2013 Mac Pro Review

[AliG]

It's upgradeable in the sense that not all the parts are soldered down, but everything but the ram and CPU is proprietary. SSD? Upgradeable, but you need to buy an Apple-specific one. GPUs? Completely custom boards, unlikely that anyone besides Apple will sell them, plus the 450 watt PSU is limiting. I don't think we'll be seeing R9-class Hawaii cards in these any time soon.

But this is the most Applerific mac ever created. No pc on the market could ever be smoother. Plus it's definitely over 9000 in the R2D2 category

[Zaxx]

imagine the rig you could make for $4k

That's exactly what I thought when I saw the price. I could build a much more desirable rig for that kind of money.

[DarthBeavis]

no reports on temps?

[Yeroon]

Someone extracted the bios of the mac pro and found that the d700 has a base clock of 625mhz with a boost of 850mhz.

Why does this have to be clocked to meet w8000 specs? Look at the price to upgrade these things and it becomes apparent that these do not need to meet w8000 and w9000 specs considering the low upgrade price. What is more important is it fit into a certain power and thermal envelope. Even the W8000 have a max rating of 225w. Too high for this type of form factor.

So with a heavy workload, its likely going to be near that 625mhz base clock.

Oh, it doesn't have to clock to that specifically, it was just for those trying to price out an "equal" rig, that since the D700's aren't going to be clocked at 850mhz consistently, and like you pointed out prob closer to 625mhz, that the w8000 would provide similar performance (albeit less vram) to the D700s just due to the clockspeed difference since any clocks below 775mhz(D700) the w8000's come out ahead perf wise.

[xVeinx]

So, it's a beautiful machine. It has good build quality, and performs pretty well. It's also expensive, and bets the farm on openCL. They put their (and their customers) money where their mouth is regarding openCL, so lets see what happens.

[N19h7m4r3]

Seems Crossfire is enabled by default, although games still only seem to use 1 GPU.



It's an 3.0Ghz 8 Core model with dual D700's.

I'm rather disappointed by the lack of longer benchmarks, and professional software where the machine can work over a few hours. Especially to see how the machine handles temps, clocks and noise levels.

[crash5s]

imagine the rig you could make for $4k

If it won't run the proprietary mac software or can't use the mac optimized versions of the software it doesn't matter what you could build on your own. That's the real issue. Workstations are justified on if they make accomplishing task X through software Y faster. Editing (among other things) is still largely mac centric due to software options. If you're learning these in school you're on a mac, if you're working on them professional you're on a mac. There are a few industries apple has by the balls and apple knows that.

The biggest issue with this is not the price, these industries could justify a lot more cost if it made things go faster, it's thunderbolt. No matter how good it is and how much it lives up to the hype there is a lot of legacy gear these machines will need to interface with. The devices to do this need to come out fast.

[zalbard]

Seems Crossfire is enabled by default, although games still only seem to use 1 GPU.

Yet apparently it already runs loud.

Cinebench OpenGL score appears to be around GTX480 (~111.8). Not bad if it runs on single GPU, but not too impressive, either.

[lutjens]

It's a very nice machine, but needs a little more graphics grunt...an R9-290X in that form factor would be nice...

A pity Apple won't pull out all the stops and do that, along with a liquid cooled core, configurable fan speed (quiet, medium and max performance) and software that allows the user to bias performance toward either graphics or CPU. Any unused cooling core thermal capacity could be used in the form of a higher clock on the chosen part.

They can call it, "The Mac Pro Extreme."....

[Heinz68]

It's a very nice machine, but needs a little more graphics grunt...an R9-290X in that form factor would be nice...

A pity Apple won't pull out all the stops and do that, along with a liquid cooled core, configurable fan speed (quiet, medium and max performance) and software that allows the user to bias performance toward either graphics or CPU. Any unused cooling core thermal capacity could be used in the form of a higher clock on the chosen part.

They can call it, "The Mac Pro Extreme."....

