Holy Mac Configuration Batman!

[JoelD 0]

With this sort of horsepower, I'd consider switching back to mac....

 

http://www.apple.com/macpro

 

Anyone have a mop to clean my drool up with?

 

Now, how do I convice the wife that I need 4, 30-inch monitors?

[TheRealDrew 0]

With this sort of horsepower, I'd consider switching back to mac....

 

http://www.apple.com/macpro

 

Anyone have a mop to clean my drool up with?

 

Now, how do I convice the wife that I need 4, 30-inch monitors?

 

 

Well telll her that they are really only 4 23" Moniors and hope she does not break out a ruler

 

When I am done with my mop I will pass it on, with NAB next week and rumors of Final Cut Update, I am a happy, yet soon to be broke, camper

[ChrisJ 0]

DONT KNOW THE GUY but here is one on ebay, I am watching to see how much this combo goes for used:

 

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewI...atchlink:top:us

[TheRealDrew 0]

DONT KNOW THE GUY but here is one on ebay, I am watching to see how much this combo goes for used:

 

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewI...atchlink:top:us

 

 

Probably too much, amazing how often on eBay things are sold at prices higher than buying brand new machine right now, without RAM upgrades the machine and monitor is $3098 straight from Apple and you can get a Gig or RAM for $160, and since Apple offers free shipping (as oppossed to $190) guess it depends on how the tax works out but even a bit higher still worth buying from Apple - of course the seller is also engaging in infringement on the software side of things, but that is another story

[davehicks 99]

With this sort of horsepower, I'd consider switching back to mac....

 

http://www.apple.com/macpro

 

Anyone have a mop to clean my drool up with?

 

Now, how do I convice the wife that I need 4, 30-inch monitors?

A couple of things to consider:

 

1) Apple is using standard Intel / PC hardware. You'll be able to by this from anyone but apple for a lot less.

2) Today 8 CPU systems have very utility outside of massive SQL or Web hosting scenarios or maybe some high end engineering applications. The incremental benefit beyond a 2 or 4 CPU system is going to be pretty minimal for almost any concievable desktop applications.

 

The 4 Monitors could be pretty cool, but you can do that on any system at all if you can afford two cheap video cards and the screens.

[TheRealDrew 0]

A couple of things to consider:

 

2) Today 8 CPU systems have very utility outside of massive SQL or Web hosting scenarios or maybe some high end engineering applications.

 

And video editing and encoding and running one app while one or more others do their thing - Mac users are used to running many things at the same time because they can And the Mac boxes run Window and Linux and there is some very cool Mac software. And perhaps the new Final Cut can use 8 Processors

[Drew 0]

A couple of things to consider:

 

1) Apple is using standard Intel / PC hardware. You'll be able to by this from anyone but apple for a lot less.

2) Today 8 CPU systems have very utility outside of massive SQL or Web hosting scenarios or maybe some high end engineering applications. The incremental benefit beyond a 2 or 4 CPU system is going to be pretty minimal for almost any concievable desktop applications.

 

The 4 Monitors could be pretty cool, but you can do that on any system at all if you can afford two cheap video cards and the screens.

 

Ah Dave, when it comes to Apple, it's not about just the hardware but the OS. OSX is simply more intuitive for those who are used to Mac. I have both OSX and XP on my computer now, and really it's the best of both worlds, esp when travelling.

 

However, just to put a damper on Macophiles, consider this little ranking:

 

Greenpeace ranks Apple least eco friendly computer maker

Apple counters with its EPA award but if you look at the criteria, and how SO many computers have a good ranking, then you sorta figure out it greenwash from EPA.

 

I've used Apple machines since 86 and will continue to. However, BFR and PVC are still in many of their products. And unfortunately, the masses don't really think about these things.

 

However,you are right. For those who do work on Aperture, FCP and Motion, I think they'll be pretty disappointed with the performance/cost of the octo core.

[TheRealDrew 0]

Ah Dave, when it comes to Apple, it's not about just the hardware but the OS. OSX is simply more intuitive for those who are used to Mac. I have both OSX and XP on my computer now, and really it's the best of both worlds, esp when travelling.

