MP All Models Do I need a Mac Pro?

[Jeffncou]

I currently have a 2009 MacPro that is due for upgrade.

I can justify the cost of the new MacPro - a lot of money, but good value if it lasts me 10 years like the old one did.

But do I need a MacPro? I mainly run Indesign, Dreamweaver and Photoshop (for image correction mainly, max file size about 100MB).

I don’t want an iMac because they don’t display the full CMYK gamut.

I’m wondering if a Mac mini would be good enough. What spec would it need to be to outperform my 2009 MacPro?

 

[Coyote2006]

I currently have a 2009 MacPro that is due for upgrade.

I can justify the cost of the new MacPro - a lot of money, but good value if it lasts me 10 years like the old one did.

But do I need a MacPro? I mainly run Indesign, Dreamweaver and Photoshop (for image correction mainly, max file size about 100MB).

I don’t want an iMac because they don’t display the full CMYK gamut.

I’m wondering if a Mac mini would be good enough. What spec would it need to be to outperform my 2009 MacPro?

Maybe you get a 16" MBP and a new 6K?

 

[jinnyman]

Well I’d only choose Mac Mini over MP if all of followings are met:
1) What I’d do doesn’t require high number of cores
2) Headless Mac is a must
3) Does not rely heavily on GPU, or eGPU with one graphic card is enough.
4) Do not need to drive high res Thunderbolt display
5) Lack of internal storage upgradability is not a concern, or external storage is more than enough

Mac Mini is a poor value given how much iMac cost, but then, if you plan to use an external display only, there isn’t really a choice. MBP is nice, but keeping a mobile device for 10 years is not good choice as it’s more prone to failure in general.

If money is not an issue, and you are content with a basic configuration of MP, why not go for it? I think the better choice would be buy a second hand MP after half year or so.
Based on the fact that you’ve been using your 2009 MP happily thus far, I’d assume that you don’t need extreme raw power.

 

[Jeffncou]

Maybe you get a 16" MBP and a new 6K?

Thanks Coyote2006. I love the look of them, but the 6k is way beyond my needs.

80% of my work is print. A highend display is great for showing every shadow and highlight detail, but when your end result relies on a process that hasn’t changed much for 100 years, it all turns to crap anyway 😂.

I’m not in the market for a new monitor at the moment. My LaCie (a really ugly bit of kit but great for CMYK proofing) does the job.

 

[Coyote2006]

Thanks Coyote2006. I love the look of them, but the 6k is way beyond my needs.

80% of my work is print. A highend display is great for showing every shadow and highlight detail, but when your end result relies on a process that hasn’t changed much for 100 years, it all turns to crap anyway 😂.

I’m not in the market for a new monitor at the moment. My LaCie (a really ugly bit of kit but great for CMYK proofing) does the job.

I just wonder, for print you need color proof system, don't you? And the 6K includes a lot of them. So it would be a perfect fit 4u. What monitor are you using?

I am working in the web business so I'd need a cheeper "non-color-proofed" 6K monitor.

If you already have the monitors you need, the MacPro would be a good choice for you I'd say.

 

[Macsonic]

I currently have a 2009 MacPro that is due for upgrade.

I can justify the cost of the new MacPro - a lot of money, but good value if it lasts me 10 years like the old one did.

But do I need a MacPro? I mainly run Indesign, Dreamweaver and Photoshop (for image correction mainly, max file size about 100MB).

I don’t want an iMac because they don’t display the full CMYK gamut.

I’m wondering if a Mac mini would be good enough. What spec would it need to be to outperform my 2009 MacPro?

I think the 2009 Mac Pro is still good for print graphics work. I also do heavy print graphic designing using a 2009 cMac Pro and 2010 cMac Pro. Gets the job done and meets clients’ deadlines. I have tons of large files and the internal HD storage of the cMac Pro is ideal for my needs. I’ve used iMacs but the corners of the monitor screens tends to have dark stains.

 

[th0masp]

Any of those i5/i7 2018 Minis should be a very noticeable speed bump over a 2009 era first generation i7 CPU really, especially in single core speed which is all your apps seem to be requiring anyway.

Question is can you live with non-upgradeable internal storage and a 64 GB RAM ceiling for years to come? E.g. if you keep your assets on network attached storage anyway and have no need for large internal SSDs and don't anticipate your photoshop files getting all that much bigger then perhaps that won't be an issue.

If so that machine is probably all you need to have a massive speed boost over your current system.

I imagine the new Mac Pro won't feel all that much faster than such a Mini for the things you do. Main advantage would be the possibilities for internal expansion but of course these will come at a steep price. Still, if you're buying with a 10 year life cycle in mind...

One thing I'd look into - if you are coming from a computer this old - are you even on a current operating system version - would your applications still all run on 2019-era OS? That's something I tend to stumble over with getting new Apple hardware every time.

 

[bsbeamer]

IF there was a MacMini/MacMiniPro with 128GB RAM option and an i9 processor, that would be the solution for many of the people on the fence between alternative products and the MacPro7,1. I’d probably preorder that for ~$3K.

The MBP16 is plenty fast. CPU benchmarks don’t do it enough justice yet. Noticing at least 25% speed bump for most CPU only video encodes (2-pass VBR). Purchased this to replace an aging MBP, but it’s not a desktop. And the fans do kick in during intensive renders. Not a huge issue, but unless you’re in clamshell mode it’s kind of in your face. Desktop is usually under a desk or out of the way so it’s not as directly audible even if louder (if that makes sense).

If the eGPU issues with Catalina 10.15.1 are resolved in 10.15.2, or the drivers for 5700 XT are improved, it would change things a lot. As it stands right now MP5,1 with RX580 GPU is nearly 33% faster METAL scores. Signals something needs to be addressed.

 

[tsialex]

In my home and office I have several MP5,1s and Mac minis (2012 i5 dual, 2012 i7 quad, 2018 i5 hexa). Most of my files are on the network, so I can live without big local storage, but I need processing power for long periods since I do very long compiles.

I really love the higher single core processing power of 2018 minis and it's six cores but I really hate the thermals, with the 2018 mini I get the CPU around 90ºC for hours and I don't see it running it this way continuously for a long time, it will definitively fail. My 2012 quad have better thermals and don't get so hot, it's a tank and that's why they have so high used market prices.

I never had a thermal problem with my MP5,1s and I do most of my compiles there since it can run for weeks with 100% CPU usage without a hitch. For most people the bad Mac mini thermals are secondary, since they don't run with CPU flat out full time, but it's something that it's a very real problem for me.

MP5,1 are cheap, extremely cheap to upgrade, parts are plentiful on the second hand market and have excellent thermals. The real problem is the low single core performance. If you can live with that, just upgrade it.

 

[thisisnotmyname]

IF there was a MacMini/MacMiniPro with 128GB RAM option and an i9 processor, that would be the solution for many of the people on the fence between alternative products and the MacPro7,1.

nah, the crowd of usual suspects would just complain that they can't buy the base version of that device for $1k and stuff it full of parts from newegg.

or they'd be upset that it's socketed for Intel

or they'd be upset that there aren't Nvidia drivers

or, or, or....

No pleasing some people.

 

[defjam]

I currently have a 2009 MacPro that is due for upgrade.

Can you expand upon why it is due for an upgrade? Do you have some task which is taking too long on the current system? Do you need to run application software which is not available on the current system? Is the current system unreliable? I read your post multiple times and I didn't find anything which gave me an idea why it is due for an upgrade (other than, I assume, age).

If the current system is working for you my recommendation would be to hold on to it for a little while longer which will permit time for some used 7,1 Mac Pros to come on the market. Only exception here is, if you have a Micro Center nearby, they might have a discount on the 7,1 Mac Pro (as they did with the iMac Pro when it was initially released).

 

[th0masp]

Interesting comment re: thermals on the Mini. That kind of thing would have me worried for long term reliability.

Of course you could still pick an iMac/Pro and simply disregard the builtin display for color work and plug in the monitor you already have.
These seem plenty fast as well, however only the iMac Pro has a memory ceiling that goes well beyond 64 GB, upgrading that by yourself seems rather ... involved and generally the computer is in the price range of what the baseline Mac Pro can be expected to be and comes with a display you don't even want.

RAM ceiling - again, that's simply assuming you want to keep the computer for a long time and that your requirements might grow over time.
At least unless there's some paradigm shift coming up for new versions of the software you are running then you can simply go with the minimum number of cores on any of these systems, that would be eight for the 'Pro' machines.

 

[now i see it]

Not only do you not need a MacPro, you don't need MacOS either. Nobody does. People choose apple products because they like them, not because they need them. The world would get along just fine if Apple didn't exist.
All the apps you mentioned are exactly the same on Windows as they are in the Mac. Exact same interface. The ONLY difference is the modifier key in windows is pressed with your pinky finger instead of your thumb like on a Mac keyboard. That's it!

 

[revmacian]

Not only do you not need a MacPro, you don't need MacOS either. Nobody does. People choose apple products because they like them, not because they need them. The world would get along just fine if Apple didn't exist.
All the apps you mentioned are exactly the same on Windows as they are in the Mac. Exact same interface. The ONLY difference is the modifier key in windows is pressed with your pinky finger instead of your thumb like on a Mac keyboard. That's it!

Please keep in mind that some of us haven't touched a Microsoft product in 19 years - moving from macOS to Windows now would include a considerable learning curve. This equates to resources which should be included in the total cost of ownership. Not to mention that there is no desktop+mobile+wearable solution on the Windows side which integrates as seamlessly as do Apple products (macOS+iOS+watchOS).

 

[vel0city]

Thanks Coyote2006. I love the look of them, but the 6k is way beyond my needs.

80% of my work is print. A highend display is great for showing every shadow and highlight detail, but when your end result relies on a process that hasn’t changed much for 100 years, it all turns to crap anyway 😂.

I’m not in the market for a new monitor at the moment. My LaCie (a really ugly bit of kit but great for CMYK proofing) does the job.

Do you think your main work will be print for the next ten years, though? I used to work exclusively in print and my industry changed almost overnight (entertainment/music) but now my work is all digital, and has also moved into 3D and animation which includes GPU rendering. I started off as a print guy working in QuarkXpress and Photoshop and ended up using Cinema4D, After Effects, ZBrush, Octane and Redshift. I would seriously consider future proofing yourself with a machine that enables a smooth transition into a digital workflow potentially working on animated projects and motion graphics, and to keep an eye on VR and AR. Remember what Steve said - "don't follow the puck, skate to where the puck is going to be"

 

[defjam]

Please keep in mind that some of us haven't touched a Microsoft product in 19 years - moving from macOS to Windows now would include a considerable learning curve. This equates to resources which should be included in the total cost of ownership. Not to mention that there is no desktop+mobile+wearable solution on the Windows side which integrates as seamlessly as do Apple products (macOS+iOS+watchOS).

This is plainly obvious when people start telling us how problematic Windows is and it is the reason why I tell them to try it now as it has significantly improved since then.

 

[Krevnik]

I really love the higher single core processing power of 2018 minis and it's six cores but I really hate the thermals, with the 2018 mini I get the CPU around 90ºC for hours and I don't see it running it this way continuously for a long time, it will definitively fail. My 2012 quad have better thermals and don't get so hot, it's a tank and that's why they have so high used market prices.

Turbo Boost is also a lot more aggressive these days than in 2012, too. So this is going to be true of the iMac as well, like the 2015 I had for four years. That had no real problems handling the temps for long encodes on a fairly regular basis.

My question about people claiming things like "it will definitively fail" in these conditions, where's the data demonstrating that? Because at least so far, it doesn't seem that there are anecdotes that this is posing a problem for folks using iMac Pros or iMacs in similar conditions, as their thermals are very similar.

And I've worked on iMac Pros and 2018 Mac minis that are subjected to 8 hour full-throttle conditions nightly on top of their usual day workloads. Or 24/7 build labs using racks of 2018 Mac minis in even worse thermal environments without the luxury of getting much in the way of breaks. I'd imagine we'd see some data coming out of that if this had real merit?

This is plainly obvious when people start telling us how problematic Windows is and it is the reason why I tell them to try it now as it has significantly improved since then.

It has improved, but as a friendly user experience, it still ain't it. The Windows API is still in a state of utter atrophy, color management is more hacked together than on the Mac, and Windows is more obviously a mish-mash of different design philosophies over the decades that are more jarring than what Apple's inflicted on it's users (and Apple generally gets rid of the old stuff over time more aggressively).

