Mac Pro for a Non-Pro

[Tanax]

You want it to be viable for 10 years? Honestly, can you even remember the computers 10 years ago? Dual core basically didn't exist. SSD was non-existent for consumers, can you even imagine a computer today without SSD?

You'll be much better off buying a simpler computer that lasts for 3 years and then replace it.

 

[ybz90]

You want it to be viable for 10 years? Honestly, can you even remember the computers 10 years ago? Dual core basically didn't exist. SSD was non-existent for consumers, can you even imagine a computer today without SSD?

You'll be much better off buying a simpler computer that lasts for 3 years and then replace it.

100% agreement, which is all the more reason to get something like a Mac Mini, which you could upgrade 5 (FIVE!) times for the price of a single Mac Pro.

This is exactly what I mean when I said in the previous post you should buy the minimal computer that meets your needs. If a Mac Mini doesn't cut it, then you have no choice but to go up to the Mac Pro. But if it does, why waste the money? High-end components depreciate faster and go obsolete quicker. Getting a Mac Pro when you don't need the power is just wasting your money.

 

[deconstruct60]

I am actually a healthcare professional who needs to be able to simultaneously have many programs running including ones for work, and ones for personal use.

The major professional group doesn't matter as much as what the programs are doing. if have 3-4 programs that all require 2-8 GB RAM each then probably a Mac Pro is a better fit. if it is 3-4 programs that take 2GB RAM each then a Mini or iMac will do.

Similar on monitor. Two relatively ordinary, mainstream monitors can be driven by an iMac or Mini (with getting one embedded in the iMac so only need one more). If need some super high resolution radiology monitor as one of the two the Mac Pro is probably better. Again what is being done is driving the costs.

I am thinking of opting for a 256gb flash drive, and connect my 6TB external hard drive via thunderbolt and use the computer as a server for all my multimedia needs. Ideally, I would run 2 or 3 screens on this mac pro.

If that is 1-2 HDDs behind the 6TB don't particularly need Thunderbolt.

I want a computer that will last for the next 5-10 years without slowing down

The computer hardware don't get slower over time. Your filesystem may get cluttered and clogged but that is fixable.

or rather a computer that'll keep up for next 5-10 years.

The storage drives on any Mac probably won't last that long if pushing them with workload. Apple isn't going to support the machine 7-10 years though. Paying more doesn't get you longer hardware support.

http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1752

There is absolutely zip in Apple's policy that extends time of support by price paid up front. You are paying more largely for more expensive components. That doesn't mean they last longer or automagically get far more support out to 10 years.

You don't want to buy the minimal machine with no room to grow but buying "expansion" as a rationale that automatically greatly extends life is deeply flawed notion. If need expansion over intermediate-medium term then get it. Buying something now that won't need for 5 years is bad idea in tech. Tech 5 years out is likely to be in numerous ways better, but not necessarily compatible with what is can be bought now. Past 5 years is almost purely crystal ball time if trying to be precise.

 

[Cubemmal]

100% agreement, which is all the more reason to get something like a Mac Mini, which you could upgrade 5 (FIVE!) times for the price of a single Mac Pro.

And all together would still be as useful as 1/5th of a Mac Pro!

Just kidding, but I have two minis and basically hate them. You have to pour SSD's and RAM to get them to be even usable (IMO), and then after all that pain (they are the hardest macs to upgrade practically) you still have ... a mini. Good for email, some web and not much else (again IMO, don't get hairy on me).

Mini's just remind me how much I like the MP.

 

[ybz90]

And all together would still be as useful as 1/5th of a Mac Pro!

Just kidding, but I have two minis and basically hate them. You have to pour SSD's and RAM to get them to be even usable (IMO), and then after all that pain (they are the hardest macs to upgrade practically) you still have ... a mini. Good for email, some web and not much else (again IMO, don't get hairy on me).

Mini's just remind me how much I like the MP.

Yeah, but what you describe seems a lot like what the OP will be doing. I couldn't use a Mac Mini either because at any given time, my Mac Pro is probably assembling a genome, which eats RAM like no other. But if I wasn't doing this and was using the types of programs I suspect the OP may use, 1/5 of a Mac Pro is more than sufficient and would allow timely upgrades that will exceed the current Mac Pro in the future.

