Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
MP 7,1 Most won’t be able to afford a new Mac Pro
- Thread starter satchmo
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
On the bright side: I can afford the monitor stand.
Large companies, yes. Small companies, no. My wife and I are professional graphic designers and own our own company. I can’t afford one MacPro much less two. And the specs on the base model aren’t good enough.
That why I went PC and built my own a month or so ago.
What I would do is buy a fast thunderbolt SSD external drive, carry it to the nearest Apple Store, plug it into the new Mac Pro, do your work there, save and go back home.
I don’t blame Apple on that one, Intel would drag ass implementing PCIe 4 until 2022, if they cou...oh, wait!
I mean, if you can save $1.36 a day, why not $2 or $3? It's less than a coffee, and that boosts your budget up to $6500
[doublepost=1559617184][/doublepost]
I mean, I'm on a system with PCIe 2 and it's pretty much irrelevant.
I have bought two new Mac Pros the last 11 years. One 3.1 in 2008 and then the last, and my current, Mac Pro 5.1 in 2013 (it was from 2012). Both these were base models, but costed much anyway. I have thought about Trash can since 2013, but found it so ugly, expensive and limited so I didn’t buy it. And now, when the history for old Mac Pro is over and I can’t upgrade it any longer, I would like to change it for a new one, but it’s out of the question to buy a computer for at least 5 999 US Dollars (56 990 SEK) with rather poor specs. And I wonder how many Apple will sell. If they lowered the prices more people could afford them and Mac would be a more common computer-brand. And then it will last at most 7 or 8 years, then it’s history, but I guess all computers are going the same way, it’s a question of time and how you use them. Well, I guess I go on with my old computer, what else can I do when prices are like they are? One thing I regret. I upgraded it with new processor-tray (12 core) and maximum of RAM (128 GB). What was I thinking? I should of course have waited until now to get to know if it would be obsolete or not before I invested. For that money I could have bought a nice Windows-computer, and then I would have been free from the spell of Apple.
Last edited:
I think Ars sums it up best: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/201...e-apples-new-mac-pro-and-the-pro-display-xdr/
The price is undeniably steep; the product earns its Pro name, with ultra-expensive features specifically designed for creative professionals in fields like video editing and 3D modeling. Apple isn't thinking about the Mac Pro in terms of selling it to consumers—not even power users.
It would be nice to see a tower design geared towards power users who don't need 28 cores or multiple 500-watt GPU solutions.
The price is undeniably steep; the product earns its Pro name, with ultra-expensive features specifically designed for creative professionals in fields like video editing and 3D modeling. Apple isn't thinking about the Mac Pro in terms of selling it to consumers—not even power users.
It would be nice to see a tower design geared towards power users who don't need 28 cores or multiple 500-watt GPU solutions.
We have the Cascade lake W prices: https://fuse.wikichip.org/news/2400/intel-rolls-out-cascade-lake-xeon-w-processors/
That 28 core upgrade price is going to be like $13K.
That alone is approaching a half decent 2-4 node mini-cluster.
They priced me out of it .. it has been fun apple .. going to build a TR pc i guess.
Thanks, so - we're looking at maybe $400 Apple pays for the base CPU, $150 for the base GPU. Damn, that aluminum got really expensive.
I think Ars sums it up best: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/201...e-apples-new-mac-pro-and-the-pro-display-xdr/
The price is undeniably steep; the product earns its Pro name, with ultra-expensive features specifically designed for creative professionals in fields like video editing and 3D modeling. Apple isn't thinking about the Mac Pro in terms of selling it to consumers—not even power users.
It would be nice to see a tower design geared towards power users who don't need 28 cores or multiple 500-watt GPU solutions.
Yeah, it doesn't sound like a machine for graphic designers or web designers anymore.
This is gold, Apple released a pro computer that's too pro till MR pro users can't own it. LOL
Let us face it, for the majority of the users an iMac Pro is more than enough, the new MacPro is for those working in fields that can actually pay for it. If you can't afford it, it simply means the work you do isn't "high end" enough.
[doublepost=1559663191][/doublepost]
Like I would want to know how often will the GPUs be upgraded in the future, cause on the trash can MP, that GPU upgrade option never came to fruition even though its design should allow an easy aftermarket upgrade.
Since Apple designed it as custom like the new Mac Pro, it falls on Apple to update the GPU and sadly it was never offered as an aftermarket upgrade. So I hope this wont be the same case again
Let us face it, for the majority of the users an iMac Pro is more than enough, the new MacPro is for those working in fields that can actually pay for it. If you can't afford it, it simply means the work you do isn't "high end" enough.
