What would you do? (go iMac? wait?)

[thefredelement]

Here's what I have:

Mac Pro 4,1 - 2x 2.93 Quad core Xeons, 48GB RAM, ATI 7970HD 3GB, 512GB SSD RAID 0 on a Sonnet Tempo Pro, 2x ViewSonic VP2770-LED screens.

I'm at a crossroads of where I either have to:

get an Apple PCIe SSD blade (for faster Xcode performance - big projects with lots of small files)

get 2 4k screens for retina quality display
(I'd prob. go with these: http://www.amazon.com/ViewSonic-VP2...&qid=1447511713&sr=8-1&keywords=view+sonic+4k)

probably upgrade to 2 3.33Ghz 6 core Xeons.

I'm kind of getting the feeling that I'm starting to waste my money putting it into this old box, though it still performs most tasks relatively well the tasks I need it for are starting to lag (Xcode).

Having been spoiled by retina displays and faster performance with other devices I've been debating getting the 5k iMac - but I'll have to put a different display next to it for the real estate I need. The idea of having two non-uniform displays freaks me out a little. I'd max out the iMac.

The other option is upgrade the Mac Pro and hold out for a new one though I feel as if it would be money not well spent. I'm thinking maybe the iMac for now, then sell it when a newer MP comes out and just hope ViewSonic still makes the display so I can have two matching ones.

What would you do?

 

[mikeboss]

watching progress bars is the worst for me. so I'm always throwing money at my machines in order to get the highest performance possible. my Mac Pro (6x3.46 GHz & Apple PCIe SSD) was/is pretty fast. but I wanted a 5K display. a friend of mine bought the DELL 5K LCDisplay, but it takes ages to wake from sleep and the averall experience is not as smooth as I need it to be. I can't stand it if my main machine needs attention etc. I want it to "just work". I don't like having a glossy display, I don't like the all-in-one concept of the iMac. but in the end I ordered the 5K retina late 2015 iMac and so far, I'm happy. the screen is georgeous, the machine is almost inaudible. plus, it's faster than any of my other machines (nMP 4x3.7 GHz and/or the cMP).

4K displays don't work for me, tried it. in retina mode you're getting 1920x1080 which is ridiculous. using them with the native resolution also doesn't work: everything will be too small to read comfortably.

don't buy the iMac if you're using the CPU hard for longer periods. it'll get loud. that's what the Mac Pro (Late 2013) was made for...

 

[thefredelement]

That sucks about retina mode on 4k. I really need the 2560x1440 foot print (at least) x2.. Maybe I'll just get the iMac and keep one of my existing displays. I hope the PPI difference doesn't drive me insane.

watching progress bars is the worst for me. so I'm always throwing money at my machines in order to get the highest performance possible. my Mac Pro (6x3.46 GHz & Apple PCIe SSD) was/is pretty fast. but I wanted a 5K display. a friend of mine bought the DELL 5K LCDisplay, but it takes ages to wake from sleep and the averall experience is not as smooth as I need it to be. I can't stand it if my main machine needs attention etc. I want it to "just work". I don't like having a glossy display, I don't like the all-in-one concept of the iMac. but in the end I ordered the 5K retina late 2015 iMac and so far, I'm happy. the screen is georgeous, the machine is almost inaudible. plus, it's faster than any of my other machines (nMP 4x3.7 GHz and/or the cMP).

4K displays don't work for me, tried it. in retina mode you're getting 1920x1080 which is ridiculous. using them with the native resolution also doesn't work: everything will be too small to read comfortably.

don't buy the iMac if you're using the CPU hard for longer periods. it'll get loud. that's what the Mac Pro (Late 2013) was made for...

 

[theSeb]

That sucks about retina mode on 4k. I really need the 2560x1440 foot print (at least) x2.. Maybe I'll just get the iMac and keep one of my existing displays. I hope the PPI difference doesn't drive me insane.

I use a Dell P2715Q 4K monitor in 2560x1440 (scaled mode) and it looks gorgeous. Even the next scaled mode looks great and works well with Xcode, if your eyes can handle it, but 2560x1440 is the sweet spot for me.

You don't have to run it at 1920x1080, or 3840x2160. That's just silly. Shout if you want some screenshots of Xcode. I use it with an old 24" ACD and it does not bother me at all. The ACD is used to show reference stuff, code snippets and so forth.

I have the latest Rev 03 and there are no issues with waking up from sleep so far.

 

[thefredelement]

Awesome, so then the ViewSonic I have my eye on should be good with that same resolution.

Any other advice re: Xcode and the system you're on?

I use a Dell P2715Q 4K monitor in 2560x1440 (scaled mode) and it looks gorgeous. Even the next scaled mode looks great and works well with Xcode, if your eyes can handle it, but 2560x1440 is the sweet spot for me.

You don't have to run it at 1920x1080, or 3840x2160. That's just silly. Shout if you want some screenshots of Xcode. I use it with an old 24" ACD and it does not bother me at all. The ACD is used to show reference stuff, code snippets and so forth.

I have the latest Rev 03 and there are no issues with waking up from sleep so far.

