Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

OkiRun

macrumors 65816
Oct 25, 2019
1,005
585
Japan
Completely incorrect. Just because the UI is the same doesn't mean the performance is the same. Unrelated. It's been the case since ever and I can clearly feel a difference in speed between the two OS depending on what you're doing....

Check this for example....

OP is communicating anxiety about switching to different operating system and having to 'get used to it'. My response is mainly about UI. Given an infinite number of scenarios, Mac vs PC argument is forever going. My point being is that the UI is the same. He won't have to learn or adjust to anything new.

There is nothing the 7,1 can do in PP/After Effects that a Workstation PC can't do. There isn't anything in PP that a Workstation PC can do that the 7, 1 can't do. Nothing. With the word 'do' I mean 'get done'. I am sure there are dynamics where one type of computer excels over another. I can't argue to that point. I have yet to hear from a professional colleague that using a 7,1 destroyed a film project or album project. It isn't happening.

OP is thinking too much in my mind. A 'good enough' PC is 'good enough' so long as it can handle his workflow. The 7,1 gives additional options (even if not within some 'performance' perameter in mind) beyond a PC for certain apps use.like Logic and FCPX. To me, he should be happy to be alive in 4 years. He maybe doesn't really know it yet but his entire office production equipment will be changed/upgraded within 4 years. Very little if anything will be left if he truly makes the leap to a production house.

He might find it interesting that todays youtube video made by the Cat Woman finding a lost kitten in Kyoto and filmed on her cell phone with her 200,000 views made more than he will make for a professional commercial using his professional camera and workstation computer. A 7,1 or PC is not the key to his success. His skills and creativity and motivation are key.

This was all that I was trying to the convey and always that I am liking to read your views.
 

ghostwind

macrumors regular
Original poster
Nov 18, 2020
115
51
OP is communicating anxiety about switching to different operating system and having to 'get used to it'. My response is mainly about UI. Given an infinite number of scenarios, Mac vs PC argument is forever going. My point being is that the UI is the same. He won't have to learn or adjust to anything new.

There is nothing the 7,1 can do in PP/After Effects that a Workstation PC can't do. There isn't anything in PP that a Workstation PC can do that the 7, 1 can't do. Nothing. With the word 'do' I mean 'get done'. I am sure there are dynamics where one type of computer excels over another. I can't argue to that point. I have yet to hear from a professional colleague that using a 7,1 destroyed a film project or album project. It isn't happening.

OP is thinking too much in my mind. A 'good enough' PC is 'good enough' so long as it can handle his workflow. The 7,1 gives additional options (even if not within some 'performance' perameter in mind) beyond a PC for certain apps use.like Logic and FCPX. To me, he should be happy to be alive in 4 years. He maybe doesn't really know it yet but his entire office production equipment will be changed/upgraded within 4 years. Very little if anything will be left if he truly makes the leap to a production house.

He might find it interesting that todays youtube video made by the Cat Woman finding a lost kitten in Kyoto and filmed on her cell phone with her 200,000 views made more than he will make for a professional commercial using his professional camera and workstation computer. A 7,1 or PC is not the key to his success. His skills and creativity and motivation are key.

This was all that I was trying to the convey and always that I am liking to read your views.
It's not anxiety lol, more of a sadness or "ugh" factor. I'll give you a bit more background. I started out with PCs in college because I couldn't afford a Mac back then. Mid-90s. I would order ASUS motherboards, Pentium chips, GPUs, RAM, and build them myself. I enjoyed that process, and I would run Linux or Solaris x86 on them. Back then the kernel wasn't even 1.0 yet. I was collaborating with other developers who worked on it, I worked on some stuff as well - it was a great time to be in college during this whole time, as in college is where things were happening with Linux and the Internet. I was not a computer science major, but theoretical physics and music double major. Computers was all a hobby. Then the Internet "happened", and I got recruited upon graduation to work in cybersecurity and other aspects of network security for Wall St. firms. They paid well, and they gave a crap load of money to R&D, to implement the latest this and that, etc. So it was a great time, like no other since, as creativity was limitless, because the money was limitless and everything was new. And since I was always a creative person, as well as technical, it was tremendous fun and I got a lot of satisfaction from it - it fulfilled both my creative side as well as my technical. This lasted until about 2005-6, when everyone and their brother came into the field for the salary, too many layers of management to get anything done, etc. So it started not to be fun and creative anymore. I went from working directly with traders, fund managers, and getting things done fast, efficient, and on the bleeding edge, to reporting to some knuckleheads like in the movie Office Space. More meetings about efficiency, but less efficiency :) Photography, drawing, and painting were things I was into since I was a kid. Throughout this whole time I was working, I was also shooting stuff for fun - weddings, events, whatever. It kept me sane a bit. Later after the crisis, I decided I had enough and started my own photography business. I wanted to try it - specifically shooting sports, because that was not something I could do as a hobby really. So I started doing that, initially for the athletic departments, and then as I got bored of that, for the marketing departments of colleges where I could be more creative. This was all NCAA stuff. I did that and of course more weddings, events, portraits, whatever basically. Then I wanted to get more into branding and marketing, as I was sort of doing that anyway. And I did - for personal and business/corporate. And people would ask for video. At first I wasn't too interested, as I knew it was totally different (even if the principles are the same in many ways) and I preferred stills. But then once I got into it, I really got into it :) And I really liked the entire process - shooting, editing, audio, color correcting and grading. I like doing entire projects from soup to nuts on my own. This was one of the joys I had when working in IT until many more people came in and ruined the fun with 10 layers of this and specializing in this and that to the point I felt less creative, less control, less everything. So for video, this is what I want to do for the near future. I don't want to work in a production house pumping out tons of stuff and specializing in one area. Not for now - things could change later though. Now I'm happy doing what I've been doing, but want to do it better, and need 4-6k workflow, more gear, more computing power, etc. I have 2 documentaries I'm planning to work on starting January or so, so have big goals in mind.

OK, so I went on some tangent there to give some background. But yeah, since Windows 3.0 I've been through all of them. I don't like them, they don't inspire me, in fact the opposite - so again, not anxiety, just a sadness :) In 2004 I made the switch to Mac and haven't looked back. Now though, I'm not in the mood anymore like I was 25 years ago to research this and that, build my own PC, etc. I just want tools that work. I don't have time for it, or even the interest anymore really. That's why I said I'm really out of touch with the PC land. But man, it's hard to ignore the speed differential especially with Premiere. Still, I have not decided yet.

I know all about what makes money and what doesn't (Cat Woman example), but I don't care. It's not news to me. I prefer to do my own thing and be good at that. Of course creativity trumps everything, I know this, I've been at this for almost 10 years. I know how to deal with clients (your previous post was funny - the say YES to things), but I have the luxury to not need to do that. Everything can change in 3 years, I realize that. Heck even 1-2 years! And yes, I do overthink things, but I have that luxury now, and it's somewhat fun too (for a bit anyways). One thing I've been good at is keeping gear for along time. I don't like collecting 50 lenses or 10 cameras - I keep things very simple. My cameras are beaten up and 4.5 years old, but that hasn't stopped anything. They are tools. I know computers are the same, but yeah, the thought of going to a PC is a bit nauseating, but due to the sheer speed, a real possibility.

Neither and Mac Pro or the fastest PC are keys to my success. But one can make life easier and happier, while another more miserable. If the speed differential weren't there, the decision would be easier. It's just hard to overlook. Really it is...Anyway, I've rambled on long enough, but maybe was helpful in a way. I can afford to get one of each, but I don't want to do that. I want to keep it as simple as possible. For what I'm doing, I don't need 2 for now. Less tools, more creativity!
 
  • Love
  • Like
Reactions: OkiRun and ivion

ghostwind

macrumors regular
Original poster
Nov 18, 2020
115
51
TL;DR - I'm very tech savvy, used and built my own PCs, don't like them/Windows, never did, don't inspire me, but damn they are fast for a Premiere workflow compared to Mac Pro. Also, what I'm doing, and I said I'm lucky to do this, are projects on my own terms. As such, I don't want and need too much gear (I find it detracts from focusing on creativity), so it does make the decision harder. I also tend to use all my gear for a long time, until something significantly better comes out that will change what I do. For still cameras as an example, I still use Canon DSLRs (1DXMKII and 5DMKIV) and feel any upgrades to minor AF improvements, small DR improvements, or mirrorless won't help me with my end result at all. Same with their cinema cameras. I prefer to research a lot and then buy something that lasts. I can easily afford a Mac Pro and 3 PCs if I wanted, or to upgrade to the latest Canon DSLRs and whatever, but I see it as a waste of money for me and also, again, too much gear = less time for creative thinking and more tinkering. If I wasn't using Premiere, where the difference between a PC and the Mac Pro is so huge, the decision would have been made. Now, it's hard to ignore, so still thinking and weighing all the pros and cons of going back to PC/Windows.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Average Pro

