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

nMP vs Workstation Price Comparisons

echoout said:
Yeah, just in the AE environment, Particular, Cineware, Element 3D and the myriad of plugins use different technologies for acceleration. Each task relies on something different and often the solution I choose is based on the speed it will render, not how good it can look.

My current project is a high-profile doozie, and ultimately I'm torn between a CUDA-based Octane Render pipeline that is fast, but only implements a single machine or a traditional Cinema 4D render that isn't as fast but allows me to network render my z820 with my MP. And plenty of pitfalls along the way.

Ugh.
Click to expand...

not that this solves you're current dilemma but have you checked out Thea and its new presto engine?
it's currently cuda only but the main dev has said it's written with openCL in mind (I'm going to butcher what he said if I try to paraphrase it.. on a phone right now so it's hard to get links etc.. I'll post later tonight)

anyway, I can pretty much guarantee any cuda based OSX apps will definitely become openCL in the near future.. or maybe drop OSX altogether.. but what I don't see happening is devs continuing to developed cuda apps for mac.
 
flat five said:
not that this solves you're current dilemma but have you checked out Thea and its new presto engine?
it's currently cuda only but the main dev has said it's written with openCL in mind (I'm going to butcher what he said if I try to paraphrase it.. on a phone right now so it's hard to get links etc.. I'll post later tonight)

anyway, I can pretty much guarantee any cuda based OSX apps will definitely become openCL in the near future.. or maybe drop OSX altogether.. but what I don't see happening is devs continuing to developed cuda apps for mac.
Click to expand...

That's promising. Looks like they plan on C4D integration.

Alright, sorry for the hijack, folks.
 
fixmdude said:
You're basing your opinion of my irrationality on your simple ignorance of a fact. From your posts, you think I'm irrational for stating a fact that you didn't know was true, and also apparently because you don't understand the concept of sarcasm.

http://superuser.com/questions/245881/is-sata-bandwith-per-port-or-per-controller

If you had bothered to read this thread before displaying your beligerance, you would have seen that we already discussed the addition of the card, and the cost. Do you need a baby sitter watching what you are about to do and say so she can correct you first?
Click to expand...

Wow, who's being beligerent again? First, you post something you apperently didn't read yourself, then display the exact type of irrationality I'm talking about.

In that link the best answer was that this is controller limited, but its not the 3 or 6 Gb/s limit which is the per port limit. So, it depends on how fast your control is. Notice also that answer was from 2011 and is discussing SATA2?

Here's something a little more recent: http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1765095

So, the PCH is clearly the limiting factor and its looking like 2GB/s is the current saturation point, but I'm having a hard time nailing that down for LGA2011 C602 boards. If you can find a true published limit, that would be great. But for now it is looking to me like 3-4 SSDs on SATA3 would saturate it, while exceeding the 1.25 GB/s on the nMP. If someone would mail me 4 SSDs, I'd plug them in and test it. But I suspect someone has already done that, I just can't find it. If someone else can and post it, that would be great.

Anyway to get back on point, if you configure 3 128GB SSDs + the required controller through HP on the z420 (I guess the board itself only has 3 SATA ports? One for the ODD and 2 more for the first two harddrives as it asks for the control for the 3rd harddrive?), plus the 20% off, you're looking at $2797. Of course, that's paying $300 for each 128GB SSD.... So, if you were to buy Samsung EVOs, you could, for example, get the HP z420 with a 1TB HDD, 12 GB of RAM, the 1620v2 and an extra SATA controller for $2200. Then pick up 3 128GB Samsung EVOs for around $100 each. Heck the 250 GB EVOs hit ~$130 periodically. That would come to about $2500, depending on the SSDs you pick.
 
Last edited:
wallysb01 said:
Wow, who's being beligerent again? First, you post something you apperently didn't read yourself, then display the exact type of irrationality I'm talking about.

In that link the best answer was that this is controller limited, but its not the 3 or 6 Gb/s limit which is the per port limit. So, it depends on how fast your control is. Notice also that answer was from 2011 and is discussing SATA2?