 

[flat five]

Honestly, can you even remember the computers 10 years ago? Dual core basically didn't exist.

here's one which has recently passed its 10 year b-day..

(not meant as a counterpoint to what you've said)

 

[Cubemmal]

Yeah, but what you describe seems a lot like what the OP will be doing. I couldn't use a Mac Mini either because at any given time, my Mac Pro is probably assembling a genome, which eats RAM like no other. But if I wasn't doing this and was using the types of programs I suspect the OP may use, 1/5 of a Mac Pro is more than sufficient and would allow timely upgrades that will exceed the current Mac Pro in the future.

Maybe. Plenty of people are happy with minis, I don't like using them even for web browsing. I had to reboot my 2011 yesterday because somehow it got wedged up and was burning the fan just on browsing. Now it's working better, but I'm much faster doing web stuff on the MP. I got it originally for my kid but he outgrew it within a year, so now I've got it kicking around.

 

[ybz90]

Maybe. Plenty of people are happy with minis, I don't like using them even for web browsing. I had to reboot my 2011 yesterday because somehow it got wedged up and was burning the fan just on browsing. Now it's working better, but I'm much faster doing web stuff on the MP. I got it originally for my kid but he outgrew it within a year, so now I've got it kicking around.

What Mac Mini do you have? There shouldn't be any issues, unless maybe you have a dual core? In my advice to the OP, I'm advocating a mid or high end quad i7. Those things are roughly on par with the rMBP. If you've got the dual-core, then obviously it's not comparable, but the quad should be more than sufficient and would be the advisable purchase over a nMP.

 

[wildmac]

Hello everyone,

I have been doing some research on this heck of a machine about to be released. I am not a video editor, and I do not create music or anything. I am actually a healthcare professional who needs to be able to simultaneously have many programs running including ones for work, and ones for personal use.

I am thinking of opting for a 256gb flash drive, and connect my 6TB external hard drive via thunderbolt and use the computer as a server for all my multimedia needs. Ideally, I would run 2 or 3 screens on this mac pro.

I want a computer that will last for the next 5-10 years without slowing down or rather a computer that'll keep up for next 5-10 years.

Is the mac pro a good option? What specs?

Thank you!

Gotta laugh at all the "don't buy it, too much for you, and too expensive" folks here. Good portion of them downplaying it because they probably can't afford it anyway.

Assuming the expense is not an issue, the best system for you to buy is the base MacPro maxxed out with 3rd party ram. That will give you plenty of performance, and the legs to last quite a while (allthough 10 years is pushing it.. 5-7 is more likely a realistic limit).

DON'T get the iMac if you are concerned about longevity, much higher likelyhood that the iMac won't last that long.

If money is an issue, as some suggest, the MacMini might be a good choice as well.

----------

Should also say that for what you are talking about, you DON'T want the 6, 8, or 12 core systems, you want the 4-core with gobs of ram...

 

[ybz90]

Should also say that for what you are talking about, you DON'T want the 6, 8, or 12 core systems, you want the 4-core with gobs of ram...

Why should the OP get a Mac Pro then if by your own admission the OP doesn't need more than a quad-core? The primary advantage are in the dual GPU configuration, which the OP also does not need. Can you be more specific in what exactly the nMP features that will benefit the OP over something like a Mac Mini?

(Try not to be such an arrogant prick also; many of us can easily afford the nMP, but that has no relevance to what the OP should get based on his/her needs and what someone can or cannot afford has no bearing on the value of that person's advice. For the record, I'm getting a 12-core nMP. I'm willing to bet you're not.)

 

[jondunford]

i am in the same position

i'm thinking buying it as a personal computer but most people act as if i am committing some kind of criminal offence and i have no right to purchase this machine

 

[iMarvin]

Why should the OP get a Mac Pro then if by your own admission the OP doesn't need more than a quad-core? The primary advantage are in the dual GPU configuration, which the OP also does not need. Can you be more specific in what exactly the nMP features that will benefit the OP over something like a Mac Mini?

(Try not to be such an arrogant prick also; many of us can easily afford the nMP, but that has no relevance to what the OP should get based on his/her needs and what someone can or cannot afford has no bearing on the value of that person's advice. For the record, I'm getting a 12-core nMP. I'm willing to bet you're not.)

Im just going to chime in here and say that the OP states in the first post that he/she wants to use up to 3 displays while simultaneously using thunderbolt storage. Which the mini can't handle without some add ons.