You wrong, it's workstation not Windows gaming PC and the R9-290X would not do the work.

Another subject:
Did somebody complain that $4,000 is too much for the Apple Mac Pro (2013)? How about $10,000 plus $2, 000 for the 32-inch Sharp 4K monitor. Read the full review at TheVerge

Now if somebody think they can built much better and cheaper PC, read this

[rintamarotta]

If it won't run the proprietary mac software or can't use the mac optimized versions of the software it doesn't matter what you could build on your own.

Oh yes it would and will run Mac OS X perfectly fine along with all Mac Software. It's called Hackintosh, but im not going to talk more about it.

What i like in new MacPro is its compact size and that compact size added to performance new Mac Pro can provide is fantastic, if it costs 10k$ for best configuration then so be it, i want it due compact size, performance per inch.

[lutjens]

You wrong, it's workstation not Windows gaming PC and the R9-290X would not do the work.

Another subject:
Did somebody complain that $4,000 is too much for the Apple Mac Pro (2013)? How about $10,000 plus $2, 000 for the 32-inch Sharp 4K monitor. Read the full review at TheVerge

Now if somebody think they can built much better and cheaper PC, read this

It's when people say thing like "You wrong" that these can get out of hand and become personal, rather than amicable discussion of the topic. Let's try and keep things professional and on topic, avoiding personal pot shots like that. It's actually quite possible that both sides in a discussion may be right, depending on the circumstance.

That being said, the line between a workstation and gaming machine is quite grey, a few slight component changes will alter a system from what was previously considered a "gaming machine" into one now considered a "workstation", and vice versa. Some people actually do work on their workstations by day and game on them at night. A gaming card, in many cases, is largely a workstation card in disguise, with a few choice bit neutered, both in the drivers and on the board itself. Sometimes, the neutered items don't apply to a machine's specific work load and some folks can substitute a much cheaper (and in some cases faster) gaming card in place of the official workstation card.

An R9-290X option would be nice to see as just that, an option or as a standalone part obtainable after purchase. Improved cooling of the Mac Pro's thermal core would permit the components in the system to all function at higher power (and thus performance) levels. This increased thermal margin would benefit all workloads. The software I alluded to earlier would basically give a user the ability to decide what component should be given thermal priority, with the lower priority part being ordered to throttle first to maintain the performance of the priority part. This would be handy, depending on the nature of the specific workload being handled.

[Manicdan]

my 2c

a round case is dumb because its hard to grip. i can imagine the problems when trying to move or just rotate the thing. a handle on the top would have fixed the problems.

and the glossy surface is a nightmare for fingerprints i bet. i think a brushed metal look would be just as pretty anyway.

[crash5s]

Oh yes it would and will run Mac OS X perfectly fine along with all Mac Software. It's called Hackintosh, but im not going to talk more about it.

What i like in new MacPro is its compact size and that compact size added to performance new Mac Pro can provide is fantastic, if it costs 10k$ for best configuration then so be it, i want it due compact size, performance per inch.

I know what a Hackintosh is, here is thing, you aren't going to be using one at work. You might as well be advocating pirating all your software as well and stealing your internet connection. Companies that do editing and design work aren't going to go around building an army of hackintosh computers any more than they are going to go out and pirate all their software.

[Heinz68]

It's when people say thing like "You wrong" that these can get out of hand and become personal, rather than amicable discussion of the topic. Let's try and keep things professional and on topic, avoiding personal pot shots like that. It's actually quite possible that both sides in a discussion may be right, depending on the circumstance.

That being said, the line between a workstation and gaming machine is quite grey, a few slight component changes will alter a system from what was previously considered a "gaming machine" into one now considered a "workstation", and vice versa. Some people actually do work on their workstations by day and game on them at night. A gaming card, in many cases, is largely a workstation card in disguise, with a few choice bit neutered, both in the drivers and on the board itself. Sometimes, the neutered items don't apply to a machine's specific work load and some folks can substitute a much cheaper (and in some cases faster) gaming card in place of the official workstation card.