Here's something a little more recent: http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1765095

So, the PCH is clearly the limiting factor and its looking like 2GB/s is the current saturation point, but I'm having a hard time nailing that down for LGA2011 C602 boards. If you can find a true published limit, that would be great. But for now it is looking to me like 3-4 SSDs on SATA3 would saturate it, while exceeding the 1.25 GB/s on the nMP. If someone would mail me 4 SSDs, I'd plug them in and test it. But I suspect someone has already done that, I just can't find it. If someone else can and post it, that would be great.

Anyway to get back on point, if you configure 3 128GB SSDs + the required controller through HP on the z420 (I guess the board itself only has 3 SATA ports? One for the ODD and 2 more for the first two harddrives as it asks for the control for the 3rd harddrive?), plus the 20% off, you're looking at $2797. Of course, that's paying $300 for each 128GB SSD.... So, if you were to buy Samsung EVOs, you could, for example, get the HP z420 with a 1TB HDD, 12 GB of RAM, the 1620v2 and an extra SATA controller for $2200. Then pick up 3 128GB Samsung EVOs for around $100 each. Heck the 250 GB EVOs hit ~$130 periodically. That would come to about $2500, depending on the SSDs you pick.
Click to expand...


The speed of a PCI-e 2.0 pipe is about 540MB/s, so as we already said, the controller is the limitation and you would need to purchase an additional card which adds to the price of multiple SSDs and goes over the target cost.

You forgot to add the comparable video cards to your z420 estimate.

Trying to explain the same thing to you guys repeatedly is starting to bore me.
 
echoout said:
That's promising. Looks like they plan on C4D integration.

Alright, sorry for the hijack, folks.
Click to expand...

i kinda think the point of the thread has been made already.. you looking for a workstation? the nmp is going to be in the same exact price bracket as any other workstation.. it's competitively priced..
(if not, let me know fixmdude and i'll move this elsewhere)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

here's what the head developer at thea had to say about openCL/cuda


http://www.thearender.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=12500
In the beginning there was only one path for us, the standard path, that is OpenCL. But we have found out (the hard way) that OpenCL is not really "tuned" for complex staff. There is a varying performance and quite a lot of fighting with getting the code to actually run. Nevertheless, this is the path we would like to follow and this is why, the language used during programming has been made with OpenCL in mind and to exactly help the transition to the standard when it is more mature. We will be visiting this topic frequently to see how we can make Presto running on ATI/Intel graphic cards.
Click to expand...

that's five months ago and i'm not sure if he's made other comments since.. i don't follow thea development too closely.. after all, i have a lifetime indigo license because i was one of the first 100 people to buy it :)


idk.. if people are expecting the giant / well established programs to really grasp on to gpgpu, i think they shouldn't hope too hard.. i mean, i'm sure they'll get a bit of this bit of that in there but i don't think we'll be seeing photoshop running strictly on gpus anytime soon (not that that would make much sense anyway ;) )

it's these smaller/younger/newer devs that are going to be doing most of the experiments and it's maybe a bit unfair to expect someone who has been programming for thirty years to basically relearn everything they know.

once the younger devs get all the tricks figured out, then we can expect the larger firms to follow suit..
so in this regards, yeah, apple is jumping the gun on the dual gpu / single cpu socket.. thing is though, that's pretty awesome from where i'm sitting.. you got a new breed of devs out there and apple has built this machine basically for them to go to town with.. it's pretty cool seeing a giant corp like apple doing this as they would typically play it safe and follow..

in a way they're saying "you want turn of the century computers? fine, go buy them.. they're everywhere.. we're going to do this though"
 
flat five said:
i kinda think the point of the thread has been made already.. you looking for a workstation? the nmp is going to be in the same exact price bracket as any other workstation.. it's competitively priced..
(if not, let me know fixmdude and i'll move this elsewhere.)
Click to expand...

Discuss whatever you'd like. I'll even throw out one great big giant advantage to building your own PC over the nMP right now: Whatever parts you use will run significantly faster than a Mac that doesn't even exist. (Unfortunately, it will take a few weeks to order or build a PC, and by then who knows.)
 
flat five said:
i kinda think the point of the thread has been made already.. you looking for a workstation? the nmp is going to be in the same exact price bracket as any other workstation.. it's competitively priced.
Click to expand...

