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

IMac 2017 i7 vs 2013 Mac Pro

T

thecounthahaha

macrumors regular
Original poster
Jul 17, 2010
156
8
Hi all,

I'm using a 2012 'classic' macbook pro, which has served me well, but I'm running out of power and can't open some VI heavy logic projects due to RAM shortage (and probably some cpu issues too). I've held off upgrading for so long with the hopes that there would be a 32gb RAM Apple laptop out, but there isn't and my hand is being forced!

I do a lot of on-site work, so the laptop has always been the most helpful option. However about 40% of my work is now at my home and I can work from there if needed in most situations. The sort of sessions I'm struggling to run are large orchestral VI sessions with lots of plugins which are being made on a 12 core 2013 Mac Pro with 64gb RAM if that helps anyone!

With laptops still being limited to 16gb ram, that leaves me with either getting an iMac or a Mac Pro. The old cheesegraters don't stack up according to my research using geekbench. Although they can hold their own single and multi-core wise, the cost isn't cheaper and it doesn't have thunderbolt and could be unsupported at any point. If it was half the price, then maybe, but it isn't. It's also definitely not portable!

Looking at Geek Bench, the iMac 2017 4.2 i7 and the 6-8 core Mac Pro 2013s are in roughly the same zone, both financially and power house wise. Here's a screenshot of geekbench:

Screenshot%202017-10-20%2012.16.07.png


Screenshot%202017-10-20%2012.16.29.png


Obviously the iMac trounces the mac pro on single core, but Logic X is very much multi core supported and the 8 core mac pro still wins even after 4 years.

I can get all 3 discounted too:

Mac Pro 2013 - 6 core, 1tb SSD, 64gb RAM - £3,115
Mac Pro 2013 - 8 core, 1tb SSD, 64gb RAM - £3,445
iMac 2017 - i7 4.2gHz, 1tb SSD, 64gb RAM, Radeon 580 - £3,496.33
(iMac inc thunderbolt 3 adapter, keyboard with numpad)

All 3 have a 3 year warranty with their shops.

I'm torn. Mac Pro 2013 is more portable but is 4+ years old. The iMac has fan issues (due to i7 being so hot) and isn't as portable. I have screens already and could travel with the Mac Pro if needed, but the iMac is 2017 tech so should be supported for longer. The iMac has a much higher clock speed - is that giving it the edge? Or does the 8 core Mac Pro still have it, and if so, how many years will it be useable for?

Help!
 
FWIW, I was looking to upgrade my 2010cmp for a 2013nmp a while back, but was 'really' put off by the number of problems people have had with the gpu's (there are a few very long threads).
So ended up upgrading the cmp instead.
Maybe worth a wait till xmas, the imac pro is due then and maybe some news about the newer mp.
 
thecounthahaha said:
Logic X is very much multi core supported and the 8 core mac pro still wins even after 4 years.
Click to expand...
You're right, Logic can utilize every core you throw at it, but VSTs and other plugins/instruments are usually very single core oriented.

For the money i would definitely go with iMac. I mean, nMP is great little machine but way overpriced for it's age and you never know how long will it be at your house and how long in the repair shop. It's a gamble.
The only problem i have with iMac is temperature at which it runs and thermal throttling that can happened at times.
But if you can live in cold room with AC on, then i see no problem. :D
Hardware is new, screen is beautiful - what else can one ask for?
 
  • Like
Reactions: fastlanephil
I would highly recommend you avoid Geekbench scores and test with the applications you'll be using.

With that out of the way IMO the general rule of thumb is as follows:
  • If you're application(s) aren't highly threaded and memory requirements fit within the 32GB memory limit of the iMac then the iMac is likely the better choice.
  • If you're application(s) are highly threaded and / or you need more than 32GB of memory the the Mac Pro, at least in a higher core count configuration, is likely the better choice.
The iMac utilizes newer technology and is likely to outperform a comparably configured Mac Pro when core / memory counts do not exceed those of the iMac. The Mac Pro is the only option for higher core counts. The improved IPC of the iMac may even result in well threaded applications running faster on the iMac than the six core Mac Pro.

All of this is just speculation and a starting point. If you can I highly recommend you benchmark you application on each one if possible. While the Mac Pro may be older technology it can, under the right circumstances, be the faster system.
 
thecounthahaha said:
Hi all,

I'm using a 2012 'classic' macbook pro, which has served me well, but I'm running out of power and can't open some VI heavy logic projects due to RAM shortage (and probably some cpu issues too). I've held off upgrading for so long with the hopes that there would be a 32gb RAM Apple laptop out, but there isn't and my hand is being forced!