An R9-290X option would be nice to see as just that, an option or as a standalone part obtainable after purchase. Improved cooling of the Mac Pro's thermal core would permit the components in the system to all function at higher power (and thus performance) levels. This increased thermal margin would benefit all workloads. The software I alluded to earlier would basically give a user the ability to decide what component should be given thermal priority, with the lower priority part being ordered to throttle first to maintain the performance of the priority part. This would be handy, depending on the nature of the specific workload being handled.

Nothing personal, actually when I was reading your post I was wondering if you was just kidding and maybe just ignore it, looks like you was not kidding Well you're still wrong. The 2013 Mac Pro is all about workstation and doing great job as such, according to many reviews.

You want a good gaming computer get yourself much cheaper Windows PC, it will look exactly the same as you're suggesting and no company will buy it as high end workstation, guess they rather prefer the employes to work than gaming.

If you want "The Mac Pro Extreme." as you suggested, here you go, oops they forgot to put in it R9 290X, sorry. Damn also the water-cooling is missing.
For me this end of discussion

[tajoh111]

You wrong, it's workstation not Windows gaming PC and the R9-290X would not do the work.

Another subject:
Did somebody complain that $4,000 is too much for the Apple Mac Pro (2013)? How about $10,000 plus $2, 000 for the 32-inch Sharp 4K monitor. Read the full review at TheVerge

Now if somebody think they can built much better and cheaper PC, read this

The whole basis for that article is the person used dual w9000s.

That is simply incorrect. Put dual w9000's into a 450watt power supply and see the performance you will get from the card. The think will likely crash the computer and it will not run. The w9000's have a base clock of 625mhz and when it's running heavier work loads or using its dual precision power, that what its going to run at.

Its rated TDP is 108W, that going to ensure it runs nowhere near a w9000. This makes sense as the upgrade to dual d700s is only 1000 dollars. When has Apple ever had affordable, good deal on its upgrades on its PC. They are known for having some of the heaviest upgrade costs in the industry when building and buying a PC from them.

If someone builds a PC with w9000s. They are likely going to be running 60% more performance as the w9000 won't be encumbered by the 450Watt power supply limit nor heat.

The w9000 in perspective has a 275watt power rating and it actually hits this when running compute tasks.

One problem I noticed with all the reviews are the benchmarks were really just so so considering what it was running against and the reviews only tested productivity task were final cut pro and/or apple specific task(like itunes ripping or quicktime encoding).

I could see this being a better fit for people that work exclusively in an Apple environment manipulating various forms of media. But not so much for people doing rendering tasks or want the flexibility of a do it all machine.

[rintamarotta]

I know what a Hackintosh is, here is thing, you aren't going to be using one at work. You might as well be advocating pirating all your software as well and stealing your internet connection. Companies that do editing and design work aren't going to go around building an army of hackintosh computers any more than they are going to go out and pirate all their software.

Thing is, im running Hackintosh at work, infact we have 4 hackintosh machines in work (i own the company), i have bought Mac OS X Mountain Lion from Apple and later upgraded to Mavericks from iTunes Store, im heavely against software piracy.
I do alot of editing work with my hackintosh, sometimes switch to Windows side for things mac just cant do well.

Im thinking of buying new Mac Pro's to home and work, the size of the machine just matters, leaves alot of more space in desk.

[lutjens]

Nothing personal, actually when I was reading your post I was wondering if you was just kidding and maybe just ignore it, looks like you was not kidding Well you're still wrong. The 2013 Mac Pro is all about workstation and doing great job as such, according to many reviews.

You want a good gaming computer get yourself much cheaper Windows PC, it will look exactly the same as you're suggesting and no company will buy it as high end workstation, guess they rather prefer the employes to work than gaming.

