# New Mac Pro Specs/price announced



## floydian05 (Oct 22, 2013)

http://www.apple.com/mac-pro/specs/

some quick thoughts:

At that price point I do not think it is worthwhile for most music/audio pros. 

- The dual GPU knocks the price way up and we Logic users won't benefit much from that because logic only uses GPU for very small tasks. (maybe this will be updated) but doubtful because it still doesn't even run multiple cores that well so what can we expect....
- The PCIe is also super expensive, but at just 256 gigs its not enough to do more than boot the computer, so i guess your mac would turn on very quickly and logic would be quick to boot up... but its not enough to store more than a few sample libraries on. (upgrades to 512 and 1 TB will be a fortune) 
- the standard comes with only a quad core. wait and see what the benchmarks are.. 
- Thunderbolt 2 just doesn't interest me because anything related to it is so expensive, I am much more interested in the upcoming USB 3.1 which will provide plenty of speed at a much lower price. 

I don't think that it is priced that poorly for some of the things that you get, but for as much money as it is I think that most of us could get adequate performance from systems at a fraction of the cost as we wouldn't get a ton of benefit from some of the most expensive features. 

For video editors I think this machine makes a lot more sense and some of the engineering is very cool, but I won't be able to afford it. If money was no object I would probably be getting one...


----------



## stonzthro (Oct 22, 2013)

Very interesting!

I love how all the other uses ('Video editing', '3d Rendering'_) have performance stats, but not 'audio' - that's a little weird since it should be measurable within Logic... maybe it wasn't that impressive?

(to be fair there are no stats for 'science' either, but I'm not sure Apple has a foothold in the science software realm).

At any rate, I'm very interested to see the benchmarks on these little guys.


----------



## Symfoniq (Oct 22, 2013)

floydian05 @ Tue Oct 22 said:


> At that price point I do not think it is worthwhile for most music/audio pros.



As a Mac user since the late 1980s, I have to agree with you. I still own and use Apple laptops, but I built a Windows workstation (Haswell i7) for audio. It was a much better value, and it's working flawlessly so far.


----------



## dinerdog (Oct 22, 2013)

Personally, I will be ordering this the day it comes out. =o


----------



## floydian05 (Oct 22, 2013)

I know some scientists who all use PCs, though I think university research departments may use Macs. 



> I built a Windows workstation (Haswell i7) for audio. It was a much better value, and it's working flawlessly so far.



This is an increasingly appealing option, but I've gone back and used Windows a bit and I just like working in OS so much more. 

Any thoughts on slave systems? I have never set one up is that a viable option for cheaply upgrading an existing system or more trouble than its worth?


----------



## Per Lichtman (Oct 22, 2013)

@floydian05 Depends on what you are used to working with and your library licenses, etc.

In terms of solutions that work across OS X and Windows, VE Pro is popular 3rd-party solution and Cockos Reaper users have ReaMote. I don't know what the current state of System Link support is Cubase or Nuendo (been years since I looked into it), but Logic's approach is designed to OS X only.

I don't know about all the options, but at least some of them do not depend on the soundcard in the slave system and just use virtual channels, so you can decrease costs that way. But one thing to keep in mind is that any solution of this kind will result in additional latency and most require a KVM switch (or another way to access the monitor and controls on your slave system easily) to be able to make use of the slave system.

Hope that helps a bit, even if it was rather vague.


----------



## floydian05 (Oct 23, 2013)

Seems like a bit more trouble than it is probably worth, but I'd like to learn more. Do you know a site that offers a step by step program of how to go about setting up a system do you hook it up via thunderbolt or USB 3 or ehternet? I don't really know where to even start. 

I think for my next system I would consider just using a laptop which is pretty competitively priced. My main concern with this is lack of ports for extra hard drives and other hardware. 2 thunderbolt 2 ports would probably have enough speed for a few more SSDs and an interface and monitor but it would require an expensive box or monitor to split them. But the RAM limitations....

The more I think about this the more I don't really know what is a good option anymore for audio and music production on MAC.


----------



## rgames (Oct 23, 2013)

Per Lichtman @ Tue Oct 22 said:


> any solution of this kind will result in additional latency and most require a KVM switch


Neither of those statements is correct.

