Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
they built you a hackintosh that they support thru os upgrades? Share.

There was a time when OSX was measurably better than windows - that hasn't been true for a while - the only reason I have stayed with OSX is because ZFS doesn't run on Windows - that is the ONLY reason I haven't already jumped ship. I don't know about you, but I do my work in applications, not the OS. OSx isn't any more stable than Windows 10.

Not to mention that my software runs better in Windows 10 than it does on OSX. Getting access to CUDA rendering engines would be a bonus.
 
I mean, Apple has not yet released the full price list for the new Mac Pro, but it seems like it is too much. Just look at the base model compared to the iMac Pro.

Mac Pro
3.5 GHz 8-core Intel Xeon W (4.0 GHz Turbo Boost, 24.5 MB cache)
32 GB 2666 MHz
AMD Radeon Pro 580X 8 GB (36 compute units, 2304 stream processors, 5.6 teraflops single precision)
256 GB SSD
4x PCI-E, 2x 10 Gb Ethernet, 2x USB 3, 4x Thunderbolt 3, Wi-Fi 802.11ac, Bluetooth 5.0
$5,999.00

iMac Pro
3.2 GHz 8-core Intel Xeon W (4.2 GHz Turbo Boost, 19 MB cache)
32 GB 2666 MHz
AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 8 GB (56 compute units, 3584 stream processors, 9 teraflops single precision)
1 TB SSD
10 Gb Ethernet, 4x USB 3, SDXC card, 4x Thunderbolt 3, Wi-Fi 802.11ac, Bluetooth 5.0
27-inch monitor with a 5120x2880 resolution and 500 nits brightness
$4,999.00

The base model of the Mac Pro has a somewhat more powerful processor than the iMac Pro (although no benchmarks were made available, it seems to be slightly faster, and not much); some more ports (in general); and far more expandable.

The base model of the iMac Pro, however, has a much more powerful video card, four times the storage, and comes with a 5K 27-inch monitor.

Yes, the iMac Pro comes with a monitor that would cost more than $1,000 alone. And yet it costs $1,000 less than the Mac Pro. I did not think I would ever say that, but the iMac Pro seems like a bargain now. It is all a matter of perspective.

When released back in 2013, the base model of the previous Mac Pro cost $2,999, and it already came with a 256 GB SSD. Now it costs double. Somehow, the iMac Pro seems just an excuse to raise the prices of the Mac Pro even further. I am shocked.

The Mac Pro is indeed very impressive, but I think Apple is exaggerating (once again). The price is too high in exchange for just more expandability.
 
Yes, it is.

The video card is a sub $200 card that is 2 years old (just like the ones that were in the 6,1).

8 cores in 2019? I can get a 32 core threadripper or a 24 core Eypc system with 128 gb of ram for the same price.

PCIe 3.0 - when PCIe 4.0 launches shortly.
 
Does the z6 have 8 pcie slots?
3 PCIe x4; 1 PCIe x8; 2 PCIe x16; 2 M.2 PCIe x4

Dunno, I went to HP and tried to configure a Z8 G4 with comparable specs to he base MP, came up to $9000.
These price comparisons are never exact. I took a quick look at the Z8: 3.4GHz Xeon, 32GB RAM, 256 SSD = $6300. Add your GPU of choice, I'm not sure which compares most directly to the 580, but if it's just to drive a screen, go for a cheapie.

Again, this doesn't reflect the discounts HP will give anyone with a business account. AND the Z8 has more headroom for expansion. I feel the Z6 has more overlap with the 7,1 and of course it's even less expensive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: eltoslightfoot
People that are saying this isn't ludicrous, the first generation Mac Pro could be specced starting at $2299, and the Powermac G5 base model was $1999. The mid-range Mac Pro was at $2499 in 2006.

This price tag is absolutely insane for a modular mac tower. It should start at $1999. I wish it included spinning HD bays, because they're going to be around for another 5 years at least.
 
No.

The case is expensive, as is the motherboard that will support a 28 core CPU, the hardware that supports the expandability, etc.

Insofar as people who need this level of power go, the best value will probably be the 16 core version.

It looks to me like Apple finally extracted its head from its rear end and designed and built what its customers were saying they need.
 
The new Mac Pro is actually very competitively priced when compared to Z Workstations and other Pro machines. Yes, you could build a PC for cheaper, but professionals rarely do that. They go with workstations that have support behind them. So if you look at it that way, Apple is now the cheapest option for that type of pro workstation. Especially with the monitor. I've been in the market for a pro HDR reference display for DolbyVision grading, and the only ones on the market until today have cost around $50,000.

So before you start ripping on Apple for this Mac Pro, put things into perspective! Apple is seriously undercutting their competitors, and giving us a less expensive option that's arguably much, much better. Just because it wasn't designed for you doesn't mean it's not what real professionals want. This is exactly what we wanted!

The top-specced Xeon processor ALONE ranges between $10,000 and $15,000. Processor ALONE.
 
Hey, if it makes anyone feel better... you'll be able to save a whopping $360 on the price of a base Mac Pro + Pro Display XDR ($12,000) by using Apple's new credit card!!! That's like a free Homepod!
 
People that are saying this isn't ludicrous, the first generation Mac Pro could be specced starting at $2299, and the Powermac G5 base model was $1999. The mid-range Mac Pro was at $2499 in 2006.

This price tag is absolutely insane for a modular mac tower. It should start at $1999. I wish it included spinning HD bays, because they're going to be around for another 5 years at least.

Yeah, you missed the point entirely. This is competitively priced for its uses. It’s not for you.
 
Yeah, you missed the point entirely. This is competitively priced for its uses. It’s not for you.

The problem— and the point your argument is missing entirely— is that there are, I'm sure, substantially more "Pros" or "Enthusiasts" or "Power Users" who could and would (and have been!!) chomping at the bit to buy something in the $3000–$4000 range than those elite few supposedly targeted by this $6K price tag. The point that those of us in that camp are trying to make is that we think Apple is targeting the wrong customer (or not enough customers) w/ that price tag. Dismissing everyone willing to pay multiple thousands but not six thousand as "not for you" sounds pretty arrogant (you may not mean it that way; Apple can't help but be that way).
[doublepost=1559620204][/doublepost]Additionally, while I realize the CPU cost alone may be driving the cost of this system up, I think it would be wise for Apple to work on add'l lower cost configs that utilize other CPUs, perhaps like the iMac Pro has. For me, comparing this to a $5K iMac Pro that has better GPU and storage plus a display makes a $6K Mac Pro a very tough pill to swallow, since the main thing I'd want it for would be the expandability...and that's some expensive expandability.
 
w0t?

Is its use different from every Powermac/Mac Pro (except the trashcan) that came before?

Yes, it is.

Again, it’s like people didn’t watch the keynote. This is unbridled processing power. It’s a completely different beast than the trash can. The trash can was not a Mac Pro at all, really.
 
What’s taking so long with the keynote? Are they editing out the part where people laugh about the stand?
 
  • Like
Reactions: dysamoria
This price tag is absolutely insane for a modular mac tower. It should start at $1999. I wish it included spinning HD bays, because they're going to be around for another 5 years at least.

The CPU+RAM alone are around 1500...
 
They should’ve made it dark black or a space grey. That would help hide some of the ugliness.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.