If you want "The Mac Pro Extreme." as you suggested, here you go, oops they forgot to put in it R9 290X, sorry. Damn also the water-cooling is missing.
For me this end of discussion

Actually, you're the one who's wrong and neglected to fully read and/or interpret my previous comment regarding workloads, so I'll repeat. The performance derived from a CPU/video card combination can differ greatly depending on the type of workload and the type of card used. Some "professional workstation" workloads actually run faster on a gaming card and some run worse. It is entirely dependent on the workload. Some workloads may run better on "gaming hardware". "Gaming hardware" tends to be ahead of "workstation hardware" technologically, so this may actually provide improved performance for some users again depending on their workload. The purchaser would have to analyse what type of hardware their particular workload runs best on and purchase the hardware that provides the best performance for their workload.

The addition of a integrated water cooling ability would help performance regardless of the type workload or video card used.


Check out various applications and how they fared here (surprising in many instances):

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...card,3493.html


I do understand their logic in excluding the R9-290X though...they needed to stay within the 450W envelope, and two R9-290Xs would exceed that by a wide margin.

[LeoAndrade]

450w is way too low for that kind of computer IMHO...

I'm curious to see temperature and noise reading also.

[lutjens]

450w is way too low for that kind of computer IMHO...

I'm curious to see temperature and noise reading also.

I agree...450W is pretty middling for a "professional-grade" computer. However, the amount of heat that the thermal core can handle is quite limited, making a power supply greater than 450W pointless. Components drawing more power would probably overheat the core or require the fan to run at dustbuster speeds, which would violate Apple's noise requirements. This is where an integrated, water-cooled core would boost its thermal dissipation and permit higher performance components to be used (and/or higher frequencies).

[tajoh111]

I agree...450W is pretty middling for a "professional-grade" computer. However, the amount of heat that the thermal core can handle is quite limited, making a power supply greater than 450W pointless. Components drawing more power would probably overheat the core or require the fan to run at dustbuster speeds, which would violate Apple's noise requirements. This is where an integrated, water-cooled core would boost its thermal dissipation and permit higher performance components to be used (and/or higher frequencies).

For a computer this high end, I think if Apple would really want to innovate, I would add a bit more to the size of this thing but do something that is a bit more rare. I think because of the weird shape of the boards and the strange layout, I think oil immersion cooling would be super practical for something like this. This way, the surface area and cooling capacity of the thing are truly maximized.

The center heat core would need to be expanded but this way, you get the exterior of the unit to act as a heatsink along with the heatcore.

[lutjens]

For a computer this high end, I think if Apple would really want to innovate, I would add a bit more to the size of this thing but do something that is a bit more rare. I think because of the weird shape of the boards and the strange layout, I think oil immersion cooling would be super practical for something like this. This way, the surface area and cooling capacity of the thing are truly maximized.

The center heat core would need to be expanded but this way, you get the exterior of the unit to act as a heatsink along with the heatcore.

That would indeed be very interesting, although probably a bit too complex and problematic for mass production. It would also add another huge difficulty to servicing/upgrading the machine to fully immerse the components. Some sort of heat conduction to the outer shell would definitely aid in cooling, but reliability would be tough to achieve when the shell is designed to be able to be removed as it is, so the transfer mechanism couldn't be rigidly connected to the shell.

[zalbard]

I agree...450W is pretty middling for a "professional-grade" computer.

It's possible that they are using lower voltage mobile-grade parts.

[lutjens]

It's possible that they are using lower voltage mobile-grade parts.

Possibly, or perhaps AMD had a quantity of high yielding 7900 GE GPUs that were made obsolete by the R9-290X and they simply turned them into FireGL GPUs. This way they still get a fairly premium price for the GPUs, which otherwise would have to be neutered down into mid-grade gaming GPUs, which would earn them considerably less.

[zalbard]

I think oil immersion cooling would be super practical for something like this.

It is a maintenance nightmare, they would never do something like that.

Besides, they would need much greater volume, and likely a way to circulate the liquid. Neither of these things sound appealing.