New Mac Pro - Best Price Point?

[zephonic]

Originally Posted by cinealta

Are you guys sure it's significantly more cost-effective to buy a 2009 Mac 4-core refurb and drop in the 6-core oneself?

I thought the difference is only about $500 but with a new 6-core one gets a full warranty and a new machine. Factoring the cost of the warranty should be worth something. Let's say a one year warranty is worth $100. Then the difference is only around $400. Is it worth it to get a 2009 model to save only $400? How much more is RAM on a 2009 than a new one?

Well, a 2009 quad can be had for about $1200-1300. The CPU costs about $600. A new 6-core MacPro costs $3000 (+tax).

The difference is bigger when you let Apple spec it up. Add extra memory and storage and ouch...

[jcschild]

Originally Posted by Martin_LPF

Man that "jcschild" is working hard to sell one of his PCs to a guy that wants / need a Mac. Who cares if Cubase runs better on PCs? The OP runs it great on his Mac already...

To the OP : you like the Mac environnement, you have other Macs, you have Mac-only softwares and you already have the interface for it. The answer is easy.

By new........you won't regret it. I run 2x 2011 MMS in my writing room (1 for audio and 1 as a sample server) and it's running great. Even 1 MMS is more than enough for my needs but at this price i had to get 2.

Martin

no not really.. just pointing out the facts

1) i never linked to my site.. others did.
2) just presenting the facts about price per performance and age of Apple systems..

[TAFKAT]

As other have already noted, the O.P has a M.H interface which automatically rules out Windows , and also has other programs on OSX apart for Cubendo, ( not to mention his , hmmm, dislike of Windows ).

I would second Zephonic, get an earlier MAC Pro and shoehorning the last of the 3680 Xeons , not sure what that entails re EFI update, but I would get the finer detail on that before dipping my toe in the water - i.e ensure the update is available for the specific model of the MP as the EFI would need to be updated to recognise the CPU ID of the Xeon Hex.

[Depressionman]

Maybe Software Sampler, Sound Module, Plugin Host, VST Plugins and Instruments | Muse Research MUSE research RECEPTOR may be an good option for you.

[mike11]

If I get rid of my Metric Halo, I lose my +DSP and a whole mix engine that is part of my work.

That point that was made about not buying the RAM and SSD from Apple - absolutely right and that skews the alleged price point a LOT. You can buy Ram, SSD's and hard drives outside of Apple - the same of better so that's not a legit comparison price wise.

A Mac Pro is not a PC... Doesn't look like one... haha

Anyway all good and helpful advice on both sides, so thanks a lot everyone. I'm still undecided.

[mike11]

Ok wow I didn't see all these other posts, sorry. bunjji - thank you for clarifying that, that sounds about right.

[mike11]

Ok so if I were to find out that the differences with cost and speed were as drastic as some are saying, then I would *have* to consider relegating the metric halo to other uses... but I'm just not finding that that is the case. Thanks to everyone who has responded above - great comments. The difference is just not definitive for me. I've looked inside a Mac Pro and inside a PC, I really don't see they are the same. Re the comment on build quality I was not comparing HP laptops with a MBP, this is a Mac Pro, different animal. Again, if the price of the Mac Pro was $1000 more say, with 30% drop in performance (that's kind of what people were telling me) , then I'd have to say, hey, is this worth it - just to keep the MH, can't I sell this mac, buy a mac mini, run my old software on that, and get a PC for Cubase. But, I'm just not seeing that in the real world that is the case.

[mike11]

ADK, that benchmark you sent through was for old versions of OSX (10.6 saw significant core improvements) and Cubase 5.5 - we're on 6 now (6.5 but I haven't gotten 6.5 yet). The newer benchmark below that for 10.6 shows clearly the difference is seriously narrowed - 160 multiband compressors vs 167 on a PC? I'll keep OSX thanks, it's worth the tradeoff, not only for today, but tomorrow. Another thing, my Mac now is 5 years old, it's been on most days every day nearly the whole time. Worst thing that happened was a dud hard drive right when I bought it, which was replaced free. Applecare gave me a brand new 30inch display one week before the 3 year warrantee expired because I was having graphics card problems. Then they replaced the graphics card with a newer better model. I like Apple - whatever I invested into it, whatever more I spent than I could have on a PC at *that* time, has paid off in spades. That may not be the case now, but I can't easily forget my experience thus far. I remain always open minded, and I'd be willing to happily use Windows if it was just for Cubase and work mode, but... I don't know, I'd need compelling reasons - financial, performance, or stability. Compelling! haha