 

[LoftyHammond]

I'm not an Xcode user, but I was considering getting the new iMac 5k over waiting for a refreshed nMP. I decided to wait it out mainly because of the thermal design of the iMac. Not saying it's bad or anything, but my workload taxes computers for long periods of time. If I got an iMac, I probably would take a hit in performance due to heat throttling. The Mac Pro has really good thermal management, which means it's not going to throttle as often.

 

[AidenShaw]

I use a Dell P2715Q 4K monitor in 2560x1440 (scaled mode) and it looks gorgeous. Even the next scaled mode looks great and works well with Xcode, if your eyes can handle it, but 2560x1440 is the sweet spot for me.

+1

I have a Win7 system at home (with a 4 GiB GTX960 - 3 DP out) with a 1920x1200 left monitor and a P2715Q right monitor. The P2715Q is set to 2560x1440 at the hardware level. Beautiful, none of the scaling fuzziness that we used to see with running LCDs at non-native resolution.

At work I have a Windows 10 system (2 GiB GTX960 - 3 DP out) with P2715Qs as the right and left monitors, and a 1200x1920 as the center monitor. All monitors are at native hardware resolution, but I've set the left P2715Q at 150% size, the center 1200x1920 at 100%, and the right P2715Q at 125%. (Win10 lets you set resolution independence independently for each screen.)

The left and center monitors are roughly the same visual size, so I park windows depending on whether they are landscape or portrait. On the right (125%) monitor windows are definitely smaller, so things that need more real estate end up their.

Point is - that even with simple non-native resolutions the 4K monitors can be great, and if your OS can run the monitor at native resolution and scale the UI elements they are excellent.

 

[thefredelement]

I'm not an Xcode user, but I was considering getting the new iMac 5k over waiting for a refreshed nMP. I decided to wait it out mainly because of the thermal design of the iMac. Not saying it's bad or anything, but my workload taxes computers for long periods of time. If I got an iMac, I probably would take a hit in performance due to heat throttling. The Mac Pro has really good thermal management, which means it's not going to throttle as often.

That is a really good point I didn't even think about. I may bite the bullet on the iMac for now and sell it later and switch to a newer Mac Pro when available. Hopefully this all happens before a new iMac is announced and I don't lose too much off the top... then that thought just makes me think - get a couple of 4k screens for my current Mac and while I'm doing that why not just get a faster 500GB blade to help everything else along.. sigh.

+1

I have a Win7 system at home (with a 4 GiB GTX960 - 3 DP out) with a 1920x1200 left monitor and a P2715Q right monitor. The P2715Q is set to 2560x1440 at the hardware level. Beautiful, none of the scaling fuzziness that we used to see with running LCDs at non-native resolution.

At work I have a Windows 10 system (2 GiB GTX960 - 3 DP out) with P2715Qs as the right and left monitors, and a 1200x1920 as the center monitor. All monitors are at native hardware resolution, but I've set the left P2715Q at 150% size, the center 1200x1920 at 100%, and the right P2715Q at 125%. (Win10 lets you set resolution independence independently for each screen.)

The left and center monitors are roughly the same visual size, so I park windows depending on whether they are landscape or portrait. On the right (125%) monitor windows are definitely smaller, so things that need more real estate end up their.

Point is - that even with simple non-native resolutions the 4K monitors can be great, and if your OS can run the monitor at native resolution and scale the UI elements they are excellent.

Thank you so much for such a detailed reply I really appreciate it. I know OS X has some scaling stuff on their retina displays so hopefully that translates to a 4k screen.

 

[theSeb]

Thank you so much for such a detailed reply I really appreciate it. I know OS X has some scaling stuff on their retina displays so hopefully that translates to a 4k screen.

Yes,it does. I am running the screen on a 6 core nMP and using the scaled "retina" resolutions.

 

[theSeb]

Awesome, so then the ViewSonic I have my eye on should be good with that same resolution.

Any other advice re: Xcode and the system you're on?

Yes, the Viewsonic "should" work, but some 4K monitors can be finicky. I would double check Apple's 4K support page to make sure it's listed.

As for Xcode, not much to say really. Regardless of how many files you have the storage speed makes little difference after going SSD with faster SSDs providing diminishing returns. There are benchmarks that show this very well. For example, even going to a pure RAM disk (which is at least 10 times faster than the PCIe SSD in the nMP) provided very little decreases in compilation times. This is because the relatively small source code files are perfect candidates for OS X's caching mechanism, so you're basically compiling from memory every time, after the first compilation. The only thing that makes a real difference is the CPU with Xcode scaling very well across cores. The simple conclusion is that more cores = faster compilation times. I hope that helps.

 

[pastrychef]

I'm another one who uses a Dell P2715Q 4K monitor at a scaled resolution. I use 3200x1800 and everything is as clear and sharp as can be, no fuzziness at all. Best monitor I've ever owned.

 

[thefredelement]

I've put the Mac Pro up for sale - I was going to buy a new flash drive and was looking at 4k screens and just didn't think it was a good idea to keep spending money on it considering what it's worth.

It's actually a little heart breaking, not like selling a MacBook at all.