MAC pro is BETTER??

Hey again. I was considering purchasing an alien-ware desktop computer, either the area-51 7500 or the aurora 7500 with the default setups. However, after seeing the Mac Pro, I was hesitant about making that purchase.
Would the MAC Pro be better than these two machines. ?
Both would have one dual core processer, 1 GB ram.
Ignore the video cards and hard drive sizes.
I plan to use Windows XP.
The SATA hard drive problem will soon be fixed so I am not worried about that issue.
Thanks!!
(this may be the deciding factor on the purchase)

For me, support is everything... over the last 2 1/2 months, I've had troubles with my machine and had it at the Apple Store for quite a while. I did a lot of complaining to the folks at Apple about certain things and to make a long story short, they've taken care of me. The MacPro is incredibly quiet, and runs beautifully. Of course this is with OSX and not Windows, so your experience might differ.
While I was going through the headache, I did some research into other machines, mostly Alienware and Dell. What I found out about Alienware scared me good and far away from their products. I simply Googled Alienware and found a lot of customer reviews about their support and customer service and it was not pretty.
I'm sure if you get a machine that works flawlessly, you may never have to experience these short-comings, (not that the reviews about buying were good at all), but if you don't, it sounds like they're very contentious and if you return the machine, you're slapped with a $250.00 re-stocking fee.
Of course this is just my 2¢; do the research, it won't be hard to find, and come up with your own conclusions, just be aware of what you might have to go through.
The service you get after you buy is just as critical as the treatment you receive when shelling out the money.
Good luck.
-Vincent
Mac Pro 2.66 Mac OS X (10.4.7) 1 GB RAM

Similar Messages

Why Mac pro is better & more expensive than IMac?!

can you advice me on this:
tell me which one is more practical and powerful for 3D rendering and animation?! why?!
and why Mac pro is more expensive than IMac?! even though numbers in IMac are higher than Mac pro.......
IMac:
          - 27-inch
          - 3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7
          - 16GB 1333MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 4x4GB
          - 2TB Serial ATA Drive
          - AMD Radeon HD 6970M 2GB GDDR5
or
Mac pro:
Two 2.66GHz 6-Core Intel Xeon “Westmere” (12 cores)
12GB (6X2GB)
2TB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s hard drive
2TB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s hard drive
ATI Radeon HD 5870 1GB
One 18x SuperDrive

Apparently you don't fathom or realize what I said:
Better value: Mac Pro 6-core 3.33GHz. You can buy base and throw in W3680.
You can buy a single 6-core like that from Apple and pay $900 more.
I do not recommend 12-core.
I do not recommend the slower 2.66 processor
I do recommend avoiding the 2009 model.
Better off starting with the 2.8 4-core and go from there.
Ivy Bridge socket LGA2011 will have a lot of other features making them the "to die for" but no one knows and I for one would not want to be on cutting edge with any chipset or new revision. Seriously, Apple has always had issues with first silicon whether 2011 MBP or iMac or 2008/2009 Mac Pro. And always takes a couple OS updates. And then things break. And then software has to catch up.
A slower 12-core is not going to future proof. It is going to cost more and not deliver.
For last year we've all been seeing and saying 6 x 3.33.
why I sent you link to MPG site.

SolidWorks x64 Edition up and running on Mac Pro

I have the 64-bit version of Solidworks running on my Mac Pro and it's a screamer!
I used Solidworks 2007 x64 Edition on Windows XP x64 Professional on my Mac Pro for a solid 3 hours today at work. I had no problems other than a slow SATA hard-drive issue that is well known and remains unfixed on my machine. However, once Windows has loaded the registry with the program guts it runs like a top, just don't expect it to load up a program for the first time blazingly fast and you'll be fine.
Be that as it may, even with all the hardware issues I still have, SolidWorks is AWESOME on the Mac Pro, even better than any other Intel boxes I've used previously. To be fair, I don't have any experience with SW 2007 x64 on real XP x64 box.
(I posted this on another thread earlier, but at the time I didn't know what I was doing. I felt this information would be of better use under this category.)
For those who want to do this and run the x64 version of XP here's the drivers and the drill:
My Windows software is sourced from a free download of x64 120 day trial version from Windows.
Interestingly enough, I called Microsoft and asked what happens after 120 days, the answer was...."I don't know"...
weird.
Anyway, for those who don't know how to get the format of the download file to be correct for Boot Camp to recognize it as a Windows CD, here's the procedure.
This is all done on the Mac Pro.
1. Download XPx64 from: http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/64bit/facts/trial.mspx
2. Open Disk Utility
2. Double click downloaded file: WS03SP1RTM_1830_PX6EN.iso (this will allow you to see it in Disk Utility)
3. In Disk Utility select the WS0...EN.iso file mentioned previously and click the "convert" button.
4. When the "Save as" box pops up set the location to wherever you want ( I named the file the same name w/o the .iso extension and put it on my desktop) and set the Image Format to "DVD/CD master", Encryption to "none"
5. After saving the file, it will show up with a new extension *.cdr. Double click this file in the Disk Utility drive list.
6. After Finder finishes launching the file, go back to Disk Utility and select your new *.cdr file and click the Partition button to the right.
7. Once in the partition window, select Options and set the partition scheme to "Master Boot Record", hit OK.
8. After getting back in the partition window, select Volume Scheme and set to "1 partition", The size should be around 558.62 MB (don't worry about the format set to mac OS extended and the other greyed functions)
9. Select the Burn icon, insert your CD-R, set your post burning options, and have a Coke and a smile. Verify the file format is ISO 9660 file system by selecting the "get info" on the CD under "Finder".
**TIP #1 - make sure you've printed out the e-mail from Microsoft outlining the setup instructions and including the CD-Key. Don't be like me and get 98% through the Windows setup where it asks you for CD-Key and have to power off the computer and get it out of OS X.**
**TIP #2 - Since you are using an Apple keyboard Windows doesn't seem to be able to use it on the blue screen portion of the install. My remedy (after assuming the install locked up 6 times in a row) is to go find a cheap-o usb keyboard and mouse lying around (probably standard Microsoft stuff in your closet) and plug it in to be back of your Mac Pro tower. You do not need to go through the Mac OS hardware setup thing that pops up.
10. After printing out your MS instruction e-mail and plugging in your keyboard and mouse (see above), launch Boot Camp (don't even try to use the driver CD it makes, it's useless for XP x64) and install XP x64.
11. Have a beer and a smile, you will need the alcohol in your blood from here on out.
**TIP #3 - go buy 2 or 3 magazines and get a comfortable chair.**
12. Install Windows, follow the Boot Camp Beta instructions carefully until you get to the part where you install the driver CD. It won't work.
13. Follow these links to get the x64 drivers:
Audio: http://www.realtek.com.tw/downloads/dlhd-2.aspx?lineid=2004052&famid=2004052&ser ies=2004061&Software=True&title=HD%20Audio%20CODECs
Nvidia Graphics driver for the 7300GT (remember, this is for Win XP x64 edition so it's not the same as the regularly posted 32 bit version):
http://www.nvidia.com/object/winxp64_91.47.html
LAN drivers (Be sure to get the x64 version):
Download PROEM64T.exe from the Intel website
13. Update Windows.
**NOTE: I am still having the same driver issues as others that have installed XP x64 on a Mac Pro, for example the Apple keyboard and mouse function, but the CtlAltDel and Eject CD disk remain non functional.**
14. Install SolidWorks 2007 x64 from the included DVD in your software update box that came in the mail last week.
15. GO TO BED...IT'S 4:30 am!!!
Mac Pro Mac OS X (10.4.7) Microsoft XP x64 Professional
Please correct me on any driver postings if they are in error or missing. These are the ones I used and they are working for me. I do not claim to be a guru (this is only my 7th day of using Macintosh in my entire life), I'm just a CAD guy that has a MacNut for a boss. It was either adapt or die, so I'm hapilly adapted.
Mac Pro Mac OS X (10.4.7) Microsoft XP x64 Professional

Alright CT, here's the deal.
You'll need to update windows first, they have the HD USB audio device driver update on Windows Update. After this, install the RealTek driver you downloaded earlier. Don't worry about windows saying it found a device but can't find the driver for it, that'll be fixed when you run the Realtek install program.
As far as the broken stuff in Device Manager, it's the usual stuff everyone has (be sure to go to "view", "show hidden devices" to see all the stuff) :
-USB human interface device
-Other device
-unknown device x3 (you will note there is also one unknown device on the Mac os)
-Intel(R) 5000 Series Chipset PCI Express x4 (Port 3 thru Port7)
As far as performance goes, BIG IMPROVEMENT! I did the slipstream fix using the 64bit drivers (obviously) and found out the hard way that you do infact have to use Boot Camp and delete and recreate the partition for a reinstall.
(tried to install on top of existing installation twice...failed twice. Suck!)
I used the picture guide located at:
http://st118.startlogic.com/~macproxp/index.html
I don't understand all the super-geek evaluation stuff when using the recommended evaluation SiSoftware Sandra, but it looks like the drive is listed as a:
ST3250824AS (P)ATA
I thought this driver was supposed to turn it into a SATA drive. Maybe it did and I'm just an idiot. So, I downloaded HD tune (give me a chart anyday over a bunch of gobbledy-gook numbers & letters) and installed it.
Here are the numbers after making about 40 copies of a 59.8 MB file on the desktop to the desktop (to try and tax the processor/hd):
HD Tune: ST3250824AS P Benchmark
Transfer Rate Minimum : 0.6 MB/sec
Transfer Rate Maximum : 66.9 MB/sec
Transfer Rate Average : 20.2 MB/sec
Access Time : 13.0 ms
Burst Rate : 152.4 MB/sec
CPU Usage : 1.5%
This is no where close to 3GB/sec, but a helluva lot faster than 35KB/sec like before, pretty dang fast nonetheless.
Hopefull someone smarter that me can figure out if I'm at the fastest I can go or not.
-MSW

Data transfer very slow on mac pro!! mac H/W unable to fit specifications.

Hi,
I am installinginternal disks on the quad mac pro and the transfer ratet in the mac are very slow!!!
the disks are: barracuda 7200.10 disks, 500 GB. Sta II 300, max ST3500630AS firmware 3.AAE . throughput:300mb.jumpred off to get the 300.
MAC tells that the QUAD MAC Pro equipment (2x2.66ghz dualcore intel xeon) comes with a 3.Gigabit specification/ 300MB/sec. (Intel ESB2 AHCI, speed: 3.0 Gigabit. AHCI version 1.10 supported)...
And the benchmarks of the disk ST3500630AS show maximum 80MB/sec and a minimin of 37.3MB/sec, average 63.1 MB/sec. (anandtech tests).
According to seagate.com the maximum sustained data transfer rate:78MB/s
but in the mac the reallity is different: I am getting a transfer rate of 22MB/sec!!!!! . with out any application running and only making copy of the files!!!!
that means that the mac is only providing only 1/3 of the expected transfer rate for the disks..
so, is there a way that the MAC Pro gets all the normal transfer rate for those disks???
Is the Quad MAC Pro hardware unable to get the maximum throughput of the disks???
It seems that the mac is unable to get also the average transfer rate of those disks.. how to correct it???
thanks a lot
Alberto
ps. just for fun: I am getting a faster transfer rate from an old power pc ,and old pc, and firewire 400 and old ide disks!!! (36MB/seg!!!)

Yup.
BThe latest Mac Pro are better, so if you have a new or 2 month old unit, Seagate should work, though I think there should be later firmware.
Some would say those drives take the cake or woRSe.
http://www.barefeats.com/hard91.html
SEAGATE PUZZLES
+Firmware version 3.AEE or later solves the slow sustained large block write speed issue for a single 7200.10 inside the Mac Pro.+
+The remaining performance issue is slow small random read speeds for one, two, three or four drives. No matter how many drives you configure in RAID 0 sets, the average random read speed for combined block sizes from 64K to 1024K is less than 30MB/s (based on QuickBench 3 testing).+
+Until Seagate fixes this, we can't recommend the 7200.10 series as the ideal boot drive for the Mac Pro (or Power Mac).+
http://www.barefeats.com/quad08.html

Updating your older Mac Pro for a few more years of good use...

Hello everyone, I wanted to share my tips for getting your aging Mac Pro running better for Mavericks and the FCPX 10.1.
Please note your Mac Pro's specs before doing what did..I am an editor and use the 3 big A's to get my work done. Adobe, Apple, Avid (not so much Avid)
I got a great deal on it for only $1300. I did a bunch of research and decided my upgrade options were best for my machine and the way I use it so your upgrade options my differ slightly. (do your research!!!)
I have 2009 Nehelem Mac Pro 2x 2.66 Ghz Quad-Core Intel Xeon. Installed was 6GBs of factory RAM, an upgraded ATI 512 GPU, and 1, 1TB WD Black system drive. (this was a nice upgrade compared to my 4 core Mac Pro)
I was running 10.8 and all my apps were installed and running. I installed 3 more 7200rpm drives to fill the drive bays. Momentus XT's 2TB each.
(I upgraded to Mavericks, as you know it overwirtes the old OS, I wanted the new FCPX...) more on this later.
1- RAM,
I removed the puny 6GBs of RAM it came with and installed 32GBs of 1066 Mhz DDR3 from OWC. I decided 32 would be enough for my needs looking into the App requirments and of course the cost. I noticed a slight difference in some performance. (to my dissapointment) fcpx beachballs!!
However now you will have more RAM to allocate RAM for programs that can read it. After Effects anyone...
link- http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/memory/Mac-Pro-Memory#1066-memory
2-GPU,
I had a 5770 sitting in the closet, and put that in and bascilly it sucked! I never like the 5770. fcpx beachballs!!
I contacted apple they informed me FCPX is written for GPUs and that a large card (while they didnt suppport it at the time) would be the best upgrade to better performance. So I installed the AMD Sappire 7950 3GB GPU from OWC. This is a monster card! and right away I noticed a huge difference in the perfromace of FCPX and AE! Not only that but the card supports up to 2K I believe... and is a great price... and for you gear heads it looks bad *** and the fan is super quiet!
less fcpx beachballs
link-http://eshop.macsales.com/item/Sapphire/100352MAC/
3- Hardrive,
Ok so now I'm thinking my machine is a beast! I have all this RAM and a huge GPU and the top ESATA drives you can buy, butI was still getting beachballs and FCPX was painfully slow at times..needless to say I felt Apple backing my in a corner to drink more coolaid a get the new small round black can...What to do???
As I mentioned before I did not do a clean install....Most folks dont like going through the pain of 2 days to do a clean install but I knew deep down it would have ot be done. Before I did that I decided to do some research on those new SSD cards everyone is raging about. Remeber your Mac Pro's bus speed is only so big...remember this when doing this last and most important upgrade!!
The market has all kinds of SSD drives for sale and OWC has a PCIe option (too much money for me) they have 3G drives 6G drives and so on. I could be wrong but buying a more expensive 6G card is a waste of money with bus speed of the Nehelem (this my differ with Westmere) I bought an of the self Kingston Hyper X 120GB (get at least 240GB if you can) and the OWC Mac Pro Drive Sled.
This by far was the best upgrade! Before installation please go through the pain of the clean install...For Mavericks you need to create a bootable drive on a USB stick first. You then need to monut SSD in an empty enclosure in order to get it to mount for the OS to be installed
OSX install Instructions-http://www.macworld.com/article/2056561/how-to-make-a-bootable-mavericks-install -drive.html
link- Drive Sled http://eshop.macsales.com/item/Other%20World%20Computing/MMP35T25/?utm_source=go ogle&utm_medium=shoppingengine&utm_campaign=googlebase&gclid=COyxzMyOub0CFcqUfgo d8xUAPQ
kin
link-SSD http://www.kingston.com/en/ssd/hyperx
PCIe Expansions
H.264 Encoding-
Matrox Compress HD PCIe card, This card is amazing however it does not support Compressor 4.1 but it does support legecy Compressor 3 and I did successfully install both Apps in Mavericks. (You must hide legecy versions in a folder in applications)
ESATA CARD- 4 Port 6G Caldigit esata card.
USB 3.0- Newertech 2 port USB3.0 Mac Pro Card. I dont recommend buying this card. Mac Pro Nehelem, was not made for USB3.0 and the drives I plug into it rarely mount...if ever mount... restart...when they do its a little faster than firewire and close to my Esata options. Dont bother....
I have setup my drive structure as follow.
Drive Bay 1 All System Apps run on the SSD drive.
Drive bay 2 hold the contents of all the Media for my projects.
Drive bay 3 hold all the AutoSaves and the FCPX Libaries and daily Project backups and renders.
Drive bay 4 Is Special Effects drive.
Dual Samsung 27 inch HD displays
M_Audio Monitors
1-3TB Caldigit RAID
12-TBs of drives attached to every port on the back.
2_USB docking ports voyager s3 for archive drives.
Now that I have all these upgrades, a clean install, fresh updates to my softwares, my Mac Pro runs better that ever! My boot ups time is twice as fast as before and my OS is very snappy...Oh yeah FCPX, After Effects, Boris RED, Mail, Safari all open at the same time a running brilliantly!
Many of us are not ready to upgrade to the new Mac Pro, and as we all know the legecy Mac Pro was built like a tank with military grade proccessors and endless upgrade options. It wont ever be as fast as that new black can but I know I will be working faster with my trusty Mac!
Good luck!
basementape films

SSD Killer-fast Mac Pro
Upgrade RAM to 16GB (4 x 4GB)
Upgrade all the hard drives to 2TB
Upgrade to 10.6.8 and CS5.5
Replace graphic card with ATI 5770
Upgrade the processors with X5355s, which is what many are doing now with theirs.
Forget Lion. Dropped PowerPC and Rosetta code support
Clone your drives.
Keep 40% or more free space on any drive.
Move any non-OS or applications off the boot drive to a data drive.
Move system and apps to SSD
Use SSD(s) for Aperture Library or stripe RAID.
None of the above, sell yours and pick up a 2010 2.8GHz $2100 (people that want or need to run Tiger and PowerPC will likely pay $700 range for MacPro1,1). Upgrade the processor in 2010, with 6-core 3.33GHz $590.
Apple Special Refurbished Mac Pro 2.8GHz Quad
Intel Xeon W3680 3.33 GHz, SLBV2
Intel Xeon UP W3680 3.33 GHz Processor - Hexa-core
W3670 Upgrade photos
At some point, it doesn't make sense to pour money into older system.
But you can, and do it gradually one step at a time.

G5 User wanting to Move to a Mac PRO but questions

My G5 1.8Gz single processor mac still works but i can't do anything that I want. Specifically, 3D Graphics and animation. All the programs nowadays want a better Graphics card and better processor.
Even the Free DAZ Studio 3, needs a much better computer than i have.
My computer is quite old now i recognize that. And i'm really ready to upgrade but I don't want to spend tooo much money aside from the near 2400 for the mac pro.
1. Would i be able to keep my Current monitor?? I have an ACER flat screen and is connected to the G5 Tower. I bought it about 1 year ago, so it's not too old and it works perfectly.
2. Will programs that i use in the G5 work fine in the mac pro( which will have Snow Leopard?Utilities, MS Office,3D Graphics Poser 6 and DAZ Studio 3. i don't really use any CLASSIC ( macos 9) stuff. Just OS X programs.
and will all the files I have work ? I mean, i don't want to have my mac not recognize files
3. Since i don't really want to spend extra money. Will the base Quad Core mac pro which has 3 GB RAM be sufficient even though my current G5 has 4GB??? Will the Mac pro run better even though it's less GBytes than my current G5?
Ok I'm not a scientist or professional, just a hobbyest. Some may say that it would be better to just get an iMac. i know imacs are great and cheaper but i already have a monitor and i don't want to waste it and not use it.
Or would a Mac mini be better for me???? I"m attracted to the mac mini price.. But would i be able to connect my monitor and have enough options for connecting Firewire drives etc?( There's only one Firewire port)
And is the mac mini good enough for a 3D Graphics/animation hobbyetst?

1. You can definitely keep your current monitor when you move to a Mac Mini/Mac Pro. A DVI or VGA connection is standard and available from either with included adapters.
2. Programs should run fine using Rosetta on Snow Leopard. However, you will have to try your individual programs to find out. Many older programs have a few bugs running in Leopard/Snow Leopard, and any current machine will run Snow Leopard only.
3. Mac Mini versus Mac Pro: you're looking at two different classes of machine. 3D rendering requires powerful hardware unless you are very patient. Only you can decide if a Mini is fast "enough". I encourage you to go to an Apple store. They will (probably) be willing to let you install one of the programs you use on both a Mini and a Mac Pro to see how they run, or they may have something pre-loaded you can try. Then you can decide if the speed difference is worth the $ to you.
Since you're still using a G5 1.8 GHz, it sounds like you get long use out of your machines. The Mac Pro is much better positioned to last a long time. Minis tend to be more "a good solution until the next hardware upgrade" devices or home theater PCs.
Good luck; let us know what you choose and how it goes!