[TAFKAT]

Originally Posted by mike11

The newer benchmark below that for 10.6 shows clearly the difference is seriously narrowed - 160 multiband compressors vs 167 on a PC?

Allow me to jump in for a moment, seeing its my work being referenced.

You are referring to the result for 256 samples, the exercise was in regards to comparative performance at lower latencies , 256 is the top end. If you check out the lower latency values its a different story. Also , you may want to avoid Part VI which is based on Kontakt 4 and polyphony at the respective latencies.

Re the price comparative of a current MAC Pro Hex and equivalent PC, there is no such thing, the X58/Socket 1366 platform was EOLed except by Apple almost 12 months ago , current X79/C606 platform is an entirely different beast , quad channel memory, expandability to Octocore, etc.

All that aside , you are heavily invested and far more comfortable on OSX, so you are better off with the devil you know.

[DAW PLUS]

Originally Posted by TAFKAT

All that aside , you are heavily invested and far more comfortable on OSX, so you are better off with the devil you know.

Pretty clear imo. Maybe this thread can focus on its title again...

[mike11]

Paul: Yes I saw the latencies, I work at 128, or even 256 pretty well (but not more). I never use 32, which is where there is a big difference no doubt about that, and 64 also I don't really use. From 128 up there is not much difference - not enough to make me want to "switch". 128 I'm quite happy with.

I don't know about quality PC's, I mean the case designs are so awful for a start, maybe I'm biased - but I'm no expert, that's just a humble opinion - but I know when I look inside the Mac Pro, looks really well designed to me, and I've never had an issue with a Mac, and I've had many through work and personally probably at least a dozen over the last 10 years, and personally about 5 including macbooks, macbook pros, towers, etc.

Tafkat, now you're talking this is the sort of thing I don't understand, yet, even from the benchmarks I'm not seeing this huge difference in performance, OR a huge difference in price point. By the way it would probably be a 12 core mac I'm looking at, I can't even find a 12 core PC - for the same price, probably the 8 core PC is going to give the same performance as the 12 core mac, maybe it's a few hundred dollars cheaper - but for the build, the design, and the OS, aren't I better off with the Mac? I mean prove me wrong?

[mike11]

Ok Tafkat, I'm just had a look at that part IV you linked to - well, now that is a crazy difference. This is what I'm talking about - that is a whole other ball game. Anyone else got comments on that?

Also is there a version of that which shows Cubase 6.5 - someone mentioned they tidied that up for OSX recently?

[mike11]

By the way if I want to look at doing a DIY - can anyone point me to the best place to buy everything in on shop online? Or just general recommendations?

Also just as an aside what's the deal with Windows 7 licensing controls, is it still a pain in the backside where it prompts you to contact Microsoft and transmit your DNA through the finger scanner while they scan your brain for pre-crimes?

[zephonic]

For Mac upgrades: Performance Upgrades; FireWire USB SATA Storage; Memory, more at OWC

For general computer components: Newegg.com - Computer Parts, Laptops, Electronics, HDTVs, Digital Cameras and More!


I run Cubase 6.5.x (1 I think) on OSX 10.6.8 with an Mbox3Pro at 128 sample buffer, and hardly ever run out of headroom. But I don't do orchestral mockups, my average projects use between 4 and 6 GB of memory, mostly Kontakt and Spectrasonics stuff.

That's in 64-bit mode, btw.

[string6theory]

^ OWC +1

Memory, storage, cards, peripherals, software, etc., and customer service.

[mike11]

Ok thanks for those suggestions. And aside from the recommendations already given for ready built machines any others just to check out?

