New Mac Pro

[Darryl Ramm]

Originally Posted by ProtoolsLover

You are by far the most arrogant person on this forum. You’re always antagonistic, you always come across as holier than thou. I’m not gonna get into your childish argument.

If there’s one thing I know about you, as you are an intelligent person, and it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to connect the dots to what I’m saying. If you put all of my comments, not just in one particular post, but in their entirety together, you’ll simply find out that I’m suggesting! Yes I am suggesting!!! That, the power of this computer, “COULD” potentially change the game in the DAW world. Meaning, that UAD DSP powered, HDX DSP powered, we can even throw in Soundgrid DSP powered, r freaking anything DSP powered, could all “PROVE” to be, “potentially”, outperformed with even the core Mac Pro. Depending on the users need, if they have a combination of all of these, and this new Mac Pro can actually do what I am potentially suggesting it “may” be able to do based on Apple’s “initial” specifications , then the cost “could be” justified.

All I’m doing is simply asking a question, but for some reason you consider asking that question, to somehow be offensive for some reason. Let me tell you something buddy, you may think you’re the smartest guy in this forum, but I can assure you you’re not the only smart person!!!

The power of the CPU *has* changed the DAW world. Speaking generally (there are always counter examples of slow CPU systems) HDX has already lost that battle. HDX is used for large IO connectivity and deterministic low-latency tracking. Is it really needed for the later? Not always, it depends, and often a subjective argument. And now 2019.5 has finally unleashed what Pro Tools should have been doing for ages we are in an intersting place with CPU performance much less handicapped by software problems. So I probably agree with much of your sentiments about DSP. *I* would never buy a HDX system for my audio work. But folks buying HDX say for massive IO connectivity will need to keep buying them unless Avid changes the marketing restrictions/crippling.

My point was simply measuring aggregate throughput is very different than latency (one reason people actually purchase HDX). That is all. We will know what native systems can do on these boxes with real tracking performance when we get them in our hands and that will be fascinating.

[ProtoolsLover]

Originally Posted by massivekerry

And yet they still continue to sell our songs for 99 cents...

Not anymore, they are eliminating iTunes! They played a huge part in dismantling the music business, however, it was inevitable post file sharing, people in general are flat out dishonest when nobody is watching, sadly.

In the end “we” as a society did this to ourselves.

[ProtoolsLover]

Originally Posted by Darryl Ramm

The power of the CPU *has* changed the DAW world. Speaking generally (there are always counter examples of slow CPU systems) HDX has already lost that battle. HDX is used for large IO connectivity and deterministic low-latency tracking. Is it really needed for the later? Not always, it depends, and often a subjective argument. And now 2019.5 has finally unleashed what Pro Tools should have been doing for ages we are in an intersting place with CPU performance much less handicapped by software problems. So I probably agree with much of your sentiments about DSP. *I* would never buy a HDX system for my audio work. But folks buying HDX say for massive IO connectivity will need to keep buying them unless Avid changes the marketing restrictions/crippling.

My point was simply measuring aggregate throughput is very different than latency (one reason people actually purchase HDX). That is all. We will know what native systems can do on these boxes with real tracking performance when we get them in our hands and that will be fascinating.

Fair enough.

[Dizzi45Z]

I am so excited for the new Mac Pro! My 2012 cheese grater has been such an amazing machine for the past 7 years and I imagine this new machine will carry out the next 7+ years. I'm so glad to see PCIe back and the ability to add insane amounts of RAM. I can't wait to see how it runs with a session full of CPU intensive VI's.

Besides cost, I can't see much to complain about yet. I've made my money back many times from my previous Mac Pro and I imagine it'll be the same with this one. Most of us won't need the most upgraded model with all of the fancy video upgrades. So while I imagine the cost will probably still be around 10-15k, I think it will be worth it for many pro users.

[Marsdy]

Of course it’s expensive but is it overpriced relative to the competition? I’m not sure it is.

I’ve just looked and an Avid qualified dual 14 core HP Z8 costs nearly £11.5k GB, a dual 18 core nearly £16.5k (ex VAT) and those prices don’t include a graphics card.

Could you actually build a PC for less? Not by much if you used like for like components and it would be far from Avid qualified.

A Cheese Grater v2 is almost certainly going to cost me less than I paid for my 12 core Trashcan aberration when I factor in the extra £2k I had to spend on an external PCIe chassis and external disk solution. It’s also highly likely I will no longer need VE Pro slave PCs.

In other words I’m getting one because it’s a dream come true true, at least for me.

The only negative that springs to mind is it appears to have just two SSD slots which look proprietary. I was hoping to be able to simply plug in say four Samsung 970 EVO M.2 drives. I’m sure OWC will have a PCIe card solution to that in no time.

[JFreak]

Originally Posted by Marsdy

I was hoping to be able to simply plug in say four Samsung 970 EVO M.2 drives. I’m sure OWC will have a PCIe card solution to that in no time.

I wouldn't be surprised if the connector is just the same as in the trashcan, which means OWC already has 2TB Aura Pro X2 for $700 -- the real question is, when will they be able to offer 4TB, 8TB, 16TB and so on..

[Darryl Ramm]

Originally Posted by Marsdy

The only negative that springs to mind is it appears to have just two SSD slots which look proprietary. I was hoping to be able to simply plug in say four Samsung 970 EVO M.2 drives. I’m sure OWC will have a PCIe card solution to that in no time.

I also am sure they and other will had PCIe card slot solutions, including properly engineered PCIe x8 and maybe even x16 cards, with great thermals, and hopefully the Mac Pro will handle the slot lane reconfiguration/bifurcation nicely (be annoying if Apple did not do this).

[musicman691]

Originally Posted by BScout

This shows a different form factor/casing than what is in the email I got from Apple this morning. I wonder if they're going to do two separate versions (desktop and rack mountable) where the end user can't do the rack mount conversion themselves? Here's what's in the email I got:

[JFreak]

You can buy racks of any sizes, but the question being: "is the mac pro mountable to a STANDARD 19" rack" and the answer is no -- length 18" makes it possible to "fit it" in one but mounting it into one surely doesn't help the airflow that is supposedly crazy hot

[musicman691]

Originally Posted by JFreak

You can buy racks of any sizes, but the question being: "is the mac pro mountable to a STANDARD 19" rack" and the answer is no -- length 18" makes it possible to "fit it" in one but mounting it into one surely doesn't help the airflow that is supposedly crazy hot

That's why they make fans and blowers that mount in standard 19 inch racks to evacuate the heat. Here's a link to one such solution: https://www.kooltronic.com/packaged-blowers

Full disclosure: I worked for the company as a QC person and customer repair back in the late 70's/early 80's before I got married. They also have fan trays that fit in a single rack unit height.