How satisfied are you with your Mac Pro?

[jasonvp]

Most Adobe applications scale fairly well actually - with the main exception being LightRoom.

So your two remarks were actually both incorrect.

The video editing software (which is what I was referencing with my first post) available to me, Adobe's Premiere Pro, scales very poorly once the core count crests about 6 or so. The same is true with Photoshop, but I use that infrequently, so my core count might be off.

I know how to watch resources with iostats at the UNIX level. When Premiere is running (slowly), the CPU load is between 25-50%, and nothing else is happening on the machine. In other words: it's not waiting for disk I/O or anything like that. The only conclusion I can draw: Adobe didn't do a decent job of threading the application such that it could keep the 12 real (24 v) cores busy enough with work.

jas

 

[Tesselator]

The video editing software (which is what I was referencing with my first post) available to me, Adobe's Premiere Pro, scales very poorly once the core count crests about 6 or so. The same is true with Photoshop, but I use that infrequently, so my core count might be off.

No, both of those actually scale fairly well as I mentioned. Go profile them (as I have done) for yourself instead of listening to the whiners, complainers, and on-line nay-sayers who actually don't know enough about application design to comment accurately.

I know how to watch resources with iostats at the UNIX level. When Premiere is running (slowly), the CPU load is between 25-50%, and nothing else is happening on the machine. In other words: it's not waiting for disk I/O or anything like that. The only conclusion I can draw: Adobe didn't do a decent job of threading the application such that it could keep the 12 real (24 v) cores busy enough with work.

25-50% is pretty damn good and shows a properly "threaded" application design. Additionally there are many program operations in both of those which utilize 80-95% of all cores. With a complex application it's undesirable as well as often impossible, to have small tasks max out all the CPU cores. Neither PS nor PP are like Handbreak or something where it's doing nothing else but processing a single data-stream with a very specific and ridged algorithm. But when they do indeed do such a thing you will indeed see the cores hit over 80% as they should - the only reason they might not is if it's offloading the processing to the GPU or something but this is also a sign of a well designed application. They want to keep the user experience as snappy and responsive as possible remember...

Yes. If they were available, we would buy it. For us, warranty support is also critical. Personally, I have no problems buying parts building/upgrading my own systems. For business, it's another matter that I believe, requires warranty and support. I hate for any executive to say to me, "So you're telling me we're running production systems on outdated equipment with no support?" I wish I can say all our systems are properly supported but we do have some *ahem* legacy app/systems still running but that's not the norm.

Ah, that makes sense. I've often thought about sawing off a portion of those "handles" on the MacPro case so that I could stack them in my cabinet. I never do it tho. I guess I lack the nads.

 

[thekev]

The video editing software (which is what I was referencing with my first post) available to me, Adobe's Premiere Pro, scales very poorly once the core count crests about 6 or so. The same is true with Photoshop, but I use that infrequently, so my core count might be off.

I know how to watch resources with iostats at the UNIX level. When Premiere is running (slowly), the CPU load is between 25-50%, and nothing else is happening on the machine. In other words: it's not waiting for disk I/O or anything like that. The only conclusion I can draw: Adobe didn't do a decent job of threading the application such that it could keep the 12 real (24 v) cores busy enough with work.

jas

Is it lagging on you during these times?

 

[jasonvp]

Is it lagging on you during these times?

Not in the least. It's barely breaking a sweat, in fact. The machine is perfectly responsive and usable. I'd actually prefer it to be bogged down (with high CPU usage) which would indicate the software is able to push the cores to their max.

jas

 

[thekev]

Not in the least. It's barely breaking a sweat, in fact. The machine is perfectly responsive and usable. I'd actually prefer it to be bogged down (with high CPU usage) which would indicate the software is able to push the cores to their max.

jas

Well it sounds like it's processing everything at a strong framerate. Perhaps a future version (CS7) will be more aggressive in terms of added features, although it seems like Adobe has been adding more gpu optimized functions to their software lately compared to anything else.

 

[Macsonic]

Generally satisfied and happy with the Mac Pro. Does the job well, stable, durable and only gave me minimal problems like HD and ram ( Kingston ) stick failure. It can handle large files even when several apps are open. I was a long time Windows PC user before switching to the Mac and found the Mac OSX a better user experience. My first Mac Pro was the 2006 1,1 2.66ghz quad. I recall Aug 2006 was a memorable year for the Mac Pro released and got a high media coverage with the first intro of Xeons. Now I have the 2008 3,1 2.8ghz 8 core and a Mid 2010 5,1 8 core Mac Pro which I use alternately with my work Recently just got the 2012 Mac Pro 12 core machine as backup.

Though the technology is 3 years old, the Mac Pro is still adequate for my needs and work. The 2008 MP is still good, quiet and does not get too hot for long hours. I guess we don't always have to buy the latest tech as longs as the current model helps us with our work Though I am curious what the new 2013 Mac Pro design and spec look like.