 

[Sun Baked]

If the externals are just as important as a long lasting machine, then there is nothing wrong with the Mac Pro.

You don't need to be a "professional" or make money to use it.

Basically, seems like you will need CPU and memory going forward. Which as the memory gets cheaper it won't be too hard to add to the Mac Pro. And the ability to easily swap displays as you go forward won't hurt.

It should last likely 5 years before Apple kills it and no longer supports it with OS/app updates.

However, no telling how fast OpenCL will catch on and Apple will make cuts based on that alone. Which means a current Mac Mini and some machines with integrated GPUs might get axed quicker.

---

If money is an issue, then you'd be able to swap in a new Mac Mini every couple couple/few years for the same price and stay reasonably current. But might sacrifice and have to go to 2 displays.

---

If you are pricing a long term keeper for a iMac and checking all the boxes, you are rather near the cost of a Mac Pro anyhow, and if you already have multiple displays, keyboards and external drives -- then the step over to a Mac Pro from an iMac isn't that bad anyhow.

 

[flat five]

However, no telling how fast OpenCL will catch on and Apple will make cuts based on that alone. Which means a current Mac Mini and some machines with integrated GPUs might get axed quicker.

fwiw, OpenCL based software which shows considerable gains on a mac pro will also exhibit these gains on a mac mini..
probably not to the extent you'll see on a dual gpu system but just sayin, gpu*2 isn't an openCL requirement

 

[goMac]

i am in the same position

i'm thinking buying it as a personal computer but most people act as if i am committing some kind of criminal offence and i have no right to purchase this machine

A non-pro has the right to purchase this machine. That doesn't change that it's probably a stupid thing to do. Everyone has the right to do stupid things.

This machine will be outdated in 5-6 years. A 27" iMac could easily last just as long.

The processor architecture is the key, and the iMac and Mac Pro both use the same architecture. And if you want to get technically, the iMac actually uses a newer processor architecture than the new Mac Pro.

Ask all the people who bought Power Mac G5s because they'd last 10 years how that plan is going.

 

[iMarvin]

A non-pro has the right to purchase this machine. That doesn't change that it's probably a stupid thing to do. Everyone has the right to do stupid things.

If you want a mac without a built in display, and a mac mini doesn't cut it. You're kinda out of options.

 

[Sun Baked]

fwiw, OpenCL based software which shows considerable gains on a mac pro will also exhibit these gains on a mac mini..
probably not to the extent you'll see on a dual gpu system but just sayin, gpu*2 isn't an openCL requirement

I don't expect Apple to support the current integrated chipset in the Mac Mini, nor dual core machines to be supported very long long either.

Just the way Apple moved in support in the past with the OS and graphics chipsets in the past.

In 5 years you won't need dual GPUs, but Iris Pro and i7 might barely squeak you by on that OS update. And you might be looking at the writing on the wall as your machine is last on the list of supported machines for that update.

 

[goMac]

If you want a mac without a built in display, and a mac mini doesn't cut it. You're kinda out of options.

So is the extra $2000 worth it?

Nothing the OP said excludes a Mac Mini anyway. Mac Minis come in a quad core variety, and at $600, he could replace it several times in the next ten years.

 

[Agent007pr]

Hi All,

I don't know if anyone is aware that for example many Radiologist use dual FirePro W5000 or W7000 for their workstations. Without knowing exactly what the OPs job is I don't think we have all the elements of judgement to call the nMP an overkill for him. I see many of the radiologists I provide service to looking at the nMP as they carry a baseline GPU for use for diagnostic 3MP or 5MP monitors that they need. Just the size of the nMP vs a Dell T7600 makes it appealing for healthcare. We need more info on the work use that the OP will give to it.

 

[ABCDEF-Hex]

Everyone has the right to do stupid things

A non-pro has the right to purchase this machine. That doesn't change that it's probably a stupid thing to do. Everyone has the right to do stupid things.

This machine will be outdated in 5-6 years. A 27" iMac could easily last just as long.

The processor architecture is the key, and the iMac and Mac Pro both use the same architecture. And if you want to get technically, the iMac actually uses a newer processor architecture than the new Mac Pro.

Ask all the people who bought Power Mac G5s because they'd last 10 years how that plan is going.

Even you. Who are you to say that one person's hobby is stupid. Some people spend money on golf, fishing, skiing, diving and enjoy it. It's no more stupid than spending most of your time on this forum criticizing other people.

 

[BayouTiger]

fwiw, OpenCL based software which shows considerable gains on a mac pro will also exhibit these gains on a mac mini..
probably not to the extent you'll see on a dual gpu system but just sayin, gpu*2 isn't an openCL requirement

For me the lack of dedicated graphics is the deal breaker on the Mini for my use. I have several Mini's chugging away with i7's and 16GB doing server duties. I love them, but I would not want to work on one of them for my daily CAD and modeling work.

I don't see OpenCL being a big plus for integrated graphics. Hard to use the graphics processor that doesn't exist!

The nMP is all about forward thinking. Definitely designed with a vision of "Skating to where the puck will be rather than where it is". Many here will simply never get that concept.

 

[ybz90]

For me the lack of dedicated graphics is the deal breaker on the Mini for my use. I have several Mini's chugging away with i7's and 16GB doing server duties. I love them, but I would not want to work on one of them for my daily CAD and modeling work.

I don't see OpenCL being a big plus for integrated graphics. Hard to use the graphics processor that doesn't exist!

The nMP is all about forward thinking. Definitely designed with a vision of "Skating to where the puck will be rather than where it is". Many here will simply never get that concept.

Sigh. No one is hating on the nMP. It's just not appropriate for the OP. This thread has gotten a bit off course, but back to the original question, the OP asked if the nMP would be a good option for his or her tasks. Truthfully, it's not. A Mac Mini or iMac would be better. People like you or me can't get by without a Mac Pro because our work demands heavy graphics processing, but the OP does not need it therefore, it'd be a waste of money.

But if you are a hockey fan, I applaud you. There are too few of us in the States.

 

[wildmac]

Why should the OP get a Mac Pro then if by your own admission the OP doesn't need more than a quad-core? The primary advantage are in the dual GPU configuration, which the OP also does not need. Can you be more specific in what exactly the nMP features that will benefit the OP over something like a Mac Mini?

(Try not to be such an arrogant prick also; many of us can easily afford the nMP, but that has no relevance to what the OP should get based on his/her needs and what someone can or cannot afford has no bearing on the value of that person's advice. For the record, I'm getting a 12-core nMP. I'm willing to bet you're not.)

So I'm an arrogant prick for pointing out that quite a few here knock stuff they can't afford to make themselves feel better? Did I just do it again?...

But I guess you didn't read the rest of my message, or failed in comprehension.

My point, again, is that if the OP wants a system that will last "ten years", which i pointed out was a bit unreasonable, the MacPro, with the enhanced memory bus, solid CPUs, and overall design is the system that's likely to last him the longest.

Is it overkill for his current tasks? sure.

Will it perform better than a MacMini? totally.

Will it last longer than an iMac? most likely.

The problem is this.. the OP asked the equivalent of "I want a rock solid truck to use on the weekends" and you are analyzing the cupholder design. You are overthinking the OP request.

A MacMini might certainly serve his needs now, but a MacMini is not a 10-year system.

Actually.. for the OP.. a mid-range MacBookPro might be a good choice. Or if the system can be a tax-write-off, then an iMac might be ok too, with the expectation of replacing it every 3 years.

But again, I will chuckle at all the folks that rage when someone "who doesn't need a MacPro" wants to buy one. Jealousy is the only reason for that.

 

[gavinstubbs09]

here's one which has recently passed its 10 year b-day..

Image

(not meant as a counterpoint to what you've said)

Yet they were a beast at the time! Dual processor Power! Still usable today for basic enough things, yet some people have mac minis and iMacs and don't use them for anything more than what the G5 can do today.

 

[wildmac]

Sigh. No one is hating on the nMP. It's just not appropriate for the OP. This thread has gotten a bit off course, but back to the original question, the OP asked if the nMP would be a good option for his or her tasks. Truthfully, it's not. A Mac Mini or iMac would be better. People like you or me can't get by without a Mac Pro because our work demands heavy graphics processing, but the OP does not need it therefore, it'd be a waste of money.

But if you are a hockey fan, I applaud you. There are too few of us in the States.

How well is that MacMini going to run the 2-3 monitors that the OP wanted to run? Think that might be stretching the limits of the MacMini there.