# Ordered a 16-core Mac Pro.... and I'm now seriously questioning that decision! PC alternative?



## jemu999

By all accounts, the 16 core Mac Pro will do exactly what Im looking for. So I ordered it and I should receive it by next week. But.... I can't help but feel like the price is just not worth the OSx I happen to prefer.

I currently run a 5,1 Mac Pro with 2 slave-PCs. I absolutely no longer want to deal with multiple computer setup. I want one computer to handle everything in combination with disable features (Preferably without VE Pro). My template is roughly 1000 tracks (90% Kontakt) and I use Cubase. I can't work without templates . I want to have at least 100 tracks active at any given time with a much smaller number of tracks ever playing at the same time.

Would something like the Intel 10980XE with ASUS Prime X299 Deluxe II motherboard and 256gb Ram be something that would compete or be on par with the 16-Core Mac Pro?


----------



## José Herring

The answers to all your questions is Yes. So if you are having buyers remorse of course that is normal. The mac is a perfectly capable machine. You could probably get more performance from AMD Ryzen chips but would you feel comfortable going that route? Probably not. 

So the way I read your post if you had all of sudden decided to go PC you'd probably posting that you should have probably gotten a Mac Pro.

Be happy that you can afford it. Use it until it can't be used any more. Never look back with regrets. That's your road to composer purgatory.


----------



## easyrider

Ryzen 5950x 16core 32 thread would have been my choice....oh wait it was!

😎

The Mac Pro’s are just not worth the money...In fact the price is laughable...and wait for all your plugins to break when they update the OSX....

Can I ask what you paid for it?


----------



## el-bo

easyrider said:


> ...and wait for all your plugins to break when they update the OSX...


Why say this? Someone running a 5.1 Mac Pro has potentially been doing so for over a decade. These days, MacOS iterations seem to be smaller evolutions and software companies seem more used to the pattern. Either way, the sage advice (Not only for Mac) to not immediately update to the latest and flashiest OS takes care of any teething issues. And seeing as the op is a Cubase user, they are unlikely to be tempted to scratch the Logic bi-yearly itch.


----------



## jemu999

easyrider said:


> Ryzen 5950x 16core 32 thread would have been my choice....oh wait it was!
> 
> 😎
> 
> The Mac Pro’s are just not worth the money...In fact the price is laughable...and wait for all your plugins to break when they update the OSX....
> 
> Can I ask what you paid for it?


Hey Easy, thanks for commenting! She was $7899 refurbished from apple store! 1tb drive, 96gb ram, with Radeon 5700x 16gb gpu. Plus tax, plus apple care,...!  (But.... I can still return her!)

Can you tell me a little about your system? What motherboard did you choose and what is the maximum ram? Any glitches or unforeseen issues? I built one of my PC slaves and to be honest I had no issues. But it was Intel. Any quirks that I might run into with Ryzen? Your input is greatly appreciated!


----------



## jemu999

el-bo said:


> Why say this? Someone running a 5.1 Mac Pro has potentially been doing so for over a decade. These days, MacOS iterations seem to be smaller evolutions and software companies seem more used to the pattern. Either way, the sage advice (Not only for Mac) to not immediately update to the latest and flashiest OS takes care of any teething issues. And seeing as the op is a Cubase user, they are unlikely to be tempted to scratch the Logic bi-yearly itch.


Very true. I bought the 5,1 brand new in 2010. This computer has been spectacular. I have upgraded so many things over the years including cpus, hard drives, pcie cards, gpu's, and somehow the 5,1 was always capable of keeping up with new technologies. Remarkable engineering. To be honest, if it wasn't for the new M1 change, I would not be hesitant to move forward with the new Mac Pro. But there are too many variables now with such a hefty price tag. If I can get away with spending $4k less in PC land, I think I can live with using that for the time being.


----------



## rnb_2

Somebody get @JohnG...


----------



## jemu999

rnb_2 said:


> Somebody get @JohnG...


LOL. Ive been following John's Mac Pro thread closely. Ended up buying after him! Don't make him second guess his purchase just because I've become neurotic about my purchase!


----------



## Wunderhorn

jemu999 said:


> Very true. I bought the 5,1 brand new in 2010. This computer has been spectacular. I have upgraded so many things over the years including cpus, hard drives, pcie cards, gpu's, and somehow the 5,1 was always capable of keeping up with new technologies. Remarkable engineering. To be honest, if it wasn't for the new M1 change, I would not be hesitant to move forward with the new Mac Pro. But there are too many variables now with such a hefty price tag. If I can get away with spending $4k less in PC land, I think I can live with using that for the time being.


The M1 chip has not much of an impact for professional use as of yet because it is linked to ridiculously small RAM limitations. Sure, this might change over time. But until then you would have plenty of time to make good use of the 2019 Mac Pro.
The 2019 Mac Pro is a good machine that only shows its shortcomings thanks to the buggy abandon-ware called Catalina. You can easily have your template on this one machine. Add some internal SSDs and you can focus on creativity for a long time until you hit the ceiling.

A PC is a viable alternative indeed especially since you want to use Cubase but unless you have good experience with the Windows environment you might just trade in a whole new set of challenges which might not be worth the money you save in additional time to be invested.


----------



## rnb_2

jemu999 said:


> LOL. Ive been following John's Mac Pro thread closely. Ended up buying after him! Don't make him second guess his purchase just because I've become neurotic about my purchase!


I was actually going for the opposite.


----------



## Manaberry

Running a 10980XE / 256 GB solo machine here. Rock-solid.



jemu999 said:


> Would something like the Intel 10980XE with ASUS Prime X299 Deluxe II motherboard and 256gb Ram be something that would compete or be on par with the 16-Core Mac Pro?


The mac would be crushed easily. Xeon runs at a slower speed. Also, with a bit of tweaking, you can get the best out of the intel chip.


----------



## storyteller

I’ve been following these threads as I’m at the upgrade stage as well and sitting in the midst of Apple’s timeline limbo plan. I’ve been a Mac user for ages and the thought of returning to pc is like being being drug face-first across asphalt. I keep entertaining the idea of a pc... also entertaining the idea of moving to multiple slaves, but I really want to one machine, At the moment, there are way more pros than cons in my book for the Mac Pro... and the refurbs are definitely the best value. If the iMac could Handle 256gb of ram, I think that might be the best Value, but it is limited to 128... So @jemu999, I would feel confident in your purchase! I’m strongly leaning that way... and am probably right behind you...

The craziest upgrade path I’ve considered sounds great if it wasn’t built on 8th gen i7s that are probably about to be updated soon... but you could add four mac minis loaded with 64gb of ram each for around 6k. That would effectively give you 24 cores of distributed processing and 256gb of ram via Vepro.... but that also means Vepro and not an all-in-one solution...


----------



## samphony

jemu999 said:


> LOL. Ive been following John's Mac Pro thread closely. Ended up buying after him! Don't make him second guess his purchase just because I've become neurotic about my purchase!


Good choice. You won’t regret it. Don’t forget you can always sideline and install windows on it!


----------



## Shad0wLandsUK

jemu999 said:


> By all accounts, the 16 core Mac Pro will do exactly what Im looking for. So I ordered it and I should receive it by next week. But.... I can't help but feel like the price is just not worth the OSx I happen to prefer.
> 
> I currently run a 5,1 Mac Pro with 2 slave-PCs. I absolutely no longer want to deal with multiple computer setup. I want one computer to handle everything in combination with disable features (Preferably without VE Pro). My template is roughly 1000 tracks (90% Kontakt) and I use Cubase. I can't work without templates . I want to have at least 100 tracks active at any given time with a much smaller number of tracks ever playing at the same time.
> 
> Would something like the Intel 10980XE with ASUS Prime X299 Deluxe II motherboard and 256gb Ram be something that would compete or be on par with the 16-Core Mac Pro?


I am going to be building an AMD Ryzen System:

AMD Ryzen 16-Core 5950X System
ASUS Crosshair Dark Hero III MOBO
128G Crucial Ballistic Sport RAM
2 x 1TB 970 Evo Plus drives
1 x 2TB Samsung 860 EVO


Already got the PSU and the case and a Sapphire RX 580 GPU


I have a Mac mini 2018 1 TB NVMe 32GB RAM 10GbE as my DAW System

However, I think the Mac Pros are awesome machines, though I would not buy one. Too much for old Intel Tech. AMD, kill it when it comes to Multi-core now, Intel Single-core performance is currently higher though

Also, you can install macOS on the AMD machine, as OpenCore (macOS Hackintosh ) is stable and getting easier to setup than before with extensive guides and a growing community of support on FB and Discord


----------



## el-bo

jemu999 said:


> Very true. I bought the 5,1 brand new in 2010. This computer has been spectacular. I have upgraded so many things over the years including cpus, hard drives, pcie cards, gpu's, and somehow the 5,1 was always capable of keeping up with new technologies. Remarkable engineering. To be honest, if it wasn't for the new M1 change, I would not be hesitant to move forward with the new Mac Pro. But there are too many variables now with such a hefty price tag. If I can get away with spending $4k less in PC land, I think I can live with using that for the time being.


Yeah, I'm platform and DAW-agnostic, albeit with a preference for MacOS and a ton of open projects in Logic. I did go down the route of looking at PC a while back, when I thought my computer was dead. Fortunately it still lives...kinda 
I can definitely see your dilemma, although it's a shame you cant stand to keep using the slave workflow a little longer.


----------



## Shad0wLandsUK

jemu999 said:


> Hey Easy, thanks for commenting! She was $7899 refurbished from apple store! 1tb drive, 96gb ram, with Radeon 5700x 16gb gpu. Plus tax, plus apple care,...!  (But.... I can still return her!)
> 
> Can you tell me a little about your system? What motherboard did you choose and what is the maximum ram? Any glitches or unforeseen issues? I built one of my PC slaves and to be honest I had no issues. But it was Intel. Any quirks that I might run into with Ryzen? Your input is greatly appreciated!


This machine will cost me *£2899*:-

AMD Ryzen 16-Core 5950X System
ASUS Crosshair Dark Hero III MOBO
128G Crucial Ballistic Sport RAM
2 x 1TB 970 Evo Plus drives
1 x 2TB Samsung 870 EVO

I could throw in a top of the line AMD Card more drives, and a 4K display and still have cash to burn based on what you spent.

I think for those composers who are going to make back the money on their work, it is worth it, but if you are not going to pay off the $8K any time soon, I personally think it is too much.
Also, as someone who works in IT, I have noticed that the RAM allocation in Windows is better than on macOS. Yes it does swap and compression, but Windows appears to do more with the same amount of RAM.

UPDATE: I must add that I will be using this as a slave machine, along with virtualisation for VMware. Building servers for work. My Mac mini being my primary machine, because I really do like working in unix. Since I have a RPi4 running Linux Manajaro for ARM now too.

Also, as a current Mac Pro 2012 12-Core owner, I am going to miss the machine as a powerful workhorse. Fortunately I can still use it as a VMware ESXi server for testing and thanks to OpenCore I can run Catalina and even macOS Big Sur on it 

All in all though, if you can stomach one slave, then for the price of the Pro you could get a Mac mini and build a mighty slave (only a single one too)


----------



## Shad0wLandsUK

jemu999 said:


> By all accounts, the 16 core Mac Pro will do exactly what Im looking for. So I ordered it and I should receive it by next week. But.... I can't help but feel like the price is just not worth the OSx I happen to prefer.
> 
> I currently run a 5,1 Mac Pro with 2 slave-PCs. I absolutely no longer want to deal with multiple computer setup. I want one computer to handle everything in combination with disable features (Preferably without VE Pro). My template is roughly 1000 tracks (90% Kontakt) and I use Cubase. I can't work without templates . I want to have at least 100 tracks active at any given time with a much smaller number of tracks ever playing at the same time.
> 
> Would something like the Intel 10980XE with ASUS Prime X299 Deluxe II motherboard and 256gb Ram be something that would compete or be on par with the 16-Core Mac Pro?


My final point is the you run Cubase, not Logic Pro... I don't even see a need for you to be on macOS...

I am a Logic Pro user and Cubase.

I believe, Cubase will always run better on Windows for the near future, because it is primarily written for it (unless of course all the latest videos on Cubase show Steinberg moving to macOS as their primary now)

If you need more than 128GB of RAM, there is AMD Threadripper and that is monstorous!


Lastly though, I would just say, go with your gut and what you will be happy with.


----------



## davidson

I've got to admit, if I wasn't running logic I'd have to think long and hard about staying on mac for my daw needs.


----------



## easyrider

jemu999 said:


> Hey Easy, thanks for commenting! She was $7899 refurbished from apple store! 1tb drive, 96gb ram, with Radeon 5700x 16gb gpu. Plus tax, plus apple care,...!  (But.... I can still return her!)
> 
> Can you tell me a little about your system? What motherboard did you choose and what is the maximum ram? Any glitches or unforeseen issues? I built one of my PC slaves and to be honest I had no issues. But it was Intel. Any quirks that I might run into with Ryzen? Your input is greatly appreciated!


Hi Mate,

Please Return that overpriced lump of dead tech tin....

Outdated CPU
Only 96GB Ram
Last Gen 5700x released in July 2019 
Low storage capacity 1TB 

I honestly fail to see where $7900 has gone...Its a total rip off 

MY system is:

Ryzen 5950 X
128 GB Crucial Ballistix Ram
Gigabyte X570 Aorus Ultra Motherboard
2TB Crucial P5 NVME Boot
4TB SSD
2TB SSD
2TB SSD
RTX 3060ti
Silent Watercooled AIO cooler

SSD's all pooled into one single 8TB volume that can be expanded without compromising data.

My system is faster than yours, has more ram, uses less power from the wall, runs cooler and has more storage for 1000's of dollars less.

Its been a faultless machine. The general consensus is that people who have mac feel like they are compromising going for a windows machine. This is quite frankly BS. You even say it here yourself...



> Very true. I bought the 5,1 brand new in 2010. This computer has been spectacular. I have upgraded so many things over the years including cpus, hard drives, pcie cards, gpu's, and somehow the 5,1 was always capable of keeping up with new technologies. Remarkable engineering. To be honest, if it wasn't for the new M1 change, I would not be hesitant to move forward with the new Mac Pro. But there are too many variables now with such a hefty price tag. If I can get away with spending $4k less


The only remarkable thing about Mac engineering is the cost for example $400 on wheels 


> in PC land, I think I can live with using that for the time being.


Live with what? A far superior machine for less money....Thats the truth here.....


----------



## Synetos

I am running 7980XE with 128GB ram, and it handles anything I want to throw at it. I OC the cpu to 3.6ghz and it runs perfectly cool with a big old fan cooler. I considered upgrading to 10980XE, just for added ram capability, but I do not need it. 

Disabled tracks approach is cleaner than a big old VEP template, and super easy to manage resources. I run Cubase/Nuendo/Studio One v5. I would only use a MAC if I wanted to run Logic. Otherwise, Win 10 PC all the way.

I thought there were still latency issues with VEP and Ryzen? If so, you probably need to consider that if you are going to use a VEP template in localhost mode.


----------



## zvenx

Manaberry said:


> Running a 10980XE / 256 GB solo machine here. Rock-solid.
> 
> 
> The mac would be crushed easily. Xeon runs at a slower speed. Also, with a bit of tweaking, you can get the best out of the intel chip.


You have ran comparisons or are you just guessing?

Both my mac and pc need updating.

In theory my PC desktop spec wise is vastly superior to my macbook pro.

However in practice at the sample buffer size I work at (64), the pc is not significantly better/faster.

Nuendo 11 | Gigabyte GA X79 UP4 : Intel HEX Core Ivy Bridge Extreme 4930K : 32GB RAM | Windows 10 64bit | Lynx Two C | Midisport 2x2 | UAD-2 Quad | AMD Radeon HD 7700 Series

Cubase 11 | MacBookPro Retina 2.8Ghz Quad Core I7 | 10.14.6 | 16GB | NI Komplete Audio 6 | UAD-2 Satellite Thunderbolt Quad | NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M 2048 MB

rsp


----------



## Manaberry

zvenx said:


> You have ran comparisons or are you just guessing?
> rsp



I've seen benchmarks of Mac Pro 24 cores around 18/19000 on Cinebench R23. I'm around 26400. As Xeon used to run at a slower frequency, it makes a serious difference.

It's not a real-world situation of course, but it's a good way to compare CPUs.


----------



## zvenx

Ok got ya..... I find benchmarks and practical don't always coincide, see my own experience above.

On Topic: I am a mac diehard (even though I also have a PC), but with that said, personally I would try to wait to see what happens on the mac pro front with silicon before I lay out thousands of dollars much less $7800 on a new mac currently.

And indeed if there was no Mac Silicon, I too would have gone for a PC instead of a Mac Pro based solely on the pricing differences.

rsp


----------



## Manaberry

Yep, as Apple announced their own CPU, being patient is the best thing we can do for now.


----------



## Tim_Wells

Boy, if you just paid 15 or 20% more than a comparable PC, I'd just say live with it an be grateful for the amazing tool you have. But $7,800!? Whew... maybe send it back


----------



## wayne_rowley

easyrider said:


> Hi Mate,
> 
> Please Return that overpriced lump of dead tech tin....
> 
> Outdated CPU
> Only 96GB Ram
> Last Gen 5700x released in July 2019
> Low storage capacity 1TB
> 
> I honestly fail to see where $7900 has gone...Its a total rip off
> 
> MY system is:
> 
> Ryzen 5950 X
> 128 GB Crucial Ballistix Ram
> Gigabyte X570 Aorus Ultra Motherboard
> 2TB Crucial P5 NVME Boot
> 4TB SSD
> 2TB SSD
> 2TB SSD
> RTX 3060ti
> Silent Watercooled AIO cooler
> 
> SSD's all pooled into one single 8TB volume that can be expanded without compromising data.
> 
> My system is faster than yours, has more ram, uses less power from the wall, runs cooler and has more storage for 1000's of dollars less.
> 
> Its been a faultless machine. The general consensus is that people who have mac feel like they are compromising going for a windows machine. This is quite frankly BS. You even say it here yourself...
> 
> 
> The only remarkable thing about Mac engineering is the cost for example $400 on wheels
> 
> Live with what? A far superior machine for less money....Thats the truth here.....


Your 5950X maxes out at 128GB of RAM. That 16 core Mac Pro can be upgraded to 768GB!

What are you going to run out of first - cores or RAM?

My take - make a choice and make it work. The Mac Pro’s are expensive compared to a home built PC. But they are server/workstation grade and they should last years!

Ive seen a lot of comments about slower clock speed on Xeons not being as good for audio, and I’ve seen a lot of Logic Benchmarks where the Xeons crush the newer processors. They are built for sustained performance and cruise along nicely.

To the OP - enjoy your Mac Pro. If you can afford it, without putting yourself in debt, then good for you - enjoy.

Wayne


----------



## ridgero

If you want to stay on macOS then waiting for the ARM MacPro is your best option.

If Windows, then Ryzen


----------



## easyrider

wayne_rowley said:


> Your 5950X maxes out at 128GB of RAM. That 16 core Mac Pro can be upgraded to 768GB!
> 
> What are you going to run out of first - cores or RAM?
> 
> My take - make a choice and make it work. The Mac Pro’s are expensive compared to a home built PC. But they are server/workstation grade and they should last years!
> 
> Ive seen a lot of comments about slower clock speed on Xeons not being as good for audio, and I’ve seen a lot of Logic Benchmarks where the Xeons crush the newer processors. They are built for sustained performance and cruise along nicely.
> 
> To the OP - enjoy your Mac Pro. If you can afford it, without putting yourself in debt, then good for you - enjoy.
> 
> Wayne


He’s already spent $8000 and it’s shipped with 96gb....

Home PCs last years....

If you think dumping $8000 on tech released in 2019 in 2021 with paltry storage and 96gb ram is a good thing then that’s fine....but that’s the reason why apple get away it....

I see no positives at all, all I see is someone being ripped off....


----------



## wayne_rowley

easyrider said:


> He’s already spent $8000 and it’s shipped with 96gb....
> 
> Home PCs last years....
> 
> If you think dumping $8000 on tech released in 2019 in 2021 with paltry storage and 96gb ram is a good thing then that’s fine....but that’s the reason why apple get away it....
> 
> I see no positives at all, all I see is someone being ripped off....


I’m not dissing home computers. But a Mac Pro is not a home PC, it’s a server/workstation class machine. If you look at the prices of Dell equivalents, they are quite similar, and also have seemingly ‘low’ amounts of storage and RAM out of the box, but again can go much higher.

Your AMD 5950x is great, but it’s a 16 core/32 thread machine that you can never take above 128Gb of RAM. That may never be an issue for you, but if your use case is virtual orchestras you may hit a RAM ceiling before you hit the CPU one. 

Wayne


----------



## kgdrum

My 2012 5,1 was sold as a Mac Pro server its still running well,this gave me the confidence to upgrade the tray last year from 6 core 32g --------> 12 core 96gig on a 8 year old computer.
The 5,1 Mac Pros were exceptionally designed and although the current MP’s are very expensive, I suspect the current MP's are top tier design-wise as well. As @wayne_rowley said if you look at a similar Windows based server they are as expensive as the current MP's.
I hope mine can last until we see if M1 Mac Pros come to fruition in a couple of years but in the meantime I'm sure the current ones are great!


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

wayne_rowley said:


> Your AMD 5950x is great, but it’s a 16 core/32 thread machine that you can never take above 128Gb of RAM. That may never be an issue for you, but if your use case is virtual orchestras you may hit a RAM ceiling before you hit the CPU one.


^ This. Plus, one may pay $8K for a nice Mac Pro, but it will last YEARS. The reliability alone is worth it for a working composer IMO.


----------



## easyrider

Jeremy Spencer said:


> ^ This. Plus, one may pay $8K for a nice Mac Pro, but it will last YEARS. The reliability alone is worth it for a working composer IMO.


But it won’t cost him 8k it will cost more as he will have to upgrade the ram and storage....

8k got him 96gb and 1tb storage....lol

Again more BS about reliability....are windows PCs not reliable all of a sudden...? I’ve been building them for over 25 years.

The Navi Gpu in that so called cutting edge Mac is from 2019 and already dead tech...replaced by big navi....However way you spin it it’s not a good deal....


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

easyrider said:


> But it won’t cost him 8k it will cost more as he will have to upgrade the ram and storage....
> 
> 8k got him 96gb and 1tb storage....lol
> 
> Again more BS about reliability....are windows PCs not reliable all of a sudden...? I’ve been building them for over 25 years.


But at least he has the options to upgrade the Ram and storage to a hefty amount if needed.

I can't vouch for these new Mac Pro's, but mine has been used pretty much daily, since 2013, without a single failure. Considering how many productions I worked on, it has paid for itself several times over, and the peace of mind is invaluable. More than I can say for my PC's over the past ten years.


----------



## easyrider

Jeremy Spencer said:


> But at least he has the options to upgrade the Ram and storage to a hefty amount if needed.
> 
> I can't vouch for these new Mac Pro's, but mine has been used pretty much daily, since 2013, without a single failure. More than I can say for my PC's over the past ten years.


Its cheaper for me to dump 5950x in 2 years....sell the mobo chip and ram and move to new offerings with DDR5 high ram capacity and faster IPC...

I have a Home Server used for back up and video streaming running windows 10 pro....it was built from PC parts in 2010....it’s been on 24/7 for the past 11 years....

Your point ?

Buy high end PC parts, build them well, implement good housekeeping and good adequate cooling and PC will last for years....I’m still using a Dell Laptop I bought from 2007 for email and surfing the net....

The few dead motherboards I have encountered over the years from customers have proved to be user error....Overheating, dust build up and general neglect....


----------



## kgdrum

easyrider said:


> But it won’t cost him 8k it will cost more as he will have to upgrade the ram and storage....
> 
> 8k got him 96gb and 1tb storage....lol
> 
> Again more BS about reliability....are windows PCs not reliable all of a sudden...? I’ve been building them for over 25 years.
> 
> The Navi Gpu in that so called cutting edge Mac is from 2019 and already dead tech...replaced by big navi....However way you spin it it’s not a good deal....


Well from Apple I would have ordered with the minimal amount of ram and added myself,Apple does charge exorbitant prices for ram.
For a boot drive I actually like 1tb,everyone has different needs.
@easyrider I think mocking and continually laughing at the op's choice is uncalled for,there are no absolutes everyone has an opinion and we all have different circumstances,perspectives and needs.


----------



## R. Soul

I'm thoroughly a PC user - have built a 5950x for measly £1300 recently by taking GPU and SSD's from my old PC.

But even if I wasn't, this is a really bad time to buy an Intel based Mac. Apple will release M1X/M2 chip based Mac pro's later in the year, which will absolutely smoke the Intel ones. Even the basic M1 based Mac's that we got recently are really fast, although they are lacking in cores.


----------



## Saxer

Got a Hackintosh for 4k (12core, 128GB, 2TB). Works fine so far since October!


----------



## kgdrum

R. Soul said:


> But even if I wasn't, this is a really bad time to buy an Intel based Mac. Apple will release M1X/M2 chip based Mac pro's later in the year, which will absolutely smoke the Intel ones. Even the basic M1 based Mac's that we got recently are really fast, although they are lacking in cores.


Myself I will never buy the 1st generation of any new line from Apple,we’ve seen too many times the follow-up is improved and typically has more future upgrade possibilities.So for me a M1 based Mac Pro will be a few years down the road.
Is the current Mac Pro expensive,sure but I’m also confident it’s a great computer.


----------



## storyteller

kgdrum said:


> Myself I will never buy the 1st generation of any new line from Apple,we’ve seen too many times the follow-up is improved and typically has more future upgrade possibilities.So for me a M1 based Mac Pro will be a few years down the road.
> Is the current Mac Pro expensive,sure but I’m also confident it’s a great computer.


I agree with this. Nearly every Apple product that is a 1st generation product winds up being heavily crippled compared to future releases and does not carry the potential same long term sustainability as later generations. I mean, you can’t fault Apple... they are transitioning to new platforms and use a somewhat hybrid approach of old + new To ensure their transition goes smoothly. But generation 2 is the way to go for sure.


----------



## easyrider

kgdrum said:


> Well from Apple I would have ordered with the minimal amount of ram and added myself,Apple does charge exorbitant prices for ram.
> For a boot drive I actually like 1tb,everyone has different needs.
> @easyrider I think mocking and continually laughing at the op's choice is uncalled for,there are no absolutes everyone has an opinion and we all have different circumstances,perspectives and needs.


The OP was having doubts....asking wether he should return it....I offered him some advice...and a bit of banter...

All I have had in responses form the pro Mac community is Nonsense spin about engineering, reliability and longevity....server grade this and server grade that....

The 5700x is a consumer graphics card based on old Navi architecture and was mediocre on release in 2019 and is mediocre now....

The storage offered for this high price is an insult. I recently bought a 4 TB SSD for £289 and a 2TB Crucial P5 Nvme for £229


----------



## kgdrum

easyrider said:


> The OP was having doubts....asking wether he should return it....I offered him some advice...and a bit of banter...
> 
> All I have had in responses form the pro Mac community is Nonsense spin about engineering, reliability and longevity....server grade this and server grade that....
> 
> The 5700x is a consumer graphics card based on old Navi architecture and was mediocre on release in 2019 and is mediocre now....
> 
> The storage offered for this high price is an insult. I recently bought a 4 TB SSD for £289 and a 2TB Crucial P5 Nvme for £229


IMO there’s a huge difference between asking people for perspective and possible reassurance or a decision to cancel than mocking and laughing at the OP’s questions and dilemma continually.
We get it you like rolling your own and don’t like Apple please try to realize your course is not is not the correct path for everyone


----------



## easyrider

kgdrum said:


> IMO there’s a huge difference between asking people for perspective and possible reassurance or a decision to cancel than mocking and laughing at the OP’s questions and dilemma continually.


The OP thanked me for my input in post 5.



kgdrum said:


> We get it you like rolling your own and don’t like Apple please try to realize your course is not is not the correct path for everyone


I Love Apple, I have an iphone and IPad Air 3rd gen....is the iPad Air 4th gen worth it over a 3rd gen for £250 more? No....

Is the Mac Pro with an EOL 14nm Xeon W ,96gb ram ,5700x and 1 TB hard drive worth $8000

No...

This is not about liking or disliking tech....I’m not romantic or Precious about brands or silicon all churned out from the same factories.Its about performance per dollar.

I would get a Mac Pro in an instant if it offered me any compelling reason to do so....Fact is it’s Medicore performance wise and also ridiculously overpriced.


----------



## Publius

PC versus mac is an eternal debate and if you ask in a forum, you will get two answers expressed in the most strenuous tems, if not more. Either technology works for millions, so I think its up to OP as to whether the switching costs are worth the savings and how well you like the result. Nobody else can assess that for you. If you want 1,000 other options visit macrumors. 

All I suggest is that if you are going to return it, don't open the box so that apple can re-sell it as a new item. My opinion, wintel is more performance for the dollar, and those who go with mac value other things than simply horsepower. The beauty of capitalism is we have money and can get the things we like instead of what other people force on us.

I switched from apple a few years ago for the main desktop, but I still have lots of apple gadgets around the house. I still have a 2010 mini in the basement, but at this time, no use for it, but I will still keep it because I like it.


----------



## Minsky

jemu999 said:


> Hey Easy, thanks for commenting! She was $7899 refurbished from apple store! 1tb drive, 96gb ram, with Radeon 5700x 16gb gpu. Plus tax, plus apple care,...!  (But.... I can still return her!)
> 
> Can you tell me a little about your system? What motherboard did you choose and what is the maximum ram? Any glitches or unforeseen issues? I built one of my PC slaves and to be honest I had no issues. But it was Intel. Any quirks that I might run into with Ryzen? Your input is greatly appreciated!


You can be grateful you aren't buying that machine in the Uk where it's marked up to be even more pricey .. your dollar figure in pounds ... and then a bit. 

For my money the Macs are getting a bit silly wit their prices (and I used to work for them so I'm an apple fanboy!); but I'm largely in the same place... looking at an upgrade at some point and wondering (as I sort out an orchestral template) whether it's cubase on a PC for me.. but .. I've been on a Mac for 20+ years ... with a LOT of plug ins (all still working!)  ... so the biggest question is .. could you be bothered to make such a big jump?


----------



## Minsky

easyrider said:


> He’s already spent $8000 and it’s shipped with 96gb....
> 
> Home PCs last years....
> 
> If you think dumping $8000 on tech released in 2019 in 2021 with paltry storage and 96gb ram is a good thing then that’s fine....but that’s the reason why apple get away it....
> 
> I see no positives at all, all I see is someone being ripped off....


I used to liken professional Macs and PC's to high-end cars like Jaguar and Mercedes. They are both excellent cars - which would you like to drive? One key difference (for those that care) is that Apple are in (almost) complete control of what goes into their machines and how ... they also make the software that runs on it. Integration is a key apple principle - and of course, not just integration within the machine but with other apple devices (if that's your thing). Ease of use has not been bettered as far as I can see. All of this comes at a cost - for those outside the 'Apple ecosystem' it can be baffling why anyone would pay so much but for many inside it the reasons are more obvious. My colleague has just dropped £9K on a Mac Pro... but it's all set up and it's running like a dream. He loves it and won't need to think about it for probably 10 years. That's less than £1k a year for a serious professional rig (and how he earns his pay-cheque). In those terms, for many, it's really not too bad.


----------



## mscp

Macs are expensive. PCs are not;
MacOS is cute. Windows is not;
Macs are sometimes stable, sometimes unstable (especially these days) - same goes to PCs (regardless of how well built the machine is);
PT/Cubase/Studio One/ and other cross platform software work in the exact same way in both machines.
Macs are expensive. PCs are expensive too (if you build a decent machine with good components).


----------



## JT

Hopefully this is a business purchase, not just for a hobby. You got yourself a good write-off at tax time with several years of depreciation.


----------



## Chamberfield

jemu999 said:


> I absolutely no longer want to deal with multiple computer setup. I want one computer to handle everything in combination with disable features (Preferably without VE Pro).


You'll still need VEP if you plan to run a lot of CPU heavy VI's in real time without freezing tracks. I have a 16-core / 128GB ram and using my DAW alone (Digital Performer) it still chokes sometimes on a single instance of S+A Cycles for example. But hosting the heavy hitters on VEP causes no problems whatsoever.


----------



## jemu999

Thanks for all the comments guys. Just about everybody made great points and I thank all of you for your personal input. I sincerely did not intend for this to become a Mac vs PC debate! <--- But I should have known better!!!

Anyhow, it seems for Mac users it is a bit precarious at the moment; at least it is for me. My whole rationale for concern is the transition to M1. I did previously get burned during the PowerPC Mac to Intel transition and just want to avoid that, especially at these current sticker prices. 

So the Mac Pro I ordered is delayed because of snow storm issues. At the moment my plan is to go ahead and accept delivery whenever it gets here and test the crap out of it during the 14 day return period. 

In the mean time, I am still seriously considering the PC option. I am fortunate and grateful that for me it's not so much an "affordability" issue. It's more like a " WTH? Is this _really_ a smart $$ move at this _particular _moment?" issue. 

And since I never really had the need to keep up with whatever Windows Cpu/Motherboard combos are currently in the market, I was just looking to get some information from the pro's here on what was available and what type of performance I could expect in COMPARISON to the 16 Core Mac Pro.

So WITHOUT getting into which is better Mac or Pc, here are some of the questions I currently have:

*1.* Would it be fair to say that I could get comparable results with either the 10980XE or the 5950x? 

*2.* For someone like me that is not really a power Windows tweaker, would it be recommended that I go with the 10980XE (established) as opposed to the 5950x? Or does it not really matter any more?

*3.* And finally, since we all know that Mac is obviously superior to PC, is it 2.5X the price superior?  (Just Kidding!)


----------



## Manaberry

jemu999 said:


> *1.* Would it be fair to say that I could get comparable results with either the 10980XE or the 5950x?


Yes. Both would perform in the same performance range. The 5950X could be a bit stronger (following regular CPU benchmarks) on the paper. Not sure about the audio benchmark though.



jemu999 said:


> *2.* For someone like me that is not really a power Windows tweaker, would it be recommended that I go with the 10980XE (established) as opposed to the 5950x? Or does it not really matter any more?


Intel has been in our audio machine for years, on both Mac and PC. That was an argument on my end to pick my CPU.
Either you go for AMD or Intel, you can't do wrong. Those are two very good CPUs.

If you are not into tweaking your hardware, then AMD will be better. The good thing about the 10980XE is you can overclock the shit out of it quite easily, but it requires some knowledge in order to make that move safe.

Be warned that AMD does not handle very well audio interfaces like UAD. They are great CPUs but there are some behaviors that can be problematic depending on your audio hardware.

--

There will be always people trying to be more comfortable with their choices by assuming others' are not good. For me, as soon as you have something that suits your needs, you are good to go! Of course, you should try to save a few bucks along the way 



jemu999 said:


> *3.* And finally, since we all know that Mac is obviously superior to PC, is it 2.5X the price superior?  (Just Kidding!)


That the price to pay to flex! haha (jk)
I'm waiting for a stronger version of the M1 to get a Mac (in order to use some plugins I can't use on PC and to resolve an issue with my AI). My PC then, will become a power-machine for the libraries and power-eating plugins. I'm convinced this is the best way to merge Mac world and PC Power.


----------



## AudioLoco

Publius said:


> The beauty of capitalism is we have money and can get the things we like instead of what other people force on us.


The "beauty of capitalism" is that both Apple and any PC have the same poor workers making the parts for you in some forgotten place on Earth.
One puts them in a pretty white box with a fruit logo and the other is generally a rather mishmash affair, more based upon pricing, functionality and custom needs.


----------



## easyrider

jemu999 said:


> In the mean time, I am still seriously considering the PC option. I am fortunate and grateful that for me it's not so much an "affordability" issue. It's more like a " WTH? Is this _really_ a smart $$ move at this _particular _moment?" issue.


I could afford to buy a Mac pro but why would I bother?


jemu999 said:


> And since I never really had the need to keep up with whatever Windows Cpu/Motherboard combos are currently in the market, I was just looking to get some information from the pro's here on what was available and what type of performance I could expect in COMPARISON to the 16 Core Mac Pro.
> 
> So WITHOUT getting into which is better Mac or Pc, here are some of the questions I currently have:
> 
> *1.* Would it be fair to say that I could get comparable results with either the 10980XE or the 5950x?


The 5950X is the faster chip. Even the 3950x AMD's last gen beat it in benchmarks. Here watch this video. I have linked to the conclusion of Gamers Nexus, hugely respected people in this space.



*Quote from the video- "the 10980XE was basically instantly killed by the 3950x"*




jemu999 said:


> *2.* For someone like me that is not really a power Windows tweaker, would it be recommended that I go with the 10980XE (established) as opposed to the 5950x? Or does it not really matter any more?


Doesn't matter...X570 is a mature platform now and AMD have tweaked between generations of chips.