I do a lot of on-site work, so the laptop has always been the most helpful option. However about 40% of my work is now at my home and I can work from there if needed in most situations. The sort of sessions I'm struggling to run are large orchestral VI sessions with lots of plugins which are being made on a 12 core 2013 Mac Pro with 64gb RAM if that helps anyone!

With laptops still being limited to 16gb ram, that leaves me with either getting an iMac or a Mac Pro. The old cheesegraters don't stack up according to my research using geekbench. Although they can hold their own single and multi-core wise, the cost isn't cheaper and it doesn't have thunderbolt and could be unsupported at any point. If it was half the price, then maybe, but it isn't. It's also definitely not portable!

Looking at Geek Bench, the iMac 2017 4.2 i7 and the 6-8 core Mac Pro 2013s are in roughly the same zone, both financially and power house wise. Here's a screenshot of geekbench:

Screenshot%202017-10-20%2012.16.07.png


Screenshot%202017-10-20%2012.16.29.png


Obviously the iMac trounces the mac pro on single core, but Logic X is very much multi core supported and the 8 core mac pro still wins even after 4 years.

I can get all 3 discounted too:

Mac Pro 2013 - 6 core, 1tb SSD, 64gb RAM - £3,115
Mac Pro 2013 - 8 core, 1tb SSD, 64gb RAM - £3,445
iMac 2017 - i7 4.2gHz, 1tb SSD, 64gb RAM, Radeon 580 - £3,496.33
(iMac inc thunderbolt 3 adapter, keyboard with numpad)

All 3 have a 3 year warranty with their shops.

I'm torn. Mac Pro 2013 is more portable but is 4+ years old. The iMac has fan issues (due to i7 being so hot) and isn't as portable. I have screens already and could travel with the Mac Pro if needed, but the iMac is 2017 tech so should be supported for longer. The iMac has a much higher clock speed - is that giving it the edge? Or does the 8 core Mac Pro still have it, and if so, how many years will it be useable for?

Help!
Click to expand...
If you are seriously a "pro", then first thing I suggest is forget about 10% differences in benchmarks or how "old" or new the tech is... I suggest looking at this as a professional "appliance" to get your stuff done... that's how Apple designs and markets their products. And there are people here that will endlessly bash the nMP about design, reliability, etc., but that's forum "talk"... you be best advised to take all of that with a grain of salt.

How much do you value the portability of the Mac Pro as a stand alone device versus the AIO of the iMac? If you have to cart a screen around with the MP, does that change the equation?

How much do you value the iMac's 5K screen?

How much do you value the MP's quietness? The nMP is super quiet (though its fans will become quite noticeable when the system is pushed for a period of time... like just about any other computer). OTOH, the iMac's fan noise gets blown out of proportion. But if you are doing any recordings in the same room as the computer, it's hard to be the MP for quiet.

Is iMac's TB3 important to you?

While many plug-ins may be single-threaded themselves, macOS thread scheduling will be able to spread out workloads to different cores, so while any individual plug-in might not complete any faster, the system itself will be able to handle more of them, more efficiently. There's a trade-off in single-thread performance, but how much that matters is largely based on how long any given plug-in needs to perform its work... if it's designed to process in real-time, than it either doesn't matter, or the nMP probably wins out in the end... if it takes 5 seconds to process a bit of audio on the iMac, will it really bother you if it takes 7 seconds on the nMP? If it's 5 minutes vs 7 minutes, then maybe that's more annoying if you're using that functionality multiple times a day.

Good luck!
 
  • Like
Reactions: poematik13
Food for thought:

"...The other deciding factor is heat. There are some who expressed concern that the 17% hotter running Core i7 might not be as reliable in the long term. If you think 212F CPU is hot, the GPU die sensor reported a constant 264F."

cite Barefeats

So I wouldn't personally be interested in an iMac if I was doing any heavy lifting.
 
12-core 3.46GHz 2010 Mac Pros on eBay are about about half the cost of the eight-core nMac Pro but it looks like you’re in Britain.

