MP 7,1 Does it make sense to purchase a 7,1 Mac Pro today?

[Kenndac]

Reading this thread is interesting as someone who ordered a new Mac Pro after the M1 announcement. I'd agree that other than some hyper-specific use cases, the Mac Pro isn't a great buy at the moment.

I'm a developer that ships apps for Mac and iOS in the photography space. That gives us a huge range of customers — from the photographer that has an established setup that won't change until it physically stops working, to the photographer that gives us one-star reviews because we don't yet support the camera they bought on release day that hasn't even come to our market yet.

That means we have customers that will be on Intel (and older OS versions) for a very long time, and customers that are already moving over to a full Apple silicon workflow. We need to work great on everything.

For this use case as a developer, a Mac Pro is a sort-of reasonable purchase at the moment. It's nice and powerful for day-to-day use, and when powerful M1 machines come along, we can switch to those for day-to-day work and the Mac Pro can become a computer for testing on Intel, including in older macOS versions in virtual machines. It can ride out the entire Intel transition to the point where Intel machines are like PowerPC machines are now — simply not a concern at all for developers.

Getting a 15% discount didn't hurt either. We improved the value for money by getting the lowest RAM available and "only" a 1TB SSD — we can upgrade the RAM and storage ourselves for a significant savings.

That said, I really wish Apple made something in the middle. A tower form factor computer without workstation-grade parts would be perfect for us.

 

[AndreeOnline]

Does this shed any light for you?

Thanks! I'll add it to my data collection. When I have a few different systems I'll update the benchmark thread.

As you noticed, the three different media files produce similar results. I will probably adjust the project and replace the first clip with the original .braw file and apply a more traditional node structure to that clip; something that might reflect an actual grade.

 

[AndreeOnline]

Reading this thread is interesting as someone who ordered a new Mac Pro after the M1 announcement.

Apple M1 products have very little in common with a 7.1 Mac Pro. But people love comparing numbers. Probably because it's "so easy". Ironically, based on these, they often draw wrong or at least extremely over simplified conclusions. ?

Some of us use our computers several hours every day. We will have a lot of hours under our belts before the next Mac Pro comes out. Most likely over 2 years....

During this time, the 7.1 will lose value. Or... generate value, as it were. Much of the initial cost will be written off by then. And what's left will most likely be reflected in the 'used 7.1' price—because believe it or not, it will not be $0.

 

[ghostwind]

Apple M1 products have very little in common with a 7.1 Mac Pro. But people love comparing numbers. Probably because it's "so easy". Ironically, based on these, they often draw wrong or at least extremely over simplified conclusions. ?

Some of us use our computers several hours every day. We will have a lot of hours under our belts before the next Mac Pro comes out. Most likely over 2 years....

During this time, the 7.1 will lose value. Or... generate value, as it were. Much of the initial cost will be written off by then. And what's left will most likely be reflected in the 'used 7.1' price—because believe it or not, it will not be $0.

In my case, 2 years couldn't justify it. It really came down to that, and the fact that I'm OK with going slower and milking it for a bit longer as I said. I said it earlier, I tend to run all my gear into the ground before replacing it with top gear that lasts a long time, unless there are clear benefits to an upgrade, outside of speed (in this case) or more megapixels (in photo cameras) for example. Benefits that will make a difference to my work, not my want. Real improvements are made every 5-6 years it seems like, at least for what I do and in my own experience. Had I been in this position a year ago, I would have gotten the Mac Pro. Now, it took a bit of time to understand that it's not for me at this point in time. Everyone is different though, so it will always be a personal decision with no right or wrong. This thread was very informative, and I have enjoyed all the opinions shared.

 

[tanoanian]

I disagree that the 7,1 is a bad purchase idea right now. It depends on your individual use.

My use case relies heavily on virtualization. I run as many as ten windows virtual machines with VNC access for remote workers. I also run VMware ESXi and vCSA via Fusion. I purchased a 16 core 7,1 with a W5700x and added 384gb of RAM.