AS for your term Established? what does this even mean? Yes, I get the connotation but in essence its meaningless. Intel have rested on their tech performance crown for too long. They didn't innovate. 

INTEL drip fed their customers with paltry ticks not tocks while in the wings AMD was innovating. Intel now just cannot compete in this space. So the word established should be changed to stagnant.


jemu999 said:


> *3.* And finally, since we all know that Mac is obviously superior to PC, is it 2.5X the price superior?  (Just Kidding!)


There is nothing superior at all about the Mac Pro....One can spout meaningless marketing jargon about engineering, stability, longevity, or whatever but all this is marketing illusion.


----------



## wayne_rowley

jemu999 said:


> So WITHOUT getting into which is better Mac or Pc, here are some of the questions I currently have:
> 
> *1.* Would it be fair to say that I could get comparable results with either the 10980XE or the 5950x?
> 
> *2.* For someone like me that is not really a power Windows tweaker, would it be recommended that I go with the 10980XE (established) as opposed to the 5950x? Or does it not really matter any more?
> 
> *3.* And finally, since we all know that Mac is obviously superior to PC, is it 2.5X the price superior?  (Just Kidding!)


1. Overall you will likely get better CPU performance from the AMD 5950x. It’s 16 cores benchmark faster than the 18 slower cores of the 10980XE. Whether you notice that performance difference in usage is another matter.

However, some other factors to think about:

- Availability: I can’t see the AMDs available over here in the UK - they are constantly on pre-order. Can you get one?

- Low latency. The AMD Zen 2s were slightly worse off at lower latencies (under 256) than the Intel chips, which performed better at lower latency. Zen 3 in the 5950 is supposed to fix it, but I’ve yet to see any definitive audio specific tests.

- RAM. The 5950x is limited to 128GB. The Intel 10980XE supports 256GB. As I commented in an earlier post, only you know if your usage is likely to hit the RAM limits before the CPU limits. But if it will, the Intel is a better option.

- Do you need Thuderbolt support for an audio interface? If so, Intel is safer. Some (UAD thunderbolt ) don’t work at all under AMD.

2. Doesn’t matter

3. Not answering  . However, as a Cubase user you may get more efficiency on a PC compared to a Mac. Again, anecdotal, but I constantly hear that it performs better on PCs compared to Macs (of equivalent specs).

Wayne


----------



## easyrider

wayne_rowley said:


> 1. Overall you will likely get better CPU performance from the AMD 5950x. It’s 16 cores benchmark faster than the 18 slower cores of the 10980XE. Whether you notice that performance difference in usage is another matter.
> 
> - Availability: I can’t see the AMDs available over here in the UK - they are constantly on pre-order. Can you get one?



I think the OP is based in the US...The fact he paid in dollars and is getting hit by snow storms would indicate this. 



jemu999 said:


> Hey Easy, thanks for commenting! She was $7899 refurbished from apple store! 1tb drive, 96gb ram, with Radeon 5700x 16gb gpu. Plus tax, plus apple care,...!  (But.... I can still return her!)


----------



## wayne_rowley

easyrider said:


> I think the OP is based in the US...The fact he paid in dollars and is getting hit by snow storms would indicate this.


Is availability better in the US? Honestly don’t know, just seems that AMD CPUs and all kinds of graphics cards aren’t available!


----------



## easyrider

wayne_rowley said:


> Is availability better in the US? Honestly don’t know, just seems that AMD CPUs and all kinds of graphics cards aren’t available!


Due to Covid I think the hardware shortage is worldwide. Problems in china etc and distribution through borders etc due to local lockdown restrictions with factories.


----------



## JonS

For working composers who use DP, Logic or Pro Tools, getting the 2019 Mac Pro 16-core, 24-core or 28-core makes a lot of sense give how much RAM one can install and buy much more affordably than thru Apple. Anyone using Cubase should probably stay on a PC. Even though the 2019 Mac Pro is way overpriced in every way, if you think about how much it used to cost to purchase a large mixer, rack of hardware synths, samplers and fx units along with DA-88s, getting a fully loaded Mac Pro is actually not that bad given it will be the foundation of your ITB solution.


----------



## easyrider

JonS said:


> if you think about how much it used to cost to purchase a large mixer, rack of hardware synths, samplers and fx units along with DA-88s, getting a fully loaded Mac Pro is actually not that bad given it will be the foundation of your ITB solution.


So now to justify silly pricing from Apple you have resorted to making an example of buying hardware mixers and hardware synths?

What has this got to do with anything?

Spending $5000 less for a 16 core 32 thread Ryzen is not that bad given it will be the foundation of your ITB solution.

You have posted a non argument!


----------



## JonS

easyrider said:


> So now to justify silly pricing from Apple you have resorted to making an example of buying hardware mixers and hardware synths?
> 
> What has this got to do with anything?
> 
> Spending $5000 less for a 16 core 32 thread Ryzen is not that bad given it will be the foundation of your ITB solution.
> 
> You have posted a non argument!


For composers who want to work on a Mac platform simply spending less money to work on a PC is not even a choice if one wants to be on a Mac. I personally have no interest having a PC as my main DAW computer, that's why I said what I said in my post. Does Apple price gouge all of us? Yes, and I don't like it. Are PCs way more affordable than Macs? Absolutely!! I've tried using only PCs for my main DAW computer and I much preferred being on a Mac in OSX so for me and others who only want to work on a Mac as a main computer, the PC is just not an option. I am not interested in a hackintosh either.


----------



## easyrider

JonS said:


> For composers who want to work on a Mac platform simply spending less money to work on a PC is not even a choice if one wants to be on a Mac. I personally have no interest having a PC as my main DAW computer, that's why I said what I said in my post.


The OP was asking about performance and pondering returning the $8000 box of tin and going for a windows machine.

Many Composers have ditched Apple and moved to windows based DAW systems and never looked back. This is not this case for you which is fine. But others are more open minded and open to explore new possibilities.

The OP is also using Cubase which is also a factor worth consideration on what platform you use.



JonS said:


> Does Apple price gouge all of us? Yes, and I don't like it. Are PCs way more affordable than Macs? Absolutely!! I've tried using only PCs for my main DAW computer and I much preferred being on a Mac in OSX so for me and others who only want to work on a Mac as a main computer, the PC is just not an option. I am not interested in a hackintosh either.


The consumer has the power to use or not use their wallet. If people are willing to be shafted by Apple over and over again. Then Apple will kindly oblige. Laughing all the way to the bank.

After all the Church of Apple is important in reinforcing its ideological state apparatus and the doctrine of superiority amongst its followers.

If you don't like it then why do it? The Church of Apple is very powerful I know...

NOTE TO SELF: I must build a Hacintosh to see what all the fuss is about over OSX...I will do this as this will keep me entertained and I will surely learn something along the way. 

Looks funky. Ryzen 5950x and X570 Aorus Ultra


----------



## Cat

Manaberry said:


> I've seen benchmarks of Mac Pro 24 cores around 18/19000 on Cinebench R23. I'm around 26400. As Xeon used to run at a slower frequency, it makes a serious difference.
> 
> It's not a real-world situation of course, but it's a good way to compare CPUs.


just wondering - have you increased the overclock frequency or are you still at 4.4 GHz/1.12V?


----------



## johnsrev

jemu999 said:


> Thanks for all the comments guys. Just about everybody made great points and I thank all of you for your personal input. I sincerely did not intend for this to become a Mac vs PC debate! <--- But I should have known better!!!
> 
> Anyhow, it seems for Mac users it is a bit precarious at the moment; at least it is for me. My whole rationale for concern is the transition to M1. I did previously get burned during the PowerPC Mac to Intel transition and just want to avoid that, especially at these current sticker prices.
> 
> So the Mac Pro I ordered is delayed because of snow storm issues. At the moment my plan is to go ahead and accept delivery whenever it gets here and test the crap out of it during the 14 day return period.
> 
> In the mean time, I am still seriously considering the PC option. I am fortunate and grateful that for me it's not so much an "affordability" issue. It's more like a " WTH? Is this _really_ a smart $$ move at this _particular _moment?" issue.
> 
> And since I never really had the need to keep up with whatever Windows Cpu/Motherboard combos are currently in the market, I was just looking to get some information from the pro's here on what was available and what type of performance I could expect in COMPARISON to the 16 Core Mac Pro.
> 
> So WITHOUT getting into which is better Mac or Pc, here are some of the questions I currently have:
> 
> *1.* Would it be fair to say that I could get comparable results with either the 10980XE or the 5950x?
> 
> *2.* For someone like me that is not really a power Windows tweaker, would it be recommended that I go with the 10980XE (established) as opposed to the 5950x? Or does it not really matter any more?
> 
> *3.* And finally, since we all know that Mac is obviously superior to PC, is it 2.5X the price superior?  (Just Kidding!)


----------



## johnsrev

This YouTube Video from Trevor Morris's channel may be of interest to you. He had moved to a PC platform with Cubase because Apple did not produce a pro platform that would serve his professional needs. Now that the new Mac Pro came out, he ran tests between a 16 core Mac and his PC that he has been using to score movies/TV/Games. Here is the link: https://www.youtube.com./watch?v=Ub_4GE5ezVM. I Hope Trevor's video helps you in your decision. Blessings.


----------



## Manaberry

Cat said:


> just wondering - have you increased the overclock frequency or are you still at 4.4 GHz/1.12V?


Still at 4.4 / 1.12v. 
This is the sweetest spot to get a balanced ratio between energy, performance and cooling.


----------



## Synetos

johnsrev said:


> This YouTube Video from Trevor Morris's channel may be of interest to you. He had moved to a PC platform with Cubase because Apple did not produce a pro platform that would serve his professional needs. Now that the new Mac Pro came out, he ran tests between a 16 core Mac and his PC that he has been using to score movies/TV/Games. Here is the link: https://www.youtube.com./watch?v=Ub_4GE5ezVM. I Hope Trevor's video helps you in your decision. Blessings.


That was a really good comparison. I caught something he said in the intro that I think is important for OP. Which OS makes you feel more creative?

If you are more comfortable on the Mac OS, then that must be a factor in your decision process. Being able to just drop in the new mac and get back to making music, rather than learning a new OS and hardware platform is not insignificant.

I also think you need to consider your time horizon. Is this Mac your forever machine? If you use it for say 3 years, the new M1 Mac Pro should be out and tested by then...about the time you might be ready to upgrade. 

Mac will always be more expensive than PC. So? If MAC is the platform you like to work in, then I would probably just be happy with your Mac purchase. I would just look at it having a useful life of ~3 years, at which point it will probably still we worth 25-50% of what you are paying for it now. PC doesnt hold it's value like Mac.


----------



## Pier

easyrider said:


> The general consensus is that people who have mac feel like they are compromising going for a windows machine.


Been using macOS to make music since 2007 and I recently switched my DAW machine to Windows 10.

Generally speaking, once you're into the DAW there's no difference at all. Keyboard shortcuts change and a few plugins don't behave well with hiDPI monitors, but other than that it's pretty much the same.

Windows 10 is certainly fugly, but if you have good hardware and don't install crap, it is super stable and very fast. The hardware savings are notable but for me the biggest advantage is the flexibility to configure your hardware however you want. Another huge advantage is being able to just upgrade the MOBO+CPU+RAM and get a completely new machine.

That said, I wouldn't be surprised if Apple released a cheaper ARM tower at some point just like they did with the M1 Mini once they've figured out how to add more RAM to their SOC.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

jemu999 said:


> At the moment my plan is to go ahead and accept delivery whenever it gets here and test the crap out of it during the 14 day return period.


Excellent decision. Ultimately, it's your choice. Put it through the ringer and see how much it can handle before it chokes. I'll be upgrading to a new machine sometime this year, and the allure of switching to a custom built PC is definitely an option, as my recently built i7 slave is very powerful. If you're a working composer (even part time), it's nice knowing you have a piece of equipment (Mac) that's going to work every single time....and no fussing around with drivers, etc. A custom built PC is only as good as it's weakest component, so if you go that route, don't skimp on parts. Plus, there's the tax write-off if available. And really, if you totally feel comfy in the Mac environment, why switch?


----------



## el-bo

easyrider said:


> The OP was having doubts....asking wether he should return it....I offered him some advice...and a bit of banter...
> 
> All I have had in responses form the pro Mac community is Nonsense spin about engineering, reliability and longevity


Banter? Spin?

You started out by advising a more-than-decade long Apple user not to buy into Apple because he'd find himself routinely without functioning plugins. I don't think my answer to you, which you ignored, contained any spin. 

It's fun to troll, now and then. Just own it, though


----------



## el-bo

easyrider said:


> $8000 box of tin
> 
> But others are more open minded
> 
> If people are willing to be shafted by Apple over and over again.
> 
> After all the Church of Apple is important in reinforcing its ideological state apparatus and the doctrine of superiority amongst its followers.
> 
> If you don't like it then why do it? The Church of Apple is very powerful I know...


Just offering advice, and just receiving "spin"?

On any other forum, you'd likely be just another voice in a choir. But it seems (and maybe I've missed it) that his community tends to avoid platform wars. Again, maybe my ignorance, but everyone seems to be happy to get on with using what systems and DAW they prefer, completely unfettered by the different choices of others. As such, you're sticking out like a very sore thumb. Anyway! I thought it was the Mac users that did the whole 'superior' thing.


----------



## Ivan M.




----------



## easyrider

el-bo said:


> Just offering advice, and just receiving "spin"?
> 
> On any other forum, you'd likely be just another voice in a choir. But it seems (and maybe I've missed it) that his community tends to avoid platform wars. Again, maybe my ignorance, but everyone seems to be happy to get on with using what systems and DAW they prefer, completely unfettered by the different choices of others. As such, you're sticking out like a very sore thumb. Anyway! I thought it was the Mac users that did the whole 'superior' thing.


Its not a platform war. I'm enthusiastic about computer hardware...I like new tech...10980xe is not new tech hence why I dont recommended it....especially when spending 8k


----------



## JonS

easyrider said:


> The OP was asking about performance and pondering returning the $8000 box of tin and going for a windows machine.
> 
> Many Composers have ditched Apple and moved to windows based DAW systems and never looked back. This is not this case for you which is fine. But others are more open minded and open to explore new possibilities.
> 
> The OP is also using Cubase which is also a factor worth consideration on what platform you use.
> 
> 
> The consumer has the power to use or not use their wallet. If people are willing to be shafted by Apple over and over again. Then Apple will kindly oblige. Laughing all the way to the bank.
> 
> After all the Church of Apple is important in reinforcing its ideological state apparatus and the doctrine of superiority amongst its followers.
> 
> If you don't like it then why do it? The Church of Apple is very powerful I know...
> 
> NOTE TO SELF: I must build a Hacintosh to see what all the fuss is about over OSX...I will do this as this will keep me entertained and I will surely learn something along the way.
> 
> Looks funky. Ryzen 5950x and X570 Aorus Ultra


I tried being on a PC and I greatly preferred the Mac. I have no issues with anyone wanting to be on a PC as clearly its much more bang for your buck. For some moving off the Mac platform works for them, so I am not implying that others should be on a Mac or PC at all. But I find the OSX platform easier to deal with and applaud those who can make that work on a Hackintosh!! I just didn't feel comfortable with that. Who wants to be price gouged by Apple? No one!!


----------



## el-bo

easyrider said:


> Its not a platform war. I'm enthusiastic about computer hardware...I like new tech...10980xe is not new tech hence why I dont recommended it....especially when spending 8k


I literally just wrote that nobody here has a problem with your choice, or your opinion. Why can't you just acknowledge that the issue is not with what you are saying, but in how you are saying it?


----------



## easyrider

el-bo said:


> I literally just wrote that nobody here has a problem with your choice, or your opinion. Why can't you just acknowledge that the issue is not with what you are saying, but in how you are saying it?


I’ll withdraw from this thread....apologies.

My enthusiasm has been misunderstood as something else.


----------



## babylonwaves

jemu999 said:


> Anyhow, it seems for Mac users it is a bit precarious at the moment; at least it is for me. My whole rationale for concern is the transition to M1. I did previously get burned during the PowerPC Mac to Intel transition and just want to avoid that, especially at these current sticker prices.


from what we see right now, this transition is different. about 50% of the current apps are already re-compiled and work fine. the big difference in between this transition and the one before is that compiler and programming techniques have changed a lot. these days it is easier to write code with is super efficient and also very compatible. it's not perfect but a lot better. 
also apple has done more homework, rosetta 2 is surprisingly good. we had a developer transition kit here (a pre-series model of the Mac mini M1) and the performance we saw just using rosetta with a beta version was amazing. in fact, if the adjustments to make a native M1 app wouldn't have been so easy, we probably would have sat it out - the app I'm talking about was just fast and snappy using rosetta. apologies for not providing more details, I simply can't.


----------



## el-bo

easyrider said:


> My enthusiasm has been misunderstood as something else.


When you say things like this:



easyrider said:


> and wait for all your plugins to break when they update the OSX....





easyrider said:


> $8000 box of tin
> 
> But others are more open minded
> 
> If people are willing to be shafted by Apple over and over again.
> 
> After all the Church of Apple is important in reinforcing its ideological state apparatus and the doctrine of superiority amongst its followers.
> 
> If you don't like it then why do it? The Church of Apple is very powerful I know...



all you are inferring is that Apple users have no sense, are willing to be shafted by and are beholden to "The Church Of Apple". Not sure there is much misunderstanding, but I'd be happy to be corrected.


----------



## easyrider

el-bo said:


> When you say things like this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> all you are inferring is that Apple users have no sense, are willing to be shafted by and are beholden to "The Church Of Apple". Not sure there is much misunderstanding, but I'd be happy to be corrected.


I was responding to:



> JonS said:
> 
> Does Apple price gouge all of us? Yes, and I don't like it.


He is obviously willing to be shafted as he agrees he’s being price gouged but still buys into the eco system.

If he doesn’t like being shafted...then don’t allow yourself to be shafted....

what don’t you get?


----------



## kgdrum

easyrider said:


> I was responding to:
> 
> 
> He is obviously willing to be shafted as he agrees he’s being price gouged but still buys into the eco system.
> 
> If he doesn’t like being shafted...then don’t allow yourself to be shafted....
> 
> what don’t you get?


Why don’t we start with the repeated use of words like “shafted” These endless passive agressive posts that continually denigrate any choice that doesn’t coincide with your stance rings hollow and imo is negative and combative.
The OP is trying to make a decision he’s comfortable with,he’s already stated while doesn’t like the cost of admission with the Mac Pro he likes the Mac OS,he has the funds and wants to give it a fair chance,end of story.
But you seem to have a need to keep belittling his decision.