 

[jasonvp]

although it seems like Adobe has been adding more gpu optimized functions to their software lately compared to anything else.

Yes, and that's generally a good thing. It's why I continue to use Premiere Pro, even though it's currently a bug-ridden piece of crap with respect to AVCHD footage (I'm forced to use CS5.5 because CS6 isn't usable). Their support for throwing things at GPUs is way more advanced than Apple's is with FCPX. A bit OT but the next version of PPro will support multiple GPUs for various tasks, which is a very nice addition.

jas

 

[AdeFowler]

I absolutely adore my mid 2010 6 core. My AppleCare policy expires in September this year, but I'm hoping to keep this machine running for at least another two years, by which time there should be a new model available

 

[thekev]

Yes, and that's generally a good thing. It's why I continue to use Premiere Pro, even though it's currently a bug-ridden piece of crap with respect to AVCHD footage (I'm forced to use CS5.5 because CS6 isn't usable). Their support for throwing things at GPUs is way more advanced than Apple's is with FCPX. A bit OT but the next version of PPro will support multiple GPUs for various tasks, which is a very nice addition.

jas

That sounds excellent, and I wish Adobe was a bit better regarding bugfixes. The complaints are similar with a lot of the other creative suite apps, which is ridiculous as they force you to upgrade anyway if you wish to retain upgrade eligibility rather than migrate to the rental system of licensing. Photoshop is another where CS6 can be really quirky. The only reason I stayed with that version was the brush improvements.

I absolutely adore my mid 2010 6 core. My AppleCare policy expires in September this year, but I'm hoping to keep this machine running for at least another two years, by which time there should be a new model available

I almost want to make that into a sig. The way you wrote it was extremely funny.

 

[Derpage]

I have a 1,1 and a 4,1 that one of my employers gave me. I turn them on from time to time when I've got to do some test renders. They are quiet and do as they are told. No complaints from me.

 

[TheEasterBunny]

I bought my Pro just a few months ago.
I do very light PS (CS5) work, maybe a few light actions, or creating multi-layer images for work.
I paid 500.00 for my Pro and it had:
2 dual core 2.66
1 250 5400RPM SATAII
4GB RAM
7300 GT
LSI 7204 card
I sold the LSI 7204 for $200.00 bringing my cost down to 300.00.
Added 8GB of RAM for $72.00
Imported 4 drives from other computers I have:
1 1TB SATAIII 7200RPM drive from one of my windows boxes
1 500GB SATAII 7200RPM drive from one of my windows boxes
2 Crucial M4 128GB SSD's from one of my Mac Mini's
Added:
1 2TB two platter 7200RPM SATAIII for data ($89.00)
Did RAID0 stripe with the two SSD's
GT430 ($15.00)

Having all these drives in one box has made my work so much faster it is unbelievable, before they were externals and networked. The data drives needed compression and back up, this took most of a day to perform and tied up the PC. Now it takes minutes to do both.

When I considered this purchase, I considered a new Mini, what I would need (want) would have cost $1100.00
I also wanted to dabble with 3D rendering, more for fun than work. Of course the Mini would not be able to do this. The Mini would have been faster but more expensive, and the most time I would get out of it was 4 years (all I got out of the last one's) because needs change over time.

I am not one of those "OMG, there is a new OSX update I must install it this very second!" kind of guy. My Mini's were both on 10.5.8, and still are. Since this was true, and since the Pro was about 4x faster than the mini's at half the cost, it was a good option for me.
I have not been disappointed at all in this decision!
The Pro does more work and runs cooler than the Mini's. They needed occasional cool down breaks with some tasks (hobby tasks).
So far, best bang for the buck at $476.00.

Would I want 24 virtual cores or 400,000 for a GB score?
Oh hell yes!
But, I prefer to keep the money those things would cost, and ergo the bragging rights for my, "antique and obsolete" Mac Pro that gets the job done for $476.00
Love my Pro!

 

[designs216]

I have been extremely happy with this machine. No, it wasn't inexpensive, but the build quality, reliability, performance, and versatility are top notch.

With the fit and finish of the case, the power of the Xeons and the expandability with 128GB of RAM, I must say I have been extremely happy with this machine.

The only things I would wish for would be the additional of USB 3.0 standard, Thunderbolt, and newer EFI version to boot Windows 7 x64 native EFI, but these are very minor issues and do not affect my opinion of the current machine.

I feel the same way. I bought mine upon the last release and it has been everything you said -- fast, solid and dependable. I could be wrong but nothing in the update is going to make me want to run out and purchase the latest although I am curious.

 

[Lesser Evets]

I also see many 1,1 models to 4,1 models in use, and that is very impressive.

When the 6,1 is released, I hope they do not change the design of the machine.

I've been, and still am, a MacPro user for two decades (They were called Power Macs before the CPU switch last decade). They are excellent machines; the MacPros have been far better investments and utility than the old Power Macs. Usually I would keep a Power Mac for 3 or less years. This 1,1 I have is over 6 years old and I am currently planning to keep it through 2014 and into 2015.

