then again I use plenty of samples, but I mean I use a ton of soft synths too. Lots of the logic soft synths use almost no CPU. Logic's compressors and EQ use no CPU either.
I used to complain a lot about the computers ability to write music. I had this one laptop that was a few years back and this Macbook Pro smokes with the SSD and 8 GB of ram. The ram upgrade was a whopping $40, not paying Apple $400 for whatever generic chips they use.
Of course I could use even more power, but this thing is pretty awesome the way it is now. With a iMac 3.4 GHZ iCore7 and maybe a Mackie UAD card, it's going take some effort to max out the system. Of course if you goal is to max the system, it's easy to break it.
I think Logic is a bit better then Cubase, as I used Cubase for years. Also I have to say the Audio Units at least in Logic use so little CPU it's nuts. Also the in-house tools in Logic sound pretty darn good, better then Cubase.
Oh and I'd just get Protools and the HD cards if I was big on the money. They have 6.4 GHZ cards, impossible to run out of power then. |
|
|
| DJ RANN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Looney4Clooney
The only guys begging for this are video and big studios. Thunderbolt solved the hardrive issue which made them kinda necessary in the past.
And since logic doesn't really do multi core well, just get an iMac. Do what ran says. |
I think you're right about the big studios and video guys but the same could be said of previous mac pro generation releases, and it didn't stop normal consumers from buying them by the shed load.
As for multicore, it's going to be all about logic X - I expect that (and it's price point) to put at least one of the other major software developers out to pasture.
The moment it does full multicore support, 64 bit node support and comes with a bunch of new plugins (and the existing ones are ing great anyway) it will kill the market. I also expect to see a bunch of protools features get integrated as well.
FB is right - cubase has been way more buggy for me and Logic, pound for pound, can handle more without freaking out. Both have pros and cons obviously, but Logic bundled plugins, stability, performance and price point just outshines Cubase. I mean Cubase is still like $600 with halion. Logic pro 9 with more software and samples included is $199.
If you have a mac, absolute no brainer.
Oh and you;re a bit off base with the Pro tools thing; Unless they are being given away, you'd have to be a muppet to buy PTHD interfaces now it's gone native - the new mac pros I think will put the nail in the coffin for Pro tools HD hardware, but give it a new lease of life on native system as few current mac setups can handle that many tracks for real time FX. |
|
|
|
|