I couldn't be more happy with my 2019 Mac Pro. If the rumors are true the ARM Mac Pro won't be available until the end of 2021, probably into 2022. Early adopters ALWAYS get screwed. We saw that with the 2019 Mac Pro and Radon 580 MPX module. If you didn't want Vega II at launch your only option was a complete piece of garbage in the 580 MPX module. Early adopters of the M1 are getting screwed in their own way with thunderbolt and the fact they are buying entry level machines meant to replace the i3 that in no way compares to a high end MacBook Pro or the Mac Pro.

I'll take four years of use from an intel Mac Pro before there is a MATURE version of an ARM Mac Pro and they sort out virtualization.

Early adopters ALWAYS get screwed.

 

[chfilm]

Thanks! I'll add it to my data collection. When I have a few different systems I'll update the benchmark thread.

As you noticed, the three different media files produce similar results. I will probably adjust the project and replace the first clip with the original .braw file and apply a more traditional node structure to that clip; something that might reflect an actual grade.

Im curious about your benchmark numbers. Would like to know how this runs with only a single Vega.

 

[AndreeOnline]

Im curious about your benchmark numbers. Would like to know how this runs with only a single Vega.

Of course! I just updated the thread with the benchmark with a few numbers. Looking for a Mac Mini M1 next.

 

[PowerMike G5]

I don't think anyone can go wrong with any of the different camera offerings out there TBH, as they are all very, very good. It simply depends on what tool you need for what you do (narrative, documentary, run & gun, a mix, commercial, etc.). Do you need XLR inputs? AF? PL mount? The list goes on, and everyone's needs are different. I have, and will continue to rent cameras for specialty one-off projects, but for my main workhorse, I want to own it so I can know the ins and outs of it like the back of my hand. It helps. I do rent lenses often, but for me that's quite different. @PowerMike G5 - don't worry, these cameras will last. People worry too much IMHO about cameras getting outdated - HD still rules the world, look at stuff shot on Arri 2K still. It's like the MP wars with DSLRs - after a point, you no longer care or need more. Same will be with video cameras. Focus more on pixel quality, etc. Since a lot can now be done in grading, I also don't worry too much about the Canon look vs the Sony look, and stuff like this. I think, as I was saying, the Sony FX9/FX6 are superb cameras. I just don't have the lenses.

@AndreeOnline I started with Canon cameras with the 1V film. Then the 10D, 1D, 5D, 1DX, etc. I'm still on the 1DXII and 5D4, as the 1DXIII didn't offer much for me for stills TBH to upgrade to. I'll wait for the 1DX RF MILC before upgrading and slowly moving to RF. The R5 let me down - IMHO they should have made 2 cameras and split up the stills from the video. I also prefer larger bodies, as ergonomics are very important. Sonys have amazing IQ, but it's hard for me to work with the small buttons, balance the tiny bodies with large glass, etc. One camera I'm interesting in is the Fuji GFX100 for getting unique looks.

Yeah, this talk can go on forever, but back to the main point.

What do Mac Pro users think about what I was saying above - Pro Vega II vs 5700 or 2 x 5700s?

Yeah, I'm not worried. I owned the Mark II version for the past 5 years and that camera is still very much relevant. With the brand new sensor - a really, really amazing sensor - both very clean even in high ISOs (even more so than the C500 MII due to the DGO) and large dynamic range, internal raw recording and the 4K/120fps, this camera will last for a long time. You're right, you can't go wrong with most of the cameras on the market today.

 

[PowerMike G5]

I disagree that the 7,1 is a bad purchase idea right now. It depends on your individual use.

My use case relies heavily on virtualization. I run as many as ten windows virtual machines with VNC access for remote workers. I also run VMware ESXi and vCSA via Fusion. I purchased a 16 core 7,1 with a W5700x and added 384gb of RAM.

I couldn't be more happy with my 2019 Mac Pro. If the rumors are true the ARM Mac Pro won't be available until the end of 2021, probably into 2022. Early adopters ALWAYS get screwed. We saw that with the 2019 Mac Pro and Radon 580 MPX module. If you didn't want Vega II at launch your only option was a complete piece of garbage in the 580 MPX module. Early adopters of the M1 are getting screwed in their own way with thunderbolt and the fact they are buying entry level machines meant to replace the i3 that in no way compares to a high end MacBook Pro or the Mac Pro.

I'll take four years of use from an intel Mac Pro before there is a MATURE version of an ARM Mac Pro and they sort out virtualization.

Early adopters ALWAYS get screwed.

Yes, if your use case allows you to make the cost back relatively quickly with work, while accelerating the efficiency of your work, then it makes a good purchase now.

I spent about $15K on mine, but knew going in that I had some post production work that already covered its cost early on. Now it allows me to work faster and it just helps generate income now.

I wouldn't hesitate to buy now. The machine will last for years to come. If you can generate more income with it before the ARM version comes out, then it makes total sense.

 

[OkiRun]

Yes, if your use case allows you to make the cost back relatively quickly with work, while accelerating the efficiency of your work, then it makes a good purchase now.

I spent about $15K on mine, but knew going in that I had some post production work that already covered its cost early on. Now it allows me to work faster and it just helps generate income now.

I wouldn't hesitate to buy now. The machine will last for years to come. If you can generate more income with it before the ARM version comes out, then it makes total sense.

The business decision boils to ~ is he losing money with his current computer system that he could earn if he had the 7,1 now and for the next two years - waiting on the 8,1 and is that amount substantially more than the cost of a 7,1 outfitted for his workflow. Its simple.

Limping along for two years, as a business owner, is bad situation to find oneself in.

 

[ghostwind]

The business decision boils to ~ is he losing money with his current computer system that he could earn if he had the 7,1 now and for the next two years - waiting on the 8,1 and is that amount substantially more than the cost of a 7,1 outfitted for his workflow. Its simple.

Limping along for two years, as a business owner, is bad situation to find oneself in.

No, I'm not losing money nor would a new Mac/PC make me more money. It's about making work easier/faster. That's all. Right now, for all reasons stated, it's not a good investment. In 6-8months, I'll get my stop-gap ARM Mac. So my limp will be short-lived. To me it's an OK sacrifice. The ARM Mac will have good resale value. This one I feel will have horrible resale value, and iffy support. I may be wrong, but that's my feeling based on Apple's past history with the Intel transition and their general support for pros.

 

[tanoanian]

No, I'm not losing money nor would a new Mac/PC make me more money. It's about making work easier/faster. That's all. Right now, for all reasons stated, it's not a good investment. In 6-8months, I'll get my stop-gap ARM Mac. So my limp will be short-lived. To me it's an OK sacrifice. The ARM Mac will have good resale value. This one I feel will have horrible resale value, and iffy support. I may be wrong, but that's my feeling based on Apple's past history with the Intel transition and their general support for pros.

Why would you want to limp along with an entry level machine?

 

[ghostwind]

Why would you want to limp along with an entry level machine?

Not sure I understand. Read my posts - I was pretty clear I think.

 

[IA64]

This one I feel will have horrible resale value, and iffy support. I may be wrong, but that's my feeling based on Apple's past history with the Intel transition and their general support for pros.

I don't think it's going to have a horrible resale value at all. Yes the transition to x86 left the PowerPC users in the dark however it's a bit different here.

You can still install the latest Windows version or any x86/x64 OS and run your machine whereas with the PowerPC you were the absolute minority.

 

[tanoanian]

Not sure I understand. Read my posts - I was pretty clear I think.

Not so much...but to each their own.

 

[Dong Anh Nguyen]

I have a deal to buy a Mac pro 2019 refurbished for $6700: 8 core, 48gb ram, 1tb ssd, dual radeon pro w5700x, afterburner card.
Is it a good deal?

 

[timerickson]

Definitely a good deal if you can make use of that machine for your work. A pretty significant discount over the retail cost

 

[atonaldenim]

Hey @ghostwind , I didn’t read every page of the thread, but just chiming in to say I agree with your decision not to drop big money on a Mac Pro right now during this major platform transition, just for video editing work. The big issue is that Adobe Premiere has pretty mediocre performance on MacOS in general. I think a good place to start is figuring out workflows that don’t push as hard on Premiere’s weak spots.

For example it sounds like you’re doing color work early in the editing process, and trying to edit in Premiere with color corrections being applied in real time. That is quite taxing on the machine, especially on a less powerful laptop GPU. You won’t get good timeline performance in Premiere if you’re editing with LUTs and color correction applied to all your footage. The typical film production workflow reserves color grading and sound mixing as finishing steps after the film is edited and picture locked, and only the shots actually used in the final cut are color corrected.

If you want to edit your footage with some kind of color correction, a good way is to make proxy media with a LUT baked in. That way all the footage has basic Rec.709 color to begin with, and Premiere isn’t trying to do any GPU color correction in real time. I use EditReady to easily generate proxy media with a LUT applied. You’ll want to use an editing-friendly codec for your proxies like ProRes LT or Proxy, not H.264. I use a 5,1 Mac Pro (12-core, Vega 56, 96GB) for generating the proxies after a shoot, and I can keep doing other work on my MacBook Pro (2019, 8-core, 32GB, Vega 20.)

Another performance tip is to avoid using Premiere’s Attached Proxy workflow, if you are bringing a lot of clips into Premiere (for example, a documentary or feature film). For best performance, stick to the traditional proxy workflow of making your proxy media identically named to the originals, and only bring the proxy media into Premiere. When your cut is locked, take all your clips offline, then relink them to the original media. If the original media has identical file names, it will relink very easily. That way Premiere doesn’t having the extra burden of keeping track of the original media and proxy media at the same time.

Another best practice for Premiere performance is to keep your Premiere project files small. Be very selective as to what media you bring into the Premiere project at all. For example on an episodic series, you should not have every shoot from every episode in the entire season all inside one project. (I’ve seen some editors work this way.) Make one Premiere project per episode, and only bring the footage for that one episode into the project. Premiere just can’t handle having a ton of things to keep track of in a project, whether clips or sequences. If you’re the kind of editor who keeps a ton of backup copies of old sequences, it’s better just to periodically make a backup copy of your Premiere project, then delete all the old sequences from your current project to keep it light.

After a shoot, when you’ve reviewed the footage, remove any unneeded clips from the project altogether. Don’t leave the entire camera card sitting in the project if you don’t need it. Or keep all your dailies in one project for reference, make your selects sequences within that project, then move ONLY the selects into a separate project that you actually edit in. In a documentary project with a ton of footage, split the footage up into projects by year, or by subject, etc, and again only bring the selects into a separate editing project to actually work in. This is sometimes called the “Hollywood workflow.” Keeping very lean projects will keep Premiere a lot happier. The new “Productions” feature can make this workflow easier too.

Of course for best performance you’ll want to keep the playback quality set to 1/4 or 1/2 most of the time, only going to “Full” quality when absolutely necessary.

You mentioned working on a feature film soon, another recommendation is to budget for an assistant editor, who can take care of all this media management stuff, so you can focus on the creative work of storytelling.

Davinci Resolve and Final Cut Pro are better optimized for performance on a Mac, so you’ll probably have an easier time working with your current footage on your current machine in those NLEs as well.

This is probably familiar stuff, but if you’re a photographer who’s recently moved into editing, it’s worth bringing up in case there might be parts of a normal photography workflow that should be approached differently for video work. Especially since Premiere has such surprisingly mediocre Mac performance given its huge popularity.

 

[OkiRun]

"The typical film production workflow reserves color grading and sound mixing as finishing steps after the film is edited and picture locked, and only the shots actually used in the final cut are color corrected."
============

This. Its so important to move from a linear - work as you go - mind set - to one of stages.

AND

Under penalty of death - don't allow someone (director, producer, assistant to (insert here), convince you to go back and forth between CC ~ PP and FCPX. Choose one and STICK.