The odd thing about any comparison involving the Mac Mini Pro is the issue with OpenCL.
  • If the apps important to you can be multi-threaded on hundreds to thousands of OpenCL cores -- then the Mac Mini Pro is great for you
  • If you don't use apps that can use OpenCL - it's a waste of money to buy dual ATI cards that you won't be able to use.

In the latter case, you can find much more competitively priced systems that don't have the half-eaten fruit as a logo.
 
AidenShaw said:
The odd thing about any comparison involving the Mac Mini Pro is the issue with OpenCL.
  • If the apps important to you can be multi-threaded on hundreds to thousands of OpenCL cores -- then the Mac Mini Pro is great for you
  • If you don't use apps that can use OpenCL - it's a waste of money to buy dual ATI cards that you won't be able to use.

In the latter case, you can find much more competitively priced systems that don't have the half-eaten fruit as a logo.
Click to expand...

In general, yes, but I also think the low end GPUs have merit even if you don't need OpenCL... if you want a powerful Mac and the ability to run one or more 4K displays, they are a great choice along with the CPU you need.
 
AidenShaw said:
The odd thing about any comparison involving the Mac Mini Pro is the issue with OpenCL.
  • If the apps important to you can be multi-threaded on hundreds to thousands of OpenCL cores -- then the Mac Mini Pro is great for you
  • If you don't use apps that can use OpenCL - it's a waste of money to buy dual ATI cards that you won't be able to use.

In the latter case, you can find much more competitively priced systems that don't have the half-eaten fruit as a logo.
Click to expand...

yeah, i get what you're saying (though there is the display thing too besides opencl).. and i guess if you're needing a computer right now, it's a tough spot to be in.. but things will be different when v2, v3 etc of the nmp start rolling out.. the gpgpu stuff will be more widely known about with less guesswork involved for the user.. less of a gamble when buying because there will be more facts to base decisions on..

if you need a computer right now and you want a mac but are unsure about the nmp config.. upgraded 4,1 or 5,1 seems super sweet to hold you over until later versions of the nmp arrive.. they'll probably remain supported for at least another 3-4 years.

[edit] but if you're letting me spend your money.. you'll have a nmp over a 5,1 :)
 
Last edited:
fixmdude said:
The speed of a PCI-e 2.0 pipe is about 540MB/s, so as we already said, the controller is the limitation and you would need to purchase an additional card which adds to the price of multiple SSDs and goes over the target cost.
Click to expand...

Ok, you posted an old forum to back this up. A newer forum is talking about 2GB/s. Do you actually have something credible? I’d honestly just like to know the answer regardless of the nMP.

You forgot to add the comparable video cards to your z420 estimate.
Click to expand...

It was in the price, I just forgot to mention it. This computer is also using $380 ($304 after 20% off) of HP RAM, which could be had at newegg for $150-$200 bucks. And if all you need is another freed up SATA controller the PCIe-SATA card can be bought at newegg for less than what HP is offering. Both together might save another $150-$200 on the finished system, or about $2300-$2350.

Trying to explain the same thing to you guys repeatedly is starting to bore me.
Click to expand...

Well, you can say the same thing over and over and I can respond with the same questions. See the SATA3 port/controller issue. I can’t find a factual answer on the limitation of the C602 chipset and I’ve put maybe 20-30 minutes into googling it, looking up the specs of my own C602 motherboard....if you got another source, please provide it.
 
AidenShaw said:
The odd thing about any comparison involving the Mac Mini Pro is the issue with OpenCL.
  • If the apps important to you can be multi-threaded on hundreds to thousands of OpenCL cores -- then the Mac Mini Pro is great for you
  • If you don't use apps that can use OpenCL - it's a waste of money to buy dual ATI cards that you won't be able to use.

In the latter case, you can find much more competitively priced systems that don't have the half-eaten fruit as a logo.
Click to expand...

If your apps do not use Open CL, that means you can simply go for D300 setup and pay around 250$ extra for a GPU you won't use. And yes, you can find other comparable setups which cost less (not a lot less) but are more suited for you.