You can upgrade and improve all the models every made over the last 7 years, and they will all be excellent machine in 2014. One day their star will fade, but they have been amazing computers.

I'd like to see the MacPro chopped down a little, lightened, compressed, and the drive bays taken out completely. If they keep it as it is, I have no problem with that either. The 2005 design is still brilliant, though heavy-heavy-heavy. It's a much better design than the mirrored drive doors of circa 2003 which would scrape skin off fingers and knuckles when you moved the thing with the handles.

Comparing any dual-processor Mac to a modern i7 is like comparing apples to lemons. The duals are all better and more enjoyable, since you can still function while the computer does heavy processing. My modern Macs with single processors are nowhere as nice as my old 1,1. You can also cheaply mod out the processors on the older MacPros and beef up the speed beyond the benchmarks of modern i7 Macs.

 

[derbothaus]

I was happy until I put 10.8 on it and upgraded my video card. Now it is an endless list of tweaks every time I boot. I am hoping something is just horribly wrong. Because if this is what they shipped...jesus

 

[OS6-OSX]

Satisfied to the point where any 2013 MP will be meaningless!

 

[xDeLiRiOuSx]

Satisfied to the point where any 2013 MP will be meaningless!

Well said! And when the 2013 Mac Pro comes out, prices for the 3,1 and 4,1 and 5,1 will all go down a bit. So if you ever want more performance, you can upgrade to one of those without breaking the bank. (I'd recommend the 4,1 and then upgrade the CPU afterwards if you need even more performance!).

-David

 

[Mac Hammer Fan]

I am very satisfied with my Mac Pro. I bought a Nehalem 2.66 in 2009 with an ATI Radeon 5870 and installed an OWC SSD in it. And now, a couple of weeks ago I flashed my machine from 4,1 to 5,1 and installed a Westmere 3.33 6 cores thanks to the very usefull info from the kind people here in this forum.
My MacPro rocks! It's a pleasure to work with it and I hope to use it another couple of years.

 

[IceMacMac]

I'v enjoyed my Mac Pro 2008 and my Mac Pro 2009. The only problems I've had are when I tried to upgrade RAM on the 4.1 beyond 32 GIGs. Despite trying multiple remedies it was KPCity. Not pretty. When I finally gave up on that...it's been stable.

My disappointments?
-Heat
-Lack of high-end GPU options (until recently)

 

[Photovore]

U-Huh!

Bought a used 4,1 about 18 mos ago from an apple store employee on craigslist.

Just a 4-core; got it for its ability to hold a monster GPU (5870 c/1600 ALUs). Write my own OpenCL so if my software isn't "threaded enough" it's my own danged fault!!

The big surprise was how much throughput I get targeting the OpenCL to the Xeon instead of the GPU -- not quite as fast, but like 80%! So, maybe I should rent a 12-core for a week to check that out instead of thinking about a 570; could then perhaps dispense with the GPU altogether.

This machine has one purpose: live entertainment (programming on portable MBP, throw latest project onto MP for showtime). I'm tossing it in the car tonight to haul it to a show. If I crash into a bridge abutment on the way home, I'll probably croak but the MP will be fine.

 

[monkeybagel]

I'v enjoyed my Mac Pro 2008 and my Mac Pro 2009. The only problems I've had are when I tried to upgrade RAM on the 4.1 beyond 32 GIGs. Despite trying multiple remedies it was KPCity. Not pretty. When I finally gave up on that...it's been stable.

My disappointments?
-Heat
-Lack of high-end GPU options (until recently)

Do you do rendering or other CPU intensive tasks? I have heard that the G5 gets very warm, but so far I have not had my 5,1 get warm at all, and I don't think I have even heard the fans accelerate.

Do your fans rev up when you experience the heat?

I hope I don't see kernel panics if I upgrade to 128GB.

 

[StephenCampbell]

I have had my Mac Pro 1,1 since August 2006. I have found it is the sturdiest and most ingeniously built machine of any kind I have ever owned. It doesn't show its age one bit.

 

[digiegg]

I'm pretty happy with my 2008. Wow it's been 5 years and it's still going strong!
No IOS though. I use it as a Windows 7 computer and also, I have a good graphics card on it. The PSU is starting to act up and that's a 300$ fix, but I don't mind. I never needed something "new" till now and I won't till this thing dies, which I don't see it happening any time soon.

 

[RoastingPig]

im gonna be very happy when the new one comes out

 

[sash]

Great machine, satisfied for 100%. My only hope is Apple won't discontinue its workstation line, as I'd like to keep working on these beasts.

 

[DPUser]

Satisfied to the point where any 2013 MP will be meaningless!

+1.

Love my 4,1 that has been rejuvenated by its upgrading to 5,1 hex status with 24 gig RAM. 5770, eSATA and a bunch of SSDs.