AndreeOnline

macrumors 6502a
Aug 15, 2014
704
495
Zürich
If I wasn't using Premiere, where the difference between a PC and the Mac Pro is so huge, the decision would have been made. Now, it's hard to ignore, so still thinking and weighing all the pros and cons of going back to PC/Windows.

So, with your background... you prefer to limp on with Premiere than to move over to something like Resolve?

Are there dependencies that prevents you to switch? Adobe has proven incapable to update its suite to properly leverage hardware. For years now, Premiere has been an order of magnitude slower at basic video related tasks than both FXPC and Resolve. Why support that?

On the other hand, Blackmagic Design is enabling users with both affordable camera gear, dedicated hardware in monitoring and broadcast and they are literally giving their software away for free.

They had their beta of their NEXT Resolve 17 basically ready on day 1 for the new Macs with M1. They support MacOS, Windows and Linux, but they are very pro Mac.

I don't get how anyone here wouldn't support that. The tie-ins or dependencies need to be REEEEEEAAALLLY strong.

I know there is a valid reason and I'm really curious. I'm listening.
 

OkiRun

macrumors 65816
Oct 25, 2019
1,005
585
Japan
So, with your background... you prefer to limp on with Premiere than to move over to something like Resolve?

Are there dependencies that prevents you to switch? Adobe has proven incapable to update its suite to properly leverage hardware. For years now, Premiere has been an order of magnitude slower at basic video related tasks than both FXPC and Resolve. Why support that?

On the other hand, Blackmagic Design is enabling users with both affordable camera gear, dedicated hardware in monitoring and broadcast and they are literally giving their software away for free.

They had their beta of their NEXT Resolve 17 basically ready on day 1 for the new Macs with M1. They support MacOS, Windows and Linux, but they are very pro Mac.

I don't get how anyone here wouldn't support that. The tie-ins or dependencies need to be REEEEEEAAALLLY strong.

I know there is a valid reason and I'm really curious. I'm listening.
All editors in my company must be fully proficient in FCPX, Davinci, and PP (and some Adobe CC apps) ~ in case of special project demanding it or if only have access to certain computers with software of it only. I think time is coming when Davinci will replace PP - because it is more efficient and versitle and this will be pushed further on transition especially if budgets saved by not having subscription fee. I don't see Davinci replacing FCPX market though.
 

Melbourne Park

macrumors 65816
While looking here for a custom PC, I came across this article. Damn, I assumed the PCs would be faster, but this much faster? Crazy. Hard decision to make to switch to a PC still...Argh!


ghostwind,

I read that link with a 15.4" macbookpro, and so didn't read much of the chart data, it was too small.

But I did see this bigger chart:
In many of those speed tests, the iMac Pro with 14 cores, was faster than the 28 MacPro 2019.

Those speed figures were not logical IMO.

I then looked briefly just now ... hmmm ....

Time to drill down and find out more I reckon ... but then, perhaps the tests did not operate using MacOS. I don't think they did use MacOS. Pretty silly therefor ... as if Microsoft optimise their platform for Mac Pros, and that software developers focus on Win software running on a MacPro ... quite the reverse I reckon. Best to test a Mac Pro with Mac OS and also, using the best software. But doing so, it would not be easy for an "even" revue. But in reality, productivity is what matters, and also downtime, fault tolerance, even ease of use.
 

blackadde

macrumors regular
Dec 11, 2019
165
242
Computer performance isn’t just a matter of X cores > Y cores, therefore X is faster. Some (most) tasks do not scale linearly with core count or may have dependencies that make them poorly suited to a multithreaded approach. In those cases, otherwise identical CPUs with lower core counts and higher frequencies will run those tasks faster. For video work there are also issues with certain consumer CPUs having dedicated silicon for en/decode that more ‘professional’ grade chips lack. It’s complex - that’s why Puget benches actual tasks on actual hardware platforms.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ghostwind

ghostwind

macrumors regular
Original poster
Nov 18, 2020
115
51
ghostwind,

I read that link with a 15.4" macbookpro, and so didn't read much of the chart data, it was too small.