My latency was cut in half when I started using slaves and audio over ethernet. My setup is PC-to-PC, not Mac-to-PC but it's the same hardware, so it shouldn't be that much different.

Also, you don't need a KVM for any system - there are plenty of software solutions that have been around for more than a decade.

rgames


----------



## rgames (Oct 23, 2013)

floydian05 @ Wed Oct 23 said:


> 2 thunderbolt 2 ports would probably have enough speed for a few more SSDs and an interface


Not necessarily.

Thunderbolt has significant bandwidth but I haven't seen any indication that it can match native controllers for latency. RME does a pretty good job with basic USB for A/D/A but I don't know about SSD's. It's entirely possible that SSD's would perform significantly worse under Thunderbolt because of the controller latency.

What you care about is number of streaming voices at a given system latency. That metric is inherently tied to the controller latency.

You need to find benchmarks of number of streaming voices over Thunderbolt vs. a native SATA controller. I've been looking for them but haven't seen them.

rgames


----------



## Per Lichtman (Oct 23, 2013)

rgames @ Wed Oct 23 said:


> Per Lichtman @ Tue Oct 22 said:
> 
> 
> > any solution of this kind will result in additional latency and most require a KVM switch
> ...



I'm not trying to start an argument here.  My statement is accurate: The minimum possible latency increases as you do this because you add either soundcard or network latency. The minimum latency is based on the input and output buffers of the soundcard you are monitoring on.

If you mean that your main issue previously was that your system could not handle running large sessions but once you minimized the load on the CPU you could use your lower latencies, then your statement sort of makes sense. But you cannot decrease the minimum latency of one computer by connecting it to another - network design (and soundcard design) currently depict that as impossible given current technological implementations: network protocols add latency, hence the need to track ping, etc. and we of course don't need to discuss adding additional audio buffers to the equation in the case of solutions that use that. I won't rule out the possibility that there could be a breakthrough in the future, of course.

Not trying to be difficult - just pointing out that my original statement is accurate based on the nature of the implementation.



> Also, you don't need a KVM for any system - there are plenty of software solutions that have been around for more than a decade.
> 
> rgames



I specifically discussed ReaMote, which is one many solutions that requires that you access another screen through another method. You can use a KVM or you can use screen-sharing software - and I personally prefer KVM. The trade-offs with every screen sharing software I have used so far are not preferable to using a KVM. Here are some of the potential hassle of some screen-sharing software I have tried. 

- Increased latency and/or decreased resolution.
- Taking up bandwidth on the network (that could otherwise be dedicated to audio tracks)
- Potential compatibility issues (depending on how well your specific OS is supported)

In other words, there are alternatives - and everyone that I have tried over the years has had trade-offs that made me prefer a KVM: I consider a KVM to be required to minimize latency and potential issues. But you should definitely recommend what 3rd party software you prefer for that so that @Floydian05 can use that option if it works for them. If you have an especially good one, I'd be happy to give it another try myself. 

@Floydian05 It's worth listening to @RGames about the software solutions part. I didn't discuss them because they don't work well for me, but they could still be good for you.


----------



## jaeroe (Oct 23, 2013)

if you want to stay on mac you can always build a hackintosh. it's the same thing as building a PC.... literally. there are a million people doing this nowadays, especially in music and video. tonymacx86 has a huge database of successful builds. just look up what external hardware and software you want to use, what os version, and you'll find out what works. for those who think it is illegal, it has been litigated, and as long as the end user installs the OS him/herself, it's legal (e.g. a builder can't install Mac OS and then sell the system to someone - answer, user comes and installs the OS).

protoolsexpert.com also has some nice videos on hack builds running protools and working system configurations.

re - screen share software, since you're using VE Pro, just have remote desktop go on your other network - the one where VE Pro isn't going. it's a slave, you're not playing a video game - it just needs to be functional, not the highest resolution in the world. works fine for me and i was all too happy to get rid of the kvm.


----------



## peksi (Oct 30, 2013)

surprisingly modlest specs when it comes to cpu / ram. i would see pro workstation as being a multi cpu computer with ram scaling up to hundreds of gigs.


