Live data from Hacker News

The Mac Pro Review

anandtech.com

21–30 of 163 posts

Re: The Mac Pro Review

#21
post #15

Wow. For me, the big takeaway from this review are the benchmarks showing the iMac and MBPs beating out the Mac Pro. That shows that this machine is really for niche markets like professional video editing. Makes you wonder why Apple even bothers.

align your silicon choices to your workload

The MacOS market in general might be described niche, but it seems to have sustained itself over the years.

Re: The Mac Pro Review

#23
post #2

AnandTech hardware and Ars Technica's software (especially OS X) reviews are works of art by themselves. The level of details that goes into these pieces is nothing short of amazing. They are examples of tech journaling done right.

AnandTech is often the only place that measures and reports anything about the screens of computers, tablets, and phones aside from how many pixels they have (color space, color accuracy, etc.). For this alone they are gold.

I like Anandtech but they have come into criticism recently, from some of their long-time readers, for fawning over Apple products.

Re: The Mac Pro Review

#24
post #15

Wow. For me, the big takeaway from this review are the benchmarks showing the iMac and MBPs beating out the Mac Pro. That shows that this machine is really for niche markets like professional video editing. Makes you wonder why Apple even bothers.

[deleted]

Re: The Mac Pro Review

#25
post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AnandTech is often the only place that measures and reports anything about the screens of computers, tablets, and phones aside from how many pixels they have (color space, color accuracy, etc.). For this alone they are gold.

I like Anandtech but they have come into criticism recently, from some of their long-time readers, for fawning over Apple products.

Well that's silly. "Anandtech does great reviews unless it's favorable to something I'm not, so then those reviews must be biased". Either you trust Anandtech or you don't. And if you do, then you shouldn't call the reviews that go against your views as biased.

By "you", I don't mean you, yapcguy. Just in general towards those that are criticizing Anandtech.

Re: The Mac Pro Review

#26

Apple needs to fix Mavericks before I ever buy anything from them. They have so much cash, and so many bugs in Mavericks?

iOS is insecure, Mavericks buggy as hell, iCloud can't keep the lights on.

One has to wonder what all their engineers are actually working on.

Re: The Mac Pro Review

#27
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

After running every version of Windows since 3.1, I've decided to go Mac for my desktop. I run stuff on it 24/7 and have 6 external disks, so a MBP is out of the question. The cost of external enclosures, though, for the new Mac Pro makes it out of reach ($3000 + $2400 = $5400... I can put together a nice hackintosh for $1700).

The DIY PC route is still going to be more affordable. If we go the Ivy Bridge E route and opt for a Core i7-4930K, you get more cores than either of the options above for around $600 for the CPU. Adding in another $330 for a motherboard, $180 for 12GB of DDR3-1866 memory, $1400 for two W7000 GPUs and $220 for a fast SATA SSD (Samsung 840 Pro) we’re at $2730 for a configuration that would cost at least $3499 from App…

Only because of the workstation GPUs. You can get better performance for much less if you don't need the special labeling.

Re: The Mac Pro Review

#28
Interesting they compared the new Mac to a workstation.

Older workstations these days are a lot more affordable and can easily be upgraded. Most MACS you're stuck with what you get.

Case in point, I just purchased an HP 8400 workstation for a friend. $320 for a dual proc 2.6GHz quad core Xeon, 16GB RAM, Two 320GB SAS drives in RAID config and ATI Fire V7350 1GB video card. Sure its a pig and isn't the quietest PC in the room, but it completely shreds anything I could find in a retail setting.

Re: The Mac Pro Review

#29

Interesting they compared the new Mac to a workstation. Older workstations these days are a lot more affordable and can easily be upgraded. Most MACS you're stuck with what you get. Case in point, I just purchased an HP 8400 workstation for a friend. $320 for a dual proc 2.6GHz quad core Xeon, 16GB RAM, Two 320GB SAS drives in RAID config and ATI Fire V7350 1GB video card. Sure its a pig and isn't the quietest PC in…

Really? $320 for a new machine with that spec? That graphics card alone costed more than that when it was new, did the CPU/storage/power supply come at negative price?

If this was true, it would really explain HP's financial situation /s

EDIT: that graphics card despite being old, still sells for $300 on Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/ATI-100-505143-FireGL-512-bit-Express/...

Re: The Mac Pro Review

#30
post #15

Wow. For me, the big takeaway from this review are the benchmarks showing the iMac and MBPs beating out the Mac Pro. That shows that this machine is really for niche markets like professional video editing. Makes you wonder why Apple even bothers.

In general, the MacPro loses out in single-thread performance only, since Xeons are typically one architecture behind. When the Haswell based Xeons come out, Apple will refresh the Mac Pro line, and you'll get parity single-thread performance.

Do we know that though? Historically speaking, the Mac Pro doesn't get updated nearly as often as Intel releases a new architecture.
Post reply on HN