Yea I am leaning Mac Pro heavily. I think my main thing is buying now or waiting for the next model. I really want to have a 5K display, if I can't get that in/with the iMac, I would at least like that option down the road with the Mac Pro. I do share the same concerns with you regarding heat, and have heard that is an issue.
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.
5K iMac or 6 Core Mac Pro
- Thread starter mashinhead
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Editing is actually somewhat difficult on a really large display. I can't personally stand anything past 100% even for most really detailed work. It's misleading, and most people only zoom in that far to compensate for inaccuracies in the way they work with it. For example a large wacom tablet is around 12x19" with the current generation. If you set that to a 27" screen, you have some fairly scaled movement. If you have a steady hand and can make use of something secondary such as one of Apple's trackpads, you can lock that down to an equal portion of screen area and just use the trackpad to grab out of range stuff. It sounds like a hack and it is, but it does take care of the issue of having to zoom way in to bring the margin of error low enough.
Another thing to consider is that it's closer to the resolution of a high quality output, regardless of whether that is printed or a device like an iPad. If you can't see it at 100% on a retina imac, you may want to reconsider what you remove from that image.
For me it matters because my work varies from portrait to product photography that will be on retail signage and exhibits. I agree if the end product is on the Web or an 8x10 no problem, at 4x6 feet those little details matter.
You make unfair assumptions about my background sir. I found the best results to be obtained right around 100% zoom for most things. Zooming in a bit further to draw out a clipping path is typical due to the annoying issue of aliasing, but for many things it can cause you to lose perspective on the image. I think part of the reason for this is that scale contributes to the issue of aesthetics. Overall though I prefer to be around 1:1 with a large tablet limited to equal dimensions in terms of screen area. It gives the greatest feeling of precision, because the movement is very natural when it comes to subtle shading.
Edit: The reason I mentioned iPads was as a device with high display resolution. There isn't as much print work as there was even a few years ago, although it's probably comfortable enough with the number of people that have dropped out of it.
I honestly don't know what assumptions were made? I agree working at 100% on my nec 1920 x 1200 display gives me a nice large image to work on but that same image at 100% on a 2x scaled retina imac would be much smaller to see details. Most people won't be seeing it like you or I would on a retina it would be much larger on their lower resolution screens.
I am also very tired and not sure if I am making sense at this point.
Oh sorry. I was having a little fun with it, thus the excessively formal language. You mentioned 8x10s and web, which used to be euphemisms for work that was either of lower quality or less forgiving.
In my own experience it's easier to work with a higher resolution display. It's not however easier to work with a more reflective display. If I switched to a retina imac for anything important, I would want to ensure that I could make the lighting around it work. Regarding resolution though I have a 1920x1200 24" display. It's a CG243W that's left over from the old work. That replaced a 1600x1200 NEC 2190 UXi. I much prefer the resolution of the retina macbook pro. The Eizo is just superior in every other aspect.
Anyway I also know what you mean about others viewing things larger. I was trying to state that not zooming way way in doesn't necessarily mean being less detailed with the work. I should also be careful about not going further off topic. It's just that this sub-thread made me think about the reflectivity of the thing. The 2012 and newer are far better than the old ones in that regard, but it's still noticeable under many lighting conditions.
No problem like I said it was really late!
Honestly I've been putting stuff in my BHPhoto cart and despite the heat/first generation to get the i7/295/512GB iMac with OEM 32GB Ram, a TB RAID5 box would be nearly $1k USD less than getting a 4c nMP/D300/512GB SSD, 27in Display, and the same RAID5 Box. Decisions decisions!
No problem like I said it was really late!
Honestly I've been putting stuff in my BHPhoto cart and despite the heat/first generation to get the i7/295/512GB iMac with OEM 32GB Ram, a TB RAID5 box would be nearly $1k USD less than getting a 4c nMP/D300/512GB SSD, 27in Display, and the same RAID5 Box. Decisions decisions!
If you could be alright with 256 SSD, you could get the Mac Pro from refurbished store for 2550$.
Also it depends on the Screen you would want to use, with the Mac Pro.
Dell has pretty nice IPS monitors right now with 4K resolution.
105ºC is the certainty of getting a radeongate sooner or later. I'd buy with Apple Care and try to stress it enough to fail within the 3-years window.
The temperature variations and throttling most likely down to the usual slapdash thermal paste are uncannily similar to the mbp 2011, the last time they put a pair of chips too hot to handle for a chassis and that 125w option GPU I reckon will start to fail in time, particularly in years 2 and 3 of AppleCare.
I have yet to have my first tear down to redo the thermal paste on the 5k but I'm already looking forward to making them run as cool as a cucumber compared to Apple. Though that is for clients, lovely screen or not they are not designed for hard work like a Mac Pro. Hence why my mbp 2011 hardly does anything that resembles hard work when I have a flashed 4,1 to do all of that and far quicker too!
So the choice of the 6,1 or the 5k is a dead easy choice for me. The silent bin every time.
Bit of a shame spending all that $$$ for a computer you can't enjoy the processing potential fully, don't you think? Of course if you have the skill to unglue the screen and tweak the cooling... But for most iMac users this is a bit out of reach.
It's my mobile dual boot Mac for my work as a mixed Apple/Windows tech and consultant for taking out on jobs. I've already repasted and polished my die plates on my 2011 and it runs very cool. But my 4,1 absolutely stomps it in turns of performance. If I bought a 5k myself I would certainly be whipping that screen out and redoing the thermal paste!
No problem like I said it was really late!
Honestly I've been putting stuff in my BHPhoto cart and despite the heat/first generation to get the i7/295/512GB iMac with OEM 32GB Ram, a TB RAID5 box would be nearly $1k USD less than getting a 4c nMP/D300/512GB SSD, 27in Display, and the same RAID5 Box. Decisions decisions!
I guess Apple has their reasons, but the base mac pros have taken on high markups relative to their configurations since 2009. I don't see them changing that anytime soon. It's unfortunate that you're now sort of stuck with thunderbolt for any fast storage or scratch access
True. I finally decided I can't wait for an updated MP and with the heat issues of the BTO riMac I picked up a 2013 fully spec'd model. I figure I can keep it for a couple of years, donate it to my wife and pick up either a 2017 iMac or a skyline MP.
To the OP good luck with your decision and hopefully you don't take half a year to decide like I did.