[doublepost=1559663191][/doublepost]
This one I agree, the only thing that pros should push Apple is for more transparency on their plans as having a consistent update cycle makes sense.
Like I would want to know how often will the GPUs be upgraded in the future, cause on the trash can MP, that GPU upgrade option never came to fruition even though its design should allow an easy aftermarket upgrade.
Since Apple designed it as custom like the new Mac Pro, it falls on Apple to update the GPU and sadly it was never offered as an aftermarket upgrade. So I hope this wont be the same case again
Or audio professionals, despite their perplexing Logic Pro X demo. (Audio is not nearly as CPU-intensive as they made it out to be.)
Right. This is clearly designed around folks that need to cram a ton of stuff in with PCIe but don't really need a lot of CPU power. That's where the value of this machine peaks: 8-16 cores, but duel GPUs you buy yourself and maybe a couple other add on cards. That's the use case where this machine makes sense.
For people that really only need those 8-16 fast cores and not all the PCIe, there are MUCH cheaper options out there (dell 5820 will hit those people at the ~$3K price point). For those that need lots of cores, regardless of the PCIe needs, this just won't work.
Exactly. This is a machine that will most likely be paid for by a company, not an individual. This machine is aimed squarely at "industry professionals" - people working in larger studios that use ProRes / Final Cut Pro and Logic Pro.
For everyone else, there's iMac Pro (with apologies to MasterCard), or even iMac or MacBook Pro. And this is why I believe Apple has been shoving six and eight core CPUs in the last two.
I don't need all this. Don't want to spend so much. 5 grand for a base model? I have zero need for all that power and potential. Don't apple see us mere mortals anymore?
I have an old g4 tower sitting right here. Bought in 2000 I think. Satchmo, you bring back memories.
Why can't they take a high end spec from the 27" imac and put it in a box, a mac medium instead of mini or a mac pro junior, kill the screen, and sell it for 2499 to start. Let us be able to play with some expansion cards, ram, even a hard drive or two. Maybe be able to add some ssd's. The 27" imac with nearly highest end specs is around 3900. I don't want the screen. I like my NEC 27" mat screens. Apple, you can keep your glossy imac screens. Okokok, I'm talking to no one. Tim isn't posting today.
As a 3d art hobbyist, let me assure you that I could melt an iMac Pro.
I don't mind paying $6,000 for a system.
I do however mind paying $6,000 for a box with a bunch of EOL technologies:
8 core processors
PCIe 3.0
a sub $200 video card that is 2 years old (and what is worse, it isn't even the workstation version of the card - WX5100).
It appears Apple is s
I don't know a lot about video, but the music industry is largely composed of small studios and independents. The days of large record companies with hordes of cash are long gone. There are LOTS of pros who earn their living in music and video who could definitely use a reasonably-priced tower solution, however.
I don't know a lot about video, but the music industry is largely composed of small studios and independents. The days of large record companies with hordes of cash are long gone. There are LOTS of pros who earn their living in music and video who could definitely use a reasonably-priced tower solution, however.
$50.000 for a top spec with one display
https://www.theverge.com/circuitbre...pro-how-much-top-spec-price-estimate-ballpark
https://www.theverge.com/circuitbre...pro-how-much-top-spec-price-estimate-ballpark
Taking inflation into account, a Mac Pro for $2000 in 2009 is equivalent to about $2400 today, not $6000. Clearly Apple is going after different market with the new Mac Pro.
1 TB of ssd now cost around 100 usd, and very nice 4k display cost around 500 usd. nVidia Titan that can be used to utilize CUDA can be bought with $3,000. The technology also advances and drives the price lower. I can't wait to see Apple's upgrade price for Mac Pro.
A fair bit of the cost in the machine is to provide the power and thermal overhead to support 28 core CPUs and over $2000 video cards. HP only offers a 1400-watt power supply on their top-end Z8 workstation - lower models max out at 1000 watts.
And a Z8 with 32GB of RAM, a 256GB SSD and an AMD WX4100 GPU is just over $5000. And that is with a Xeon Bronze 3106 8 core at 1.7GHz. If you want a ~4GHz with 8 cores that is Xeon Gold territory and the CPU upgrade cost alone is $5000.
And the Z8 is not on PCIe 4.0. I don't think anyone is shipping PCIe 4.0, and I know nobody is doing it on Intel since supposedly only AMD (Ryzen) supports it at the moment.
Then factor in the R&D costs and the fact that Apple knows no matter what they priced it at, the market for it would be small as the majority of end users just don't want a tower (be they macOS or Windows). So the only way the RoI likely works is to charge the moon and the stars for it.
Last edited: