Just what are you trying to point out as a failing of the Windows UI with this post?I keep forgetting that I shouldn't engage Windows people who, for some unknown reason, post on a Mac Rumors site. But despite the random sale that many people may not even find or know about as an added bonus Windows 10 users get to enjoy this beautiful example of user interface:
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.
New to Mac Pro. Ordering today. Any advice ?
- Thread starter darkus
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Huh, random sale? The HP sale? Its pretty clearly right at the top of the page when when you click to configure.
And its interesting that you jump right to “Windows people”. Just FYI, I work in OS X, Windows 7 and Ubuntu. I’m pretty platform agnostic so long as its a computer that gets the job done with out some royal PITA (and all platforms have their upsides and downsides depending on what you’re doing). And that image... who cares? Do you buy computers based on what a finder menu looks like?
I honestly don’t see how I’m derailing anything here. One guy points out the z440 is just as expensive or more expensive than the nMP. I’m pointing out that: A) That’s not true; it substantially cheaper. B) The z440 is up-to-date hardware; The Mac Pro is ~3 year old stuff now.
Linuxcooldude has a point that how out of date the Mac hardware is could be largely irrelevant and that’s up to the OP to figure out. But lets help get all the facts; that’s what he’s here for right?
Yes, the UI does play a factor into making a decision. That's the point pretty sure I couldn't have made that more obvious.
Hi all,
Would it be safe to assume that the next Xeon chips which will go into the next "mythical" Mac Pro update won't be substantially faster (assuming quad-core configuration) than the Xeon chips in the current Mac Pro?
What about the potential GPU upgrades compared to the current GPUs in the (baseline configuration) of the current Mac Pro?
I would love to hear from anybody with insights and comments! Thanks.
richmlow
Would it be safe to assume that the next Xeon chips which will go into the next "mythical" Mac Pro update won't be substantially faster (assuming quad-core configuration) than the Xeon chips in the current Mac Pro?
What about the potential GPU upgrades compared to the current GPUs in the (baseline configuration) of the current Mac Pro?
I would love to hear from anybody with insights and comments! Thanks.
richmlow
Right, but what aspect of the UI was so obviously bad in that picture? You basically just said, “Windows sucks, see look.” And to a lot people nothing you showed was bad? Is it the lack of pretty pictures and rounded edges on those boxes?
Btw, the part of my post that you quoted had nothing to do with what you actually said.
There's a lot you could have done to make it more obvious because what you provided says nothing all by itself.
Current Mac Pro is a bit dated, while the latest iMac 5k upgrade seems to kick its but it practical applications, in many areas. Not everywhere, and not saying Xeons aren't the bomb, but that system is dated. Compare the higher-end iMac 5k with a lower end Mac Pro, and it's not looking like an upgrade. iMac is cheaper and comes with a kick-ass 5k display.
But, again, the iMac runs hotter, louder, and will need to throttle itself down a lot more than the nMP
Which, IMO, is a defective product. iMac should be able to run at its full baseline speed without throttling down.
We already know how much better Haswell Xeons are than the Ivy Bridge Xeons in the current nMP. We also already have a decent idea how much faster Broadwell architecture will be relative to Haswell, even though Xeon Broadwell-E5s are not available. More or less you should expect about 10% clock-for-clock performance increase from Ivy Bridge to Broadwell. But that’s based on the desktop/mobile core series which had more emphasis on power consumption and iGPUs. So the Xeons may be a bit better than 10%. But what we don’t know is how Intel will juggle the clock count vs clock frequency across the line. Its probably safe to assume they will still have 4-core zipping along at near 4.0 GHz though. I just don’t see them dropping the 4-core as the base E5-1600 CPU yet. But it might be possible that the middle ground 1600 is a 6 core (i.e. replacing the 1630 4-core). Then, I would guess they also get an 8-core down in a more modest price range (i.e. the 1650 becomes an 8-core), while the "if have to ask, you can’t afford it" versions (1680 and up) get a 10 core, maybe even a 12 core.
This is all conjecture, but Intel has been slowly adding extra cores at the lower price points, while taking increasingly taking advantage of turbo boost to not loose out on clock rate per working core, for several generations now and I doubt it stops here. Before we know what intel does though, we can’t really figure out what Apple will do. And until we actually see tests of those Xeons we won’t know for sure, but my guess is you’ll see 10-15% increased performance per core, but also 2 additional cores for the same price (except at the base model), which MIGHT mean about 40-50% increased performance in applications that can put all the cores to work [i.e. 8(cores)*1.1(speed increase per core)/6(old core count) = 1.4667].
Last edited:
Keep in mind that the Mac Pro has some disturbing GPU issues https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/mac-pro-late-2013-gpu-driver-issues.1860297/ which has prevented me on buying it.
Hmm....that thread certainly does not inspire confidence in me! It appears that the current Mac Pro has some very serious GPU failure problems. =(
richmlow
richmlow
In the Apple discussion forums you can read many entries about these GPU issues. This is very sad, because nobody knows if this is a hardware or software failure. I think it depends on the hardware (regardless of which GPU model: D300, D500, D700), because using Bootcamp with Windows doesn't solved the problem.
I strongly agree with this statement as well, even if it is contradicting my original post.