----------



## Neutron Star

I agree 10000000000000 percent with easyrider on everything he has said. If I was him, I would not even bother wasting my time commenting on this post anymore. If people want to P---s their money up the wall on extortionately over priced apple marketing c---p, its their choice. Apple have a 37.5 percent profit margin, when the industry average is 7 percent for the same components.


----------



## el-bo

easyrider said:


> I was responding to:
> 
> 
> He is obviously willing to be shafted as he agrees he’s being price gouged but still buys into the eco system.
> 
> If he doesn’t like being shafted...then don’t allow yourself to be shafted....
> 
> what don’t you get?


Well I suppose trying to justify your attitude is a step in the right direction 

But actually what I don't get is why you are stripping everything down to one variable i.e cost. This isn't an object that gets taken out of a cupboard for a bit of fun, on a rainy day. This is a piece of hardware that many of us will be using upwards of ten hours a day, every day, for a decade, with many here depending on said hardware to earn a living. How a user gets along with the general foibles of the operating system etc. day-to-day will have a vital impact on how enjoyable or not that experience will be. It's perfectly understandable that someone can hold at the same time the opinion that something is over-priced, but that in the grand scheme of things that price is worth paying.


----------



## el-bo

kgdrum said:


> But you seem to have a need to keep belittling his decision.


Apparently, it's called enthusiasm


----------



## easyrider

kgdrum said:


> Why don’t we start with the repeated use of words like “shafted” These endless passive agressive posts that continually denigrate any choice that doesn’t coincide with your stance rings negative and combative.
> The OP is trying to make a decision he’s comfortable with he’s already stated while doesn’t like the cost of admission with the Mac Pro he likes the Mac OS and wants to give it a fair chance,end of story.
> But you seem to have a need to keep belittling his decision.


Why don’t we start with the facts....I used the term shafted once...

Then responded to el-bo after he used the word shafted.

All I have done is posted facts....links to real world performance data and actual pricing.

If people don’t like the truth then that’s up to them...the facts are clear....a 5950x outperforms 10980x and comes in at a considerably lower price point...

People are free to make purchase decisions themselves...but it’s not belittling anyone choice my examining what they have bought especially when they ask for input from window users in the first instance.


----------



## kgdrum

el-bo said:


> Apparently, it's called enthusiasm


Enthusiasm?

from Wikipedia: 

Enthusiasm: is intense enjoyment, interest, or approval.


----------



## easyrider

el-bo said:


> But actually what I don't get is why you are stripping everything down to one variable i.e cost.


Why are you trying to negate the truth?

I stated performance per dollar not just cost...


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

el-bo said:


> Well I suppose trying to justify your attitude is a step in the right direction
> 
> But actually what I don't get is why you are stripping everything down to one variable i.e cost. This isn't an object that gets taken out of a cupboard for a bit of fun, on a rainy day. This is a piece of hardware that many of us will be using upwards of ten hours a day, every day, for a decade, with many here depending on said hardware to earn a living. How a user gets along with the general foibles of the operating system etc. day-to-day will have a vital impact on how enjoyable or not that experience will be. It's perfectly understandable that someone can hold at the same time the opinion that something is over-priced, but that in the grand scheme of things that price is worth paying.


Well said. I can’t put a price on peace of mind. So let’s say I spend $4k on my next Mac, and on my first production with it I break even. And then....knowing it’s going to pull through for every deadline for the next 5-8 years. The cost is peanuts, and irrelevant quite frankly. And then there’s the warranty stuff; with a self-built PC, have fun troubleshooting (if you’re savvy enough) and then running to the local Best Buy to buy a new mobo or whatever, only to find out your computer buddy is busy for a few days.....and your stems are due like yesterday.


----------



## kgdrum

easyrider said:


> Why don’t we start with the facts....I used the term shafted once...
> 
> Then responded to el-bo after he used the word shafted.
> 
> All I have done is posted facts....links to real world performance data and actual pricing.
> 
> If people don’t like the truth then that’s up to them...the facts are clear....a 5950x outperforms 10980x and comes in at a considerably lower price point...
> 
> People are free to make purchase decisions themselves...but it’s not belittling anyone choice my examining what they have bought especially when they ask for input from window users in the first instance.


You think you used the word shafted once?


“He is obviously willing to be shafted as he agrees he’s being price gouged but still buys into the eco system.

If he doesn’t like being shafted...then don’t allow yourself to be shafted....”

In my world that’s(shafted) 3 times in that one post,while continually saying the OP is letting himself get shafted ,gouged etc.....
For someone who said they were done posting in this thread,you seem to be still quite active in your negative passive-aggressive manner.
Again everyone can make different choices,do you think your position is the only correct position?
We all have different needs,finances and circumstances.


----------



## easyrider

kgdrum said:


> You think you used the word shafted once?
> 
> 
> “He is obviously willing to be shafted as he agrees he’s being price gouged but still buys into the eco system.
> 
> If he doesn’t like being shafted...then don’t allow yourself to be shafted....”
> 
> In my world that’s 3 times that post.


I was referring to my initial post that was quoted.


----------



## babylonwaves

Neutron Star said:


> when the industry average is 7 percent for the same components.


that's a bit like you suggest that everybody who's not 100% on Behringer stuff in his studio wasted his money. maybe. but I know a lot of people who love their Neves, totally independent of the fact that it won't make their music sound better because for other reasons, they mix everything in the box. in other words: if you like H&M it'll keep you warm for sure but maybe you're just not him.


----------



## easyrider

Neutron Star said:


> I agree 10000000000000 percent with easyrider on everything he has said. If I was him, I would not even bother wasting my time commenting on this post anymore. If people want to P---s their money up the wall on extortionately over priced apple marketing c---p, its their choice. Apple have a 37.5 percent profit margin, when the industry average is 7 percent for the same components.


Apple users tend to ignore basic performance numbers to justify their purchase decisions....it’s typical purchase justification complex...

Which is fine in my opinion....but they shouldn't get all defensive when someone basically posts cold hard facts about performance and cost...

The 5700x is dead tech...the 10980xe is EOL dead tech....this is not bashing Mac Pro users...this is fact...


----------



## Neutron Star

Jeremy Spencer you have succumb to the relgion of apple. Their motherboard contains exactly the same chip-set and components as a Windows computer. Additionally, built by the highest human suicide rate Chinese manufacturing company on the planet.


----------



## easyrider

Jeremy Spencer said:


> Well said. I can’t put a price on peace of mind.


Your faith in Apple is strong young Padawan 

I myself have peace of mind in the fact I’ve got more performance per dollar and more money to spend on other things that count like more libraries or VSTi or guitars....


----------



## easyrider

Neutron Star said:


> Jeremy Spencer you have succumb to the relgion of apple. Their motherboard contains exactly the same chip-set and components as a Windows computer. Additionally, built by the highest human suicide Chinese manufacturing company on the planet.


Yes components and Cpus in Mac Pros can’t be used in PC’s......

oh wait....yes they can....but unless they are in a Silver case with $400 wheels the same components will break and leave you all alone in the wilderness....


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

easyrider said:


> Your faith in Apple is strong young Padawan
> 
> I myself have peace of mind in the fact I’ve got more performance per dollar and more money to spend on other things that count like more libraries or VSTi or guitars....


Yes, valid points for sure. I do admit, my new slave (i7 10700) is a beast, and is doing a great job as the VEPro server.


----------



## easyrider

Jeremy Spencer said:


> Yes, valid points for sure. I do admit, my new slave (i7 10700) is a beast, and is doing a great job as the VEPro server.


There is no difference between Mac Pro hardware or PC hardware...the 10980xe will work in both Mac and pc....failure rates of said component is the same....

Stabilty, engineering, longevity like I said is all Marketing illusion...


----------



## el-bo

easyrider said:


> Why are you trying to negate the truth?
> 
> I stated performance per dollar not just cost...


Doesn't make any difference as I'm arguing user experience as distinct from either cost or performance per dollar (still money related).


----------



## kgdrum

easyrider said:


> There is no difference between Mac Pro hardware or PC hardware...the 10980xe will work in both Mac and pc....failure rates of said component is the same....
> 
> Stabilty, engineering, longevity like I said is all Marketing illusion...


It’s not all about the hardware and pricing it’s also the users OS preference and what DAW is being used.


----------



## Neutron Star

el-bo said:


> Doesn't make any difference as I'm arguing user experience as distinct from either cost or performance per dollar (still money related).


So you are in your DAW ( obviously not logic ) and working away, after that, what is the difference? its just file saving.........


----------



## easyrider

kgdrum said:


> It’s not all about the hardware and pricing it’s also the users OS preference and what DAW is being used.


As far as I can tell Cubase , pro tools and studio one all the the same regardless of OS.

I have all three...on windows....is there a difference in them on OSX?

A few keyboard shortcuts is all I can see...

Doesn't Cubase perform better in Windows than OSX?

I read Cubase runs more efficiently on windows...

The OP uses Cubase....


----------



## easyrider

Junkie XL

“People are so precious about what computer they work on, but I don’t care. I always used to work on a Mac and now everything is PC, because Cubase works so much better on a PC.”


----------



## el-bo

Neutron Star said:


> So you are in your DAW ( obviously not logic ) and working away, after that, what is the difference? its just file saving.........


What do you mean "obviously not logic"? I've been using Logic for about 16 years


----------



## easyrider




----------



## Jeremy Spencer

Guys, I think we need to just end the pointless nitpicking. Let's face it, it's all about personal preference....both platforms are solid and have valid pros/cons. 

To the OP, please update us with your "test results" with the new Mac. I, for one, will be interested to hear how it performs.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

easyrider said:


> There is no difference between Mac Pro hardware or PC hardware...the 10980xe will work in both Mac and pc....failure rates of said component is the same....
> 
> Stabilty, engineering, longevity like I said is all Marketing illusion...


Since your a "techy" guy, what is the ultimate processor for a PC built to run Cubase? Is there something coming later in the year? Honest question, as I'm considering all options for when the upgrade time comes this year.


----------



## kgdrum

Some users use Logic which requires a Mac. I use DP currently(but I'm Logic and S1 curious).
Most reports from DP users with Windows are pretty bad and most Studio One users report poor Mac
performance compred to Windows.
Some users are comfortable with Windows,tweaking bios etc..... Some users prefer Mac OS.

Some users are not platform reliant many are,why can't everyone agree there are numerous options available and it is not alwys totally about the price?

So the point I'm trying to make is there are numerous variables and no absolutes.


----------



## Neutron Star

> el-bo


You cannot use logic in windows, so it is not a comparison barometer of performance, unless you have a hakintosh. Which is another subject..........


----------



## Neutron Star

Jeremy Spencer said:


> Guys, I think we need to just end the pointless nitpicking. Let's face it, it's all about personal preference....both platforms are solid and have valid pros/cons.
> 
> To the OP, please update us with your "test results" with the new Mac. I, for one, will be interested to hear how it performs.


Yep, buy apple and waste your money. Its a ( relatively ) free world and you can choose to waste your money as you so wish. So we totally agree on this.


----------



## rnb_2

Neutron Star said:


> Yep, buy apple and waste your money. Its a ( relatively ) free world and you can choose to waste your money as you so wish. So we totally agree on this.


The funny thing is, there are a ton of Mac users (myself included) who used to think exactly this, then bought their first Mac and realized,"Oh, so that's why they cost more." Whether that extra cost is worth it to any given person is up to them.

It's one thing to say "I don't understand why you'd pay that much", and quite another to say "You're an idiot for paying that much", and one of the nice things about this board is that things usually stop at the first statement.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

Neutron Star said:


> Yep, buy apple and waste your money. Its a ( relatively ) free world and you can choose to waste your money as you so wish. So we totally agree on this.


This is not about wasting money, it's about preference. I have never "wasted" money on a Mac, and nor has the OP. As mentioned previously, my Mac from 2013 is still ROCK SOLID since coming out of the box....eight years later and I have never put a cent into it since (and countless productions). Personally, I'm exploring options since I may go back to using Cubase (from Logic) as my primary DAW because the VEPro routing is music more efficient.

You are obviously not a working composer, otherwise you'd completely understand.


----------



## Neutron Star

rnb_2 said:


> The funny thing is, there are a ton of Mac users (myself included) who used to think exactly this, then bought their first Mac and realized,"Oh, so that's why they cost more." Whether that extra cost is worth it to any given person is up to them.
> 
> It's one thing to say "I don't understand why you'd pay that much", and quite another to say "You're an idiot for paying that much", and one of the nice things about this board is that things usually stop at the first statement.


So explain in objective data, how opening and closing you DAW in a MAC is such an orgasmic experience in comparison to Windows.


----------



## Virtuoso

You don't want to know how much I spent on my Mac Pro. I don't regret a cent of it. I also have a kickass PC (3 actually) and have been running PCs since the late 80s, but I VASTLY prefer using the Mac which is my main workhorse. I use the PCs only when I have to.

Why the Mac Pro?

- It is rock solid. I never need to reboot it because it has developed odd behavioral quirks.
- It is silent, even when maxed out.
- It will take up to 768GB. I'm running with 384GB currently with half the slots free.
- It has tons of PCIe slots without restrictions on what you can actually use (unlike many PCs)
- The UI and Apps scale very well to ultra high resolution - I run at 6k. Windows scaling is hideous and the whole OS is an ugly mess.
- It doesn't spontaneously reboot in the middle of the night to install updates while I'm in the middle of a time-critical render. Windows has done this many, many times to my utter frustration.
- Many workflow-enhancing features are built right into the OS.
- Many apps and plugins in my field of work are Mac Only - FCP/Motion/Logic/MotionVFX/FXFactory etc
- UA hardware is a joy on the Mac and an ugly mess on the PC.

As for Cubase, I use it daily on the Mac. Since v11 got released it's MUCH faster. They rewrote the graphics engine to use Metal and it's a vast improvement.

Can you build a faster PC for less money? Of course. You can mod a Toyota Supra to be faster in a straight line than an Aston Martin. Go for it, if that's your priority!

For me personally:-
PC = rage, irritation, frustration, frequent time-sapping creativity-killing troubleshooting, endless fucking rebooting (8 updates found, reboot, 6 updates found, reboot, 4 updates found etc etc etc)
Mac = zen bliss and no barriers to inspiration


----------



## el-bo

Neutron Star said:


> You cannot use logic in windows, so it is not a comparison barometer of performance, unless you have a hakintosh. Which is another subject..........


But you asked me a question, stipulating that i had to completely ignore the fundamental backbone of my music setup, for all these years. And why are you asking me about performance comparisons? I use a nine year old laptop. Does I sound to you like I am after cutting-edge performance? Could you perhaps point to a post where I've claimed performance superiority of Mac, either in this thread or elsewhere?


----------



## Macrawn

I just bought a pc 16 core new top line amd chip for $3,400. Went to Mac store and and matched up the specs. Came to $10,200. 

My jaw is still on the floor.


----------



## easyrider

rnb_2 said:


> The funny thing is, there are a ton of Mac users (myself included) who used to think exactly this, then bought their first Mac and realized,"Oh, so that's why they cost more."


Please enlighten me?


----------



## easyrider

Virtuoso said:


> - It doesn't spontaneously reboot in the middle of the night to install updates while I'm in the middle of a time-critical render. Windows has done this many, many times to my utter frustration.


You can't blame PC or windows for this. This is user error.

You can delay updates, schedule them at will. If windows updated when you didn't want it to then its your fault.


----------



## easyrider

Virtuoso said:


> For me personally:-
> PC = rage, irritation, frustration, frequent time-sapping creativity-killing troubleshooting, endless fucking rebooting (8 updates found, reboot, 6 updates found, reboot, 4 updates found etc etc etc)


Thats because you don't know what your are doing. If you did then you wouldn't have these issues.

You can't blame windows for being a noob.


----------



## easyrider

Virtuoso said:


> - It is rock solid. I never need to reboot it because it has developed odd behavioral quirks.
> - It is silent, even when maxed out.


My PC is rock solid.

My PC is silent. Its water cooled...


Virtuoso said:


> Can you build a faster PC for less money? Of course. You can mod a Toyota Supra to be faster in a straight line than an Aston Martin. Go for it, if that's your priority!


So now a Mac is an Aston Martin and a PC a Toyota Supra?

The Apple machine has clearly brainwashed you by clever Marketing....


----------



## Virtuoso

Wow - you really are a prick!  What are you - 12 years old? I've forgotten more about Windows than you will ever know. I've been working with Microsoft for 20 years, as have most of my social circle.

Windows still gives me hives.


----------



## Virtuoso

easyrider said:


> You can't blame PC or windows for this. This is user error.
> 
> You can delay updates, schedule them at will. If windows updated when you didn't want it to then its your fault.


This has not always been the case. Microsoft had to change this behavior in W10 due to massive user pushback.


----------



## easyrider

Virtuoso said:


> This has not always been the case. Microsoft had to change this behavior in W10 due to massive user pushback.


You could turn off updates in widows 7...


----------



## easyrider

Virtuoso said:


> Wow - you really are a prick!  What are you - 12 years old? I've forgotten more about Windows than you will ever know. I've been working with Microsoft for 20 years, as have most of my social circle.
> 
> Windows still gives me hives.


You're the one name calling...

The reasons you state are nothing but user error on your part. Thats all I am saying. These are not issues for me...As I can manage my PC OS just fine.


----------



## Virtuoso

If this is how you like to spend your workday when you're up against a tight deadline, then you'll be fine with Windows:-









How to make Windows 10 stop ignoring active hours? — Auslogics Blog


If you are experiencing the issue, don’t worry. There are a few workarounds you can use to stop this from happening.




www.auslogics.com





Windows is designed by engineers - many of whom are very talented but decidedly odd people, working in silos with no real exposure to end users. The feedback they get is often filtered through multiple layers of management all with different and often conflicting priorities (and a lot of internal politics). Actual user experience has always been very low down the list. Apple are the total opposite.


----------



## dgburns

@easyrider Real Men ( and Women ) buy Macs

Go grab a Ruddles, and calm down.


----------



## easyrider

dgburns said:


> @easyrider Real Men ( and Women ) buy Macs
> 
> Go grab a Ruddles, and calm down.


ickle diddy housekeeping tasks seem to knock these so called real men and women for six!

It seems to me that the people who are getting all flustered...are Mac users....Question the faith and you shall be punished!

I'm eagerly awaiting the answer to the lightbulb moment "so thats why Macs are so expensive" comment.

Can't wait to find out why!


----------



## Virtuoso

They're not for you, they're for grownups.


