I don't recall having ever used the word always operate at turbo speed. In fact my comments have always been in relation to the base clock. Likewise when I gave the example of using 2.7GHz that was a reference to the base clock and not the turbo clock specification. My lawsuit comment has always been wrt base clock.His response was in regards to the the "sue Apple for wrongful claims" being discussed. What he means is that TB is variable depending on thermals and cores in use.
As you know, there are times the E5 you mentioned will be operating at 2.3GHz, and there are times when cores will be at 3.6GHz, and everything in-between depending on thermals and cores in use. I.e., there's no way Intel can guarantee what speed the CPU will be working at at any given time.
Therefor, by pl595's logic, you could sue HP for false claims since it won't ALWAYS operate at 3.6GHz turbo even when only two cores are in use, and it won't ALWAYS operate at 3.4GHz with 3 cores in use, etc. I'm not so sure MG's logic is apples to apples in this instance, but this sub-topic about suing Apple is ridiculous to begin with, so who cares.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Will there be a new Mac Pro in 2015?
- Thread starter Anto38x
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
Do you feel it is unreasonable to expect a system to operate at its advertised speed under continuous operation?Just because it becomes a legal case doesn't mean it's not idiocy.
East Texas has thousands of ridiculous troll lawsuits... it only shows how idiotic that part of the legal system is. Again, have fun with that.
Anyway, is there a reason you keep going on about the iMac CPU in a Mac Pro thread? Maybe take it up in the iMac forum?
My comment is not specifically targeting the iMac but any system which cannot maintain its advertised speed under continuous operation.
OK, I believe it's clear now. Let's drop it.
It's fair enough that you should expect full performance from a product as advertised, indeed.
But I also believe there are ridiculous lawsuits out there, and don't take me wrong, but in the US I believe it's unbelievable the type of claims that would never stick here.
It's fair enough that you should expect full performance from a product as advertised, indeed.
But I also believe there are ridiculous lawsuits out there, and don't take me wrong, but in the US I believe it's unbelievable the type of claims that would never stick here.
I didn't say you did. I was explaining to someone else what someone else was suggesting. As you'll notice in that reply, I suggested that the logic wasn't an apples to apples comparison for that very reason. I know what you meant.
I think I made pretty clear I really don't give a !@#$. And no one else here seems to either.
To my knowledge, neither the cMP or nMP throttles under any normal circumstances, so again, why are you still going on about it here in this Mac Pro thread?
Are you going to continue trolling on this?
Whether you care or not is irrelevant to my comment Apple could face a lawsuit if their products fail to perform as advertised. You may not care but other people do.
I keep "going on" about it because I am addressing people's comments. Now I ask you: Why are you?
I hope we will see another iteration before mine bite the dust with 6 / 8 cores in the base model and hopefully the option, but this is really questionable, but I'd BEG them to do this, to opt out of the Firepro graphics solution for something more average, acting as a spokesman for the people from the audio industry that require mainly CPU horsepower, and having a better CPU instead. This graphics option is forced upon every potential customer, making the system probably around 1 grand more expensive and I have NO use for it. Talking about casting my money to the wind.
Last edited:
Apple does advertise this in the machine specifications. There's no lawsuit here.
Thanks for the reply. I did some googling but can't find benchmark comparisons for something like FCPX... do you have any links (or point me to previous post)? Thanks!
I'm not understanding what you're referring to. What are they advertising in the machine specifications?
More options would be great, but it's extremely unlikely it will happen, so if that's what you're waiting for, you're going to be disappointed. Aside from the size and quietness, standard dual GPUs are the main distinguishing factor between the nMP and typical tower workstations from Dell, etc.
I get the impression some people here don't understand the way Apple works.
Right but a graphics card that's adding another grand to total price which I don't use AT ALL is beyond futile and more than just a small detail I could gulp down. How do you think customers would react if Apple added a graphics card for 1 grand to every model of the iMac? For example one model with 8 cores and an average graphics card and the other one with 4 cores and the amd firepro.
Clearly, if you are not here to marvel at the engineering, or rub lotion on it's skin, you are not wanted.
It's kind of exciting though. By the coordinated tag team action I'm guessing that 7,1 is just days away.
I'm getting my tent out of storage and heading down to the Apple Store.
Y'know, I'd be the slightest bit tempted to get a nMP if they had a BTO option with dual Quadro cards.
Just slight, mind you. Wouldn't change the fact I'd have to buy a thousand dollars worth of Thunderbolt PCIe and hard drive enclosures on top of the base price just to achieve functional parity with the cMP it'd replace.
Just slight, mind you. Wouldn't change the fact I'd have to buy a thousand dollars worth of Thunderbolt PCIe and hard drive enclosures on top of the base price just to achieve functional parity with the cMP it'd replace.
Right, but I'd drink the Kool-Aid, support their new design choice, if they only offered a model that's more for the audio guys with an average graphics card but a strong cpu, that's all I'm asking for... I mean, to me personally, it is downright ridiculous that they all come with an AMD Firepro, no matter what. They didn't do this before, why are they forcing a render / photoshop build upon everybody?
I mean, the equivalent to an AMD Firepro D300 is an AMD FirePro W7000, which was 650 each at launch, 1,300 in total?! I'm paying 1,300 for something I will never end up using, and so do a lot of other people. But they take away all the periphery, no keyboard nor mouse, great...
I have nothing against Apple's design choice, I'd rather staunchly support it, but only if they got their product right, which they don't, not for me and for a lot others.
I have nothing against Apple's design choice, I'd rather staunchly support it, but only if they got their product right, which they don't, not for me and for a lot others.
Operating temperatures before it has to down clock.
Pretty much exactly what you are complaining about is in the specs.
This thread is indeed the gift that keeps on giving.
I'm with Melodist and MacVidCards: I think Apple ignored vast swathes of various and sundry pros and focused too much on an aspect that isn't vital to most professionals, that of size. Lots of professionals in creative fields are unhappy with the lack of options that cater to their industry, and nearly everything we don't like about the nMP is the result of the decision to make it small.
As someone who has used Apple computers since the early 90's and has solved his upgrade dilemma, I'm still drawn to this thread because I, like many others, simply want useful options in the tools I purchase.
We're not "haters". We want Apple to make the best computers for our various industries, and it's frustrating and sad to see Apple not do so.
I'm with Melodist and MacVidCards: I think Apple ignored vast swathes of various and sundry pros and focused too much on an aspect that isn't vital to most professionals, that of size. Lots of professionals in creative fields are unhappy with the lack of options that cater to their industry, and nearly everything we don't like about the nMP is the result of the decision to make it small.
As someone who has used Apple computers since the early 90's and has solved his upgrade dilemma, I'm still drawn to this thread because I, like many others, simply want useful options in the tools I purchase.
We're not "haters". We want Apple to make the best computers for our various industries, and it's frustrating and sad to see Apple not do so.
You know you can't go 5000 meters above sea level? ;D
I get where you're coming from but yeah, this topic is not about the iMac and the Mac Pro actually stays pretty cool, those machines sometimes last forever.
Operating temperatures before it has to clock down? Can you provide a reference to this specification as I'm not aware of what you're referring to.
But it's only able to do that by crippling the MP6,1 GPUs with serious underclocking to stay within the power/cooling constraints.
It's also a bit premature to say that the MP6,1 "lasts forever" - since it's still the original version with only tiny changes since introduction.
Last edited:
- Status