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

Torn Between 2012 MP or nMP for Audio Recording

costabunny said:
Well as sataII is 3gb/s and usb3 is 5gb/s its faster. My seagate 7200 is faster in a usb3 enclosure than it is internally.
Click to expand...

USB 3.0 is 5 Gbs "theoretically," not sure in actual practice. Many variables.

VirtualRain said:
And USB3 can exceed SATA2 but not all USB3 enclosures are created equal... Some perform poorly, and others well.
Click to expand...
I'm concerned that the USB 3.0 protocol may not be optimum for clocked digital audio streaming, ie isochronous transfer. AFAIK, USB 3.0 throughput can vary with the quality of the host/device controller, encode/decode error correction, varying file size, non-direct memory access transfer etc.

I'm sure USB 3.0 is fine for large, bulk transfers but not sure about high-bandwith streaming audio, unlike Firewire 800, Thunderbolt, SATA etc, especially with multiple, daisy-chained devices.
 
Further clarification on cMP and nMP comparisons

Mike Biggen said:
What? There are so many inaccuracies here it makes my head spin. The tower's case isn't the heat sink, those are attached directly to the CPUs and don't touch the case. No one knows how loud the nMP will be under load...except Apple, who posted that information on the Mac Pro's section of their site (roughly 18.5 dBA for the nMP vs 27.5 dBA). You said fans -- there is only one fan. There's no question at all as to whether any of them will use Thunderbolt 2 or Thunderbolt 1. Their website says TB2, they said TB2 during both of their presentations, and they're already shipping computers with TB2.
Click to expand...

In order to keep heads from spinning, I decided to do a bit of further inquiry into these issues.

In terms of terminology, the case of the cMP is not a heat sink, but its large aluminum surface area disperses a significant amount of heated airflow. The air inside the case is heated by the cMP’s heat sinks, power supply, hard disk drives and whatever is in the expansion bays. Considering it uses spinning disks, along with the other stuff in the case, cMP is remarkably quiet.

The nMP is essentially a fast core computer with a lot less stuff in it. Including an SSD. So it runs cooler and quieter right from the get go.

So that would help account for the baseline dBA levels. You said you got you got the figures “roughly 18.5 dBA for the nMP vs. 27.5 dBA” from the Mac Pro section of the Apple site. I couldn’t find this, but I did find the statement ”typical acoustical performance, sound pressure level (operator position): 12 dBA at idle.” So apparently Apple has reduced the nMP’s dBA even further at idle. But the important part of this quote is “at idle.”

In pro audio, the user is generally advised to work from a second HD, not the primary HD. So right from the start, an outboard drive is required for the nMP. And if music needs to be archived, I was taught, “if it doesn’t exist in 3 places, it doesn’t exist.” So that would mean at least 2 separate external HD’s to be safe. For cost purposes alone, that would probably mean 2 disk drives.

For a fair comparison of the total dBA of each system, the dBA of the nMP plus the necessary outboard HD’s should be added together.

BTW, for a quiet audio drive, Pacific Pro Audio makes a nice fan-less 7200 FW800/USB2 drive, up to 2 Terabits. Here’s a link for more info:

http://www.pacificproaudio.com/drives.asp

The take-away is we don’t know what the comparative dBA levels will be under load with the necessary HD’s to do pro audio (as I previously stated). Or what the level will be after hours of continuous operation under load.

Since the OP does everything in the box, this is most likely an annoyance issue rather than a noise floor issue.

Other issues. I don’t care how many fans each machine has. And the last time I paid attention to TB1 and TB2, Intel said TB2 would be available for Xeons in late 2013. Funny how time flies when you’re having a good time.

Anyway, thanks for pushing me to do some further inquiry. It helped me figure out ways to improve my cMP system.
 
cinealta said:
USB 3.0 is 5 Gbs "theoretically," not sure in actual practice. Many variables.

I'm concerned that the USB 3.0 protocol may not be optimum for clocked digital audio streaming, ie isochronous transfer. AFAIK, USB 3.0 throughput can vary with the quality of the host/device controller, encode/decode error correction, varying file size, non-direct memory access transfer etc.

I'm sure USB 3.0 is fine for large, bulk transfers but not sure about high-bandwith streaming audio, unlike Firewire 800, Thunderbolt, SATA etc, especially with multiple, daisy-chained devices.
Click to expand...

The Presonus site has a webpage with summary of "the Pros and Cons of FireWire vs USB." Although it's for USB2, the basics remain the same.