----------



## rnb_2

easyrider said:


> ickle diddy housekeeping tasks seem to knock these so called real men and women for six!
> 
> It seems to me that the people who are getting all flustered...are Mac users....Question the faith and you shall be punished!
> 
> I'm eagerly awaiting the answer to the lightbulb moment "so thats why Macs are so expensive" comment.
> 
> Can't wait to find out why!


When I said that one of the nice things about this board is the general lack of computer platform wars, that wasn't an indication that I was interested in being a part of one. I know a sea lion when I see one.


----------



## dgburns

easyrider said:


> ickle diddy housekeeping tasks seem to knock these so called real men and women for six!
> 
> It seems to me that the people who are getting all flustered...are Mac users....Question the faith and you shall be punished!
> 
> I'm eagerly awaiting the answer to the lightbulb moment "so thats why Macs are so expensive" comment.
> 
> Can't wait to find out why!


Lemme know when you’re on your second Ruddles, and I’ll let you in on the secret.


----------



## Will Blackburn

Apple heavily focused their marketing on music / media studio owners in the early 00's when Logic was getting big. It was an excellent marketing move because Logic was gaining ground on PT and Cubase at the time (hence the buyout later - which by the looks of things has now killed it). There was an opportunity for commercialization. Steve Jobs knew that PC had a geeky perception and he could make something fashionable. They targeted that geeky perception and made a product that 'will make you look cool' - They targeted the BSODs - 'It Just Works' etc. All the 'professionals' were suddenly using macs'.

That was all rubbish of course to anyone who knew how to use and customise their PC.

Since then Mac's have literally been a twice the price 'half the performance' alternative to PC's for 20 odd years. 

Don't shoot me, just saying how it happened


----------



## Virtuoso

I have no particular brand bias towards Apple - I just want to use the best tool for the job and right now, with the work I do, that means a Mac.

The day Microsoft (or anyone else) makes a better OS than Apple, I will happily switch. I just don't see it happening. Windows is no longer a priority for Microsoft - Azure is their main focus for development now. Maybe some flavor of Linux will reach mainstream status someday? I hope so.

It's a shame BeOS never worked out. Anyone remember that?


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

Macrawn said:


> I just bought a pc 16 core new top line amd chip for $3,400. Went to Mac store and and matched up the specs. Came to $10,200.
> 
> My jaw is still on the floor.


Matched up the specs?? Do you actually know all of the Mac Pro internal components? Can you add 1tb Ram? And Apple dues not use AMD


----------



## easyrider

rnb_2 said:


> When I said that one of the nice things about this board is the general lack of computer platform wars, that wasn't an indication that I was interested in being a part of one. I know a sea lion when I see one.


So you don't agree with me....You didn't answer my question so resort to another insult....

"so thats why they cost more"

If you are going to post this at least back it up before resorting to insults....



rnb_2 said:


> then bought their first Mac and realized,"Oh, so that's why they cost more."


What is the reason?

Its a genuine question....


----------



## easyrider

Will Blackburn said:


> Apple heavily focused their marketing on music / media studio owners in the early 00's when Logic was getting big. It was an excellent marketing move because Logic was gaining ground on PT and Cubase at the time (hence the buyout later - which by the looks of things has now killed it). There was an opportunity for commercialization. Steve Jobs knew that PC had a geeky perception and he could make something fashionable. They targeted that geeky perception and made a product that 'will make you look cool' - They targeted the BSODs - 'It Just Works' etc. All the 'professionals' were suddenly using macs'.
> 
> That was all rubbish of course to anyone who knew how to use and customise their PC.
> 
> Since then Mac's have literally been a twice the price 'half the performance' alternative to PC's for 20 odd years.
> 
> Don't shoot me, just saying how it happened


You will get flamed and be called a sealion for posting facts...I have done nothing wrong in this thread. I posted some Performance data and am now being ganged up upon my certain members of the community I actually had respect for!


----------



## rnb_2

Pot, kettle.


----------



## easyrider

Jeremy Spencer said:


> Apple dues not use AMD


Sony and Google do....Funny that


----------



## easyrider

rnb_2 said:


> Pot, kettle.


So thats why they cost more.....

You going to tell me or what?


----------



## Virtuoso

easyrider said:


> You will get flamed and be called a sealion for posting facts...I have done nothing wrong in this thread. I posted some Performance data and am now being ganged up upon my certain members of the community I actually had respect for!


Ah - I see. You're not an immature aggressive troll, you're a VICTIM!






Poor you.


----------



## easyrider

Virtuoso said:


> Ah - I see. You're not an immature aggressive troll, you're a VICTIM!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Poor you.


lol

I can hold my own....But I'm still waiting on certain answers....And the silence speaks volumes....

What's interesting is that Civil debate changed into name calling because people just didn't have an argument to muster.

Shame...

Even JUNKIE XL is talking rubbish apparently ...What does he know about running Cubase...


----------



## Virtuoso

Maybe nobody can be bothered to engage you. What's the point?





__





Psychic vampire - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org


----------



## easyrider

Virtuoso said:


> Maybe nobody can be bothered to engage you. What's the point?


I don't think they can't be bothered....They just know deep down they're talking bollocks


----------



## easyrider

"Mossberg warned consumers and journalists not to treat Apple like a religion, but treat it like the flawed company it is. But those warnings fall on deaf ears. Apple remains a religion, and its power becomes more and more apparent in the days leading to its major press events. Hundreds of journalists make the pilgrimage to Cupertino and the Yerba Buena Center. Thousands of people line up around the block just to be the first to get their hands on the newest Apple device. Entreprneeurs live and die by the ethos of Steve Jobs. Criticizing Apple will bring out legions of fans who will make sure you know that your opinion is wrong."


----------



## easyrider

__





Logic will not open - error message to do with Spitfire Audio BBCSO


I was working on a track earlier, saved it and then quit Just attempted to open Logic about 10 times and kept receiving this error: I then shut down, waited a few minutes and booted up my machine again - kept receiving the same error message Anyone have any insight into this? @christianhenson




vi-control.net


----------



## kgdrum

easyrider said:


> I’ll withdraw from this thread....apologies.
> 
> My enthusiasm has been misunderstood as something else.


This is from page 4 so why are you still spewing your endless stream of passive-agressive trollish nonsense?
I guess it's like saying you only used the word "shafted" one time,who's counting when you get to roll in your trolliish glory.
On behalf of the other naive VI-C Mac users Thank You for trying to teach us the mysteries of the computer universe that only a dedicated Windows price-conscious user seems to know and will not let go until everyone falls in line.
@easyrider are you lonely,do you need attention? Whats your problem with other people having point of view that's different than yours?
Enlighten us,please!


----------



## easyrider

kgdrum said:


> This is from page 4 so why are you still spewing your endless stream of passive-agressive trollish nonsense?


What nonsense have I posted?

After I posted that some asked me a question so I responded...



kgdrum said:


> Whats your problem with other people having point of view that's different than yours?
> Enlighten us,please!


I don't have a problem with people having a POV different to mine....But when their opinion is based on thin air then surely I'm allowed to question it?

The OP asked a question.

I answered it.

I provided Performance data

I linked to videos

I linked to a video of JUNKIE XL answering the OP's question...

Thats it...

If this winds people up....Then the problem is not with me. It is with them.


----------



## kgdrum

easyrider said:


> What nonsense have I posted?
> 
> After I posted that some asked me a question so I responded...
> 
> 
> I don't have a problem with people having a POV different to mine....But when their opinion is based on thin air then surely I'm allowed to question it?


Of course now I understand, any opinion that doesn't line up with yours has no factual basis!

Thank You! 👍


----------



## easyrider

kgdrum said:


> Of course now I understand, any opinion that doesn't line up with yours has no factual basis!
> 
> Thank You!


When it comes to computer hardware and performance. Opinion is MOOT

"My opinion is that a 10980XE performs "around the same" as a 5950X"

Nope, this is not good enough.....The 5950x beats it and here is the data to prove it.

"Macs just work"

"Macs are more stable"

etc.....

Post an opinion of course...This is Computer Hardware not ART. But pulling facts out of ones ass to justify a thought process is not healthy. Especially when someone is about to embark on a major purchase.


----------



## Cat

easyrider said:


> "My opinion is that a 10980XE performs "around the same" as a 5950X"
> 
> Nope, this is not good enough.....The 5950x beats it and here is the data to prove it.


Ryzen 5950x only supports max 128 GB Ram, as opposed to 256 GB in the case of Intel 10980xe; at least for me this settled the case! Just got the i9 after a couple of weeks of research. I read lots of documentation about how to choose the Ram and how to set it up for an AMD machine especially if you wanted the ram maxed out (at only 128). Nah...Plus the difference in performance is not that big (especially after I easily overclocked the s*** out of the i9)...And I am actually happy that the 10980xe is not, as you say it, a new technology (I wouldn't call it very old either).
Yes, for gaming, I would definitely get the AMD, but in my opinion, for a pro audio/composing setup - it just seems too risky -at least for me (probably some people will disagree and that is fine).


----------



## dgburns

easyrider said:


> I don't think they can't be bothered....They just know deep down they're talking bollocks


Ok, ok, ok pipe it down a few notches. Let’s get down to brass tacks shall we?

No one is saying a win10 machine is bad. In fact there are many compelling reasons why it might in fact be the better choice. For one, older software more often than not, survives OS updates.... much better than Mac OS.

In terms of cost, well, let’s just say we DO pay a premium for a Mac Pro. However, as others have attempted to convey, it’s not as much as you would have us believe when comparing to a pro comparable server class PC. Not equal, but not so outside the realm of reasonable, at least for me. Sure if you want to compare Mac Pro to a desktop PC cpu and non error correcting ram, go ahead. But we need to compare like with like. And many of us buy the minimun from Apple then go to OWC and load up on the periphery anyway.

But when we talk about Mac, like it or not, it’s become as much about the ecosystem as it is about the hardware. If you are a LPX user, there really is no alternative. I tried, and continue to try Cubase, but I must confess, I just latched onto Logic, and it‘s been my saddle, my blankey, my go-to when the shit hits the fan and it’s go time. Wish it wasn’t sometimes. So that means Mac, whatever form the box manifests itself as. If LPX was on PC, that would change everything for me. 

I also just like the computing experience, and just can’t seem to get my head around the way win10 looks, hate the text style and filesystem looks. Sure I use win10 all day long too, but as my main daw machine- No, I just can’t see myself going there. But that’s personal. Hopefully, and I don’t think this is the case, but I don’t think the Mac crowd are trying to preach from on high that we’re superior. It’s just what we use and like. What’s wrong with that?

I confess when I started out, a big reason for going Mac was because it was the machine of choice in the Post world, and it made sense to conform for an easier client experience- our stuff interchanged with everybody else. Times have surely changed, this may in fact be switched around, now that many video shops will use PC’s. But post work appears to be still Mac centric, and that plays into my decision making.

I love my new Mac Pro rackmount. I feel I paid alot. I don’t like the fact that Arm chips are just around the corner. I grilled the pro rep, to the point he called California and talked to an engineer. Not sure the answers leant themselves to my piece of mind, but then, the last cheesgraters had a long serviceable lifespan. Sure, I bought tons of PC’s in that time. They are all in a landfill somewhere now. A few cheesgraters are still in service around here.

The Mac ain’t the be all end all, but it’s a choice, and presently, my choice. My software migrated over really well. I had over 15 years of files and things, a good chunk of proprietary stuff, key to specific projects I need to have access to. Going PC would have meant closing the door on alot of things like presets, past project compatibility, things like subsequent seasons of a show where I MUST recall past media assets. There’s that dang ecosystem thing again.

The mac is expensive, but it’s a joy to work on. It’s dead quiet, built like a tank. It’s possibly over-engineered in certain aesthetics, but still wondrous to behold. It will be supported for a good 5 years, and will be easy to see 10 years of service out of it, possibly longer.

If you don’t agree, that’s great, by all means use a PC. Just realize that maybe for reasons you can’t fathom, people will choose something you can’t get behind. Like putting ketchup on a steak. Then again, us Mac users tend to like our caviar, comte cheese and champagne....


----------



## wayne_rowley

easyrider said:


> What is the reason?
> 
> Its a genuine question....


The bottom line, Apple kit costs more because Apple are a premium brand making and selling premium products. The same reason why a BMW or Mercedes costs more than a Skoda or Dacia! Will they both get you from A to B? Yes. So why do many people continue to buy BMWs and Mercedes instead of Skodas and Dacias?

On to more specifics, in the case you are measuring a server/workstation class computer against a home computer. A server/workstation is going to cost more than a home computer, and that's true whether comparing PC to Apple to PC to PC. Just Google for Dell Xeon workstations. You're advocating a Ryzen 5950X - which are great. But they are still consumer grade processors. Fast, yes, but limited in other ways. We've already pointed out that such a system would be limited to 128GB of RAM! The processor in the 16 core Mac Pro is a Xeon W-3245. It supports over 700GB of RAM! Retail price is £1,900 in the UK, so over $2000 US - which is over a quarter of the price of his Mac Pro! Why does the Mac Pro cost more... because its base components cost more!

If you're going to compare like for like compare a 5950X system to a top-end 27" 10 core iMac. Both are limited to 128GB of RAM. Both are reasonably priced computers! Take out the 27" 5K display of the iMac and it will likely be cheaper than the Ryzen. Of course the Ryzen is likely to benchmark better, but whether that makes a significant difference in real world usage would be down to the user to work out.

Apple kit is expensive, and I think they do over charge for RAM and storage. But in the context of the market and customer that Apple aim these pro-end products at it it not overly expensive. In some cases it's actually cheaper. Remember the Apple 6K pro display? £5k for the monitor and then £1k for the stand! Oh how we laughed! Well, in the pro circles its aimed at they don't see it as a £5k display plus £1K for the stand - they see it as a £6k display. One that, just so happens to be of better or equal quality and colour accuracy than the £10K displays they used to buy instead!! 

You can't get away with calling people who prefer Apple computers over Windows computers fanboys, brainwashed or caught in some kind of cult! It just won't wash. I'm not saying that some Apple fans don't behave that way - they do, and so do fans of other products (I myself have been roasted on this forum for daring to criticise Spitfire Audio - it ain't nice). But it's just a choice, and you can produce great music on both Macs and PCs.

I moved to Mac from PC at home after Microsoft released the car crash that was Vista. I haven't moved back. I still use Windows 10 nearly every day on my work laptop. It's fine - it gets the job done, but I prefer to use Mac OS. I find it more elegant. I enjoy using Macs more than PCs. It's a choice. 

I'm not a Pro, and while I would *love* a Mac Pro I can't justify the cost for my needs as a hobbyist. But for many Pros they do the job. I currently have a Mac mini which does what I need today, and I look forward to up coming AS Macs, though if they lack RAM upgradability and their RAM prices are stupid, I may look again at PCs.

But to finish, here's one architectural argument on why so many music pros prefer to use Macs over PCs. Core Audio. It's just better than the Windows driver model (which is why Cubase needs ASIO for low latency). It's built into the heart of the OS. On Windows your low latency mileage depends more on the quality of the interface and its driver - which is why so many Windows musos swear by RME. You just don't get those kinds of hassle with Macs and audio.

Have a great day!

Wayne


----------



## el-bo

dgburns said:


> It’s possibly over-engineered in certain aesthetics, but still wondrous to behold.


Possibly? I'd suggest, absolutely! And that's fine. I believe everyone who buys one understands they are paying quite a premium for the aesthetic. Not that there aren't some great examples of PC builds, but I've never seen anything that I found to be as striking a it is minimal.


----------



## AudioLoco

Virtuoso said:


> You don't want to know how much I spent on my Mac Pro. I don't regret a cent of it. I also have a kickass PC (3 actually) and have been running PCs since the late 80s, but I VASTLY prefer using the Mac which is my main workhorse. I use the PCs only when I have to.
> 
> Why the Mac Pro?
> 
> - It is rock solid. I never need to reboot it because it has developed odd behavioral quirks.



Same in PC world, sorry, that was 1998 you are referring to


Virtuoso said:


> - It is silent, even when maxed out.



Any case costing around 150£ on can be totally silent (mastering and restoration work, no machine room)


Virtuoso said:


> - It will take up to 768GB. I'm running with 384GB currently with half the slots free.


Got ya, but.... Most will to 128 with possibilities of 256 if I am not mistaken. 128 more then enough for most mortals


Virtuoso said:


> - It has tons of PCIe slots without restrictions on what you can actually use (unlike many PCs)


Most "stuff" is external these days


Virtuoso said:


> - The UI and Apps scale very well to ultra high resolution - I run at 6k. Windows scaling is hideous and the whole OS is an ugly mess.


If I can see clealrly enough what I'm doing I'm happy, I work with audio, not graphics/video


Virtuoso said:


> - It doesn't spontaneously reboot in the middle of the night to install updates while I'm in the middle of a time-critical render. Windows has done this many, many times to my utter frustration.


There are simple ways to avoid it auto updating, you should have been aware it is perfectly possible. A non-issue


Virtuoso said:


> - Many workflow-enhancing features are built right into the OS.


Ok...


Virtuoso said:


> - Many apps and plugins in my field of work are Mac Only - FCP/Motion/Logic/MotionVFX/FXFactory etc


If you are a Logic user, sure


Virtuoso said:


> - UA hardware is a joy on the Mac and an ugly mess on the PC.


Don't use UAD. From what I know it works well on both platforms


Virtuoso said:


> As for Cubase, I use it daily on the Mac. Since v11 got released it's MUCH faster. They rewrote the graphics engine to use Metal and it's a vast improvement.


It still works better on PC. Direct experience with both. It just does.


Virtuoso said:


> Can you build a faster PC for less money? Of course. You can mod a Toyota Supra to be faster in a straight line than an Aston Martin. Go for it, if that's your priority!


It is a the same Toyota I got underneath, The paint job and shiny body makes people think it's a Ferrari.


Virtuoso said:


> For me personally:-
> PC = rage, irritation, frustration, frequent time-sapping creativity-killing troubleshooting, endless fucking rebooting (8 updates found, reboot, 6 updates found, reboot, 4 updates found etc etc etc)
> Mac = zen bliss and no barriers to inspiration


I had many Apple-Care trips and hardware failures and software crashes (oh that bomb thingy!) with Macs...

Again it is a personal choice, especially regarding the OS workflow, and I respect that. And I respect people investing in what they want to feel serene and problem free and comfortable to work.
Like investing in a fancy chair... You sit on it all day.
Just please, don't make it what it is not. 
 

PS I can't believe we are MACPCing in 2021


----------



## SupremeFist

Real men use Psion.


----------



## Prockamanisc

AudioLoco said:


> I can't believe we are MACPCing in 2021


Mac keeps this contest alive by pricing their stuff so high that people have to seriously consider the alternative before taking the gut punch of buying one of their computers.


----------



## JonS

I do not yet own a 2019 Mac Pro, but I think for anyone who is a working composer that relies on Digital Performer or Logic Pro the 2019 Mac Pro is clearly the best path forwards as a mainstay computer. I currently use a 2019 iMac 8-core 2TB SSD 128GB RAM as my main machine with DP10. And, for those who cannot afford a 2019 Mac Pro but want to be on a Mac, a more affordable bang for your buck is getting one or two 2019 or 2020 iMacs, which can definitely get the job done but not quite as elegantly as a singular 2019 Mac Pro ITB setup under one roof so to speak. Obviously, Apple price gouges for RAM and internal NVMe SSDs as well as the overall price for the 2019 Mac Pro. I am not an Apple fanboy. I simply have tried having a PC as my main DAW computer and much preferred being on a Mac platform, hence I am not interested in a hackintosh but applaud others who go that route. I also feel like the iPhone and iPad are way over priced too, and I have owned Samsung and other non-Apple cellphones and tablets before, but again I prefer to be in the Mac eco system even though I can't stand how much Apple is a greedy company. I am not exactly sure why there is so much vitriol in this thread. If someone wants to be on a PC that's great, if someone is on a Mac good for them, I don't see the reason why this is an issue for conflict. We should be a community that supports each other in open conversation. Life is fleeting and fragile, and this can be a very challenging business to be in too, ladies and gents...Group hugs!


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

easyrider said:


> Nope, this is not good enough.....The 5950x beats it and here is the data to prove it.


Can you please provide real world data that shows performance on your example processors running different DAW’s, VEPro and large track counts of demanding orchestral libraries? All while scoring to pic? If not, then I’m afraid YOUR current “data” is moot.


----------



## el-bo

SupremeFist said:


> Real men use Psion.


Real men don't start sentences with "Real men..."


----------



## uOpt

Some random thoughts:

The Mac Pro is a very capable machine with:
- Error-correcting RAM
- 12 RAM slots
- 6-channel RAM (3x the memory bandwidth of the Ryzen at same frequency)
- 64 PCIe lanes out of the CPU, compared to 20 on the Ryzen
Also:
- You can't actually buy the Ryzen in a predictable manner
- The LGA2066 XE systems are nice, but if you want them with a Xeon for ECC memory you also pay through the nose.
- The LGA2066 XE systems at least offer quad channel RAM and about 48 PCIe lanes


----------



## easyrider

Some random thoughts:


Ryzen 5950x supports EEC Memory


Ryzen 5950x and X570 support PCIE 4.0 doubling the bandwidth of PCIE 3.0 meaning less lanes are needed for add in cards etc.​


----------



## uOpt

easyrider said:


> Some random thoughts:
> 
> 
> Ryzen 5950x supports EEC Memory
> 
> 
> Ryzen 5950x and X570 support PCIE 4.0 doubling the bandwidth of PCIE 3.0 meaning less lanes are needed for add in cards etc.​


Fair enough. Correct on the ECC.

Just nitpicking that PCIe 4.0 only does its thing with a PCIe 4.0 peripheral.

If you want a x16 graphics card on the Ryzen you only have 4 lanes left for things directly connected to the CPU, and you can't split it. One NVMe can be on the CPU, that's it. Same if you give up CPU PCIe lanes by using thunderbolt. A LGA2066 system or the Mac Pro have CPU-connected PCIe lanes on the mainboard slots. And separately from Thunderbolt, you can use them at the same time.

Not that you need that much I/O for a music computer


----------



## Virtuoso

uOpt said:


> - You can't actually buy the Ryzen in a predictable manner


True - I've been trying to get a 5950x since they launched. In the same time period I've managed to get an RTX 3090, Xbox Series X and PS5, but the Ryzen still eludes me.


----------



## Antkn33

I’m a little late to the game here. But here’s my advice. If you’ve already ordered it, don’t question it or ask for advice or read reviews for other things. Just enjoy it. It’s certainly a nice machine.


----------



## easyrider

I bought 5950x just before Christmas...I just had to be actively engaged in getting one..Stock was coming in sporadically. But I managed it....Same with the RTX 3600ti GFX card....in the end I ended up with two GFX cards a RTX 3060ti and RTX3070!



My view is buy what you need in terms of features...I do video editing as well as music creation so wanted 16 cores 32 threads....I dont have mission critical DATA and have a comprehensive backup with two mirrored servers....So EEC ram was not needed although supported on 5950x

Both my servers run EEC Ram 

I have more than enough lanes for my needs...8 TB SSD storage pool with scope to increase to 20TB ( But I won’t), RTX GFX and 2TB Nvme drive as boot.

Ive got my system water cooled with 4 x 140mm fans in push pull on a 280mm Radiator so it’s silent.

128GB of Ram is fine for my needs...

All this horsepower came in at a silly low price....I sold the 3900x I had previously for £400 and 5950x cost me £789 at time of purchasing...so to upgrade to 5950x was £389

I’ve had the system since the x570 launch July 2019....and its been rock solid...There are few legendary chips in my view...The AMD Opteron 170 and the Intel Q6600 I loved those chips...The 5950x is a phenomenal chip too. And a real powerhouse for any DAW machine for anyone and it’s in reach for most. It’s tech like this that we should all celebrate as it will give Intel the kick up the ass to ditch 10nm and actually produce something on par with the 5950x in performance and cost.

Threadripper Pro is amazing too...64 cores 128 threads and support for 2TB of ram....


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

For anyone who thinks Mac’s are too expensive Lol....


----------



## el-bo

Jeremy Spencer said:


> For anyone who thinks Mac’s are too expensive Lol....


To be fair, that price does include the printer


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

el-bo said:


> To be fair, that price does include the printer


And a 12” monitor! Woot!


----------



## easyrider

Help a brother out...

This chap has updated OSX and his plugins don’t work






Issues with Big Sur and UAD Software 9.13.1


Having waited until all my software was Big Sur compatible, I yesterday took the plunge and upgraded to Big Sur. Unfortunately the UAD 9.13.1 software doesn't seem to want to install properly, and am getting the error message 'Driver Not Installed Correctly'. The computer (Macbook Pro 2017) sees...




vi-control.net


----------



## storyteller

jemu999 said:


> By all accounts, the 16 core Mac Pro will do exactly what Im looking for. So I ordered it and I should receive it by next week. But.... I can't help but feel like the price is just not worth the OSx I happen to prefer.
> 
> I currently run a 5,1 Mac Pro with 2 slave-PCs. I absolutely no longer want to deal with multiple computer setup. I want one computer to handle everything in combination with disable features (Preferably without VE Pro). My template is roughly 1000 tracks (90% Kontakt) and I use Cubase. I can't work without templates . I want to have at least 100 tracks active at any given time with a much smaller number of tracks ever playing at the same time.
> 
> Would something like the Intel 10980XE with ASUS Prime X299 Deluxe II motherboard and 256gb Ram be something that would compete or be on par with the 16-Core Mac Pro?


Hey - so I am in the final decision stages myself. What are your thoughts with the 16c MP? Did you wind up keeping it? How much ram do you have in it? And, what is your CPU load when the ram and # of instances are pushed in VEPro?


----------



## jemu999

storyteller said:


> Hey - so I am in the final decision stages myself. What are your thoughts with the 16c MP? Did you wind up keeping it? How much ram do you have in it? And, what is your CPU load when the ram and # of instances are pushed in VEPro?


Hey Storyteller,

I changed my mind and canceled the Mac Pro order. TBH, it wasn't an affordability issue. I just couldn't justify the cost at this time. I went through the whole Mac PowerPC to Intel transition and so I decided to wait and hold with my current system for the time being with so many new changes coming. You should reach out to @JohnG who recently purchased 16c MP. For what it's worth, all my research indicates the 16c MP is a beast and would have satisfied my needs. Good luck!


----------



## Saxer

I had the same thoughts one year ago and got a Hackintosh.


----------



## storyteller

jemu999 said:


> Hey Storyteller,
> 
> I changed my mind and canceled the Mac Pro order. TBH, it wasn't an affordability issue. I just couldn't justify the cost at this time. I went through the whole Mac PowerPC to Intel transition and so I decided to wait and hold with my current system for the time being with so many new changes coming. You should reach out to @JohnG who recently purchased 16c MP. For what it's worth, all my research indicates the 16c MP is a beast and would have satisfied my needs. Good luck!


Thanks for letting me know how it has gone with you too man. It isn’t a $$ issue for me either as much as making the right decision in this Intel transition. All I know is that a decision has to happen... which path? Still deciding. And Apple could introduce some twists to this on June 7... so that is the very last I can stretch a decision date unless I go ahead and decide sooner.


----------



## mscp

jemu999 said:


> By all accounts, the 16 core Mac Pro will do exactly what Im looking for. So I ordered it and I should receive it by next week. But.... I can't help but feel like the price is just not worth the OSx I happen to prefer.
> 
> I currently run a 5,1 Mac Pro with 2 slave-PCs. I absolutely no longer want to deal with multiple computer setup. I want one computer to handle everything in combination with disable features (Preferably without VE Pro). My template is roughly 1000 tracks (90% Kontakt) and I use Cubase. I can't work without templates . I want to have at least 100 tracks active at any given time with a much smaller number of tracks ever playing at the same time.
> 
> Would something like the Intel 10980XE with ASUS Prime X299 Deluxe II motherboard and 256gb Ram be something that would compete or be on par with the 16-Core Mac Pro?


If you have the skills to find the right components and build an Intel eXtrememachine, yes - it will be far superior than the Mac Pro.

I recommend you to go the Mac route if you have doubts.

The great thing about the Mac Pros are the maxed out versions.


----------



## mscp

Jeremy Spencer said:


> For anyone who thinks Mac’s are too expensive Lol....


1. Purchasing power back then was way higher than today’s.
2. This type of tech was super expensive to manufacture back then - far more than today.
3. What apple uses to build their machines are components that are sold for much cheaper. Yes…the same exact things. No excuse for charging a much higher price - just so people can use a different “freebsd distro”. but hey! If someone wants to buy a Ferrari to drive in NYC, or a studio apartment or rent a garage to live in Malibu, hey! Choices. Preferences. 😂 

Yes, Macs are uber expensive in today’s world because Apple’s markup is too friggin’ high. Not everyone wants to deliberately throw money at a company that clearly overcharges them by a LOT since, at the end of the day, these are just tools that depreciate over time. Econ 101.


----------



## rnb_2

Phil81 said:


> 3. What apple uses to build their machines are components that are sold for much cheaper. Yes…the same exact things. No excuse for charging a much higher price - just so people can use a different “freebsd distro”. 😂


I won't dispute that the Mac Pro is very expensive, but it's not true that it contains "the same exact things" that you can buy off the shelf and assemble yourself. Beyond the very basic components that can't be avoided (CPU/RAM/BT chip, etc), there is very little stock about the Mac Pro - not the motherboard, not the GPU cards (even the base, underpowered GPU is by no means stock), not the cooling.

One of the ancillary benefits to Apple of switching to their own CPUs will be the decrease in the number of people who will say "I can build that exact computer for SO much less" (with "exact" being very flexibly-defined). Intel was the only real option in 2006, but this was always going to be a downside - beyond PowerPC, it isn't like there ever was a complete, parallel set of manufacturers that only made components for Apple.


----------



## mscp

rnb_2 said:


> I won't dispute that the Mac Pro is very expensive, but it's not true that it contains "the same exact things" that you can buy off the shelf and assemble yourself. Beyond the very basic components that can't be avoided (CPU/RAM/BT chip, etc), there is very little stock about the Mac Pro - not the motherboard, not the GPU cards (even the base, underpowered GPU is by no means stock), not the cooling.


Well, you can. But will you? Probably not, and that’s cool. You prefer Macs, I get it. I have both types over here and get along with both. I prefer Mac laptops to PCs for obvious reasons, but their current desktops? Please…



rnb_2 said:


> One of the ancillary benefits to Apple of switching to their own CPUs will be the decrease in the number of people who will say "I can build that exact computer for SO much less" (with "exact" being very flexibly-defined). Intel was the only real option in 2006, but this was always going to be a downside - beyond PowerPC, it isn't like there ever was a complete, parallel set of manufacturers that only made components for Apple.


I’m a consumer, not a fanboy. I really don’t care what they (or any manufacturer) think. If they can make something not marginally but incredibly more powerful and overall amazing in every sense, I’m all game - pending the fact if I’ll benefit from it entirely as I take cost-benefit seriously (I don’t live in a sandboxed world where money is infinite and I don’t have to do squat to get it 😂). A computer is NOT an asset that will be in the studio for decades unlike outboard gear. It’s a tool that depreciates very quickly.

Also, bear in mind that cost is not all. My friend’s Z8 is a lot more expensive than the Mac Pro, but he bought for obvious reasons. Raw performance and built quality. To him, the cost benefit of owning a Z8 instead of a Mac Pro is far greater. 


So far, Apple is not even close to be called a cost-benefit company. You may continue to say Apple is superior but in reality,
it is just a preference. I used to think Apple was superior, until I got my hands on a few PCs a few years ago. I guess I was super late to the game because I was surrounded by “Apple Evangelists”. Silly me.

I do hope Apple, or another company comes up strong in the future because Intel has been kind of in super annoying comfort zone these days and that’s not good (eg: 11th gen cpus).


----------



## sinkd

jemu999 said:


> By all accounts, the 16 core Mac Pro will do exactly what Im looking for. So I ordered it and I should receive it by next week. But.... I can't help but feel like the price is just not worth the OSx I happen to prefer.
> 
> I currently run a 5,1 Mac Pro with 2 slave-PCs. I absolutely no longer want to deal with multiple computer setup. I want one computer to handle everything in combination with disable features (Preferably without VE Pro). My template is roughly 1000 tracks (90% Kontakt) and I use Cubase. I can't work without templates . I want to have at least 100 tracks active at any given time with a much smaller number of tracks ever playing at the same time.
> 
> Would something like the Intel 10980XE with ASUS Prime X299 Deluxe II motherboard and 256gb Ram be something that would compete or be on par with the 16-Core Mac Pro?


Do you know that you can upgrade your 5,1 to a 12-core 3.4GHz and up to 128 GB of RAM for about $1500 (maybe less)?


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

Phil81 said:


> Yes, Macs are uber expensive in today’s world because Apple’s markup is too friggin’ high. Not everyone wants to deliberately throw money at a company that clearly overcharges them by a LOT since, at the end of the day, these are just tools that depreciate over time. Econ 101.


Aside from the Mac Pro's, I disagree. When I recently upgraded to my 2020 iMac, I also priced out a similarly spec'd PC. You can't have identical parts obviously, but when you factor in the overall build and a hi-res monitor....it's about the same price (actually, the PC was a bit higher). And again....cost per use. All personal preference, of course, but I don't buy into the "Apple is overpriced" jargan. Plus, it paid for itself within the first month, so it owes me nothing already. The same applies to my 2013 MacBook; still going strong without a single failure after daily use for eight years. I'm sure a Windows laptop could also last, but my point is that it was worth every penny.


----------



## mscp

Jeremy Spencer said:


> Aside from the Mac Pro's, I disagree. When I recently upgraded to my 2020 iMac, I also priced out a similarly spec'd PC. You can't have identical parts obviously, but when you factor in the overall build and a hi-res monitor....it's about the same price (actually, the PC was a bit higher). And again....cost per use. All personal preference, of course, but I don't buy into the "Apple is overpriced" jargan. Plus, it paid for itself within the first month, so it owes me nothing already. The same applies to my 2013 MacBook; still going strong without a single failure after daily use for eight years. I'm sure a Windows laptop could also last, but my point is that it was worth every penny.


You’ve just described personal preference, which is fair enough. I’m literally afraid of moving to a PC laptop (been a MBP user for decades) partially because of what people say…but despite that, one thing I know for a fact, I’ll be very limited as to what I can do to a laptop anyways. I’m also fairly lazy to research for laptops - so a Mac is perfect for me.

My points were never about “cheap”, but cost-benefit. Totally different things. In fact, one of my PC machines cost slightly (marginally) more than the same spec’ed Mac Pro, but I wanted to squeeze out performance. Gear always pays off over here too otherwise I would not even consider getting them in the first place. I’m happy to spend, but I also don’t overspend “just because” (eg: I won’t buy a Pepsi for 10 dollars unless I’m in a desperate need of a soda drink and there’s no Coca-Cola being sold for less 😂 - It’s not like I make money without having to work). I’d also spend more if I’m either too tired to search for something, just want to call it a day (compromise), or there’s a deep connection (logical or illogical) between me and that thing (eg: my Eurorack collection. It’s soooo fun and addictive). For anything else, I prefer to leave the money in an investment fund or buy something else with it.

What I often find out in PC/Mac or DAW arguments are nothing but pure evangelism which can in turn cloud other members’ decisions. It took a lot of time and denial to “waste” my money on PCs to ultimately find out: “wait a second… Why do people hate this thing again? I don’t get it. This is awesome!” Now I have both ecosystems in my studio and I see no real difference except aesthetics. I spotted a dash of evangelism when I saw people complaining about something breaking on PCs and going after MSoft or PCs in general, while the same thing happening to them on the mac, and going after the software developer, never Apple. 😂 

My ultimate point is - to avoid clouding other VIC members decisions just because we prefer one thing over the other. Let the OP choose what to do based on real facts, not personal preferences. My latest posts sound like I'm a huge W10 fan, but actually, I'm not. If Apple can really outdo what is already reality in the PC world, I'll be the first one to jump right in....I'll post pictures and everything over here the following day! Time will tell.


----------



## InLight-Tone

Whenever I have to do IT work for my wife's Windows laptop, I literally get physically ill...


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

Phil81 said:


> My ultimate point is - to avoid clouding other VIC members decisions just because we prefer one thing over the other. Let the OP choose what to do based on real facts, not personal preferences


Agreed. However, saying Apple computers are overpriced (for a working composer) is rubbish.


----------



## mscp

Jeremy Spencer said:


> Agreed. However, saying Apple computers are overpriced (for a working composer) is rubbish.


Overpriced doesn't really mean whether one is able to afford or not. It means 'to charge too high a price for'. I don't like to lease computers, but some other working composers (even A-Listers) do...whether Mac Pros/HP Z8's/Lenovo workstations...because they considered them to be overpriced --- combination of factors --- or simply something that will become metal junk in a few years time. Why keep it eh? I find the idea of leasing extremely smart, but I was never really on board with it because part of me illogically screams "it's miiiinnnee! nobody will take it away! mwahaha." haha.

Another depreciative factor is support. You're very lucky you've never had to resort to fixing your Apple computers...because if you do (knock on wood), you will quickly realize you want to "poke your eye out", especially if you have some knowledge about computer assembly, and, like it happened to me once, are tight on schedule.

Anyway, I hope Apple gets to a point where I find their computers attractive again. They've been doing "meh" for their laptop lineup since I don't see many PC laptops to compare with (I'm on a maxed out MBP 2018), but their desktops are simply a no go for me at this point. If they ever release a Mac Pro Mwhatever that literally laughs at my current Intels, then I'll pull my CC out.


----------



## erodred

I will chime in with my own experience with the computers (although my composing experience is still very limited at the moment). I see a lot of going back and forth which I think will miss the biggest point in the Mac vs Windows - both are PCs - personal computers 

Macbooks are definitely the superior laptop right now and worth the high cost for their build quality. The upgradability of laptops is almost non-existent these days, even gaming laptops are losing that.

Now for the desktops... it is really hard to say. The price point of the M1 Mac mini is quite attractive and is quite powerful, and I think this is really changing things right now. No Windows computer will get that and the arm version of Windows got very little support. 

For my own history: I had the 2018 Mac mini i7 1TB. I self upgraded it to 64GB of ram for about $300 CAD (2 ram modules plus the security screwdrivers). How much was apple charging for that upgrade? I just checked for $1250 CAD. Yikes.

What did I do though? I sold that thing for about $2200 CAD after pricing out a desktop with the following:

Ryzen 9 3900X
128 GB DDR4
2x 1TB M2 SSD
2x 1TB SATA SSD
... and more stuff like case, etc. but already much better spec'd than the mac mini for the price.

And then I needed to buy Studio One.

So for the OP, I think you should take a look at Ryzen if possible? Might get more bang for your buck with that route.

I will admit that the MacOS seems a lot smoother than Windows 10. Logic I felt was easy for me to find my way around, but I managed to learn the quirks of Studio One. I am also an iPhone and Apple Watch user, so I lost a lot of integration. Really tempted to get the new M1 Mac Mini again and use VEP.

I think people should really clarify you dont buy a Mac for the specs, you are buying it for the experience, the same as when you pay a high ticket price for a movie theatre, zoo, aquiarium, etc. Is it worth it? Up to you. If OP wants the MacOS experience, then the price is justified.


----------



## mscp

erodred said:


> Macbooks are definitely the superior laptop right now and worth the high cost for their build quality. The upgradability of laptops is almost non-existent these days, even gaming laptops are losing that.



Yeah, I can't seem to see any laptop that matches or surpasses the standard on MBPs (yet) either.



erodred said:


> Now for the desktops... it is really hard to say. The price point of the M1 Mac mini is quite attractive and is quite powerful, and I think this is really changing things right now. No Windows computer will get that and the arm version of Windows got very little support.



I had the mini M1. sold it days later. I can see a massive appeal of that cpu on a macbook air though, just not on any type of desktop-grade computer. I hope they make a pro version of their silicon cpu for the Mac Pro that will smoke anything available out there at the moment for the prosumer market (Ryzen/i9x-series) because I'm just not interested on Xeons (personal preference).




erodred said:


> For my own history: I had the 2018 Mac mini i7 1TB. I self upgraded it to 64GB of ram for about $300 CAD (2 ram modules plus the security screwdrivers). How much was apple charging for that upgrade? I just checked for $1250 CAD. Yikes.



Yup. But that's impossible with the M silicons. Upgradability = 0% after purchase. It blows.



erodred said:


> What did I do though? I sold that thing for about $2200 CAD after pricing out a desktop with the following:
> 
> Ryzen 9 3900X
> 128 GB DDR4
> 2x 1TB M2 SSD
> 2x 1TB SATA SSD
> ... and more stuff like case, etc. but already much better spec'd than the mac mini for the price.
> 
> And then I needed to buy Studio One.
> 
> So for the OP, I think you should take a look at Ryzen if possible? Might get more bang for your buck with that route.



I haven't tested AMDs yet, but some people had reported issues with Pro Tools, which kind of sucks cause I really would like to build a threadripper.



erodred said:


> I will admit that the MacOS seems a lot smoother than Windows 10. Logic I felt was easy for me to find my way around, but I managed to learn the quirks of Studio One. I am also an iPhone and Apple Watch user, so I lost a lot of integration. Really tempted to get the new M1 Mac Mini again and use VEP.



You think so? I had more issues with Catalina/Big Sur than I ever had with W10.
Logic is great and super easy! I concur. Though the other DAWs are not that complex either.

Yeah, the integration is quite nice! That is certain a bonus point for Apple. Very nice for small suites.



erodred said:


> I think people should really clarify you dont buy a Mac for the specs, you are buying it for the experience, the same as when you pay a high ticket price for a movie theatre, zoo, aquiarium, etc. Is it worth it? Up to you. If OP wants the MacOS experience, then the price is justified.


Preference. Exactly. If he just wants the MacOS experience, he wouldn't have posted a thread. Have a look at the original post.


----------



## erodred

Phil81 said:


> Preference. Exactly. If he just wants the MacOS experience, he wouldn't have posted a thread. Have a look at the original post.


That is my apology, it is easy to assume with a title like this and just reading the last few posts to "know" how the topic was going. 

I think the best advice is buy the most machine for the price, while also maintaining good quality parts. My PC has good parts inside, but I really cheaped out on the case. It was the cheapest window case I could find.


----------



## rnb_2

Phil81 said:


> Well, you can. But will you? Probably not, and that’s cool. You prefer Macs, I get it. I have both types over here and get along with both. I prefer Mac laptops to PCs for obvious reasons, but their current desktops? Please…
> 
> 
> I’m a consumer, not a fanboy. I really don’t care what they (or any manufacturer) think. If they can make something not marginally but incredibly more powerful and overall amazing in every sense, I’m all game - pending the fact if I’ll benefit from it entirely as I take cost-benefit seriously (I don’t live in a sandboxed world where money is infinite and I don’t have to do squat to get it 😂). A computer is NOT an asset that will be in the studio for decades unlike outboard gear. It’s a tool that depreciates very quickly.
> 
> Also, bear in mind that cost is not all. My friend’s Z8 is a lot more expensive than the Mac Pro, but he bought for obvious reasons. Raw performance and built quality. To him, the cost benefit of owning a Z8 instead of a Mac Pro is far greater.
> 
> 
> So far, Apple is not even close to be called a cost-benefit company. You may continue to say Apple is superior but in reality,
> it is just a preference. I used to think Apple was superior, until I got my hands on a few PCs a few years ago. I guess I was super late to the game because I was surrounded by “Apple Evangelists”. Silly me.
> 
> I do hope Apple, or another company comes up strong in the future because Intel has been kind of in super annoying comfort zone these days and that’s not good (eg: 11th gen cpus).


I'm not a life-long Apple "fanboy" - I built my own PCs for a decade or so, and did corporate IT supporting Windows PCs for 12 years. I have my preferences, but they're based on a fair bit of experience. We all make purchasing decisions based on a number of factors, some rational and some not. In the end, I'd rather work with a computer that plays well with everything I throw at it, and that makes me happy when I sit down to use it - a feeling I never experienced when I sat down to use a Windows machine (and I actually do own one right now for a very specific task that I'm hoping Apple will address on June 7th).


----------



## mscp

rnb_2 said:


> I'm not a life-long Apple "fanboy" - I built my own PCs for a decade or so, and did corporate IT supporting Windows PCs for 12 years. I have my preferences, but they're based on a fair bit of experience. We all make purchasing decisions based on a number of factors, some rational and some not. In the end, I'd rather work with a computer that plays well with everything I throw at it, and that makes me happy when I sit down to use it - a feeling I never experienced when I sat down to use a Windows machine (and I actually do own one right now for a very specific task that I'm hoping Apple will address on June 7th).


perhaps I’m lucky because I throw everything I want to use in windows and it just works, that's why when I hear/read people criticising windows, I never understand why really. I have been a Mac user (and still am) for 2 and a half decades, and it has caused me more headaches than the 4-5 years I've been on Windows. Perhaps some of the developers that make software you use don't really write well or care for Windows as much as they do for the Mac, and that's why you have a better experience on the Mac.


----------



## rnb_2

Phil81 said:


> perhaps I’m lucky because I throw everything I want to use in windows and it just works, that's why when I hear/read people criticising windows, I never understand why really. I have been a Mac user (and still am) for 2 and a half decades, and it has caused me more headaches than the 4-5 years I've been on Windows. Perhaps some of the developers that make software you use don't really write well or care for Windows as much as they do for the Mac, and that's why you have a better experience on the Mac.


Or it's that I have enough experience to know where I'm happier and don't waste my time wondering if the grass is greener. I really don't care if an occasional thing might be better on Windows - I have a current Windows machine and know that I'm not interested in it being my main OS.

Do I wish that Apple did some things differently? Sure. Does it change that I'm happier working in macOS than Windows? Nope. There are rumors that Apple might make something closer to my ideal setup in the next couple years, which would be great, but I'm not unhappy with what I currently have.


----------



## mscp

rnb_2 said:


> Or it's that I have enough experience to know where I'm happier and don't waste my time wondering if the grass is greener. I really don't care if an occasional thing might be better on Windows - I have a current Windows machine and know that I'm not interested in it being my main OS.
> 
> Do I wish that Apple did some things differently? Sure. Does it change that I'm happier working in macOS than Windows? Nope. There are rumors that Apple might make something closer to my ideal setup in the next couple years, which would be great, but I'm not unhappy with what I currently have.


But we shouldn’t provide biased information when someone is asking for help. You like Macs better than Windows despite Windows doing all a composer really needs to do his or her job with. The fact you don’t care for Windows is not helping the OP at all. I have close to zero issues with both my machines (Mac/PC) these days and yes, it is evident W10 has had the upside for years whether you care for it or not. **Perhaps I should work on an A/B (dedicated to composers) video on YT one day just for the fun of it.**

Seeing people just ignoring a bunch of stuff and lazily helping by providing nothing but opinions is sad. However, this is becoming a seriously tedious, repetitive, and long argument and I apologise for the OP for earlier posts. I should have just written the facts, and called it a day. "Rookie" forum mistake.

If you like what you use and have reasons, perfect. It’s your well being. But if someone asks for help, kept it factual.

I’m a working composer running Nuendo, Pro Tools HDX, VEP, with NI komplete, Fabfilter, GRM, Soundtoys, Sonnox, Paulstretch, Some flux stuff, Madrona Labs stuff, Max/MSP, Liquidsonics Cinematic Rooms Pro, Valhalla stuff, among many other things - and have had close to zero issues (well, maxmsp is a bit flaky but C74 has helped me with it). Not sure where your “occasional app” comes from. There are a few (3) free apps I use that are mac-only but that's it. When time comes, I use them on my Mac. Can I buy similiar apps that run on windows? yes. Will I? Why would I if I can get them for free? lol.


----------



## rnb_2

Phil81 said:


> But we shouldn’t provide biased information when someone is asking for help. You like Macs better than Windows despite Windows performing the same with most apps a composer needs to do his or her job with. The fact you don’t care for Windows is not helping the OP. I have close to zero issues with both machines. But seeing people just ignoring a bunch of stuff and lazily helping by providing nothing but opinions is BS. This is becoming a seriously tedious, repetitive, and long argument and I apologise for the OP for earlier posts. I should have just stayed on topic and ignored the rest, but I feel he’d be misled.
> 
> If you like what you use and have reasons, perfect. Continue working with it. It’s your well being. But if someone asks for help, providing biased opinions about something doesn’t really help.
> 
> I’m a working composer running Nuendo, Pro Tools HDX, VEP, with NI komplete, Fabfilter, GRM, Soundtoys, Sonnox, Paulstretch, Some flux stuff, Madrona Labs stuff, Max/MSP, Liquidsonics Cinematic Rooms Pro, Valhalla stuff, among many other things - and zero issues (well, maxmsp is a bit flaky but C74 has helped me with it). Not sure where your “occasional app” argument really falls in, but it seems very biased as everything I throw in just works… as with MacOS there are, of course, the occasional things that are not available for Windows, but they are minor and if I ever need to use those things, I turn to my Mac.


I haven't advised @storyteller (not the OP, who made his decision months ago) one way or the other. I'm only here because you're on a mission to make sure that nobody makes the apparently fatal error of buying a Mac Pro. You are the Rational Man and apparently you're not going to let go of this bone until everybody just acknowledges that the things that you care about are the most important factors when making a purchase.

You're not telling anybody anything we don't already know: a carefully-sourced, home-built Windows PC can outperform a Mac Pro for substantially less money (assuming a decent GPU isn't essential to your build, since that market is nuts right now due to shortages). That said, the Mac Pro can absolutely do the job, some people prefer the Mac, some people don't want to go through the time and hassle of carefully sourcing every last piece of their computer, and you're doing your own support for a home-built PC and have to deal with individual warranties for all of your components. How much any of that matters to each person will vary. You really don't have to rebut everybody who has a different opinion - you've been very clear about where you stand.


----------



## mscp

rnb_2 said:


> I haven't advised @storyteller one way or the other. I'm only here because you're on a mission to make sure that nobody makes the apparently fatal error of buying a Mac Pro. You are the Rational Man and apparently you're not going to let go of this bone until everybody just acknowledges that the things that you care about are the most important factors when making a purchase.


You can build two similar machines and come to your own conclusion instead of indirectly accusing me of arrogant, or "know-it-all". I've done it because I want to have both. All you must do is go to a shop, build and see it for yourself. If you can't be bothered to A/B compare yourself, don't make other people's words false.

My mission here was to provide the OP with support, until I saw signs of fanaticism over something that is not all that jazz --- based (again) on the OP's original question.



rnb_2 said:


> That said, the Mac Pro can absolutely do the job, some people prefer the Mac, some people don't want to go through the time and hassle of carefully sourcing every last piece of their computer, and you're doing your own support for a home-built PC and have to deal with individual warranties for all of your components. How much any of that matters to each person will vary. You really don't have to rebut everybody who has a different opinion - you've been very clear about where you stand.


Read the OP's original question. You might have missed his point.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

Phil81 said:


> My mission here was to provide the OP with support, until I saw signs of fanaticism over something that is not all that jazz --- based (again) on the OP's original question.


I think you’re inadvertently a Windows fanboy, it’s quite apparent you’re bias.


----------



## mscp

Jeremy Spencer said:


> I think you’re inadvertently a Windows fanboy, it’s quite apparent you’re bias.


Then you haven't been following up or have missed something. Helping the OP decide over what will provide him with better performance isn't being a fanboy. What drove me to write much about windows is the fact people kept forcing the OP to make a decision based on their silly mac opinions, not facts based on A/B tests. Luckily I have AB tested it and could step in. Then - derailing began and went on and on. Whatever was written here won't change the facts about how my Mac and PC work alongside the stuff I put in them, and how they perform. Both choices are neat, but his PC build idea does take the lead, and is far superior. Sorry to burst the bubble.

Anyway, I won't be reading follow up messages anymore. This is super tedious. I hope the OP makes the best decision regardless of what he ends up choosing.


----------



## Fab

should have bought a house, would have been cheaper!

*Joking* haha

EDIT: I just checked out the apple site, those things are pretty powerful though! Jeez, 1.5 TB of RAM? Is that right?

This is the max money you can spend on one:


----------



## easyrider

Wow is this pointless thread still going....🤣

“Goes back to my Ryzen 5950x PC running windows“


----------



## Ry.Ja3

I have a 5950x and an M1 Mac Mini. I haven't touched the M1 since I started using the 5950x. In all fairness, I picked up the M1 so I could program/support some Mac + IOS apps. 

My eventual goals was to leave windows. I've rethought that strategy, and will stick with Windows even though Apple now controls 100% of their Hardware and Software stack (that's impressive).

My use case is 3D, Graphics, DAW, Programming, and some gaming. For now, the Windows PC gives me a lot more options and horse power. I threw 32Gigs of Ram in it for about $180. I can expand it to up to 128Gigs if I want. I don't have that flexibility with the M1. When NVidia Rtx's are back in stock (I'm still using a legacy Nvidia 970), I can upgrade the card. I can't do that with the M1.


----------



## Crossroads

There's a reason why big servers of large time-critical operations (hospitals, banks, army, what have you) always run on either Linux/Unix or Windows and not Apple. Backwards compatibility. Software that runs now, WILL run in 15 years from now. The hardware is customizable, and easily scalable, flexible in use cases, and way, way cheaper.

Apple sure makes their stuff sparkly, though.

Sure, the Mac Pro might have ''server quality components'' but the OS keeps it from actually functioning like a server. Because servers actually have to function and be compatible for a long time, and Apple, they don't like that.

Hans and friends all run Windows machines. Think deeply about why that is?

That's right.

Servers that actually function as servers. Software that stays compatible. Is easily replaced. Easily repairable.

Nothing can convince me that $8000 dollars is justified for that kinda hardware, especially considering Apple's despicable attitude towards backwards compatibility and user customization. Nothing.

It's not even the $8000 so much, it's Apple's attitude and the fans justifying their horrible anti-consumer behavior. I would never spend $8000 on a product from a company that at any given time might decide on a whim to say ''%#@# you and everything you've build, we're doing this shiny thing next.''

Oh, and by the way, from what I've seen, Windows is slowly becoming prettier. It just takes some time because, well, they have to ensure things actually stay working.


----------



## easyrider

Crossroads said:


> There's a reason why big servers of large time-critical operations (hospitals, banks, army, what have you) always run on either Linux/Unix or Windows and not Apple. Backwards compatibility. Software that runs now, WILL run in 15 years from now. The hardware is customizable, and easily scalable, flexible in use cases, and way, way cheaper.
> 
> Apple sure makes their stuff sparkly, though.
> 
> Sure, the Mac Pro might have ''server quality components'' but the OS keeps it from actually functioning like a server. Because servers actually have to function and be compatible for a long time, and Apple, they don't like that.
> 
> Hans and friends all run Windows machines. Think deeply about why that is?
> 
> That's right.
> 
> Servers that actually function as servers. Software that stays compatible. Is easily replaced. Easily repairable.
> 
> Nothing can convince me that $8000 dollars is justified for that kinda hardware, especially considering Apple's despicable attitude towards backwards compatibility and user customization. Nothing.


Junkie XL useless windows and a rack of decommissioned servers for his Rig too.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

easyrider said:


> Junkie XL useless windows and a rack of decommissioned servers for his Rig too.


And top guys like John Powell use Logic Pro. What’s your point?