 

[randy85]

"The typical film production workflow reserves color grading and sound mixing as finishing steps after the film is edited and picture locked, and only the shots actually used in the final cut are color corrected."
============

This. Its so important to move from a linear - work as you go - mind set - to one of stages.

AND

Under penalty of death - don't allow someone (director, producer, assistant to (insert here), convince you to go back and forth between CC ~ PP and FCPX. Choose one and STICK.

The funny flipside of this argument is that buying the 2019 Mac Pro has freed me from this way of working. I can now seamlessly work on colour as I edit, using the original media. I can see final image in full quality (thank you Afterburner) which is more satisfying and also helps inform my editing choices.

I can export full res graded frames as I go and send to my clients/collaborators to give them confidence that everything came out well.

Also if they want to change a shot after I've worked on the colour grade, I don't have to be a dick about it, since there's no re-conforming or other headaches.

I totally agree with the last point about trying to stay in one application though. This workflow I've adopted is all within Davinci Resolve and that has been a game-changer for me.

 

[profdraper]

The funny flipside of this argument is that buying the 2019 Mac Pro has freed me from this way of working. I can now seamlessly work on colour as I edit, using the original media. I can see final image in full quality (thank you Afterburner) which is more satisfying and also helps inform my editing choices.

I can export full res graded frames as I go and send to my clients/collaborators to give them confidence that everything came out well.

Also if they want to change a shot after I've worked on the colour grade, I don't have to be a dick about it, since there's no re-conforming or other headaches.

I totally agree with the last point about trying to stay in one application though. This workflow I've adopted is all within Davinci Resolve and that has been a game-changer for me.

Totally agree, exactly my experience as well (though, no need for Afterburner). Also yes to the earlier point on this thread (surely macOS buyers are aware by now?) -'early adopters get screwed', and, a comparable ARM mac pro will certainly be two generations away before I'd ever go near it. And, increasingly locked down, Apple T2, ARM, expandability etc - all in the name of supposed 'security' but more accurately refers to Apple own 'security' and complete control of the hard & -soft.

BTW, my last 2010 pro lasted 10 years & with no issues, in fact now still working just fine for audio production and gifted to uni student. The only real downside of the 7,1 (& other Apple products) is the extreme price gouging. But hey, we all know that too eh? Still, this 7,1 has been able to migrate and use all of my earlier hardware investments (UAD, Blackmagic, Sonnet, disks, displays etc). Not at all sure this will apply to some groovy, future ARM mac pro.

To answer the OP: Yes. Is built like the proverbial 'brick sh*t house'.

 

[OkiRun]

The funny flipside of this argument is that buying the 2019 Mac Pro has freed me from this way of working. I can now seamlessly work on colour as I edit, using the original media. I can see final image in full quality (thank you Afterburner) which is more satisfying and also helps inform my editing choices.

I can export full res graded frames as I go and send to my clients/collaborators to give them confidence that everything came out well.

Also if they want to change a shot after I've worked on the colour grade, I don't have to be a dick about it, since there's no re-conforming or other headaches.

I totally agree with the last point about trying to stay in one application though. This workflow I've adopted is all within Davinci Resolve and that has been a game-changer for me.

So your current workflow is 100% Davinci Resolve - not only for coloring but editing? DR does seem to be making a heavy push to unseat PP the last 12-16 months.

 

[randy85]

So your current workflow is 100% Davinci Resolve - not only for coloring but editing? DR does seem to be making a heavy push to unseat PP the last 12-16 months.

Yes for most of my work - mainly projects that are more visual and require colour grading. My muscle memory in Premiere is such that making the jump took me a while, but I'm steadily getting used to it.

I still default to Premiere if it's a corporate or doc project (basically if I need to do more titles, graphics and audio) as I'm still quicker with it and Premiere has integration with After Effects if I need it.

I see a lot of comments with people making the move due to the Adobe subscription. However I can't really function in the creative industry without access to Photoshop, After Effects & Illustrator, so realistically I'm never going to ditch CC... and therefore I might as well still use Premiere when it suits.

Loving Resolve though. It's impressive how they've added NLE functionality into it so well.