INTERACT FORUM

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: iMac vs Mac Pro  (Read 5820 times)

robertisonline

  • Junior Woodchuck
  • **
  • Posts: 74
iMac vs Mac Pro
« on: March 03, 2016, 01:36:27 am »

Just purchased Apple's latest 5K 27" inch Retina iMac using Intel's latest 6th gen. SkyLake processor. i7-6700 4.0Ghz up to 4.2Ghz, quad-core, hyperthreading. 64GB DDR3L ECC RAM, unfortunately the logic board will only accept ~1866Mhz speed. 1TB PCIe-based flash storage. Using external RAID storage mediums, don't worry about that. Read/write is over 1500MB/s. Unsure of IOPS. 4GB GDDR5 AMD Radeon 395X. May run the OS via Ram Disk since we'll never populate 64GB (no video editing or virtualization). The function of this computer is to run ProTools with a very large host of in the box plugins before sending to outboard SSL analogs. Small, professional recording studio servicing high-profile clients.

If anyone has purchased a Mac Pro with minimum 6-core Intel Xeon and has any real-world experience that would like to comment on this setups per dollar functional utility vs Mac Pro please do and has any knowledge about the cpu gen. upgradability based on the socket being used. Think it's LGA2011 but not sure. $5G at this point. Apple hasn't updated the Mac Pro since Late 2013 so it's still using Intel's 3rd gen processors. i7 is a very wasteful processor in many scenarios as it uses integrated graphics unlike Xeon. Prefer server-grade components.

This may not be up the standard audiophile ally since our computers are used with intentions that contrast just a little bit from audiophiles. Not knowing too much about computers compared to some of you, hopefully, maybe there is a CS grad that could comment or someone with real-world experience with these specific hardware components.

Best,

EKRS
Logged

blgentry

  • Regular Member
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 8014
Re: iMac vs Mac Pro
« Reply #1 on: March 03, 2016, 10:07:35 am »

Just purchased Apple's latest 5K 27" inch Retina iMac using Intel's latest 6th gen. SkyLake processor. i7-6700 4.0Ghz up to 4.2Ghz, quad-core, hyperthreading. 64GB DDR3L ECC RAM,

That's a bunch of expensive RAM.  I'm jealous, but not of the price.  Wow.  :)

Quote
1TB PCIe-based flash storage. Using external RAID storage mediums, don't worry about that. [...] May run the OS via Ram Disk since we'll never populate 64GB (no video editing or virtualization).

I would not do that.  PCI flash memory should be plenty fast for OS loading and operations.  It's a total waste to use that expensive RAM for an OS disk, IMHO.

Quote
The function of this computer is to run ProTools with a very large host of in the box plugins before sending to outboard SSL analogs. Small, professional recording studio servicing high-profile clients.

Neat!  I've read a number of opinions that Reaper is a "better" DAW than ProTools in terms of flexibility and of course the price difference is pretty huge.  I don't know because I'm not in that industry and haven't seen ProTools in something like 15+ years.  I'm curious if you have an opinion one way or the other.

Quote
If anyone has purchased a Mac Pro with minimum 6-core Intel Xeon and has any real-world experience that would like to comment on this setups per dollar functional utility vs Mac Pro

This is just my opinion, so take it for what it's worth:  It seems to me that Apple builds the Mac Pro platform, advertises it to the world as having crazy incredible performance.... and then sits on it for several years with no updates.  Frankly, I don't understand it.  I'm not "in the loop" though with Apple, or people who really use Apple machines for "heavy" production, so my view is really from the outside looking in.  But it's weird to me.

In general terms though, the real answer for your application is another question:  Does your chosen platform (Retina iMac) perform for the tasks you use it for?  Are there things that make you wait?  If your machine performs well then the answer is probably the less expensive (and rather sexy) iMac that you have now.

Brian.
Logged

mojave

  • MC Beta Team
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 3732
  • Requires "iTunes or better" so I installed JRiver
Re: iMac vs Mac Pro
« Reply #2 on: March 03, 2016, 10:26:05 am »

The function of this computer is to run ProTools with a very large host of in the box plugins before sending to outboard SSL analogs. Small, professional recording studio servicing high-profile clients.
Are you using the Alpha-Link MXs? I changed one out for a MOTU AVB 24ao. If you ever want to upgrade, I highly recommend the MOTU devices. They connect to Macs with either Ethernet or Thunderbolt for high channel counts and long cabling.

If you need large amounts of storage, consider an OWC ThunderBay system. I use the ThunderBay 4 and really like it.
Logged

robertisonline

  • Junior Woodchuck
  • **
  • Posts: 74
Re: iMac vs Mac Pro
« Reply #3 on: March 03, 2016, 11:42:08 am »

Apple wants $600 to upgrade from 8GB to 32GB for some off-brand. The RAM was the cheapest part and the easiest RAM swap I've ever done. This particular iMac has a spring-lever on the back, don't even need tools. So glad they didn't solder it. I hear you on the PCI, it's just that we'll never populate 64GB either. It is plenty fast, but I'm guessing RAM is between 4000-5000MB/s and much faster IOPS. It's certainly not negligible on paper. But real-world, maybe it is.

On the DAW, if by flexibility you mean user-friendliness, every DAW is better than ProTools in that aspect. If you mean flexibility in terms of what you can do in ProTools, there's no other DAW that even comes close. That doesn't mean that artists aren't using other DAW's, they are. But recording studios are not. Artists often times start a project in Logic, FL, Ableton. But after that each particular track is exported and loaded into ProTools and ran through a lot of expensive analog gear. Fun fact, Billie Jean was mixed 92 different times. Quincy Jones went back with the mixing engineer and said let's start from square one. The version the made it onto the record was the 2nd mix!

On Apple advertisement, you couldn't be more spot on. Apple has done an amazing job making their customers think they are smart. You will never meet someone who buys Apple products and doesn't think they are smart for doing so. In reality, you can Hackintosh the Mac Pro for literally half the price. Apple builds great products and they make you pay a lot for them. You can even buy a $15,000 iWatch - if you're stupid enough.

 On platform, it does present day. I am concerned about future-proofing. Like you said, Apple doesn't update the Mac Pro for years. I think it was 7 years before they released the current model. My biggest concern is about going with a quad-core processor. Xeon is the best, but it's actually benchmarking about 25% slower than this particular i7 because it's 3rd gen vs. 6th gen. The 8-core Mac Pro is about $2,000 more than this setup. This decision is not about the money, it's about long-term stability versus purchasing something that is just excessive. Yeah, the 64GB RAM is excessive, but it was just so cheap I couldn't pass that up!

That's a bunch of expensive RAM.  I'm jealous, but not of the price.  Wow.  :)

I would not do that.  PCI flash memory should be plenty fast for OS loading and operations.  It's a total waste to use that expensive RAM for an OS disk, IMHO.

Neat!  I've read a number of opinions that Reaper is a "better" DAW than ProTools in terms of flexibility and of course the price difference is pretty huge.  I don't know because I'm not in that industry and haven't seen ProTools in something like 15+ years.  I'm curious if you have an opinion one way or the other.

This is just my opinion, so take it for what it's worth:  It seems to me that Apple builds the Mac Pro platform, advertises it to the world as having crazy incredible performance.... and then sits on it for several years with no updates.  Frankly, I don't understand it.  I'm not "in the loop" though with Apple, or people who really use Apple machines for "heavy" production, so my view is really from the outside looking in.  But it's weird to me.

In general terms though, the real answer for your application is another question:  Does your chosen platform (Retina iMac) perform for the tasks you use it for?  Are there things that make you wait?  If your machine performs well then the answer is probably the less expensive (and rather sexy) iMac that you have now.

Brian.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up