Sorry - I get you confused with the gal who is always pushing the latest ATI graphics publicity flashes here....You might've noticed that I'm not the biggest fan of the current model
As Mork from Ork said - "Nano, Nano".
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
As Mork from Ork said - "Nano, Nano".
Nice, pull up an article from 2008 about issues around the RoHS transistion (removing lead from the solder) - and attempt to tie it to 2015 supplier decisions.
Coincidence?
...and that's why I've decided to just max out my 4,1 for another year or two.
i already gave you a particular reason.
i don't feel like arguing you about this.
---
and hey.. i actually do wish you'd sue them. (and report back with the story)
Most modern CPU's speedstep to a lower frequency when they are idle and also adjust its speed according to the load. It saves in battery life. But hey, if you always want to be tethered to an electrical socket.
Last edited:
why not d300 then? the extra one is what, maybe $200? about 5% more than what you're saying you'd be happy with..
(1x d300 with 6core for $3300 instead of $3500).
in your case (the case of possibly never utilizing dual gpus) it's a 5% tax.. sucks but not _that_ bad.
but really, you have quite a few choices except it seems you're focusing attention around a choice you don't have
?
windows pc
hackintosh
mac pro
mp5.1
imac/mini/mbp
just pick one and roll with it.
no it's not.
you should go buy this car.
drive up a hill.
sue nissan since you're spending more money on gas than their ad states you will.
Did you notice the asterisk beside the mileage info?
Actually, I'm a little in the "in-between" on this argument about throttling.
I don't have issues with a laptop throttling to deal with thermal or battery life issues - it's a compromise that you accept when you accept the form factor. If you don't realize that, you're a naïve shopper.
For a desktop (including the Imac) to throttle below the base frequency, however, isn't defensible.*
Apple needs to buy a lot of asterisks for their "mileage" claims.
*Throttling in hot environments, however, is something different. My ProLiant servers consider anything 42° or below to be "normal".
Last edited:
doubtful, he's not real big on factual details
Ask him about those GPU upgrades he predicted 2 years ago. "It's the screws !"
I've been reading this thread all along. But now that we're talking about misleading specs -- or perhaps "non-real-world specs" I find myself remembering the audio amplifier wars of a few decades ago. I'm probably not the only one who does.
Back then we had the serious manufacturers (think McIntosh Labs, for example) who only ever rated their amps by RMS continuous power, low THD, 8 ohms. If you bought one of those (and I used to have a McIntosh MC2100 that worked properly for 40 years) you knew what it would do, it always did it, and it would do it for as long as you wanted it to.
Then there were the other manufacturers, many of them, who used EIA peak power 1% or more THD, not continuous, 2 ohms, and so on. Whoa! Such power! Hundreds of watts, according to spec.
Not.
That's kind of what we're talking about here. My riMac has great specs and I'm happy with it, but it's true -- give it a big job to do and if it takes a long time, it heats up and slows down. My cMP 5.1 is slower but always chugged along, no problems.
OK, then. Just taking this in a different direction, but I do think the old plus ca change plus la meme chose. Or however that goes. I'd like for my next computer to be like my McIntosh amp.
I once found an envelope with several hundred dollars in it when I was in High School. Used it to buy a Rockford Fosgate Punch 40 Amp. Was rated at 20 Watts per channel, but at minuscule distortion.
Could make your ears bleed if you were in the back seat near the 6x9s. Everyone assumed it was 100's of Watts due to the sound pressure. I rarely let loose it was just 20 per channel, since everyone else had a Jensen or AudioVox or some such drivel pumping out 150 Watts per channel that was a poor 2nd to the Rockford. Kept that thing through 2 or 3 cars, somebody stole it finally when I was in College.
So I guess Apple has become Audiovox or Soundesign. Sad.