One area I do think MS has Apple beat on is something a lot closer to true resolution independence that doesn't require weird oversampling tricks. But even then, so many apps don't work right with it that Apple still somehow has the better user experience at the end of the day. Partly due to MS' insistence that backwards compatibility be upheld.

 

[iluvmacs99]

I currently have a 2009 MacPro that is due for upgrade.

I can justify the cost of the new MacPro - a lot of money, but good value if it lasts me 10 years like the old one did.

But do I need a MacPro? I mainly run Indesign, Dreamweaver and Photoshop (for image correction mainly, max file size about 100MB).

I don’t want an iMac because they don’t display the full CMYK gamut.

The Mac Pro allows future expansion through its slots, whereas the Mini doesn't so even if you own a Mini, your expansion options are pretty limited to one or two slots through a Thunderbolt box. Whereas the new Mac Pro can accept newer GPU cards to anticipate your future needs and evolving photographic standards which you don't see now, but because 10 years is a long time span is something you will likely need moving forward). If you can amortise the cost of the new Mac Pro and justify its cost, then the new Mac Pro would probably be a better hedge and deal.

 

[defjam]

It has improved, but as a friendly user experience, it still ain't it. The Windows API is still in a state of utter atrophy, color management is more hacked together than on the Mac, and Windows is more obviously a mish-mash of different design philosophies over the decades that are more jarring than what Apple's inflicted on it's users (and Apple generally gets rid of the old stuff over time more aggressively).

I can't speak for color management as I have no real experience with color calibration so I cannot say whether it is worse, equal, or better to macOS.

Regarding the mis-mash of different design philosophies that comes with evolution. A new OS supports a new technology but not everything can take advantage of it right out of the gate. Application developers need time to utilize it. Even the OS developer needs time to migrate supplied applications over, Apple is not immune.

Then there's the backwards support. Given Windows' strength in this area it is possible to run very old applications. Applications which may given the appearance of a mis-mash of technology. For example: One program I use, ACDsee version 3.1, is almost 20 years old. As it is an old application it has the old look and feel of contemporary Windows versions at the time of its release. Is this a mis-mash? Or should I upgrade to a later version which had a modern look to it?

In the end much of the Windows problems I read aren't really problems with modern versions of Windows and it is plainly obvious when I read such posts.

 

[fathergll]

Question is can you live with non-upgradeable internal storage and a 64 GB RAM ceiling for years to come? E.g. if you keep your assets on network attached storage anyway and have no need for large internal SSDs and don't anticipate your photoshop files getting all that much bigger then perhaps that won't be an issue.

It won't but the Mini doesn't need to last that long since it's a fraction of the price. The smart buy is a discounted Mini and upgrading the ram yourself and then upgrade to something else down the road when the time comes.

 

[tsialex]

Turbo Boost is also a lot more aggressive these days than in 2012, too. So this is going to be true of the iMac as well, like the 2015 I had for four years. That had no real problems handling the temps for long encodes on a fairly regular basis.

My question about people claiming things like "it will definitively fail" in these conditions, where's the data demonstrating that? Because at least so far, it doesn't seem to even really be anecdotes that this is posing a problem for folks using iMac Pros or iMacs in similar conditions, as their thermals are very similar.

And I've worked on iMac Pros and 2018 Mac minis that are subjected to 8 hour full-throttle conditions nightly on top of their usual day workloads. Or 24/7 build labs using racks of 2018 Mac minis in even worse thermal environments without the luxury of getting much in the way of breaks. I'd imagine we'd see some data coming out of that if this had real merit?

We will probably see more data about the 2018 thermals from MacStadium and MacMiniVault if they see more failures from the past generations rate.

My problem with Mac mini thermals is related with my use case. From a pure engineering stand point, the 2018 Mac mini do not have a thermal problem since it's designed for a very different and lighter use case than mine, while MP5,1 was designed for a flat out CPU usage and that was my own comparison point in the previous post.

I never had to replace a MP5,1 fan even after 10 years, while I lost count of failures of fans from MBPs and the occasional mini fan needing replacement within the same timeframe. iMacs have better thermal designs than the mini, with a lot bigger heatsinks and fans, so it's not a direct comparison, the mini fan has a design more similar with a MBP fan than with an iMac one.

 

[th0masp]

It won't but the Mini doesn't need to last that long since it's a fraction of the price. The smart buy is a discounted Mini and upgrading the ram yourself and then upgrade to something else down the road when the time comes.

I'm thinking the smart buy in this case might indeed by the Mac Pro base config - and to be done with the topic entirely for the next few years. Time to go back to working instead configuring and all that.

It's way over the top of course for the apps that were specified by the OP but at least there's plenty of headroom for expansion should the need arise - and no compromises will have to be made regarding expansion, cooling, noise like on all the other systems Apple is currently offering.

If its really in the budget, might as well go with that - it's not like the Mini is an inexpensive little thing within impulse-buy range like it used to be. With a decently sized SSD I can push the price to about 3K easily in the Apple store and that's not the top end either.

 

[Jeffncou]

Can you expand upon why it is due for an upgrade? Do you have some task which is taking too long on the current system? Do you need to run application software which is not available on the current system? Is the current system unreliable? I read your post multiple times and I didn't find anything which gave me an idea why it is due for an upgrade (other than, I assume, age).

If the current system is working for you my recommendation would be to hold on to it for a little while longer which will permit time for some used 7,1 Mac Pros to come on the market. Only exception here is, if you have a Micro Center nearby, they might have a discount on the 7,1 Mac Pro (as they did with the iMac Pro when it was initially released).

I haven’t upgraded my OS since High Sierra because it doesn’t support my Raid set up. As of the 2019 Adobe Suite upgrade, I can’t run the latest versions of Photoshop Etc because my OS is too old. Increasingly I am getting spinning wheels, nothing major but even just a few seconds seems like an age when you’re used to things being instantaneous. It just feels like a good time to have an overhaul of the whole system to bring me up to date.
[automerge]1575829361[/automerge]

Do you think your main work will be print for the next ten years, though? I used to work exclusively in print and my industry changed almost overnight (entertainment/music) but now my work is all digital, and has also moved into 3D and animation which includes GPU rendering. I started off as a print guy working in QuarkXpress and Photoshop and ended up using Cinema4D, After Effects, ZBrush, Octane and Redshift. I would seriously consider future proofing yourself with a machine that enables a smooth transition into a digital workflow potentially working on animated projects and motion graphics, and to keep an eye on VR and AR. Remember what Steve said - "don't follow the puck, skate to where the puck is going to be"

Like you I started with quark. I think photoshop was version 4, and I was working on a LC475! I work in publishing so my industry maybe hasn’t shifted as quickly as yours. Web design is obviously a major change, but not that power hungry. As a publisher I am more a ‘bringing together of things’ than a ‘creator of things’ so when it comes to 3D, video and the like I tend to outsource it rather than do it myself.

 

[Jeffncou]

Not only do you not need a MacPro, you don't need MacOS either. Nobody does. People choose apple products because they like them, not because they need them. The world would get along just fine if Apple didn't exist.
All the apps you mentioned are exactly the same on Windows as they are in the Mac. Exact same interface. The ONLY difference is the modifier key in windows is pressed with your pinky finger instead of your thumb like on a Mac keyboard. That's it!

That may well be true, but as a user of Macs since 1993 I don’t want to change . Plus, as a small company that has 4 other macs, it makes sense to keep everything on the same eco system. I’m not an Apple fanboy, if Apple didn’t exist I would get on fine without it. But is does, and I don’t need to.

 

[defjam]

I haven’t upgraded my OS since High Sierra because it doesn’t support my Raid set up. As of the 2019 Adobe Suite upgrade, I can’t run the latest versions of Photoshop Etc because my OS is too old. Increasingly I am getting spinning wheels, nothing major but even just a few seconds seems like an age when you’re used to things being instantaneous. It just feels like a good time to have an overhaul of the whole system to bring me up to date.

Sounds as if you may be able to wait a few months. If that's the case I would recommend holding off doing so as there are bound to be some discounts, even if slight, once supply constraints ease. If you're looking at a 10 year lifecycle then the base if only $600/year, not bad.