P.S. Not really relevant to this thread but considering the machines cost thousands of dollars, nobody will switch OS's for 300$.
 
iBug2 said:
If your apps do not use Open CL, that means you can simply go for D300 setup and pay around 250$ extra for a GPU you won't use. And yes, you can find other comparable setups which cost less (not a lot less) but are more suited for you.

P.S. Not really relevant to this thread but considering the machines cost thousands of dollars, nobody will switch OS's for 300$.
Click to expand...

For many looking at the Mac Mini Pro, this quote from Jobs is relevant:
 

Attachments

  • jobs-cube.gif
    jobs-cube.gif
    26.3 KB · Views: 441
Last edited:
AidenShaw said:
For many looking at the Mac Mini Pro, this quote from Jobs is relevant:
Click to expand...

I don't think it's relevant at all. You are saying that this device will not sell because this is not what professionals want.

That's partly true. Yes, some professionals do not want this device, so they will not buy it. Many others want this device and they will buy it. I don't know or care which group is bigger, and it seems neither does Apple.

Where you are wrong is that, the sales figure won't have any effect on its fate imho.

Cube wasn't a product Apple could simply manufacture because it was cool. It was not selling and they were not in a position to afford to keep a device in their line up that doesn't sell.

With new Mac Pro the situation is completely different. We and Apple already know it won't sell because the 2010 Mac Pro didn't sell in 2010.
So not selling well won't be a criteria for this device getting axed or not.

They are keeping this for now, for prestige imho. So they designed a machine only they could release. If it works for you, great. You get the coolest looking computer in history and you also get to use it for work.
 
^ One thing I remember with the Cube was that Pro users had a choice to stay with a expandable workstation G4, G5. But now they have no other choice except to clutch what they have from 2010~2012 or move to the nMP system.

Choice is always nice!
 
iBug2 said:
With new Mac Pro the situation is completely different. We and Apple already know it won't sell because the 2010 Mac Pro didn't sell in 2010.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure that a comparison to the 2010 model is going to be all that accurate either as Apple are creating something completely new here; a small-form-factor workstation/professional desktop depending upon how you look at it. Sure it's similar to the G4 Cube in many ways, but I do think that Apple have learned from past mistakes here, as the new Mac Pro's cooling system and choice of parts offers a lot of potential for such a small machine, though granted we'll need to wait and see. They're not building a curiosity here, it's a serious attempt to look to the future of professional computing, or at least to create their own niche within it.

The 2010 model didn't sell in huge numbers most likely because it was still trying to be a workstation while other companies quite simply offered better ones. For all I like the Mac Pros I don't think they've every been desperately competitive in the wider workstation market to begin with, and only got less competitive over time; I bought mine because it was still a good choice of workstation, but also because I put value in OS X and the aesthetics as I learned to love the cheese-grater design.

Of course the new Mac Pro is going to be even less competitive when compared against proper workstations, but that will depend entirely on what you actually want from a machine, after all the value of size, noise, aesthetics or flexibility are all very subjective.

It's one of the reasons that a direct comparison is very difficult to make; the new Mac Pro may well be offering us discounted FirePro graphics in a unique bundle, but at the same time there may be no possibility of upgrades. So if flexibility is more important to you then a workstation with an identical, or even greater, cost may still come out ahead unless you also place a similar value on the looks and size.
 
haravikk said:
I'm not sure that a comparison to the 2010 model is going to be all that accurate either as Apple are creating something completely new here; a small-form-factor workstation/professional desktop depending upon how you look at it. Sure it's similar to the G4 Cube in many ways, but I do think that Apple have learned from past mistakes here, as the new Mac Pro's cooling system and choice of parts offers a lot of potential for such a small machine, though granted we'll need to wait and see. They're not building a curiosity here, it's a serious attempt to look to the future of professional computing, or at least to create their own niche within it.
Click to expand...

Don't get me wrong, it's indeed a serious attempt to look to the future of pro computing, but the future of pro computing is already a niche market anyway.

The 2010 model didn't sell in huge numbers most likely because it was still trying to be a workstation while other companies quite simply offered better ones. For all I like the Mac Pros I don't think they've every been desperately competitive in the wider workstation market to begin with, and only got less competitive over time; I bought mine because it was still a good choice of workstation, but also because I put value in OS X and the aesthetics as I learned to love the cheese-grater design.
Click to expand...