Could make your ears bleed if you were in the back seat near the 6x9s. Everyone assumed it was 100's of Watts due to the sound pressure. I rarely let loose it was just 20 per channel, since everyone else had a Jensen or AudioVox or some such drivel pumping out 150 Watts per channel that was a poor 2nd to the Rockford. Kept that thing through 2 or 3 cars, somebody stole it finally when I was in College.
So I guess Apple has become Audiovox or Soundesign. Sad.
Jesus, what are your cost estimations based on? The d300 was similar to an AMD gpu worth 650 each based on the same launch date the nMP was announced and priced. Now you are converting it into manufacturing production costs? Right, that makes so much sense by how Apple is charging you when you add a bigger CPU BTO.
Okay, so you suggest I should get a Windows Pc on a Macintosh board even though you know I depend on the OS? Great suggestion! The MP 5.1, I appreciate since this will be my other option and mini / mbp are really no workplace options, especially considering how underpowered the mini is and the mbp is rather mobile / not built for being constantly under stress.
But Hackintosh, really? I suppose you don't really appreciate the brand and just troll the thread since you're making such futile suggestions. "The grants set forth in this License do not permit you to, and you agree not to, install, use or run the Apple Software on any non-Apple-branded computer, or to enable others to do so." Above all, Mac OSX only comes in a bundle, with the hardware, not without. I don't mean to get abusive towards you, but Hackintosh people are the kind that pirate software and music because they think everything is for free.
you should of typed less words.. then maybe your post would of shown up before mine
;-)
i think you mis-read my suggestion.
i suggest you shop for a computer that actually exists instead of shopping for a mp7.1 with a single nvidia gpu.
Hackintoshes run circles around any Apple branded Macintosh. Better yet, they cost about half the price. If you're willing to spend a bit of time learning how to do the install, there's no excuse not to have one.
if you go by your pricing logic, a base 6.1 would be much more expensive than it is now..
here's how much of it you could by for $2999 entry price.
..still needs a cpu, ram, thermal core, and about a hundred other things.
.
Now you are taking prices from a parts reseller, lol? You are aware they want to make a buck right?
When the new Mac Pro came out, the equivalent to the d300 was another AMD card that cost 650 usd, what's to argue with here?
Right, sure, they buy things much cheaper but at the time, when the nMP came out, it would've made a huge difference if you had some average instead of the AMD graphics card in there... That weird path Apple took with the Firepros on every system.
With my cost comparison, I was trying to follow your Logic you've scattered across the thread but you change your perspective every now and then.
huh? if i read you correctly, you're saying everything that supplier is selling is overpriced except the d300s.. they're a surprisingly good deal at $550 instead of the $650 you're quoting them at.
is this what you're saying? if not, do you at least understand how it may seem like you're saying this?
----
another thing i may arrive at if i continue following this logic path..
if apple were to sell you an entry mac pro except they decided to allow it with one gpu, they would charge you $2349.
does that sound right to you? or do you think it might be more like $2800
?
The initial thing I've said is that the Mac Pro is way too expensive for what it has to offer compared to much older models, not having taken all the extra costs for the external thunderbolt solutions into account to get a system going similar to the older one, or wait, just getting a system going that's necessary to actually work with this piece of art.
you're right.. nmp is expensive
you're also right.. the days of popping multiple $200 hard drives inside a mac pro are over.
i honestly don't think you're going to find very many people to argue otherwise.
(though just an alternate idea re:storage that may or may not be of use in your case.. instead of strictly thinking thunderbolt enclosures, maybe look into 802.11ac wifi drives.. you get a few advantages.. it's network storage that you can access from multiple computers/devices.. it can double as a fast router.. probably cheaper than thunderbolt storage.. no wires going to the computer..
in addition, maybe consider spending additional $20/month for the 200/20Mbps &up internet.. store off site. similar advantages are to be had as with the wifi storage.
idk.. i don't only see data storage moving from inside the box into another box next to the computer.. storage is moving other places as well.)
Yes, especially as a 1TB drive can be had for less then $50.
That does explain why you are A-OK with paying for TB stuff.
- Status