----------



## rnb_2

VI-C is usually (admirably) free of platform-war nonsense. Every now and then, though, a thread comes along that's like a honeytrap for those who just can't resist calling Mac users idiots for all the usual reasons. Rarely seems to go the other way, interestingly.


----------



## easyrider

Jeremy Spencer said:


> And top guys like John Powell use Logic Pro. What’s your point?


I’m sure I read he uses PCs as slaves.....


----------



## easyrider

rnb_2 said:


> VI-C is usually (admirably) free of platform-war nonsense. Every now and then, though, a thread comes along that's like a honeytrap for those who just can't resist calling Mac users idiots for all the usual reasons. Rarely seems to go the other way, interestingly.


I think it’s due to being able to destroy the performance of a Mac for less money....If someone is in the Market for a new system then it’s best to get views from both sides...


----------



## mscp

Ry.Ja3 said:


> I have a 5950x and an M1 Mac Mini. I haven't touched the M1 since I started using the 5950x. In all fairness, I picked up the M1 so I could program/support some Mac + IOS apps.
> 
> My eventual goals was to leave windows. I've rethought that strategy, and will stick with Windows even though Apple now controls 100% of their Hardware and Software stack (that's impressive).
> 
> My use case is 3D, Graphics, DAW, Programming, and some gaming. For now, the Windows PC gives me a lot more options and horse power. I threw 32Gigs of Ram in it for about $180. I can expand it to up to 128Gigs if I want. I don't have that flexibility with the M1. When NVidia Rtx's are back in stock (I'm still using a legacy Nvidia 970), I can upgrade the card. I can't do that with the M1.


The M1 is not supposed to be as powerful as the 5950x. The M1 felt like an i9 8th generation to me when I had it.


----------



## mscp

rnb_2 said:


> VI-C is usually (admirably) free of platform-war nonsense. Every now and then, though, a thread comes along that's like a honeytrap for those who just can't resist calling Mac users idiots for all the usual reasons. Rarely seems to go the other way, interestingly.


Still on it? Jeez...if you're assuming I called you an idiot..you're wrong..because that would have implied calling myself an idiot since I own a 16-core Mac Pro - silly. I was just trying to help the OP make the best choice until you started to defend Macs at all costs, completely ignoring the OP's real question.


----------



## mscp

easyrider said:


> I think it’s due to being able to destroy the performance of a Mac for less money....If someone is in the Market for a new system then it’s best to get views from both sides...


Exactly. The OP was trying to find the best option for himself...as soon as I said it would be best to go for his PC option based on my experience with two similar spec'ed machines...guess what happened? . Something eh?


----------



## InLight-Tone

The difference is in the OS. The hardware can be argued about all day long, boring. The new Apple Silicon is where the action is...


----------



## mscp

VICers, TOOLS DON'T matter in *MANY* ways these days. If you have previously worked in a studio/suite/dub stage/broadcasting station/..., you will see that some people use PCs, some Macs, and some like me, both - for a *MYRIAD* of reasons. A-listers have their own reasons for using one or the other - none of which is the ONLY solution. What I fail to understand is, why does the OP *CONTINUE* to be ignored?

The OP was asking which platform is more cost-efficient for him. In his case, his choice of PC hands down. I happen to have both. My PC draws more performance (whether it's because of Windows or not. I DON'T KNOW) than my Mac Pro does. I don't use Logic as my main DAW, so like him, I don't care. None of my machines perform terribly. The PC does have an advantage though.

He did NOT, at any point, ask what we like to use. No need for 10+ pages worth of preference back-and-forthism.

And no... Windows is not worse than Mac OS in terms of stability. If the user has more issues with Windows while others don't...that can only mean one thing.


----------



## InLight-Tone

That being said if you're spending 8+ hours of your day somewhere it's nice to be surrounded by nice aesthetics. A Pinto and a Lamborghini can cover miles the same but the experience is entirely different...


----------



## Shad0wLandsUK

Crossroads said:


> Oh, and by the way, from what I've seen, Windows is slowly becoming prettier. It just takes some time because, well, they have to ensure things actually stay working.




Best comment ever...
No truer word spoken!


----------



## storyteller

FWIW, I don't think @Phil81 has been advising strongly for one side or the other. I've appreciated reading his thoughts. And, of course, I've appreaciated reading @rnb_2's and everyone else's thoughts as well. No one has really mentioned this, but here is one variable that is surprisingly sucky... if you plan on doing any video editing on the same rig, the 5700XT which used to be about a $380 card is now $1500-$2000 (for pc). The 6900XT is crazy expensive... meaning a Mac is really the only option for that right now due to supply and demand. Basically this means that any "all-in-one" solution isn't happening in the current climate. An iMac with a 5700XT (and it has the T2 chip for faster decoding) is about the same price as a 5700XT PC video Card + an adequate display solution. And the iMac has twice the video ram. Crazy, right?!

I did price out PC rigs just to feel solid about my decision. I almost decided to go with a hybrid approach...

Here are the options I arrived at:


2 x iMac i9 with 5700xt, 2TB hd (boot, plus extra stuff), 128gb ram. 4x2TB Samsung 870s in TB3 enclosures (1 per mac). I'd double up the VEPro iMac as a Video Slave player as well. This clocks in just under $10k (I already have half of the SSDs). I could potentially strip one iMac down and save about $1k. so $9-10k depending. Overall, 20cores, 256gb ram.


1 x iMac i9 with 5700xt, 2TB hd, 128gb ram. 4x2TB SSDs + 1 16core Threadripper Pro with 384gb ram, 2TB M2 (boot, etc) with 4x2TB Samsung 870s internal. Use another iMac 5k I have as a video slave and remote desktop into the PC for VEPro stuff. The PC is around $5500 + $1k for the HDs... so $6500. The iMac is about $4200. Add some 10g networking gear and the least expensive high end audio device (for the driver) and you wind up around $12k. Overall, 26cores, 512gb ram.


1 x Mac Pro 16 core, 2TB, 384gb ram, 5700XT + use existing SSDs... this comes in just under $12k, but I would need a display solution.... so add another $1500+ to do it right. $14k otd. Overall, 16cores, 384gb ram.


1 x BASE mac pro with 256gb of ram (for now) + SSD solution and iMac i9 with 5700xt, 128gb of ram. Use another iMac I have for video slave, remote into Mac Pro for VEPro setup. This comes in at just under $13k and would be ONLY a base mac pro... Overall, 18 cores, 512gb ram.
The hybrid approach (#2) is definitely the most powerful and expandable. It is still bouncing around in the back of my head. But Threadrippers have gotten a bad rap for audio work. So I could look at the intel route, but be limited to 256gb of ram with the i9 XE chips, or I'm over Mac Pro prices with Xeon chips. The 2 iMac approach is the most elegant approach. I could theoretically add a 3rd to the closet for 384gb of ram + 10 more cores and still be in the price range of the other options. Plus it is failsafe... if something happened to one, I could keep marching forward with the other, though be limited to bouncing tracks, etc. In any other scenario, if one goes down, the workflow halts. The multi-iMac approach seems like the best approach when measuring cost vs. performance (plus redundancy for professionalism). They've been ordered, but they won't arrive until mid June, so I can still change my mind if something comes up on June 7th or I choose a different path.

I mean, in theory, $5-7k above the base prices above isn't a lot more money to spend on a Mac Pro setup or whatever other option I could pick. I just don't like the idea of a 50% more expensive solution for a marginal increase in performance. That would be going beyond the knee in the price/performance curve.

*EDIT:*_ If someone is reading this for a bare-bones purchase, add another $1500 for most of these options since I already have 4x2TB TB3 plus another 4xTB3 enclosure for SSDs. I'm just upgrading the disk capacities in that one._


----------



## storyteller

My real question is if 256gb is enough...


----------



## mscp

storyteller said:


> My real question is if 256gb is enough...


Not sure how much ram the OP needs.


----------



## storyteller

Phil81 said:


> Not sure how much ram the OP needs.


Agreed. I think at the end of the day, it really boils down to ram. For me, that was (and still is) the real question. But you have to have to think about cores for the voice counts as well. It does no good to have 512gb of ram in an 8 core machine since the cores would likely max out on voice count. 16 cores seems like the sweet spot. But VEPro relies on the core clock as well... so 16 cores at 3.2 ghz (4.4boost) isn't exactly stellar either for mixdown performance in a DAW. Perhaps great for arranging and VEPro, but DAWs are clock speed based for mixing. 28+ cores at 2.7ghz? That is cripplingly slow for single clock performance.

The iMac scales the best here theoretically. A mac mini SHOULD... but I think it is intentionally handicapped. Ideally, an 8 core mac mini would be able to have 128gb of ram in a cost effective solution... say $2k-$3k. Then you just stack those up with VEPro. Also, ideally, the i9 chipset would accept 256gb of ram in the iMac... 2 iMacs would be the PERFECT solution. 2 displays. 1 serving as VEPro and Video Slave. The other serving as DAW + additional VEPro. You get higher clock speeds and the cores are evenly divided across two systems. 512gb of ram would cover every professional I know. The "Apple Tax" is what scares me about this solution in future ARM chipset versions... Nobody in their right mind will want to pay $2600 to upgrade the soldered-only ram to 128gb. What does that mean, $6000 for 256gb? $12k for 512gb of ram before you factor in the cost of 2 new iMacs themselves? Ugh. A hypothetical scenario... but not unlikely.

For me, I am thinking 256gb of ram *should* cover my full VEPro template with all orchestral/choir articulations pre-loaded. Then again, I have been running a disabled template since that became possible a long time ago... so I may discover 256gb is very short sided. If that is the case, I'll either re-evaluate and just pony up for a bigger MacPro VEPro server, or add that third iMac to the studio... either way, it will be about a $5k swing for whatever the next step up is...


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

storyteller said:


> Then again, I have been running a disabled template since that became possible a long time ago


Just out of curiosity, why do you still need over 128GB Ram and VEPro if you've gone this route? I recently ditched VEPro and slave (in favour of dynamic rack loading) after discovering how powerful my new iMac is. Even with a lot of tracks loaded, it doesn't flinch, and I have yet to come close to using 128GB.


----------



## storyteller

Jeremy Spencer said:


> Just out of curiosity, why do you still need over 128GB Ram and VEPro if you've gone this route? I recently ditched VEPro and slave (in favour of dynamic rack loading) after discovering how powerful my new iMac is. Even with a lot of tracks loaded, it doesn't flinch, and I have yet to come close to using 128GB.


I’ve enjoyed my disabled setup. That is for sure. I will likely have a hybrid approach even with the larger amount of ram. I do want all of the VIs I use repeatedly to be preloaded, active, and at my beckon call for each project. I also don’t want to be limited on voice counts without having to freeze tracks as I go. That will definitely increase my productivity and is priority #1 for me. This means having a full orchestra with all articulations loaded will require VEPro... and offloading the processing to its own server will double my voice count potential.

I’ve honestly avoided vepro over the years, but the voice count has become a big issue for me as my productions have become larger. More mics, more voices streaming. But it depends on the instruments. Most ensemble patches in Evolution Series World Percussion will consume 1500+ voices on a flam or roll and kill many CPUs. String libraries are the same way. Stack a full arrangement of instruments and it is almost impossible to get by without freezing due to voice count issues. Not a dealbreaker, but I would like to remove that requirement to “get through” an arrangement. So it requires more cores.. but that reduces the core speed... which impacts mixing. So that means offloading to another computer... which means VEPro is the only viable path. It is a vicious circle.😜 So if I want everything loaded in VEPro, then I need ram. I *can* disable tracks in VEPro, which may be the saving grace in this scenario. For example, having 3 string libraries fully loaded in VEPro would just eat ram and resources unnecessarily. Having only the one I’m using enabled will free up ram... But maybe I will have enough ram overall with this setup. It is a bit of trial and error too I suppose. Expanding out is a requirement, but trying to make sure I do it cost efficiently.

I am about to release OTR v2 as well which makes heavy use of Reaticulate and a custom GUI. Which means having all ariculations loaded in a single track is the approach I want to take with this overhaul. I’ve been a track-per-articulation guy over the years. But after a lot of experimentation, I have embraced articulation management with Reaticulate since, with Flexrouter, I can get up to 128 arts per track now. But disabling/freezing/enabling a string track with 100 articulations in a single Kontakt instance is a ram hog and takes precious time to load. Multiply that times 5 for each string section... then it begins to make sense on having these preloaded in the background with VEPro and not wanting to freeze/unfreeze for voice count issues.

Also having two iMacs to distribute core loads should let me run heavy synths on my DAW while orchestral stuff will be spread out across both servers. I will probably have VEPro running on each to increase voice counts for the orchestration. But I will use disabled tracks (track templates) for my non-typical tracks and for tracks that I would layer with multiple lanes. For example having EW Voices of The Empire doesn’t make sense for me to load in VEPro. I’ll stack the heck out of it with 12 tracks to get heavy layers of singers. I can’t build a VEPro instance to accommodate that. I’ll have to make use of track templates and the disabled track concept for that. But since it will be loaded within my DAW, I need to have enough ram open on the DAW and processing power for voice counts for all of these types of scenarios.

BTW... you‘ve got a great setup. I’ve kept up with your posts here. we seem to have very similar mindsets.


----------



## storyteller

Jeremy Spencer said:


> Just out of curiosity, why do you still need over 128GB Ram and VEPro if you've gone this route? I recently ditched VEPro and slave (in favour of dynamic rack loading) after discovering how powerful my new iMac is. Even with a lot of tracks loaded, it doesn't flinch, and I have yet to come close to using 128GB.


OH! Forgot to mention that I plan on building out a live streaming presence for audio as well. Having instruments offloaded in VEPro on another server is pretty much a requirement for OBS to function, the daw to function, and playback to happen without crackles and pops.


----------



## rnb_2

Phil81 said:


> Still on it? Jeez...if you're assuming I called you an idiot..you're wrong..because that would have implied calling myself an idiot since I own a 16-core Mac Pro - silly. I was just trying to help the OP make the best choice until you started to defend Macs at all costs, completely ignoring the OP's real question.


This wasn't directed at you - there were others that followed you that went further (but you do tend to throw "fanboy" around, which certainly isn't a compliment), and I didn't think anybody was calling me an idiot, as I'm not the one pondering a purchase. @storyteller, who resurrected this thread to ask the OP what he ended up doing, was in a couple different Mac-related threads recently, and in the other thread, he said:

"PC maybe? Nope. Aside from the user experience giving me the heebie-jeebies every time I use a Windows PC, anything 256gb+ requires an Intel Xeon anyway.. or fighting with the Ryzen incompatibilities and being limited to 256gb. We are right back at Mac Pro prices and impossible to find components. So back to the Mac Pro or multi-iMac situation...

You see how this vicious cycle is going. I do video editing too, so that requires a great graphics card. They are impossible to find on the PC side, so that is another strike on that side. Back to Mac Pro I guess?"

@storyteller was not asking about cost/benefit of Mac/Windows - that was the OP, in February. @storyteller is trying to decide which Mac(s) to buy now (or very soon). So, when you stuck to Mac vs Windows, I didn't understand why, but I'm guessing you hadn't connected @storyteller's other recent posts in other threads to what was asked here.

You obviously have a lot of recent good experience with Windows and don't consider yourself a "fan" either way, but you were strongly advising someone against a Mac Pro and for a PC when they'd already made it clear elsewhere that Windows wasn't an option. I reacted to that, we locked horns, other people jumped in and escalated. In retrospect, I should have referenced @storyteller's other post earlier - in the heat of the moment, I didn't, and I apologize for my contribution to things getting more heated than they should have.

In the end, it appears that @storyteller strongly considered going Mac+Windows, so your input was valuable on that end.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

storyteller said:


> I’ve enjoyed my disabled setup. That is for sure. I will likely have a hybrid approach even with the larger amount of ram. I do want all of the VIs I use repeatedly to be preloaded, active, and at my beckon call for each project. I also don’t want to be limited on voice counts without having to freeze tracks as I go. That will definitely increase my productivity and is priority #1 for me. This means having a full orchestra with all articulations loaded will require VEPro... and offloading the processing to its own server will double my voice count potential.
> 
> I’ve honestly avoided vepro over the years, but the voice count has become a big issue for me as my productions have become larger. More mics, more voices streaming. But it depends on the instruments. Most ensemble patches in Evolution Series World Percussion will consume 1500+ voices on a flam or roll and kill many CPUs. String libraries are the same way. Stack a full arrangement of instruments and it is almost impossible to get by without freezing due to voice count issues. Not a dealbreaker, but I would like to remove that requirement to “get through” an arrangement. So it requires more cores.. but that reduces the core speed... which impacts mixing. So that means offloading to another computer... which means VEPro is the only viable path. It is a vicious circle.😜 So if I want everything loaded in VEPro, then I need ram. I *can* disable tracks in VEPro, which may be the saving grace in this scenario. For example, having 3 string libraries fully loaded in VEPro would just eat ram and resources unnecessarily. Having only the one I’m using enabled will free up ram... But maybe I will have enough ram overall with this setup. It is a bit of trial and error too I suppose. Expanding out is a requirement, but trying to make sure I do it cost efficiently.
> 
> I am about to release OTR v2 as well which makes heavy use of Reaticulate and a custom GUI. Which means having all ariculations loaded in a single track is the approach I want to take with this overhaul. I’ve been a track-per-articulation guy over the years. But after a lot of experimentation, I have embraced articulation management with Reaticulate since, with Flexrouter, I can get up to 128 arts per track now. But disabling/freezing/enabling a string track with 100 articulations in a single Kontakt instance is a ram hog and takes precious time to load. Multiply that times 5 for each string section... then it begins to make sense on having these preloaded in the background with VEPro and not wanting to freeze/unfreeze for voice count issues.
> 
> Also having two iMacs to distribute core loads should let me run heavy synths on my DAW while orchestral stuff will be spread out across both servers. I will probably have VEPro running on each to increase voice counts for the orchestration. But I will use disabled tracks (track templates) for my non-typical tracks and for tracks that I would layer with multiple lanes. For example having EW Voices of The Empire doesn’t make sense for me to load in VEPro. I’ll stack the heck out of it with 12 tracks to get heavy layers of singers. I can’t build a VEPro instance to accommodate that. I’ll have to make use of track templates and the disabled track concept for that. But since it will be loaded within my DAW, I need to have enough ram open on the DAW and processing power for voice counts for all of these types of scenarios.
> 
> BTW... you‘ve got a great setup. I’ve kept up with your posts here. we seem to have very similar mindsets.


Thanks for all those details! Always cool to hear how others have their workflow set up.


----------