There is an old Logic benchmark test on Gearslutz that shows a 2017 4.2GHz iMac scoring 149 midi tracks. My cMac Pro which has the same specs as I just mentioned scored 240 midi tracks. Granted it’s an old test that hasn’t been updated for some years but unfortunately it’s all there is for Logic right now. As I recall a 12-core 2013 Mac Pro scored around 250 tracks. Logic’s limit is 255 midi tracks right now. The eight core nMac Pro probably would’nt be far behind on this test. But as I mentioned it is six year old midi track count test.

The original score chart shows the fastest 2011 MBP scoring around 75 tracks. Add a few more tracks for your 2012 but the faster 2017 iMac CPU will probably give you a boost in dealing with those multi orchestral samples.

I think I would probably go for the 2017 iMac because it’s going to be supported a lot longer by Apple than the 2013 Mac Pro. If you need more computing power later you should look at Vienna Ensemble Pro. You can slave one or more Macs or PCs via the ethernet connection for working the sample libraries. Vienna Symphony Library makes it.

If you buy the iMac from Apple you will probably have two weeks to return it if they have the same return policy as in the states. That should give you time to see if it’s going to do the job.
 
Same benchmark I get 190-200 tracks with my trash can. Again for long sessions recording/mixing I'd go for the Mac Pro, heat and noise is not something I'd think you'd like to deal with. constant use of heavy VI's and Plugins
taxes the CPU. But either way, they are in the same ballpark so you'd be fine with either one. I'm not big on hearing turbines while trying to mix but that's me.

fastlanephil said:
12-core 3.46GHz 2010 Mac Pros on eBay are about about half the cost of the eight-core nMac Pro but it looks like you’re in Britain.

There is an old Logic benchmark test on Gearslutz that shows a 2017 4.2GHz iMac scoring 149 midi tracks. My cMac Pro which has the same specs as I just mentioned scored 240 midi tracks. Granted it’s an old test that hasn’t been updated for some years but unfortunately it’s all there is for Logic right now. As I recall a 12-core 2013 Mac Pro scored around 250 tracks. Logic’s limit is 255 midi tracks right now. The eight core nMac Pro probably would’nt be far behind on this test. But as I mentioned it is six year old midi track count test.

The original score chart shows the fastest 2011 MBP scoring around 75 tracks. Add a few more tracks for your 2012 but the faster 2017 iMac CPU will probably give you a boost in dealing with those multi orchestral samples.

I think I would probably go for the 2017 iMac because it’s going to be supported a lot longer by Apple than the 2013 Mac Pro. If you need more computing power later you should look at Vienna Ensemble Pro. You can slave one or more Macs or PCs via the ethernet connection for working the sample libraries. Vienna Symphony Library makes it.

If you buy the iMac from Apple you will probably have two weeks to return it if they have the same return policy as in the states. That should give you time to see if it’s going to do the job.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
BUT....I would not ignore the fact that the gpu's are problematic.
Don't get me wrong, I was all set to push the button on a nmp until I saw the very long threads about problems (with every gpu version).
I wasn't prepared to pay >3k for something that may/may not have issues.
That is one of the reasons I have a mac, it is so reliable :)
 
Wow thanks for all the replies, it’s really appreciated!

MarkC426 said:
FWIW, I was looking to upgrade my 2010cmp for a 2013nmp a while back, but was 'really' put off by the number of problems people have had with the gpu's (there are a few very long threads).
So ended up upgrading the cmp instead.
Maybe worth a wait till xmas, the imac pro is due then and maybe some news about the newer mp.
Click to expand...

Good to know, the only few people I know with them haven’t had issues, but I have seen lots of reports online of them - hence going with a reseller with warranty - although I don’t want it being repaired all the time!

owbp said:
You're right, Logic can utilize every core you throw at it, but VSTs and other plugins/instruments are usually very single core oriented.

For the money i would definitely go with iMac. I mean, nMP is great little machine but way overpriced for it's age and you never know how long will it be at your house and how long in the repair shop. It's a gamble.
The only problem i have with iMac is temperature at which it runs and thermal throttling that can happened at times.
But if you can live in cold room with AC on, then i see no problem. :D
Hardware is new, screen is beautiful - what else can one ask for?
Click to expand...

Yes, there are quite a few that are very CPU orientated, especially some of the synths. The price for its age is really causing me difficulties. I know machines should last a long time, but it’s already 4 years into its lifecycle - how long does it have left when things like the GPU are not upgradeable.

ixxx69 said:
If you are seriously a "pro", then first thing I suggest is forget about 10% differences in benchmarks or how "old" or new the tech is... I suggest looking at this as a professional "appliance" to get your stuff done... that's how Apple designs and markets their products. And there are people here that will endlessly bash the nMP about design, reliability, etc., but that's forum "talk"... you be best advised to take all of that with a grain of salt.