But I did see this bigger chart:
In many of those speed tests, the iMac Pro with 14 cores, was faster than the 28 MacPro 2019.

Those speed figures were not logical IMO.

I then looked briefly just now ... hmmm ....

Time to drill down and find out more I reckon ... but then, perhaps the tests did not operate using MacOS. I don't think they did use MacOS. Pretty silly therefor ... as if Microsoft optimise their platform for Mac Pros, and that software developers focus on Win software running on a MacPro ... quite the reverse I reckon. Best to test a Mac Pro with Mac OS and also, using the best software. But doing so, it would not be easy for an "even" revue. But in reality, productivity is what matters, and also downtime, fault tolerance, even ease of use.
I'm not sure what you were looking at - I didn't see anything that didn't make sense. The benchmark is compiled for macOS. You can download it yourself and try it here:


And there's a user database you can search too here:


And yes, these are raw, pure numbers. Of course the macOS/Mac system has advantages outside of raw power, or we would all be on pcrumors.com :) But the Premiere advantage is ridiculous.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OkiRun

ghostwind

macrumors regular
Original poster
Nov 18, 2020
115
51
So, with your background... you prefer to limp on with Premiere than to move over to something like Resolve?

Are there dependencies that prevents you to switch? Adobe has proven incapable to update its suite to properly leverage hardware. For years now, Premiere has been an order of magnitude slower at basic video related tasks than both FXPC and Resolve. Why support that?

On the other hand, Blackmagic Design is enabling users with both affordable camera gear, dedicated hardware in monitoring and broadcast and they are literally giving their software away for free.

They had their beta of their NEXT Resolve 17 basically ready on day 1 for the new Macs with M1. They support MacOS, Windows and Linux, but they are very pro Mac.

I don't get how anyone here wouldn't support that. The tie-ins or dependencies need to be REEEEEEAAALLLY strong.

I know there is a valid reason and I'm really curious. I'm listening.

I think I stated already that I've been using the Adobe products for 20 years now, and it's what I'm comfortable with. So it's what I'm fastest with. Also, there are 3 people I collaborate with, all on PCs, and they use Premiere. So that's how it is for now. Resolve seems very nice, I played with it, but I want to see where it goes. Overall, I find Premiere a lot more complete, better integration, etc. Of course that is to be expected given how long it's been around. And yes, I know Resolve can use the GPUs (multiple too), is faster, newer, better optimized, etc. I'm not changing the workflow for now though, but open to it of course. It's like the argument of Mac vs PC in a way. We choose Mac, but never because of speed, right?
 

AndreeOnline

macrumors 6502a
Aug 15, 2014
704
495
Zürich
What else are you considering?

I've got "the old trusty" in my sig in my studio which is setup with a Decklink card to an OLED TV, apart from a dual monitor setup. At home, I've got a 2020 iMac and a 16" MacBook Pro for mobility.

The performance of the consumer Macs today is pretty great. The gap has become smaller compared to the Pro offerings. That said, there are some things that the Mac Pro is just great for.

My old Mac Pro is now running Big Sur and I was ready to put a 4 slot Highpoint card in it and upgrade more of my storage to NVMe. I wasn't planning on buying a 7.1 now, but here comes this offer. I think the offer is good enough to consider. If not this Mac Pro, the plan was to just lay low all the way until the Apple Silicon Mac Pro shows up.

I've been very happy with my Mac Pro, but I want to avoid pushing a lot of money into it at this late stage. I say that even if I'm aware I could theoretically carry over modern SSDs to the next computer. Then again, we don't know what the next design will be so...

At any rate, I have this opportunity to reroute the SSD money into the 7.1 project, maaaaybe sell the 5.1 (but I'm pretty reluctant to do that) and start fresh.

My thinking is that at this price point, I can still sell in two years without feeling about about it. It's not like the value will drop to zero—even with S Macs.
 

Melbourne Park

macrumors 65816
I think I stated already that I've been using the Adobe products for 20 years now, and it's what I'm comfortable with. So it's what I'm fastest with. Also, there are 3 people I collaborate with, all on PCs, and they use Premiere. So that's how it is for now. Resolve seems very nice, I played with it, but I want to see where it goes. Overall, I find Premiere a lot more complete, better integration, etc. Of course that is to be expected given how long it's been around. And yes, I know Resolve can use the GPUs (multiple too), is faster, newer, better optimized, etc. I'm not changing the workflow for now though, but open to it of course. It's like the argument of Mac vs PC in a way. We choose Mac, but never because of speed, right?

IMO software that is focused on one platform, is the software to go for. I used Excel on a Macintosh SE, and then on a Macintosh CX, when that was introduced. At that time, Excel did not exist on Windows - which was just porting I think, from Win 1 to Win 2. Win 3 worked.

I recall later, that a spreadsheet which downloaded data from a Bank's mainframe, would take around 8 minutes to do its thing. This was a few years later. A 486 PC would do the job in around 12 minutes. Then Microsoft upgraded their software. Excel then would run the spreadsheet in around 9 minutes on a 486 PC. On the Mac, the speed went from 8 minutes to 12, when Microsoft "upgraded" excel. Microsoft engineered Excel downwards for the Apple platform, and sure focused on the new Win 3 and their Win Excel.

Ok ... its obvious to me, that if software sells much more to one platform, that is the platform to buy. If you're doing all your work on Windows compatible software, that works well on Windows, and your clients all are using Windows too - it's very obvious to me, to go Windows. So I would recommend you to go to Windows / PC. From the sound of it, you could build one yourself, and at least, work out the best specification for your needs, and get it build for you by someone else (as that way you can continue to add value in your work), for very little money compared to Apple. Stop wasting money procrastinating. Go Windows man, and get back to work.
 
Last edited:

Melbourne Park

macrumors 65816
Depends on your needs for the next 3-4 years. Its a great price. I would buy in a heartbeat if the machine earns for you
Yes.

I'll buy it from you if you change your mind. In Australia, that would cost $US11,700. Your price is 44% off our recommended price.

And please, don't post any pictures of it when you get it ... now that would upset me.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: AndreeOnline

Dean Yu

macrumors regular
Mar 12, 2016
162
134
Toronto, Canada
For those who may not feel confident about apple releasing any new MPX hardware...
11.1 includes proper framebuffer support for Radeon RX 6800, 6800 XT, & 6900 XT. There are also 3 specific frame buffer personalities for Navi 21 GPUs which suggests 3 new MPX modules for the 7,1 are coming.
With the current status of M1 Macs detecting eGPUs over Thunderbolt but not having acceleration, my guess would be that MPX GPU modules released from now on will have fat binary driver compiled for both x64 and Apple Silicon.

Since PCIE4 & Thunderbolt 4 have the same electrical signalling as the previous generation, it make sense that some of the previous MPX designs can be used on a future AS Mac Pro. It does not make sense for apple, product lifecycle or R&D expenditure wise, to abandon the design of MPX after only one generation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ghostwind

Weisswurstsepp

macrumors member
Jul 25, 2020
55
63
What other single computer will last those 10 years?

Pretty much any business-class or workstation PC from HP or Dell easily survives for much more than a decade.

You can be assured though, that with Applecare extending the full support for an extra three years, that means you'll be assured of 4 years full factory support. And with Apple, that support will be fast, and a good experience.

I don't want to rain onto your parade but AppleCare is only great if you are a consumer. Because schlepping a big heavy box into the closest Apple Store where some "tech" at the Genius Bar who might not even have seen a Mac Pro before can perform diagnostics or fiddle with it isn't exactly business grade service.

That this privilege costs an additional fee to an already excessively priced machine makes it only worse.

Just to give you some perspective, all the HP z-series workstations we bought came with 3 years next business day onsite warranty as standard, and (depending on the model) this can be upgraded to 4hrs instead of next day, and up to 7 years.