I don't think that's the reason at all. 2010 Mac Pro did not sell because less people needed a Mac Pro by 2010. It wasn't about the device, it was about the market. Yes, Apple never offered the fastest or the most expandable workstations, nor did they need to. People who were using Macs did not need those big boxes for the work they did.

Of course the new Mac Pro is going to be even less competitive when compared against proper workstations, but that will depend entirely on what you actually want from a machine, after all the value of size, noise, aesthetics or flexibility are all very subjective.
Click to expand...

I think it'll compete quite well, but still won't be selling well because, no workstation is.

The new Mac Pro is the first actual push by Apple to speed up the adoption of thunderbolt by 3rd party device makers. This is the future, but it can't come soon enough. If Apple is successful with the push, a lot more people than workstation users will benefit from it since we'll be finally able to use any kind of 3rd party hardware we have with all of our computer line up instead of only with the workstations they stayed in so far. This will be the biggest thing for the pro market when it finally happens.
 
theSeb said:
All the people who hate the nMP should just say so and the 200 threads about how it does not meet their needs should be closed.
Click to expand...

I believe you are being sarcastic, but I'll bite . ;)
I'd love to hear how the nMP design can be beneficial for anybody .
How it can meet anyone's needs better than a traditional workstation design .

Those requirements are obvious, but who's particular needs can the nMP possibly meet ?
It's a bit of a tired argument, but might the nMP be a solution which is desperately seeking for a problem ?
I kind of doubt portability is a factor here ...

If Apple was actually involved in TB and USB 3.0 peripherals and backward compatibility (including the OS) , to push their concept and assist in a smooth transition, maybe this would not be the most expensive workstation I have ever seen .
 
barmann said:
I believe you are being sarcastic, but I'll bite . ;)
I'd love to hear how the nMP design can be beneficial for anybody .
Click to expand...

Interestingly, I believe the answer to this is in the post directly above yours...

iBug2 said:
The new Mac Pro is the first actual push by Apple to speed up the adoption of thunderbolt by 3rd party device makers. This is the future, but it can't come soon enough. If Apple is successful with the push, a lot more people than workstation users will benefit from it since we'll be finally able to use any kind of 3rd party hardware we have with all of our computer line up instead of only with the workstations they stayed in so far. This will be the biggest thing for the pro market when it finally happens.
Click to expand...

The nMP design is ultimately derived from putting an emphasis on Thunderbolt. If you start with Thunderbolt being a key requirement, then custom GPU cards follow (thanks to DP and PCIe being key components of TB). And then if you're investing in TB and custom GPU cards, the form factor opens up to anything you want since you don't need drive bays or slots. Hence, the new Mac Pro... it could have been a cube, a sphere, or a tube... anything but a big rectangular box. The key benefactors as iBug2 points out, are the mobile computer users, who will gain access to a whole new range of TB peripherals (if the vision is realized). Mac workstation users also benefit ultimately because there's more officially supported peripherals for them too. The shrinking PC market and the growth of mobile make this a reasonably sound strategy.
 
iBug2 said:
Don't get me wrong, it's indeed a serious attempt to look to the future of pro computing, but the future of pro computing is already a niche market anyway.
Click to expand...
I didn't really mean a niche within the existing market exactly; in fact, for all the joking about it being a Mac Mini Pro, the new Mac Pro does share a number of the Mac Mini's advantages thanks to being very compact and (sort of) easy to slot into an existing setup. It may also attract more of those people who are happy to stick with a high end iMac who are put off by the vast tower of old, i.e - those that simply wanted more power and didn't care about the rest of it.

Obviously it's ability to attract switchers would have been helped by having a much more affordable entry level model, so that's disappointing as they could easily have made an appealing $2,000 model from a high end Haswell i7 and a consumer graphics.

I think it'll sell quite well, at least as well as the previous Mac Pros, maybe even a bit better. Probably not to all the same people, but also to some people who wouldn't previously have considered a Mac Pro.

Anyway, this is a little bit off topic, my main point was that the Mac Pro has advantages and disadvantages that are difficult to put a price on :)
 
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