How much do you value the portability of the Mac Pro as a stand alone device versus the AIO of the iMac? If you have to cart a screen around with the MP, does that change the equation?

How much do you value the iMac's 5K screen?

How much do you value the MP's quietness? The nMP is super quiet (though its fans will become quite noticeable when the system is pushed for a period of time... like just about any other computer). OTOH, the iMac's fan noise gets blown out of proportion. But if you are doing any recordings in the same room as the computer, it's hard to be the MP for quiet.

Is iMac's TB3 important to you?

While many plug-ins may be single-threaded themselves, macOS thread scheduling will be able to spread out workloads to different cores, so while any individual plug-in might not complete any faster, the system itself will be able to handle more of them, more efficiently. There's a trade-off in single-thread performance, but how much that matters is largely based on how long any given plug-in needs to perform its work... if it's designed to process in real-time, than it either doesn't matter, or the nMP probably wins out in the end... if it takes 5 seconds to process a bit of audio on the iMac, will it really bother you if it takes 7 seconds on the nMP? If it's 5 minutes vs 7 minutes, then maybe that's more annoying if you're using that functionality multiple times a day.

Good luck!
Click to expand...

I consider myself a ‘pro’ as I earn my living both through industry employed work, and an increasing amount of self employed income, both of which require my own computer. As the self employed work increases the type of work I do will start to shift away from being portable, but all my income comes from the field I am in.

The situation I believe I am in is not specifically to do with what is ‘Pro’ Hardware and what is not, as the gap appears to be closing, especially with 4 year old ‘pro’ technology. I’m not discounting either the iMac or the Mac Pro at all - quite the opposite - as they both seem to be as good as each other and priced the same. Hence the difficulties! :)

The portability is something I am trying to work out. I’ve been a laptop user for 7 years, so have become accustomed to it, but appreciate that what I am looking for is less mobile. I would need to travel with a screen for some on-site jobs, so if I wanted something in the 27” area it’d be similar to carrying an iMac, if not heavier! The 5k screen itself is not something I specifically value, as I have never used one. Maybe if there was a choice for a Mac mini with the iMac’s internals that’d be the computer I’d be after - but that isn’t a choice.

I’m not doing a huge amount of recording at the moment, but I do so with a laptop with its fans going, so I don’t think that’d be an issue. It’s also not a soundproof room, so there would be other issues there anyway. It’s not something my income relies on anyway.

TB3 is future proof, but at the moment I’d need to use an adapter back to TB1/2 anyway. I think as more things are made as TB3 then I’d possibly feel like I’ve missed out. I know that when USB3 came out I was very pleased my laptop was one of the first with it. It’s made my laptop possible to still be working. With usb2 it would have been superseded several years ago.

I do a lot of ‘bounce and replace all tracks’ which converts MIDI tracks into audio tracks. With the sessions being quite big, I’ve noticed at some jobs that the clock speed appears to have more of a say on the speed of the task. A 12 core 2013 Mac Pro is slightly slower than a 2015 i7 iMac for example, but only just. I’ve not done any proper tests on that front though, so it might just feel that way. If there’s a significant difference between an 8core Mac Pro and the 2017 iMac, then that’s something that I’d be interested in knowing because saving 1 minute per session does add up over a work day!
 
circuitt said:
Audio people would say a Mac Pro, video people an iMac due to quick synch.
Click to expand...
Or do what many are doing and use VE Pro to connect VSTs to slave computers. Then you can use whatever works. The current price of Mac Pro is more in line with current value, especially on the used market. Aside from a single fan, there are no moving parts so if it survives the first year it should survive a lot longer.