And for what Apple charges for a single processor only Mac Pro we can buy some nice dual processor HP z6 Gen4 or z8 Gen4 machines (and if the expandability of a z8 G4 isn't enough we can go one further to a HPE ProLiant ML350 G10). Not to forget that all these machines can be spec'd in configs way more powerful than any Mac Pro.

Don't get me wrong, The Mac Pro is a *very* nice machine, and if you have to stay on the Mac platform then it is literally your only viable option for a fast, expandable workstation. But it's only such a big performance jump because Apple stuck with an outdated architecture (Sandy/Ivy Bridge in the Trash Can) for way too long while the PC (Windows/Linux) side was constantly evolving.

Also, as to long term use, it might be worth remembering that literally *every* intel Mac ever made has been supported for much longer by Apple's direct competitor (Microsoft) than by Apple itself. For example, Macs which were abandoned with Mojave or Catalina can all run the latest version of Windows 10 with no issues, and will be able to do so for many more years.

So if longevity is your main concern then Mac OS and a Mac Pro might not be the best option.
 
Last edited:

Weisswurstsepp

macrumors member
Jul 25, 2020
55
63
In 2004 I made the switch to Mac and haven't looked back. Now though, I'm not in the mood anymore like I was 25 years ago to research this and that, build my own PC, etc. I just want tools that work. I don't have time for it, or even the interest anymore really. That's why I said I'm really out of touch with the PC land. But man, it's hard to ignore the speed differential especially with Premiere. Still, I have not decided yet.

The (unfortunately way too common) error you make is to compare a premium brand workstation (Mac Pro) with some white box PC put together from consumer-market oriented components which are mostly designed for price and "bling" than for reliability, supportability or a long service life.

There's a reason that most businesses who rely on PCs and workstations to make money don't build them themselves or even buy PCs build from standard components, but rather shell out for business-grade PCs, business-grade laptops and workstations from big brands like Dell, HP, Lenovo or Fujitsu. Because it's hardware that is designed for reliability and endurance and not for the lowest price point possible.

The equivalent to a Mac Pro isn't your self-assembled PC, it's a HP z4/z6 Gen4, Dell Precision 5820/7820 and so on.
 

ghostwind

macrumors regular
Original poster
Nov 18, 2020
115
51
The (unfortunately way too common) error you make is to compare a premium brand workstation (Mac Pro) with some white box PC put together from consumer-market oriented components which are mostly designed for price and "bling" than for reliability, supportability or a long service life.

There's a reason that most businesses who rely on PCs and workstations to make money don't build them themselves or even buy PCs build from standard components, but rather shell out for business-grade PCs, business-grade laptops and workstations from big brands like Dell, HP, Lenovo or Fujitsu. Because it's hardware that is designed for reliability and endurance and not for the lowest price point possible.

The equivalent to a Mac Pro isn't your self-assembled PC, it's a HP z4/z6 Gen4, Dell Precision 5820/7820 and so on.
I realize that. However that was not my point. I have no idea where you think I said any of this... I explicitly said I want "tools that work", and not to build my own. That's why I'm looking at Puget as I pointed out for example. I want something that's proven, supported, and premium. The problem for me in the end is Windows, not the hardware. It's truly still junk.
 

Weisswurstsepp

macrumors member
Jul 25, 2020
55
63
I realize that. However that was not my point. I have no idea where you think I said any of this... I explicitly said I want "tools that work", and not to build my own. That's why I'm looking at Puget as I pointed out for example. I want something that's proven, supported, and premium.

Puget is an assembler who builds computers from standard parts and using standard barebones (like the ones from Supermicro), mostly for "enthusiast" home users and small businesses. It's certainly one of the better ones but good luck expecting to get the same level of quality and reliability as you get from Apple or the big workstation vendors like HP or Dell.

The problem for me in the end is Windows, not the hardware. It's truly still junk.

As others noted, this is no longer the days of Windows XP, there has been a lot of progress since then.

Most of our staff has little problems to move between Mac and Windows.
 

ghostwind

macrumors regular
Original poster
Nov 18, 2020
115
51
Then I randomly came across this video. Talking about how Adobe prioritizes developing on macOS vs Windows. What??

 

MarkC426

macrumors 68040
May 14, 2008
3,700
2,097
UK
Don’t touch Adobe....... ? they just want your money every month.
Davinci and Affinity all the way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chfilm
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.