I wonder if one way to test this all out is to get a copy of windows on bootcamp, install cubase and the vienna stuff and try it out. Anyone running Cubase under Windows on Mac Pro?

[Bunjji]

Also pcpartpicker.com is a great website for setting up builds, and the prices come from newegg, amazon, and other computer parts websites. Pick Parts, Build Your PC, Compare and Share - PCPartPicker. My favorite motherboard right now is the Newegg.com - GIGABYTE GA-Z77X-UP5 TH LGA 1155 Intel Z77 HDMI SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 ATX Intel Motherboard, it would be a good starting point for your build.

[TAFKAT]

Originally Posted by mike11

Tafkat, now you're talking this is the sort of thing I don't understand, yet, even from the benchmarks I'm not seeing this huge difference in performance, OR a huge difference in price point. By the way it would probably be a 12 core mac I'm looking at, I can't even find a 12 core PC - for the same price, probably the 8 core PC is going to give the same performance as the 12 core mac, maybe it's a few hundred dollars cheaper - but for the build, the design, and the OS, aren't I better off with the Mac? I mean prove me wrong?

Current dual socket systems are overkill for audio IMO, the only guys on the Windows side utilising them are those that have a memory requirement above what is being offered on the single socket boards. Considering that good single socket X79/C606 boards have 8 memory slots and can accept 8GB DIMMs, those requiring above 64GB are pretty slim on the ground.

Re pricing of 12 core systems, again you cannot compare the MacPro's , the architecture was EOL 12 months ago , you will be able to get Dual Octo at identical clockspeeds to what Apple are still pimping as Dual Hex for around the same if not better $ wise . There is just no comparison performance wise, the earlier tech gets its clock cleaned.

I already stated that with your heavy preference to OSX , you would be better off staying with the devil you know. I am not trying to convince you to switch , far from it, I am simply clarify the performance variable that has been navigated between Win/OSX with Cubendo 5.x-6.x.

I'm just had a look at that part IV you linked to - well, now that is a crazy difference. This is what I'm talking about - that is a whole other ball game. Anyone else got comments on that?

Also is there a version of that which shows Cubase 6.5 - someone mentioned they tidied that up for OSX recently?

There has been no significant change in 6.x, if anything each incremental update has moved the performance back a notch, it certainly has on Windows, i.e, 6.5 will not deliver the plugins/polyphony that C.5.x did using that identical system / benchmark , its down about 10-15% from some of those numbers.

Who knows what Version 7 will bring... ;-)

[mike11]

Ok thanks, but I just spec'd up a computer for comparison and I can get a 8 core machine like you say, pc for about half the price of the 12 core mac, same [edit:] benchmark point, and on top of that you're saying performance on Cubase on the PC is about double of the mac - so that's literally 4X the performance per dollar right?

This is what I was talking about, it's amazingly hard to rummage through all that is out there on this and get down to brass tacks. This is the kind of performance / price discrepancy (fricken huge unless I'm mistaken) that I was talking about when I said I could consider using Windows.

For the same money as the Mac Pro, I can get a 16 core machine that will be more than twice as fast as the 12 core mac, with faster memory, and again, I get double performance again on top of that with Cubase on Windows. Now, is that right? Have I got that right because that's just freaking crazy if that's right. Even if Apple comes out with new motherboard and cpu's in 6 months I won't be worse of for having switched over because on the software side the performance issues will still be there. ??

Is this true or have I got it on backwards?

[mike11]

Oh, the last hurdle, is reliability. Now I have read for example posts like this one:

DIY DAW Build | BlueDustStudio / Chris Porro

And he sort of says well I tried DIY, I tried boutique PC outlets, and I tried a MacPro, and what I'm advising is go with the MacPro with Windows and bootcamp, for pure reliability's sake. And that is a HUGE thing. The reason I switch to Mac more than a decade ago was because I was done with the PC unreliability garbage of the time - years of problems I'm talking about. And this was before Mac OSX so Macs were not wholly fun either. But some people are telling me "Oh don't worry this or that company are great" and other's are saying same company gave them problems...

By the way I spent a few hours looking at DIY options, I think for the trouble and the learning curve personally I would have to go with a boutique builder if I went that way.

[TAFKAT]

Originally Posted by mike11

For the same money as the Mac Pro, I can get a 16 core machine that will be more than twice as fast as the 12 core mac, with faster memory, and again, I get double performance again on top of that with Cubase on Windows. Now, is that right? Have I got that right because that's just freaking crazy if that's right. Even if Apple comes out with new motherboard and cpu's in 6 months I won't be worse of for having switched over because on the software side the performance issues will still be there. ??

Is this true or have I got it on backwards?

Performance isn't quite that linear, so the 16 core will not be twice as fast as the 12 core , plus you have to factor in the benefit of familiarity and preference you have for OSX. Re Cubase, the Kontakt polyphony example I posted was pretty extreme admittedly , but in Real World Session with a mixture of VI's and Plugins, the variance will/may not be that extreme.

I still think the idea of an early refurbed or S/H MacPro updated to a Xeon 3680 Hex is a good option , bang for buck. I seriously wouldn't be investing in a Dualie unless the single Hex will be limited memory wise, as the MACPro's are a little light on memory slots - 4 per socket I believe , which has always had me scratching my head how they worked that into a viable model for Tri Channel memory arrays.. :-(

I Digress..

[mike11]

Can you perhaps comment on what the performance is *likely* to be?

Just to clarify, the main software I'm using is Vienna Instruments Pro, Ensemble Pro with MIR on every channel (that's their 3d reverb engine although I normally have that bypassed for composing then hit it up for mix stage) Vienna suite eq, usually one per channel, some SSL eq's, plus Kontact libraries LASS etc and we're talking about 100 stereo instruments all up in the template, about 24 stereo audio channels, and probably a handful of virtual instruments, like 2 8 channel instances of Omnisphere, 1 or 2 BFD2 instances other Geist, Trillian etc. As it stands, I only get about halfway with my current set up with all this, and there is a LOT of freezing going on, LOTS of bouncing, about 3/4 of my time is dealing with that side of things. This is why I wanted the 12core mac, and why I was looking at a 16core PC earlier today - if I can really get past that limitation it would be really great.

Anyway, you're now telling me the difference is not that great, not linear etc. No offense because I really appreciate the time and input from everyone but seriously, can I get a straight answer haha

edit: oh i just thought as well it should go without saying that my estimates I gave above are obviously guesstimates more or less, I don't actually expect it to work linearly like that, but even so, if it's in the ball park / region / range etc then isn't that a pretty big difference?

[TAFKAT]

Originally Posted by mike11

Anyway, you're now telling me the difference is not that great, not linear etc. No offense because I really appreciate the time and input from everyone but seriously, can I get a straight answer haha

I didn't say it wasn't that great , I said it wasn't linear in regards to the mathematics you were proposing.

In regards to using Kontakt in a Multitimbral environment at lower latencies, that graph was representative, in regards to VSL I really haven't spent the time to do the head to head comparatives to be honest, but its pretty well known that the developers of Vienna have voiced that there is a measurable performance variable using their products between Windows and OSX , especially when using Cubendo.

Straight answer is this, at the current version of Cubendo , there is a significant and measurable performance variable between OSX/Windows, there is no questioning that. How that variable effects individual working environments is the harder question to answer, and without testing your exact working sessions cross platform it will be hard to get a definitive answer.

FWIW - I have a client that is surrounded by MAC editing suites , he has the lone Windows /Cubendo suite in the complex and he works with most if not all of the instruments you listed at a required low latency. He has voiced numerous times that attempting to run any of his sessions on an equivalent spec'ed MACPro running the same hardware and version of Cubase, its a basket case. He also gets great joy out of watching the MAC/Protools rigs trying to be used in a compositional environment, but thats a whole other thread.

I know thats just 3rd hand and hearsay, but it bode well with my own comparative benching results.

BTW: I have no idea what your current system is , you may have mentioned it but I missed it in the mix.

I need to reiterate, I am not suggesting that your shift to Windows, I simply joined in the discussion here to give some further insight into the benchmark results posted, as they are my based on my work.

[zephonic]

Originally Posted by TAFKAT

There has been no significant change in 6.x, if anything each incremental update has moved the performance back a notch, it certainly has on Windows, i.e, 6.5 will not deliver the plugins/polyphony that C.5.x did using that identical system / benchmark , its down about 10-15% from some of those numbers.

But on the OSX side, C6 brings 64-bit to the table. So perhaps that performance deficit is somewhat offset by the fact that you can address more memory.

Originally Posted by mike11

Anyone running Cubase under Windows on Mac Pro?

I used to run Nuendo4 on WinXP thru Bootcamp on my old iMac. For years, never a hickup, other than some XP niggles that were irritating but not critical.

I have Win7 bootcamped on my MacPro but haven't gotten around to installing Cubase + all the VI's and the plug-ins.

[TAFKAT]

Originally Posted by zephonic

But on the OSX side, C6 brings 64-bit to the table. So perhaps that performance deficit is somewhat offset by the fact that you can address more memory.

How ?

None of the sessions are memory address intensive, DAWbench VI is well within the 4GB limit.

This discussion is like Ground Hog Day .. :-(

Unless there is a major change in the Cubendo Audio Engine, nothing of any measurable significance will change.

[mike11]

Tafkat, I really appreciate your input, and you are a (not the only) voice of reason here so far, so I appreciate that, but clearly from what you're telling me that IS the difference I was talking about earlier in the thread. I mean even if I only get half way to what I was saying (which the benchmarks say I would get at least 80% of the way there) that's a huge dollar to performance gap that can't be ignored when buying a new machine today. And I'm not seeing anyone here saying I'm wrong about that.

What about reliability? I get that I would only use Windows for Cubase, Vienna Ensemble, and file storage (that last one scares me lol). I would keep my mac for everything else. Then the reliability of the hardware. I'm actually in a pretty remote location, so I don't want break downs, waiting for parts, or DIY fixer uppers. Sure, sometimes things can go wrong you can't avoid it, etc. but I'm sure you know what I mean.

I mean, given that I'm married to Kontact and VSL software. VSL attest to the performance on PC, and your benchmarks use Kontact to pretty clear results, is there really any debate in this? I'm just trying to be realistic.

My machine now is a 2007 Xeon 8core mac, 667bus speed 16gb ram. I have a fairly large (not nearly as large as I would like, but I just can't go there right now) template, and I can honestly say that 3/4 of my time spent on larger projects is dedicated to freezing / refreezing tracks. Any track over 3 minutes starts to become a nightmare. If you are composing parts off against each other, and performing all the parts, and you can't keep more than one instance open at a time without resorting to long latencies... In fact Omnisphere in particular on larger projects will not play without horrible pops and clicks unless I set the latency to *784*. I never *imagined* this was an OS issue - I just thought that's how it is. I thought the 12 core mac was "top of the line" - these 16 core machines are like twice the power for the same money right?

[mike11]

haha, I just saw you sell pro audio workstations. haha, I didn't realise that - now I see why you don't want to appear to be encouraging me that way. Don't worry, I'll take you at your word without a conflict of interest The facts speak for themselves. Anyone got any contradicting facts? I would imagine this journey of a thread might be helpful to other people on a similar path to me who might read it now or later....

[mike11]

e I said contradicting facts not contradicting opinions... I know there's ALLLL kinds of opinions out there, and I have my own too. But I want to know what will serve my writing / music best and I sure as s*** don't want to be spending double the money when it doesn't get me anywhere. So if someone can show other benchmarks... I mean the silence is deafening right now....

[Masaaki]

How about buying Mac Pro with whatever the spec you like, and buy another off-the-shelf PC, then use it as a VEP slave? If you like, you can test that PC with Cubase at leisure.

[mike11]

Because according to the benchmarks and what I'm finding so far, it seems like I could just buy the PC with the money the Mac Pro would cost me, and I'd get twice the voices...

Again this isn't a 10, or even 20% difference we're talking about - something I would live with just to keep OSX and my 2882. This is a huge huge difference I can't ignore, unless I want to throw money away (and I don't). Am I wrong?