----------



## muziksculp (Dec 4, 2013)

Hi,

A bit of a rumor that the New Mac Pro (Cylinder) will be released on Dec. 16th !

http://www.macrumors.com/2013/12/04...o-pre-orders-claims-december-16-availability/


----------



## AC986 (Dec 5, 2013)

floydian05 @ Tue Oct 22 said:


> some quick thoughts:
> 
> At that price point I do not think it is worthwhile for most music/audio pros.
> 
> .



It definitely won't be if you can't get any audio out of it. The same issue will arise as with the iMac/thunderbolt/USB and Mavericks unless they get a fix by release date.
Check your audio interface suppliers would be my advice first. They're not really making these things for musicians/music.


----------



## Embertone (Dec 5, 2013)

Just to make sure I'm not missing something... is it possible to upgrade the RAM on these Mac Pros?


----------



## Symfoniq (Dec 5, 2013)

Embertone @ Thu Dec 05 said:


> Just to make sure I'm not missing something... is it possible to upgrade the RAM on these Mac Pros?



It is. The new Mac Pro has four RAM slots.


----------



## Per Lichtman (Dec 5, 2013)

And don't the RAM slots support 16GB modules each? That's my vague recollection of the early specs but I'm not sure if it's held true.


----------



## Symfoniq (Dec 5, 2013)

Per Lichtman @ Thu Dec 05 said:


> And don't the RAM slots support 16GB modules each? That's my vague recollection of the early specs but I'm not sure if it's held true.



Yes, the new Mac Pro will support 16 GB registered ECC DDR3 modules. Here's a Crucial 32 GB kit (16 GB x 2) for example: http://www.crucial.com/store/mpartspecs.aspx?mtbpoid=BA2FD285A5CA7304 (http://www.crucial.com/store/mpartspecs ... 85A5CA7304)


----------



## dinerdog (Dec 5, 2013)

Alright, so maybe the new MacPro is a little bit of overkill. Here are some fairly accurate price estimates I believe:

http://alex4d.com/notes/item/maxed-out- ... -pro-price

I was thinking I'd have to get a new monitor, storage, and a way to access all my old stuff etc... So now I'm wondering about a top of the line iMac. Does anyone here have a late 2013 iMac, kind of maxed out? Do you LOVe it? I remember reading about some audio issues, but don't remember if that was related to the graphics card or what it was related to.

Anyone with one, I'd love to know what you think. The good, the bad and the large monitor. : >

ps - I forgot to say I'm coming from a MacPro Early 2008 with Mavericks and 22GB of RAM.


----------



## Mike Marino (Dec 5, 2013)

Hey Stephen,

I was just emailing back and forth with Ryan Strong about this as he has a maxed out 27" iMac and really loves it. Maybe send him a PM and he can give you the specifics of his system.

- Mike


----------



## RiffWraith (Dec 5, 2013)

A 6-core 3.5 GHz processor, with 16 Gb of RAM and a 256 SSD disk for $4k? Am I reading that right?


----------



## dinerdog (Dec 5, 2013)

Thanks Mike, I was reading the a lot of the power of the new MacPro is obviously great for graphics and video editing (which I do, and so does Ryan I think), but ALex4d said something interesting and thats, that a lot of that processing even for video editing will really shine if you working with 4K videos with serious color correction etc. and that it will be great for those serious power users that can actually utilize it.

And as always, everything we've all created has been done before this machine. Perhaps it will have some trickle down in a generation or two.

Thanks for mentioning Ryan, he seems like the right person for me to ask. : >

RiffWraith - I can't tell if you think that's good or bad? HA

It seems like the hardcore video guys think it's good:

"Although many Mac users would find these prices shocking, 'pro users' are likely to be pleasantly surprised. A few weeks ago Unbox Therapy calculated that an 'Ultimate Mac Pro' would price out to around $14,000."

Link here:

http://alex4d.com/notes/item/maxed-out- ... -pro-price

My only question is if you spend the money now for something SOOOO powerful, will it last MANY years longer than what we normally expect???


----------



## ryanstrong (Dec 5, 2013)

Hey guys - saw I was mentioned here. Stephen what questions do you have specifically? I can try and answer what I can!


----------



## dinerdog (Dec 5, 2013)

Hey Ryan,

Just how much love you have for your iMac, I know you use it for EVERYTHING (music/video/photos). I can't remember what people were complaining about (audio crackling/not working with certain audio interfaces etc.). I was just wondering how you were finding it across all those fronts? Music/Video/Photography? It seems like a killer machine at a great price. Just your mains pros and cons. Thanks man. : >


----------



## ryanstrong (Dec 5, 2013)

dinerdog @ Thu Dec 05 said:


> Hey Ryan,
> 
> Just how much love you have for your iMac, I know you use it for EVERYTHING (music/video/photos). I can't remember what people were complaining about (audio crackling/not working with certain audio interfaces etc.). I was just wondering how you were finding it across all those fronts? Music/Video/Photography? It seems like a killer machine at a great price. Just your mains pros and cons. Thanks man. : >



In short, I think it's amazing. Now I'm coming from an upgrade path of previously using a older MacBook Pro Intel Core 2 Duo with 8GB of RAM so naturally this big of an upgrade is bad A/B comparison then say comparing a new iMac to the soon-to-be-launched Mac Pro, but I really do think the iMac is a great deal.

First the 27" screen on it is beautiful! So for my color correcting with my photography retouching in Adobe Photoshop and color grading in Davinci Resolve for film it's gorgeous.

In terms of performance I have yet to hit any sort of ceiling. I use Adobe Premiere for video editing and was amazed at how quick render times are!

For audio it's been perfect for me. I have a Apple installed 768 GB SSD that runs my OS and Cubase and have never experienced any issues with my Apogee Ensemble.

I have maybe 1/3 of my samples on the internal SSD and then 2/3 of them on a Thunderbolt SSD. I'm not a huge template guy but I've ran a project with a LOT of libraries loaded and haven't really hit the ceiling yet. This track (https://soundcloud.com/ryanstrong/enders-game) had a ton of articulations loaded from almost every major commercial brass, string, woodwind, and percussion library and never had any issue.

To me it really comes down to budget. Obviously spec for spec the new Mac Pro is going to be awesome. But I liked the idea of getting a really great machine along with a really great screen.

Oh did I mention this thing is almost near SILENT?


----------



## dinerdog (Dec 5, 2013)

Man, that sounds great. I think it's time to just get it and get back to work. Stop thinking about this stuff. Thanks. : >


----------



## RiffWraith (Dec 5, 2013)

dinerdog @ Fri Dec 06 said:


> RiffWraith - I can't tell if you think that's good or bad? HA



You aren't serious, are you?

I don't want to start a Mac v. PC war here, but....

You can build an equivalent PC for slightly over half that.

Intel i7 4930k 6 core, 12M Cache, 3.4 GHz (up to 3.90 GHz) - $575

ASUS P9x79 MB - $224

Corsair 650w PSU - $89

Crucial DDR3 1866 RAM - $200

256 SSD HDD $160

Lian Li ATX Mid Tower Computer Case - $179

Dual equivalent graphics cards (3GB ea, 2048 Stream Processors, 384-bit GDDR5) $600

W7 Premium 64-bit OS (OEM) $99

Total: $2126

And you guys are going to basically be buying the equivalent machine for $4k. Man, PT Barnum was right....


----------



## dinerdog (Dec 5, 2013)

I just like the Kool-Aid I guess. :wink: 

Seriously, there are some thing that bore me to tears - assembling, tweaking & fine tuning computers till they're just right for example. There are other gear head things I do enjoy - going through thousands of EXS sound to clean up my master library. Other types of fine tuning or tweaking that people would never bother with.

I was a Sequencer Plus/Voyetra guy back in the day, but wanted to kill myself when half the music magazine discussions were about which sound card or ASIO driver to use.

No disrespect, but I'd rather spend a little more and get something off the shelf the just works. I like sounds and gear as much as the next guy, but in reality the tools are not that precious to me, the simplicity and reliability are. I don't really need to or want to fine tune anything if I don't have to.


----------



## Per Lichtman (Dec 5, 2013)

I spend about half my time on Macs and half my time on PCs so I don't really have a dog in that race, but I just wanted to give my two thoughts on this (as someone who is frequently called on to fix or debug things for people on both OS X and Windows systems for my clients).

1 ) Buying a PC does not mean you have to assemble it yourself. There are several outfits like www.adkproaudio.com that spend extensive time testing compatibility and performance specifically for audio use and provide lifetime tech support and warranties - and will pre-install software for you, provided you have (or purchase) the appropriate licenses. Of course since you are having someone else put the system together for you, it will likely cost a bit more than getting the parts together and doing it yourself. I know there are other outfits like this but I'm blanking on their names at the moment.

2 ) Whether you buy a Mac, PC or a "hackintosh", there's really no reason not to setup some form of Windows (whether that means the main version or you use Boot Camp or Parallels or something else) since that means you have the option of running more programs (and if you do video work and don't mind getting your hands dirty, AVISynth and/or VirtualDub alone are worth a bit of effort to make that happen, especially with MVTools 2 being free but sometimes getting superior results to Twixtor).

3 ) If you're comparing the quality-control between Apple's hardware and the major PC vendors, it should be noted that Apple has better QC and superior and superior industrial designers (I mean it's a subjective issue but feel free to watch what some of the top industrial designer had to say about Apple in the movie Objectified for some examples of people that can support their words on that point).

4 ) It's much more difficult to get comparison data on the boutique vendors like ADK in comparison to Apple. It is possible (but I've no anecdotal proof) that their QC could meet or exceed Apple - it certainly would seem likely that exceeds standard PC vendors at the very least.

5 ) If you have legacy hardware that is not supported on the Mac Pro, the cost of expansion can rapidly add up in comparison to a more common PC setup (even a boutique one) and that's on top of the higher original purchase price.

6 ) Whatever OS you are most used to is likely to be the quickest to use for you. I've rarely found learning a new OS to be intrinsically rewarding: it's just something you do because it's need for hardware support, or a client asks you to, or your software stops supporting your current one, etc. The idea that a new OS "makes things better" comes off as wishful thinking when you've had to spend time debugging migration issues enough times. 

7 ) The Mac Pro has good specifications for video and should be a solid solution at the very least until the next generation of video cards arrive. If you didn't upgrade the video card on your last system, I wouldn't worry about the lack of ability to eventually upgrade it on this one.

8 ) The iMacs are definitely more cost-efficient than the Mac Pros at this point. The PCs are of course more cost-efficient still, and if you can find an engineer that can handle the nuts and bolts of making a hackintosh for you at a satisfactory level of stability then that could be a good solution... but I'd probably just buy a boutique PC if I were trying to save money.

9 ) Some of the boutique vendors sell both Macs and PCs. It might not hurt to e-mail some of those guys with your thoughts since they often to a lot of comparative benchmarking. Just remember to cross-check what they tell you a little bit rather than trusting that everyone will always be honest. 

10 ) Buying a Mac is not about getting the most performance for you money - they cost a lot more for the same performance. It is (in part) about having a standardized setup, in terms of the design on all levels, with good quality control that removes a lot of the variables that can cause problems. Because there are fewer Mac variants out in the wild, the tech support side of things can get simpler because the odds of somebody with "your model" running "your software" somewhere are pretty high, which is not always true of specific pre-built PC models (let alone ones you assemble yourself).

Anyway, those are some of my thoughts on it. There are pros and cons to each and neither offers a "clearly superior" option. I find you get better results if you start by picking what's most important to you and then figuring out what option/model fits that the best than by starting with a specific model and saying "is this good for me?" But to each their own.


----------



## givemenoughrope (Dec 5, 2013)

A friend of mine who has mixed some big scores (one an Oscar-winner) just had someone build a Hackintosh. He loves it. A few quirks but nothing big. No, he's not streaming samples by the GB but he's using a lot of native plug ins along with an HD rig. It cost $1700 and has the latest CPU with 32 GB RAM. It'll be my next tower provided I even bother with OS (Cubase for life). 

It just seems crazy to spend that much on hardware for an OS when you don't have to. Like buying a sports car to sit in traffic.


----------



## jcs88 (Dec 9, 2013)

Certainly a topic I'm interested in at the dawn of the new Mac Pros. they look great and I'd put up with having a TB array connected, but the video cards dragging up the price makes them very unappealing. For about £2000 I could build a monster PC and throw in a serious video card to do my gaming on at the same time. Sure is tempting!


----------



## SyMTiK (Dec 9, 2013)

im not interested in the new ones, but the good news is the old generation mac pros will go way down in price used!! :D 

2012 12 core mac pro certified refurbished with 12 gb of ram and 1 tb hard drive: $3240 on the apple store.

thats the price of the new 4 core with a 500 gb hard drive upgrade.


----------



## muziksculp (Dec 15, 2013)

Hi,

I think the new Mac Pro Cylinder will be released tomorrow (Dec. 16th) or the 17th.

It should be interesting to hear feedback from the first group of users. 

I don't think there is a mention of any special event for the release day, so most likely just a buy option at the Apple Store, and some media talk about it.

Cheers,
Muziksculp


----------



## rJames (Dec 15, 2013)

RiffWraith @ Thu Dec 05 said:


> dinerdog @ Fri Dec 06 said:
> 
> 
> > RiffWraith - I can't tell if you think that's good or bad? HA
> ...



I'm not saying this analogy is perfect but...

You can drive a VW to work or you can drive a Mercedes to work.

Maybe more equivalent... you can drive a porsche at 150mph or you can drive a ferrari at 150mph. Is the guy who drives a ferrari Barnum's sucker?

I've been told that the big differences will be in buss speed. (making my analogy on point) The new Mac Pro is supposed to be wickedly fast in that regard. Thunderbolt2 and the way its wired.

But maybe it just comes down to choice. I think we need to wait till they arrive before saying they are no better than a suped up PC.


----------



## muziksculp (Dec 18, 2013)

Well.. Finally ! Apple will be releasing the new Mac Pro Cylinder tomorrow Dec. 19th

Who is buying ? :lol:


----------



## rJames (Dec 18, 2013)

I was really thinking about it. Have been planning it ever since it was announced.

Price is just too high. Its a leap in the way of thinking and I like that. External drives that are as fast as internal.

But its first gen. Its not that much of a pure CPU-speed upgrade. Add extras like internal PCIe memory, RAM, external SSDs. Seems like the base model for someone like me will be upwards of $7K.

iMac maxxed out (including 27" screen) should be $4K.

Plus, the Mac Pro may have the same audio issues as the iMac has with Mavericks. I'm going to have to wait on deciding between an iMac and the Mac Pro.

I've got a Mac guy that should be able to sort this all out for me after he's had some time with the new Mac Pro (I hope).

Looking forward to one in a year or two.


----------



## dinerdog (Dec 18, 2013)

Agree with rJames. Been thinking about it since it was announced.

I'm curious to see some real world tests. Unfortunately it will probably be video guys before music guys. The price does seem like a bit much at first. And many people will want to see how the base model Mac Pro compares with the top of the line iMac. Almost the same price (minus keypad, monitor and mouse). My thoughts on why it might be worth it are basically if it's really that much more powerful, will I have it that much longer. I've done okay on mu Mac Pro, early 2008 (almost 6 years). Just wondering how long a new Mac Pro will last. Could be way more that 6 before it feels underpowered. So that's what I'm weighing. Plus, there's always the 2nd generation and all of it's improvements.

To be honest though, if there were no audio problems with the newest iMacs, I'd probably get one of those and a bunch of new libraries. We'll see.


----------



## mac4d (Dec 18, 2013)

I think it will be cool to have one of these one day, but since I'm usually a late adopter when it comes to hardware, especially computers, I'll enjoy 6 months to a year of reading the reports that come from the early adopters!


----------



## muziksculp (Dec 18, 2013)

Hi,

It's time I get a new PC-DAW, I plan to do so early next year (Which is not too far out now). My 7 year old PC running Cubase 7.5 with HDs has served me well, but it's time I get into the SSDs, more RAM, and more Cores. 

As far as the new Mac Pro, well.. I will wait a while and see what users are commenting about their experience with it. Even if I do get one, it will most likely be used more for video, Animation, Graphic-Design, rather than for Music-Production. Since I'm also interested in the area of visual arts. Which nicely complements Music. 

I also feel that Apple has put extra attention, and boosted the new Mac Pro specifically for the visual arts (video, animation, CAD, ...etc. ) producers. imho, the new Mac Pro is a bit of an overkill if one is only interested in music production, especially given you will be paying for the dual GPU system it offers, but most music apps. don't benefit from them. 

Cheers,
Muziksculp


----------