The highlights are:

* FireWire streams data rather than packets data (as USB does).

* FireWire is typically dedicated for audio/video purposes, and isn't in use by other services on your computer.

Both of these issues relate to your concerns. The page is located at:

http://support.presonus.com/entries/21355765-Should-I-choose-a-FireWire-or-USB-audio-interface-

----------
flat five said:
you just posted all that stuff about noise levels but you don't care about the amount of fans?
the fans are what make most of the noise.
��
Click to expand...

It depends upon the design of the fan(s) and the internal air flow. For example, a single fan that's ramped up can make more noise than 2 fans.

For me, since Apple is really good at making quiet computers, they can use or not use as many as they want. I don't care. But as I said, we won't know what happens with the nMP until it is put under load.

I hope it's quiet, because eventually I'm going to want to upgrade. And this thread is pushing me to figure out that path.
 
Last edited:
Liquidstate said:
It depends upon the design of the fan(s) and the internal air flow. For example, a single fan that's ramped up can make more noise than 2 fans.

For me, since Apple is really good at making quiet computers, they can use or not use as many as they want. I don't care. But as I said, we won't know what happens with the nMP until it is put under load.

I hope it's quiet, because eventually I'm going to want to upgrade. And this thread is pushing me to figure out that path.
Click to expand...

fwiw, apple has a promo page dedicated to just the fan. they have said one of the design targets was to match the mac mini's noise levels.


from the mac pro page
An incredible amount of innovation went into designing a fan system capable of cooling such a high-performance device. Instead of adding extra fans, we engineered a single, larger fan that pulls air upward through a bottom intake. As air passes vertically through the center of the device, it absorbs heat and carries it out the top. It’s simple and elegant — and also astonishingly quiet. To achieve that, we had to consider every detail: the number of blades, the size of the blades, the spacing of the blades, and even the shape of the blades. By minimizing air resistance throughout the system, we were able to design a fan with backward-curved impeller blades that runs at fewer revolutions per minute, draws air more efficiently as it spins, and creates considerably less noise.
Click to expand...

nmp21.jpg
 
Liquidstate said:
So that would help account for the baseline dBA levels. You said you got you got the figures “roughly 18.5 dBA for the nMP vs. 27.5 dBA” from the Mac Pro section of the Apple site. I couldn’t find this, but I did find the statement ”typical acoustical performance, sound pressure level (operator position): 12 dBA at idle.” So apparently Apple has reduced the nMP’s dBA even further at idle. But the important part of this quote is “at idle.”
Click to expand...

Flat five beat me to it with a picture. The numbers given were at load based on the graph found on the ninth 'dot' in the Mac Pro overview page (6.5 bars on the graph to hit 15dBA).
 
nmp21.jpg


It is expectied that the nMacPro will produce less noise levels since it has fewer moving parts and smaller in hardware structure compared to the classic Mac Pro. It's not much of an equal head to head comparison. With the new Mac Pro, also factor in the noise from the external devices.
 
Macsonic said:
It is expectied that the nMacPro will produce less noise levels since it has fewer moving parts and smaller in hardware structure compared to the classic Mac Pro. It's not much of an equal head to head comparison. With the new Mac Pro, also factor in the noise from the external devices.
Click to expand...

i'm sure if your concern is noise then you'll be using noiseless externals as well.. if you need a quiet drive to work off of for audio then use something like this: (for example)

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/901226-REG/LaCie_9000291_120GB_Rugged_USB3_Thunderbolt.html
 
To hone advice for me (OP), I'm not concerned about noise spec. The computer & hard disks will be outside the recording/mixing area with appropriate cable runs into the control room (DVI, Firewire etc). Thx.

My drive configuration will be:

1) SSD (OSX + Apps)
2) 7200 software sample library
3) 7200 digital audio recording scratch disk
4) 7200 digital audio backup (clone)
5) 5400 Time Machine backup

AFAIK, I can only use Thunderbolt or SATA for my audio drives. USB 3.0 and external Firewire won't be up to snuff. So an external Thunderbolt enclosure may be the rate-limiting step which determines whether I should get a cMP or nMP.
 
Last edited:
cinealta said:
To hone advice for me (OP), I'm not concerned about noise spec. The computer & hard disks will be outside the recording/mixing area with appropriate cable runs into the control room (DVI, Firewire etc). Thx.

My drive configuration will be:

1) SSD (OSX + Apps)
2) 7200 software sample library
3) 7200 digital audio recording scratch disk
4) 7200 digital audio backup (clone)
5) 5400 Time Machine backup

AFAIK, I can only use Thunderbolt or SATA for my audio drives. USB 3.0 and external Firewire won't be up to snuff. So an external Thunderbolt enclosure may be the rate-limiting step which determines whether I should get a cMP or nMP.
Click to expand...

The range of TB external enclosures is still really small... Here is a small list of ones I have marked as possible for myself. BUT - I am still waiting. I am 80% all SSD already (for noise reasons) and am carefully looking at fanless TB storage devices. Take a look at the Black magic one. Once you go external all modern macs hook up the same. There are also some sonnet rack devices for putting drives in and connecting tB.

http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?id=10607
http://www.lacie.com/more/?id=10149
http://oyendigital.com/hard-drives/store/RS-M4T.html
http://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/blackmagicmultidock
http://store.apple.com/us/product/H5184VC/A/promise-pegasus-r4-4tb-4x1tb-raid-system?fnode=5f
http://store.apple.com/us/product/H8250VC/A/g-tech-8tb-g-raid-thunderbolt-hard-drive?fnode=5f $800

And two unreleased ones...
http://www.sonnettech.com/product/echo15prothunderboltdock.html
http://www.caldigit.com/T3/

PS>> Many pros are recording to SSDs in USB3 superspeed cases. TB is better but USB3 is quite viable.
 
cinealta said:
It's Dec 2013 and I'm still torn between getting a nMP or getting one of the 2012 MP refurbs (with Apple Care) I see popping up on the Apple Store every once in awhile. I don't see a compelling argument either way and am seeking advice.

I will be using Logic Pro X and software instruments. AFAIK, I will need a fast CPU & plenty of RAM. But I don't need to run 4K monitors or powerful video cards. An SSD + three 7200 Sata2 drives would be fine for my work.

I don't really have a hard budget but would prefer to spend as much money on audio gear rather than unused computer capability if possible. I don't need Thunderbolt. My monitor is dual DVI. My A/D interface is Firewire.

A refurbed 3.33 6-core is approx $2,500. AFAIK, a 6-core nMP will start at $4,000. If I am interpreting the benchmarks correctly, a similarly clocked Xeon E5 6-core will be about 15% faster than the Westmere. Is that speed difference worth $1,500 extra (if I don't need dual d500 graphics cards)?

I've been using a 2009 Mac Mini with external firewire drives until now. If possible, I'd rather have an encapsulated, bullet-proof workhorse and not have to deal with an external spaghetti of USB 3.0 wires, Drobos not mounting etc. Is there a truly compelling reason for someone in my shoes to get the nMP? Thanks for your advice!
Click to expand...

I'm with you on that one.
I had issues with drobo not mounting and firewire and USB going to sleep, causing me to restart computer.

So I decided to stick with 2010/2012 MP
as they provide a great balance for me
I work with very large files and having option of eliminating cables and keep everything internal was the thing for me
 
MattDSLR said:
I work with very large files and having option of eliminating cables and keep everything internal was the thing for me
Click to expand...

In the last few months, I've seen this a lot. Which kind of perplexes me. To put this in perspective... in my case, I have a 2.93GHz Quad Core 4,1 with Dual GT120s. And while it's very capable, the draw of the nMP (even the 4-Core/D300) for me is what's bound to be a near doubling in CPU performance, a 5x increase in storage I/O on the SSD, and probably an order or two of magnitude improvement on GPU related tasks. So I find it a bit perplexing that some folks are willing to pass on all this performance improvement in favour of some tidy cabling.

Do you see what I'm saying?

It's almost like having a place to put your HDs is vastly more important than any performance metric. Which sounds counter to the role of the Mac Pro as Apples most powerful computer.

I dunno, but in my case, I've got 99 problems, and finding a way to store my data with the nMP isn't one. (And I work with GBs of data every week and accumulate a TB of data a year so it's not a trivial amount of data).
 
frankly I wouldn't sweat using a current "classic" Mac Pro or a few years older one for audio recording. CPU headroom isn't such a big deal in music recording as it is in video and motion graphics.
In many ways the "classic" Mac Pro is inherently superior.
It has drive sleds for the drives that host your recording projects, card slots for those old timey dsp cards (that by now probably dont have drivers anyway) and all the legacy connections like firewire.
It wont have displayport/thunderbolt like the other macs, but that isnt a big deal in audio for music recording yet.
Now MADI cards, those are cool. You can get unbeiievable amount of audio inputs/outputs with a couple madi cards and rack mounted AD/DA in a machine room.
 
Here's where I'm at in the decision so far:

1) 2012 cMP 3.33GHz 6-core = $2550
+ Radeon Sapphire 7950 GPU = $450
+ Samsung 840 EVO 256Gb SSD = $150
+ 4 SATA2 bays = $0
+ 1 optical bay = $0
+ Apricorn Velocity Solo PCIe-SATA3 SSD interface = $50
+ Orico PFU3-2P USB 3.0 adapter card = $15
TOTAL = $3,215

2) nMP 3.5GHz 6-core = $4000
+ 256Gb SSD = $0
+ dual D500 GPUs = $0
+ DataTale 4-bay Thunderbolt enclosure only = $600
+ USB 3.0 = $0
TOTAL = $4,600

Note:
Costs which will be approx same for both setups (cMP & nMP):
32Gb DDR3 OWC RAM = $400
4 x WD Black 2Tb 7200 drives = $450

Summary:
- nMP will give +30% performance increase (E5 > Westmere) for +$1,400 price increase.
- I don't need Thunderbolt (PCIe + display port in single cable) for pro audio
- Not convinced Thunderbolt, or USB 3.0, deliver latency-free digital audio (unlike Firewire 800, PCIe, SATA etc)
- Not convinced external Thunderbolt enclosures will have no additional drivers/mounting problems, or fan noise, unlike internal SATA2 bays
- Not convinced Logic Pro X can take real-time advantage of GPU OpenCL without latency

Conclusion:
- cMP > nMP for pro audio
 
Last edited:
VirtualRain said:
In the last few months, I've seen this a lot. Which kind of perplexes me. To put this in perspective... in my case, I have a 2.93GHz Quad Core 4,1 with Dual GT120s. And while it's very capable, the draw of the nMP (even the 4-Core/D300) for me is what's bound to be a near doubling in CPU performance, a 5x increase in storage I/O on the SSD, and probably an order or two of magnitude improvement on GPU related tasks. So I find it a bit perplexing that some folks are willing to pass on all this performance improvement in favour of some tidy cabling.
Click to expand...

I don't remember a 2.93 quad, only an 8 core. There is no way quad to quad will double your cpu performance. By cpu I am referring to X86 cores. They haven't doubled in performance from one to the other.
 
thekev said:
I don't remember a 2.93 quad, only an 8 core. There is no way quad to quad will double your cpu performance. By cpu I am referring to X86 cores. They haven't doubled in performance from one to the other.
Click to expand...

There was a 2.93 Quad BTO (W3540 CPU) for the 4,1. It scores similarly to the 2010 2.8 at the bottom of this chart...

mac-pro-estimate-2013-2012-mc-thumb.png


It's not that surprising really, there's a three generation gap and a 30% increase in clock speed.
 
VirtualRain said:
It's not that surprising really, there's a three generation gap and a 30% increase in clock speed.
Click to expand...

Yeah... I just found the 2009 listing for 2.93. It's still greater than I expected, but I noticed a discrepancy between the page I usually view and their blog posting. Maybe it's that the blog posting only shows geekbench 3 results and bases the scale off that? It doesn't matter much, as it's a much bigger discrepancy than I thought to expect. It's too bad the 6 core configuration goes back up in price with the nMP.
 
thekev said:
Yeah... I just found the 2009 listing for 2.93. It's still greater than I expected, but I noticed a discrepancy between the page I usually view and their blog posting. Maybe it's that the blog posting only shows geekbench 3 results and bases the scale off that? It doesn't matter much, as it's a much bigger discrepancy than I thought to expect. It's too bad the 6 core configuration goes back up in price with the nMP.
Click to expand...

Yeah. Anyway, I'm still interested in hearing from folks who are ignoring all the added performance in favour of a tidy desk. :confused:
 
cinealta said:
Here's where I'm at in the decision so far:

1) 2012 cMP 3.33GHz 6-core = $2550
...
2) nMP 3.5GHz 6-core = $4000
...
Conclusion:
- cMP > nMP for pro audio
Click to expand...

Interesting. However perhaps you should compare the base nMP ($3k) with a hex core BTO upgrade ($?, maybe $200-400?). With the D500 hex core you are paying for GPU you don't need AFAIK, same with the 7950.
 
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