Mac Pro with eGPU shakes it up just a bit, too bad it’s restricted to an x4 lane.
[doublepost=1508675976][/doublepost]
thecounthahaha said:
Yes, there are quite a few that are very CPU orientated, especially some of the synths. The price for its age is really causing me difficulties. I know machines should last a long time, but it’s already 4 years into its lifecycle - how long does it have left when things like the GPU are not upgradeable.
Click to expand...
Serious, take a look at VE Pro. I built a 3U slave PC running a 4790K water-cooled CPU with quiet fans and 32GB of RAM for well under $1000. Running the high-horsepower VSTs on that, and sample libraries on a separate server class system (also cheaply purchased and upgraded via eBay) with 96GB of RAM and dual 6-core CPUs. Setup is a bit finicky (need a separate audio network) but once dialed in it takes a lot of load off the primary system.

https://www.vsl.co.at/en/Vienna_Software_Package/Vienna_Ensemble_PRO
 
Last edited:
MarkC426 said:
BUT....I would not ignore the fact that the gpu's are problematic.
Don't get me wrong, I was all set to push the button on a nmp until I saw the very long threads about problems (with every gpu version).
I wasn't prepared to pay >3k for something that may/may not have issues.
That is one of the reasons I have a mac, it is so reliable :)
Click to expand...
I can't speak to the current generation of iMacs but past iMacs have not been immune to GPU issues.
[doublepost=1508681157][/doublepost]
thecounthahaha said:
Yes, there are quite a few that are very CPU orientated, especially some of the synths. The price for its age is really causing me difficulties. I know machines should last a long time, but it’s already 4 years into its lifecycle - how long does it have left when things like the GPU are not upgradeable.
Click to expand...
While I understand the thought process on this you need to stop thinking in this manner. The question is: Does this system meet your needs better than an alternative. If it does whether it's four year old technology or not is irrelevant. If it doesn't then you need to purchase the alternative.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Flint Ironstag
Problematic? Yes there is a possibility, but remember the people you see complaining are the same handful of people over and over again. I know the same amount of people with mac pros who never experienced any GPU issues.
I mean the guys doing Audio work so the stress on his GPU's would be
minimal. Not like hes going to be rendering 4k video for hours at a time.
If truely spooked just buy Apple care and your set for three years or until the new Mac pros come out.


MarkC426 said:
BUT....I would not ignore the fact that the gpu's are problematic.
Don't get me wrong, I was all set to push the button on a nmp until I saw the very long threads about problems (with every gpu version).
I wasn't prepared to pay >3k for something that may/may notg have issues.
That is one of the reasons I have a mac, it is so reliable :)
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: ixxx69
MarkC426 said:
BUT....I would not ignore the fact that the gpu's are problematic.
Don't get me wrong, I was all set to push the button on a nmp until I saw the very long threads about problems (with every gpu version).
I wasn't prepared to pay >3k for something that may/may not have issues.
That is one of the reasons I have a mac, it is so reliable :)
Click to expand...
Yeah, you got conned by those guys... their hate for the nMP runs strong. That's the dark side of these forums - the FUD. If you went by all the forums, Apple makes the worst products in the industry and they're so overpriced that no one will buy them... it's practically a miracle that Apple has been able to stay in business. :rolleyes:
 
  • Like
Reactions: green86 and poematik13
ixxx69 said:
Yeah, you got conned by those guys... their hate for the nMP runs strong. That's the dark side of these forums - the FUD. If you went by all the forums, Apple makes the worst products in the industry and they're so overpriced that no one will buy them... it's practically a miracle that Apple has been able to stay in business. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
The iPhone is what's led to the Apple of today. Who knows what the company would be like if it weren't for the iPhone.
 
ixxx69 said:
Yeah, you got conned by those guys... their hate for the nMP runs strong. That's the dark side of these forums - the FUD. If you went by all the forums, Apple makes the worst products in the industry and they're so overpriced that no one will buy them... it's practically a miracle that Apple has been able to stay in business. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Keep riding your unicorn while believing that nMP GPU issues are Fake News. ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: owbp
ixxx69 said:
Yeah, you got conned by those guys... their hate for the nMP runs strong. That's the dark side of these forums - the FUD. If you went by all the forums, Apple makes the worst products in the industry and they're so overpriced that no one will buy them... it's practically a miracle that Apple has been able to stay in business. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

A lot of those guys are also nMP users who lived outside of an area with Apple retail support, so they were basically on their own when it came to GPU issues. So they get bitter and just make huge echo chamber threads where no valuable information or conclusions are disclosed. It also intersects with the generally disproportionate amount of apple haters to enthusiasts on this website.

It is a fact that, in 2015, there were a batch of bad AMD D-series chips shipped that had a tendency to overheat. There is a quality program that extends beyond the standard warranty to fix these GPU's, and it's via apple support and until 2018. There have also been numerous driver and EFI updates for the nMP that help to alleviate this issue. 10.12.4 had a big one IIRC.
 
  • Like
Reactions: green86
poematik13 said:
A lot of those guys are also nMP users who lived outside of an area with Apple retail support, so they were basically on their own when it came to GPU issues. So they get bitter and just make huge echo chamber threads where no valuable information or conclusions are disclosed. It also intersects with the generally disproportionate amount of apple haters to enthusiasts on this website.

It is a fact that, in 2015, there were a batch of bad AMD D-series chips shipped that had a tendency to overheat. There is a quality program that extends beyond the standard warranty to fix these GPU's, and it's via apple support and until 2018. There have also been numerous driver and EFI updates for the nMP that help to alleviate this issue. 10.12.4 had a big one IIRC.
Click to expand...
Exactly. They've been trotting out the same few examples for years now. Deadpool came out before Apple launched the repair program, so it's very possible they were burning through defective cards. Which still sucks, but **** happens. The DaVinci Resolve and Adobe Premier issues were largely resolved mid-2014 (nearly all the articles and internet discussions on these issues are dated around 2014).

Haters like to try and paint anyone who doesn't hate as some sort of Apple fanboy, but I'm not here to defend Apple - I have as many issues with Apple as the typical hater... I'm just more rational about it. Were the AMD D-series cards a blunder? I thought so before I even bought a nMP (with few exceptions, anytime Apples goes completely proprietary/custom on something, it's almost always a disaster). Are there occasional issues and bugs and cards that go bad? Of course... like all of the rest (there's far more threads on issues with after-market cards for the cMP, but that doesn't seem to stop the haters from suggesting those every chance they get). Is it possible that the nMP just isn't cut out to literally render 24x7 for weeks on end? Possibly.

One thing I found from helping literally hundreds of people on forums and IRL with their computer issues is that 9 out 10 times, there's more to it than whoever's explaining their issues understands or is forthcoming with. Literally this weekend in the MBP forum, someone claimed they received technical support from Adobe when it turned out they had gotten the reply from some random user on the Adobe forum. People are disingenuous about the "facts" all the time when they have an agenda. It's kind of crazy to still have to say "you shouldn't believe everything you read on the internet".
 
  • Like
Reactions: poematik13
If I have to have a computer, right now I would buy the cheapest "trashcan" Mac Pro, then get someone (like OWC) to do an CPU and RAM upgrade for you. Until Apple release the new Mac Pro.

Or maybe the iMac Pro in December.
 
strukt said:
If I have to have a computer, right now I would buy the cheapest "trashcan" Mac Pro, then get someone (like OWC) to do an CPU and RAM upgrade for you. Until Apple release the new Mac Pro.

Or maybe the iMac Pro in December.
Click to expand...
B&H is still offering a limited supply of the quad core for $1999. eBay sells a 12-core and 64GB upgrade for around $800 now (DIY).
 
strukt said:
If I have to have a computer, right now I would buy the cheapest "trashcan" Mac Pro, then get someone (like OWC) to do an CPU and RAM upgrade for you. Until Apple release the new Mac Pro.

Or maybe the iMac Pro in December.
Click to expand...

IMO the 2017 regular iMac is the best stopgap solution until the next mac pro. iMac Pro is obviously ideal but a) it's $5K+ and b) we don't know when in December it's releasing exactly and it could backorder and not be in stock till the spring (just like the december 2013 mac pro)

Compared to the nMP:
-faster RAM up to 64GB (but no ECC or 128GB aftermarket option)
-Radeon Pro 580 (5.5TFLOPS, 8GB VRAM) runs circles around the D300/D500 and is slightly better than the D700 in some respects. Although the D700 is still pretty competitive today.
-4.2 i7 is faster than the stock quad core 3.7ghz xeon, and benchmarks on par with the 6-core 3.5ghz xeon. 8 and 12 core Xeons are still the fastest especially if you need to scale up to many cores.
-TB3 and USB 3.1 gen2
-PCI-E SSD is 3x faster than the nMP's, as it's a newer gen.
-You get to enjoy a 5K 10bit screen with full DCI-P3 coverage built in, as well as the luxuries of a webcam/mic, really good speaker, free keyboard and mouse that you can sell, etc.
-All of this is $2899 on BH. You can't even build a PC with these types of parts for that price. And if you do, it won't be an elegant AIO, it will be a massive loud ugly gamer tower with cables everywhere.

CPU swaps on the 6,1 are messy and void your warranty. RAM is only a benefit if you need ECC.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: owbp
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back