Updates for Mac Pro!

theheyes said:
If people are in the market for a Mac Pro then its a safe bet. You do have a point though, they may unleash some Quad Core iMacs and laptops which might satisfy some people who are stretching to a MP.
Click to expand...

A reasonable point, a quad core imac is somewhat overdue. No quadcore mobile chips for a few months yet if I remember intels roadmap correctly...
 
IIRC the iMac contains a mobile chip anyway?

The flagship being an overclocked 2.6GHz C2E, running at 2.8GHz
 
I love how subtle Apple are with their advertising.

appleadsqi5.png
 
EVH said:
IIRC the iMac contains a mobile chip anyway?

The flagship being an overclocked 2.6GHz C2E, running at 2.8GHz
Click to expand...

Thats very true, but you have to wonder if they could fit a q6600 or similar in. They're asking basically a grand for a decently specified imac and even the £600 dell my brother just got has a quad core processor.

If I wanted a desktop it'd be an issue for me, I can use a laptop for most things but video encoding etc takes an age on it. I'm tempted to buy a desktop to do it on but right now the imac offers little performance advantage over a laptop and theres nothing between the dual core imac and the xeon based mac pro. Seems silly...
 
Other than the asthetics - would the Mac Pro have any advantages over a well spec'd PC built to run OSX?

I've got a fully compatible 975X Mobo, a compatible ATI 1950, wireless card, a 4 GB's of RAM but I installed Windows on it as I needed something up and running for work - that requirement has gone now though (already have a MacBook - but its laccking in power for Fusion)

I notice Apple have now adjusted there legal stance on users installing OSX on alternative hardware too.
 
I don't think it is a serious viable option for 'power' users. For surfing the web, itunes and office tasks it'll be fine. Stability over major resource hogging applications is still a little shaky i think.
 
Bouncer said:
I don't think it is a serious viable option for 'power' users. For surfing the web, itunes and office tasks it'll be fine. Stability over major resource hogging applications is still a little shaky i think.
Click to expand...

Hmmm - I may start it tonight.

I'll document and upload everything when I do in case anybodies interested in a having a Hac Pro :)
 
I'm very interested in the whole HacPro thing, but I really want a MacPro, and i'm 78.8756% sure i'm going for one, it'll be a struggle cost wise and i'll be living off baked beans for a few months!! Is there anywhere that will give me 12 months interest free???

I just would like someone to make a really good Hac Pro that is stable enough (it doesn't even have to be as powerful) to run Maya and CS3 or even CS2 i could put up with.
 
I wonder if the Mac Pro's 8800GT works properly in Windows?

Presumably it has a special Mac firmware on it. In Windows, will it work with nvidia's standard forceware drivers and will you see the same performance as a normal 8800GT in a PC?
 
wush said:
I wonder if the Mac Pro's 8800GT works properly in Windows?

Presumably it has a special Mac firmware on it. In Windows, will it work with nvidia's standard forceware drivers and will you see the same performance as a normal 8800GT in a PC?
Click to expand...

If you install via Bootcamp then will get the drivers via that. But yes will be EFI based rather then BIOS.

As going through Bootcamp then I doubt will get exactly the same performance but I believe is likely to be benchmark differences rather then anything you actually notice it.
 
Bouncer said:
I'm very interested in the whole HacPro thing, but I really want a MacPro, and i'm 78.8756% sure i'm going for one, it'll be a struggle cost wise and i'll be living off baked beans for a few months!! Is there anywhere that will give me 12 months interest free???

I just would like someone to make a really good Hac Pro that is stable enough (it doesn't even have to be as powerful) to run Maya and CS3 or even CS2 i could put up with.
Click to expand...

Just get a Windows machine with a decent Quad core CPU, Overclock it, stick on Windows XP Professional x64 with 4GB and build one yourself for half the money.
 
The legal stance as far as I know applies to OS X Server. VMware have demoed it running virtualised on top of Mac OS X. It's only a matter of time before they release code for it.

Hopefully they will build support into ESX and OS X Server will finally be able to stretch its legs ;)
 
Interesting article here about comparative performance of the CPU options in the new Mac Pro.


Taking the stock 2.8 GHz Octo as the baseline and taking both 32 bit and 64 bit performance in to account:

The 3.0 GHz Octo is ~1.7% faster, for an extra £500.
The 3.2 GHz Octo is ~6.7% faster, for an extra £1009.99

And that's in best case CPU/Memory benchmark scenarios. Seems like lunacy to BTO the with higher CPUs.
 
Last edited:
wush said:
Interesting article here about comparative performance of the CPU options in the new Mac Pro.


Taking the stock 2.8 GHz Octo as the baseline and taking both 32 bit and 64 bit performance in to account:

The 3.0 GHz Octo is ~1.7% faster, for an extra £500.
The 3.2 GHz Octo is ~6.7% faster, for an extra £1009.99

And that's in best case CPU/Memory benchmark scenarios. Seems like lunacy to BTO the with higher CPUs.
Click to expand...
I'd still rather that extra oompfh :D

Anyone ever bought from the Apple Business store?

How do you go about the VAT? I assume you pay it upfront, then claim back?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom