# New Mac Pro is on sale now. I have a question about what to get.



## ag75 (Dec 19, 2013)

Do I go for 4 processors or 6. Would I notice that much difference in performance? That's one of those things you can't exactly add later so do I spend the extra $500 and get 6 or just stick with the quad? I know memory is cheap(ish) so I won't be upgrading that through apple. Any other thoughts?


----------



## muziksculp (Dec 19, 2013)

ag75 @ Thu Dec 19 said:


> Do I go for 4 processors or 6. Would I notice that much difference in performance? That's one of those things you can't exactly add later so do I spend the extra $500 and get 6 or just stick with the quad? I know memory is cheap(ish) so I won't be upgrading that through apple. Any other thoughts?



PC / Windows 8.1 :lol:


----------



## ag75 (Dec 19, 2013)

Ok on your windows machine then would you do 4 core or 6? And why? Is it worth the extra money?


----------



## G.R. Baumann (Dec 19, 2013)

In the plugin times we live, I have the philosophy to get the meanest and fastest processor available. If plugin count does have a high importance to you this makes sense. Knowing that there is always a premium to be paid for the latest and meanest CPU.


----------



## tabulius (Dec 19, 2013)

Any ideas what RAM are compatible with new Mac Pro? I was thinking of buying 2X16GB ram first and maybe upgrade later with other 2X16GB.

On google searches I found only IBM and HP 1X16GB 1866Mhz DDR3 memory stics, but I'm not sure if they are compatible.


----------



## muziksculp (Dec 19, 2013)

ag75 @ Thu Dec 19 said:


> Ok on your windows machine then would you do 4 core or 6? And why? Is it worth the extra money?



Surely 6 Cores is better than 4 Cores. 

Why ? because a DAW i.e. I use (Cubase 7.5) can use all cores, offering more performance, and less strain on the system, simply put, you can use more plug-ins, libraries, virtrual instruments, effects, ...etc. with more cores.

Also remember that the new Mac Pro is locked into what you get it configured with as far as the processor goes, so getting more cores will keep you happier as you move into the future. If you can afford the 6 core, go for it. Look at it as a long time investment, unless you have plans to upgrade again in a couple of years, or less. 

Cheers,
Muziksculp


----------



## ag75 (Dec 19, 2013)

Thanks this helps. I guess my specific question was do Daws utilize the different cores. I know some programs don't. I think I will go for the 6 core. I f I need more in the future I can use a slave machine correct?


----------



## G.R. Baumann (Dec 19, 2013)

AFAIK all major DAW's support hyperthreading. So with a 12 core and 30 MB cache, you'd have 24 available to serve which is a lot. However, real tests of what can be done with a 3.5 Ghz quad vs. a 2.7 Ghz dodeka are not there yet.


----------



## Simon Ravn (Dec 19, 2013)

I wouldn't get any of them for DAW work. I know I will skip this and see if Apple decide to come up with a version without those two expensive GPUs that will have no use whatsoever for audio work, at least not for the next coming years, if ever. The 6-core is much more expensive than the 2010/2012 Mac Pro 6-core.

This machine is geared at heavy 3D/gfx work, not audio. The old 2010 or 2012 Mac Pro's will give you better performance for less money (and the ability to have storage etc internally).


----------



## ag75 (Dec 19, 2013)

Well the other issue is I'm currently on tour and working out of a hotel room. I liked the idea that this machine is so tiny yet so powerful. I am having a road case build for it and a monitor as well. Should work nicely. Honestly this will be such a HUGE upgrade from my 2010 macbook pro that I'm not sure if I will utilize all of it. I guess I should start listening to Mock ups and see what hardware they used to create it.


----------



## spikescott (Dec 19, 2013)

Simon Ravn @ 19/12/2013 said:


> I wouldn't get any of them for DAW work. I know I will skip this and see if Apple decide to come up with a version without those two expensive GPUs that will have no use whatsoever for audio work, at least not for the next coming years, if ever. The 6-core is much more expensive than the 2010/2012 Mac Pro 6-core.
> 
> This machine is geared at heavy 3D/gfx work, not audio. The old 2010 or 2012 Mac Pro's will give you better performance for less money (and the ability to have storage etc internally).



I'm with Simon here. I've had Macs for years & find them super stable, but I'm strongly condsidering a proper hackintosh build from my tech man rather than teh new Mac Pro's.


----------



## IFM (Dec 19, 2013)

Simon Ravn @ Thu Dec 19 said:


> I wouldn't get any of them for DAW work. I know I will skip this and see if Apple decide to come up with a version without those two expensive GPUs that will have no use whatsoever for audio work, at least not for the next coming years, if ever. The 6-core is much more expensive than the 2010/2012 Mac Pro 6-core.
> 
> This machine is geared at heavy 3D/gfx work, not audio. The old 2010 or 2012 Mac Pro's will give you better performance for less money (and the ability to have storage etc internally).



Indeed. This machine looks great but you they really should have options to not have these cards, or maybe just one for a dual monitor setup. 
-------------
Good job a g75 for not taking the Windows fanboy bait.


----------



## synapse21 (Dec 19, 2013)

If you're running a Native DAW, get the 6 cores.


----------



## gsilbers (Dec 19, 2013)

i know for past models of mac pro the 8 core was about the same price in composrison to a windows clone but a 4 core was way too expensive. also 6 cores will let you run more apps at the same time. apps like vi synths, daw, internet, ftp and background processes so less cpu spikes.


----------



## Wunderhorn (Dec 19, 2013)

tabulius @ Thu Dec 19 said:


> Any ideas what RAM are compatible with new Mac Pro? I was thinking of buying 2X16GB ram first and maybe upgrade later with other 2X16GB.
> 
> On google searches I found only IBM and HP 1X16GB 1866Mhz DDR3 memory stics, but I'm not sure if they are compatible.



As far as I know OWC and Crucial offer RAM for the new Mac Pro.

However, what I heard from Crucial is that you have to put the same size RAM modules into each slot! That means no more 2x 2GB and 2x8GB at the same time. Basically, if you want to upgrade down the road, you have to throw out all the ones that were in there if you want to add bigger modules.

This plus the fact tat there are only 4 slots total really cuts down on the flexibility in which you can perform upgrades. You better decide for a configuration now that will serve you well enough for a while...


----------



## synergy543 (Dec 19, 2013)

An interesting read on turbo boost and cores:
http://www.marco.org/2013/11/26/new-mac-pro-cpus


----------



## rgames (Dec 19, 2013)

muziksculp @ Thu Dec 19 said:


> Surely 6 Cores is better than 4 Cores.


If all else is equal, that's true. However, in upgrading to a new system, all is not equal because you're not just swapping out the CPU - there are many other new components in the new system. For almost all DAW applications, what you really care about is the real-time performance of the system, not the number of cores. You need to look not only at the processor but also everything else that is new. There are lots of potential gotchas there.

Real-time performance has more to do with chipset drivers, video drivers, audio drivers, and network drivers. You can cripple a high-power machine with bad drivers for the real-time elements of the system.

I just upgraded from a four-core i7 920 to a six-core i7 4930k and the 4930k performs slightly worse than the i7 920 in terms of running my orchestral template. It does, however, encode video a heck of a lot faster because that's a CPU-intensive process. Most DAW processes, though, are not very CPU-intensive, so throwing a lot of money at a high-dollar CPU won't buy you much from a DAW standpoint.

The new system has a *lot* more CPU power - definitely. However, it performs worse as a DAW because the other new elements of the system are not as good from a real-time performance standpoint. Hopefully they will be at some point as driver updates are released.

I'll throw in the caveat that my comments are from a PC standpoint, so maybe there's nuance in the Mac world that would draw a different conclusion. However, the hardware is the same, so the same basic considerations apply.

rgames


----------



## colony nofi (Dec 22, 2013)

Some good new about the new mac pro's - 128GB of RAM is definitely in the works. OWC are confident of having kits enough that they have publicly announced it on their blog.
So 32GB 240pin ECC sticks are coming... 
To me, this on a 6 or 8 core mac pro with a few 1TB SSD's in a Pegasus J4 via thunderbolt will make a very powerful machine - and could well make my slaves redundant. Less to carry around when on the road. Anyone want to buy some mac mini slaves???


----------



## Ah_dziz (Dec 22, 2013)

rgames @ Thu Dec 19 said:


> muziksculp @ Thu Dec 19 said:
> 
> 
> > Surely 6 Cores is better than 4 Cores.
> ...



My new 6 core i7 build stomps the crap out of my old 920 system. And I had to downgrade temporarily to a crappy usb interface since my new system only has emulated PCI support. If your DAW performance has dropped you might try disabling some unused motherboard stuff or possibly try some different audio interfaces.


----------



## playz123 (Dec 23, 2013)

The new Mac Pro may be "on sale" somewhere, but Apple Canada is showing "February" as the date when they will be available here. Not sure what that is all about...they are either on sale or they are not, and a couple of months is not "now". Is someone in the US or elsewhere actually able to purchase and obtain one now??


----------



## charlieclouser (Dec 23, 2013)

When the Apple Store first went live with an active "order" button for the new Mac Pro the delivery date was "two weeks" or so for stock configurations. Within a few hours the delivery time said "January". By the next day the delivery time had slipped to "February", even for stock configurations. 

The plant in Austin can only crank out so many per shift, and there was a lot of pent-up demand - so that's why the delivery times have slipped so drastically.


----------



## colony nofi (Dec 23, 2013)

Apple Business custormers were getting calls a week or so before the actual release to put orders in - and there are a number who have already received their machines. I'd say this area of customers is probably getting priority for the short term at least. I know of at least one facility in sydney who are slated to get theirs on the 30th Dec.
B.


----------



## cc64 (Dec 23, 2013)

Hi ag75,

this is not a simple question. I have a MacPro 12 core 2.66 Ghz 2010 model at my studio and an iMac i7 3.4 Ghz at home. Some projects that work fine on the imac give me CPU spikes on the MacPro. 

Eric Persing did mention that for running cpu intensive plugs like Omnisphere and probably Zebra, you're better off with less cores and faster clock cycles.

I ended up straightening things up in the Mac Pro by tweaking the threads per instance in VEPRO though. 

In the end i believe that the 12 core is more robust and future-proof but that's just an un-educated guess...

HTH

Claude


----------



## playz123 (Dec 23, 2013)

colony nofi @ Mon Dec 23 said:


> Apple Business custormers were getting calls a week or so before the actual release to put orders in - and there are a number who have already received their machines. I'd say this area of customers is probably getting priority for the short term at least. I know of at least one facility in sydney who are slated to get theirs on the 30th Dec.
> B.



I went to the Apple dealers a week before the release. They had no pricing information, no ordering information and nothing from Apple about availability etc....even if I had decided to order one, which I couldn't do. So it appears to me as if priority has been assigned somewhere. One might of thought, as per iPhones etc., they would ensure they had sufficient stock to meet any demand BEFORE they released the product. There was no way to order via Apple Canada until the release, and then the February notice appeared. So something isn't quite right there. Anyway, gives me more time to decide whether I even want one or not.  The cost associated with them is not insignificant when compared to other computers.


----------



## Justin Miller (Dec 23, 2013)

ag75, before you purchase a new Mac Pro, consider looking at what Edit Builder on Ebay has to offer. They refurbish Mac Pros and outfit them in the best of the best components. There are many 3.46 gHz 12 core machines that will blow any of the new mac pros away, including 128 gb ram, 12tb storage, 250-1000gb ssd, 2-4 gb graphics card.


----------



## ag75 (Dec 25, 2013)

Thanks for the info Justin! I will indeed go check out the ebay page!


----------



## Justin Miller (Dec 25, 2013)

no prob


----------



## Vision (Dec 26, 2013)

Justin Miller @ Mon Dec 23 said:


> ag75, before you purchase a new Mac Pro, consider looking at what Edit Builder on Ebay has to offer. They refurbish Mac Pros and outfit them in the best of the best components. There are many 3.46 gHz 12 core machines that will blow any of the new mac pros away, including 128 gb ram, 12tb storage, 250-1000gb ssd, 2-4 gb graphics card.




This is interesting though.. 

http://www.barefeats.com/tube01.html

Seems that the new Mac Pro is actually faster than the fastest classic Mac Pro, at lower clock speeds.

I too am trying to decide what my next move will be. I still think it's worth waiting to see what these new mac pros can do with (Logic X specifically), since logic will probably be the most efficiently tuned method for doing audio on this machine. Honestly, you can't lose with getting a classic Mac Pro in this case. But the new one may be that much more future proof. We'll see. Also, assume that ram configurations will increase with the newer Mac Pro as well.


----------



## Justin Miller (Dec 26, 2013)

Yeah, I actually just bought an Edit Builder instead of the new Mac Pro even after reading the chart Barefoots posted. Strangely, I couldn't find their "Geekbench rating" that they posted anywhere on Geekbench. Let me show you a few things I found when doing some research over which to go with:

Here are recent Geekbench ratings of the dual X5680 (3.33 GHZ version of Edit Builder cpu)
http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbenc ... xeon+x5680

Here are recent Geekbench ratings of the E5-2697 v2 (new Mac Pro 12 core) --Click uploaded and sort by most recent, you will see a few Mac Pros with 12 core.
http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbenc ... created_at

The specs are nearly identical, and usually the Edit Builder comes out on top (except in the custom version of OS X where one Mac Pro 2013 got a score of 33k)

The Edit builder comes with 3k of 550mb/s (12gb total raid) awesome for sample storage

The new Mac Pro comes with 6-12 GB of video ram instead of 2-4 with the Edit Builder. If you need that extra video ram for games or Final Cut then you should go with the 2013 Mac Pro, but the Edit Builders have been used in professional post production suites for Smoke and DaVinci resolve so they aren't exactly weak in the graphics area.

Lastly, the Edit Builder with 3.33 GHZ, 32 gb ram, 12tb raid, 500gb ssd, and 2gb graphics is 5k instead of 8k for a similar setup with the 2013 Mac Pro that doesn't come with the 12 tb raid.


----------



## passenger57 (Dec 26, 2013)

Can anyone recommend a good 6 core - 64GB RAM Windows PC that can be customized and purchased complete online? I was thinking of getting one at maingear
thanks


----------



## Whatisvalis (Dec 26, 2013)

G.R. Baumann @ Thu Dec 19 said:


> AFAIK all major DAW's support hyperthreading. So with a 12 core and 30 MB cache, you'd have 24 available to serve which is a lot. However, real tests of what can be done with a 3.5 Ghz quad vs. a 2.7 Ghz dodeka are not there yet.



Not sure about this. Pretty sure Cubase doesn't offically support hyperthreading, on the Steinberg knowledge base they recommend turning it off.


----------



## Vision (Dec 26, 2013)

Justin Miller @ Thu Dec 26 said:


> Yeah, I actually just bought an Edit Builder instead of the new Mac Pro even after reading the chart Barefoots posted. Strangely, I couldn't find their "Geekbench rating" that they posted anywhere on Geekbench. Let me show you a few things I found when doing some research over which to go with:
> 
> Here are recent Geekbench ratings of the dual X5680 (3.33 GHZ version of Edit Builder cpu)
> http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbenc ... xeon+x5680
> ...



Ok.. Interesting. Justin did you opt for the 3.33 or the 3.46? What did you upgrade from, and how is the real world usage.. i.e. Plug in Track count, streaming (I know has more to do with the raid SSD) what buffer settings you are running.. Etc. 

But still. One other thing is that the new mac pros will be faster.. And I mean screaming, when it comes to configuring an external a raid, and connecting it through thunderbolt 2. But honestly.. My thing is when is fast, fast enough, and at what cost. I'll pm you soon. Would like gather some info from you. Thanks.


----------



## Justin Miller (Dec 26, 2013)

I'm upgrading from a 2.26 2 x 4 core Nehalem (2009 Mac Pro) with 32 gb ram. This will become a slave machine in my setup. This computer is very good, I just want a computer that I will be able to run at a lower buffer than 512 when I'm running a huge template. Also I need a better graphics card so things run a bit smoother visually since I'm using 3 screens now. The hard drive array will be a big step up from the 7200 rpm drives I've been using for my samples as well. So this is a giant leap forward (my old CPU had a Geekbench score of 11k while the new one is 30k). 

The new cpu I got was the dual X5680 which is 3.33 GHZ. The performance between the 3.33 and 3.46 is only around 1-1.5 more GHZ but 500 dollars more they said. 

I think the new Mac Pros may be better down the road, I've heard that Logic may take advantage of the GPU for plugins which would be awesome with the 12gb GPU. That's not for certain though, and right now the difference isn't worth 3k to me. Plus 2 Mac Pros next to each other looks a lot more neat than a tower and a can side by side.


----------



## Daryl (Dec 26, 2013)

Whatisvalis @ Thu Dec 26 said:


> G.R. Baumann @ Thu Dec 19 said:
> 
> 
> > AFAIK all major DAW's support hyperthreading. So with a 12 core and 30 MB cache, you'd have 24 available to serve which is a lot. However, real tests of what can be done with a 3.5 Ghz quad vs. a 2.7 Ghz dodeka are not there yet.
> ...


That advice is years out of date.

D


----------

