New Mac Pro

Post by shoo_pl » Mon, Jun 03, 2019, 10:20 PM UTC

threeseed wrote: post #308

shoo_pl wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's silly to be honest. I am a developer myself and I can tell you Mac Pro or iMac Pro is a waste of money in every way imaginable. Look up barefeats benchmarks. Unless you have very specialised needs (like video editing) there is visible penalty when you increase the number of your cores. For every day usage 6-8 cores is what you should be aiming at, and preferably with highest clock speed possible. The more core…

It depends on your needs. With Scala/Hydra I routinely run my 8-core i9 MacBook Pro to 100% for quite a few minutes. So I could definitely see more cores improving build times.

Post by timc3 » Mon, Jun 03, 2019, 10:21 PM UTC

bendavis381 wrote: post #209

electricslpnsld wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I worked at two movie studios (Pixar, Weta Digital) and they were both almost 100% Linux with a smattering of Windows machines here and there. Apple stuff was mainly iPads for story boarding and that kind of stuff.

This is more for other readers as I'm sure you know this, but VFX / animation facilities are very different than other post-production functions like editing and sound, which almost always run on Macs. Final Cut and Logic are mostly the reasons for that (Blackmagic is making a real effort to change that though).

Post by pdimitar » Mon, Jun 03, 2019, 10:24 PM UTC

sooheon wrote: post #365

jwr wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For development, I'm actually perfectly fine with 256GB SSD. And I don't care about the video card much at all. Still, I don't see this as a developer machine — I think an iMac Pro is a much better value proposition for developers, and in my case, where I really mostly care about single-threaded performance for interactive development in Clojure and ClojureScript, I'm looking at the iMac.

Why is iMac better than iMac pro for single threaded?

Post by vbezhenar » Mon, Jun 03, 2019, 10:31 PM UTC

snazz wrote: post #108

banachtarski wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

MacOS does not support vendor-supplied drivers which has been the bane to every graphics engineer's existence. Supporting mac for games as a result, is a completely inane task we avoid like the plague. To me, because of the GPU, this machine is a giant paperweight.

I’d argue this is good for users, because vendor-supplied drivers always seem to have crappy updater software running at all times and send pop-ups at all hours on Windows. Vendors really need to better support open-source drivers for user experience purposes, but they don’t because they want more control over their market.

Post by binthere » Mon, Jun 03, 2019, 10:35 PM UTC

PascLeRasc wrote: post #50

vbezhenar wrote: post #2

That price is just absurd. I waited for Mac Pro announcement to decide whether I'll stay with Windows or jump to macOS. Macbooks are not for me, but I hoped for a remotely reasonable priced computer, something like $2000 with another $1000 to expand with more memory, etc. But $6000 for 8-core CPU, 256 GB SSD, GPU that is less powerful than my old $200 NVidia 1060? It's just laughable. Otherwise seems like a good mach…

The new Mac Pro, like Mac Pros always have been, is for music/TV studios and design agencies that bill their time starting at $500/hour. It's really not for individuals, and that's ok. Apple made a computer "just for the pros", like HN begs for in every butterfly keyboard thread. I'm thrilled about it even though I know I'll never touch one. It's for people who don't know what a CPU core is but know how to produce a…