 

 

However, just to put a damper on Macophiles, consider this little ranking:

 

Greenpeace ranks Apple least eco friendly computer maker

Apple counters with its EPA award but if you look at the criteria, and how SO many computers have a good ranking, then you sorta figure out it greenwash from EPA.

 

I've used Apple machines since 86 and will continue to. However, BFR and PVC are still in many of their products. And unfortunately, the masses don't really think about these things.

 

It is an interesting subject and I hope Apple does more. Some of the rankings seem to be based on projected schedules it seems and plans to do more - at least in this mention of the subject from last year Dell still has PVCs but received a good ranking, at least in part, by plans to remove them and letting Greenpeace know of its plans.

 

CNET GREENPEACE

 

And here Greenpeace Dell Phase Out

 

Dell commits to a plan to phase out a list of hazardous chemicals with priority on BFR and PVC by 2009. Dell also announces takeback scheme for any Dell product, in US from September 2006 and globally from November 2006.

 

Dell's takeback program looks better than Apples, but Dell has not removed PVCs yet.

 

And Apple has done other things, if not all the things, we all would like to see Apple Actions - so in other words I am agreeing with you all items should be removed - not sure if it is quite as bad as simply "Apple is the Worst" though it would be better if it was a discussion that did not even have to be undertaken due to Apple being able to position itself beyond reproach.

 

Apple has a tendency to be tight lipped about many things it plans to do. Jobs is a smart guy, Apple was all over Gore's movie, Bono has been involved with Greenpeace and has relationships with Apple. Jobs is nothng if not a great marketing mind and this has to be of some concern from a business/Machiavellian point of view.

 

Sort of thinking outloud here and curious as to your thoughts - It would seem to be easier for Apple to pay some lip service to Greenpeace and their wants, such as telling them that PVCs will be removed by 2009 like Dell did, but maybe it is a case where Apple does not feel it can state a date. I would bet Dell knows darn well it can hit the 2009 date, what would the ramifications be if it misses the date and what would Greenpeace do? Is it better to stay mum on things or not?

 

But overall, no doubt I want Apple should be the leader in the field in any and all aspects.

 

However,you are right. For those who do work on Aperture, FCP and Motion, I think they'll be pretty disappointed with the performance/cost of the octo core.

 

 

Depends on where you are coming from (older machine or not) and how the software handles things. And though I take all the "performance" ratings with a BIG grain of salt, on some things the Quad core had some nice specs.

 

Some Benchmarks

 

Some Preliminary Benchmarks on the Octo

 

Though benchmarks are noticiably asbent for the Octo on some things I would like to see (Final Cut for instance)

 

If you are already a Mac User it would seem that if you have a machine less powerful than a Quad G5 and/or a Quad G5 that the spped is worth it even disregarding the fact that multiple applications will be even easier - FCP 6, Leopard and some real benchmarks may help.

 

Some of the horsepower may not compete to the Windows users, such as the speed Wagsy gets on Edius and so forth, but it may be offset by knowing you can have many applications open at the same time doing different things and not see the computer get jammed up

[davehicks 99]

Some of the horsepower may not compete to the Windows users, such as the speed Wagsy gets on Edius and so forth, but it may be offset by knowing you can have many applications open at the same time doing different things and not see the computer get jammed up

 

CPU resources are not always the biggest bottleneck once you get to a 4+ CPU system. Lack of memory, disk i/o bandwidth, even the system bus start to become the real limitations. And very few applications are capable of scaling efficiently to use all of those processors, certainly not before hitting another bottleneck.

[Drew 0]

at least in this mention of the subject from last year Dell still has PVCs but received a good ranking, at least in part, by plans to remove them and letting Greenpeace know of its plans. Dell's takeback program looks better than Apples, but Dell has not removed PVCs yet.

The point is that Dell has a projected date and other criteria, which Greenpeace's list of criteria to be much more stringent and demanding, Apple falls behind. There is no reason for Apple to be tightlipped about phasing out toxic chemicals. The only reason is that their part source cannot and thus they cannot phase it out. Bottom line.

The takeback program is bad. Especially since they are beginning to sell stuff like ipods which last 1+ year before needing to be replaced etc. It is precisely the need to sell more that Apple should work harder on lowering the impact on the planet. If they weren't given a hard time, they WOULD NOT have started the take back program. I use to have to give my old Apple computers to DELL or HP.

 

 

Depends on where you are coming from (older machine or not) and how the software handles things. And though I take all the "performance" ratings with a BIG grain of salt, on some things the Quad core had some nice specs.

If you are already a Mac User it would seem that if you have a machine less powerful than a Quad G5 and/or a Quad G5 that the spped is worth it even disregarding the fact that multiple applications will be even easier - FCP 6, Leopard and some real benchmarks may help.

What Dave was saying (and I agree) is that the Octo core is not significantly faster than the quad for most applications like FCP, Motion, Aperture. The fact that Apple didn't publish FCP, Motion and Aperture numbers should be a clue to that effect. Is it $700 faster than the quad 3.0? The smarter way is to spend that on memory and the X1900 GPU. Future proofing computers means an added 6mths lifespan, is that worth the $700. Not to me. But I'm not an authentic techno geek who wants the latest and greatest.

[TheRealDrew 0]

The point is that Dell has a projected date and other criteria, which Greenpeace's list of criteria to be much more stringent and demanding, Apple falls behind. There is no reason for Apple to be tightlipped about phasing out toxic chemicals. The only reason is that their part source cannot and thus they cannot phase it out. Bottom line.

 

The takeback program is bad. Especially since they are beginning to sell stuff like ipods which last 1+ year before needing to be replaced etc. It is precisely the need to sell more that Apple should work harder on lowering the impact on the planet. If they weren't given a hard time, they WOULD NOT have started the take back program. I use to have to give my old Apple computers to DELL or HP.

 

Interesting and agree (as mentioned above) though on the tightlipped I would be disappointed if it is the sourcing is the issue. Everything seems to indicate that Apple has gotten a bit more clout with the Intel Chip moves and the success of the iPod - and I hope they bring it to force on this issue.

 

If you see more info develop and would like to post it when it comes up on future moves, I will be in the thread looking - and if I see something come up will do the same.

 

What Dave was saying (and I agree) is that the Octo core is not significantly faster than the quad for most applications like FCP, Motion, Aperture. The fact that Apple didn't publish FCP, Motion and Aperture numbers should be a clue to that effect. Is it $700 faster than the quad 3.0? The smarter way is to spend that on memory and the X1900 GPU. Future proofing computers means an added 6mths lifespan, is that worth the $700. Not to me.

 

Yup, but coming from the older Macs (pre Quad G5 and perhaps the Quad G5 as mentioned) it would seem to make sense. I tend to use my Macs along time before jumping to the next one, basically when there is enough of a jump from my current machine to go to the next level, and my guess is the Octo, just for the ability to have 8 processors running for multiple apps when I am running a few things where some maybe processor hogs, may make things run smoother and easier in the background. Also for production work the increment may not on its face be worth it between the Quad and Octo Intels, but depending on how/who/why the workflow goes the $700 can make itself up quickly.

 

And it would seem that Apple releasing the Octo would (hopefully) mean some of the pro apps are going to follow in the ability to use the 8 Cores. The crossgrade from the non-Universal was extended from December to March, with the new FCP coming at NAB (hopefully). The optimist in me wants to believe that this was due in part to the Octo development - back in October/November people were hacking the Mac towers for Octos and maybe this played a part in this. And yes I still do believe in the tooth fairy

 

 

But I'm not an authentic techno geek who wants the latest and greatest.

 

Neither do I, though when the Octos were announced I did go the Apple on-line store and maxed one out, including two 30 inch monitors and the killer video card, had to drop my credit card in the paper shredder

[ChrisJ 0]

http://reviews.cnet.com/Apple_Mac_Pro/4505...?tag=prod.txt.1 Edited April 10, 2007 by ChrisJ

[TheRealDrew 0]

Drew

 

Quick follow up, seems some more of the benchmarks are not great, the only thing I have seen that is encouraging is that the Octo was able to do simultaneous exports of Quicktime Movies alot quicker than the Quad (seemed to be about 60% quicker) just wish they had some info on Final Cut and the rest of the suite, since Apple held it back on their site (Final Cut results) last time I looked

 

Still holding out hope something will come soon (Final Cut 6) to take advantage of the beast - even if just Final Cut and Compressor renderings/encodes were 60% faster that would make me grab one.

 

But I think I am stuck with my 604e chip for awhile longer

[Rocha 0]

1) Apple is using standard Intel / PC hardware. You'll be able to by this from anyone but apple for a lot less.

 

Not so sure about that, I was researching prices to buy machines for our department, and here is what I found out:

 

Dell Server with 2 3ghz dual-core Intel Xeon and stock video card: 3,186

 

MacPro with 2 3ghz dual-core Intel Xeon and good video good: 3,298

 

Same configuration on both (1gb RAM, single 250gb HD, no monitor, etc).

[echeng 0]

Aperture is *definitely* not CPU-bound at the moment. I'd say it's probably GPU-bound for many people, and SQL-Lite bound for everyone (the stupidest decision EVER).

 

But I've been doing some video rendering lately with Compressor and DAMN does it take a long time. I sit there watching as all 4 cores (on my Quad Mac Pro) are pegged for 8, 10, 12, 72 hours (as I fidget with settings). It's amazing. HD takes a long time to deal with...

[TheRealDrew 0]

But I've been doing some video rendering lately with Compressor and DAMN does it take a long time. I sit there watching as all 4 cores (on my Quad Mac Pro) are pegged for 8, 10, 12, 72 hours (as I fidget with settings). It's amazing. HD takes a long time to deal with...

 

 

FWIW the frame controls (Resize Filter, Deinterlace, Rate Conversion etc.) if set to other than automatic each add a tremendous amount of of time. Not sure if you are sending from Final Cut to Compressor directly or saving/exporting as self contained from Final Cut, but the later also helps speed things up a bit.

[loftus 42]

....., and SQL-Lite bound for everyone (the stupidest decision EVER).

 

Eric,

Can you explain what you mean here?

 

OK, googled it and found your explanation on your site, thanks.

Edited April 12, 2007 by loftus

[ChrisJ 0]

i almost bought the mac pro but now i am torn between it and the macbook pro. desktop vs laptop....

[LChan 0]

since we are talking about Macs.

 

should I buy now, or wait until the soon to be released Leopard OS?

[TheRealDrew 0]

since we are talking about Macs.

should I buy now, or wait until the soon to be released Leopard OS?

 

Still waiting for the official release of Leopard date, a moving target. Next week at NAB there is an Apple Event, general speculation is that it will be a new version of Final Cut Studio, but nothing definate.

 

There has also been discussion of blu-ray or HD support, both from the hardware and software side. On the hardware side since the Octo was just announced, would seem strange that anything related to the hardware side of things, such as blu-ray drives in the new towers, would be coming so close in time, but you never know. Though if I bought an Octo today and a week later a blu-ray or HD option was available I would be a bit p'od (and I am a huge Mac Fan)

 

Leopard is suppossed to have many cool things and some performance enhancements that may work better in dealing with the towers, but again, who knows.

 

I usually tend to base a purchasing decision more on the hardware side rather than the version of the OS and sometimes even prefer to grab the last version of the OS over the next one (10.4.8 or.9 which would come with a new machine now) as oppossed to getting Leopard. The reason being that you know the computer will be able to boot and run a relatively mature version so you are not necessarily tied to a version that may have hiccups (and sometimes the machines will not boot into prior versions, meaning once Leopard is released computers afterwards may not boot into 10.4.x of some variety) and even if I have to pay another $130 or so in a couple of months for the newer OS I like the flexibility to roll back to something that otherwise worked.

[shawnh 0]

Eric,

To speed up compressor, try exporting your timeline from Final Cut as 1280x720p30. I have found this can substantially reduce encode time.

Also, the frame controls do a number on your processing time...use these sparingly.

Finally, rendering H.264 HD files seems to take an insanely long time...not sure why

Shawn

[TheRealDrew 0]

Apple has a tendency to be tight lipped about many things it plans to do. Jobs is a smart guy, Apple was all over Gore's movie, Bono has been involved with Greenpeace and has relationships with Apple. Jobs is nothng if not a great marketing mind and this has to be of some concern from a business/Machiavellian point of view.

 

 

FWIW Steve Jobs actually has released something on this subject today

 

http://www.apple.com/hotnews/agreenerapple/