Code on Mac Pro

Hi All,
So as my question will shortly reveal, I'm not really an expert when it comes to the inner workings of a computer. I recently read a performance review comparing the new mac pros and one of the outcomes was:
"In fact, the 2.8GHz Mac Pro running 64-bit code is faster than the 3.2GHz Mac Pro running 32-bit code!"
My question is, what is the difference between 64-bit code and 32-bit code? Does this have to do with the application you're running or the computer itself, etc?
I'd really appreciate any enlightenment you can bring me.
Thanks!
Gustaf

It deals with the tests, and with benchmarks, and applications.
More important, what do YOU plan to use or do on the Mac Pro? Mostly, it just shows that OS X 10.5.x and the Mac Pro is better.
In the past, most thought that, due to larger addresses and code, that 32-bit was "more efficient" and this shows that is not now true. That there is no penalty.
The same is true for some applications on 64-bit Vista as well.

Windows 7 beta, 64-bit, on a Mac Pro

I'm about to attempt this, so I thought I'd gather together some tips on it. Found this thread re MacBook Pros:
http://ourcoffeestops.com/2009/01/guide-windows-7-x64-build-7000-on-a-macbook-pr o/
Has anybody else tried this on a Mac Pro with any success?
I've got a GEForce 8800 GT, early-2008 Mac Pro with 2 x Quad core. Any advice?
Thanks

If you had installed Vista, they you probably know most all the how and why, and just need tips on what is new and different.
Main new item to be aware of:
Older driver updates and installers (like Apple Boot Camp) have to run in a new "Vista Compatibile Mode" property setting. It may not run, or run and not really be successful.
You will need to reinstall or install RealTek audio driver yourself.
Pull your drives and leave one raw drive in there, formatted as Master Boot Record and FAT (MSDOS) and boot from the Windows 7 DVD you burned earlier in Disk Utility.
If someone has a Mac Pro from pre-2008, it has a different EFI32 firmware, not UEFI 2.x (EFI64) and may see an EFI boot menu when first boot from Windows 7 DVD (or Vista SP1 or later) when using 64-bit (Microsoft added some support for EFI in 64-bit versions post Vista SP1).
http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=2731677&SiteID=1
http://forums.macrumors.com/archive/index.php/t-467704.html
https://www.microsoft.com/windows/windows-7/beta-installation-instructions.aspx
Message was edited by: The hatter

I have a Mac pro(1 free bay) and a mac mini I need to back both of them Is it better to use an external NAS HD or an internal hard drive on my mac pro (mid 2010) What option has the faster GB/s?

I have a Mac pro(1 free bay) and a mac mini I need to back up both of them (time machine) Is it better to use an external NAS HD or an internal hard drive on my mac pro (mid 2010)
What option has the faster GB/s?

Disk drive using native SATA bus interface will allow the drive to copy and always present and ready.
But once you have backup any hourly changes should be smaller and as long as the NAS and your switch should allow enough.
You should always have off line backups and don't rely on just one backup set or just TimeMachine.
WD RED models are designed for RAID and NAS and 7.2k instead of your more standard slower green 5400 rpm green models while still costing less than WD Blacks.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B008JJLW4M/
How to clone your system:
http://macperformanceguide.com/Mac-HowToClone-backup.html
http://macperformanceguide.com/Mac-HowToClone.html
http://www.macupdate.com/app/mac/7032/carbon-copy-cloner
Using Cloning as a Backup Strategy
http://www.macupdate.com/app/mac/7032/carbon-copy-cloner
http://www.bombich.com/software/updates/ccc-3.5.html
Clone to internal, TimeMachine to NAS is one way to go at it.

What is better Mac Mini or Mac Pro and 4K 40" screen or iMac 5K for work with Exel

I am working on Macbook pro retina for around 16 hours a day, it is ok but the screen is to small. I am opening about 25 - 30 EXCEL windows, 20 - 25 safari windows at the same time. Excel windows are small, they only show 40 rows and S column Now I am considering buying iMac 5k ( but the screen is only 27", however a very high resolution but I think that fonts and digits displayed may be too small ). I am also considering Mac Mini or Pro with 40" 4K TV ( 4k computer monitors are 27 - 31" , so better idea would be purchasing iMac 5k ) . The problem is that 40 - 42" TV don't have Display Port ( I can't find it anywhere )
Please help me to choose what would suit my needs better. I need large screen to work comfortably with an Excel sheets. What is better? Mac Mini or Mac Pro and 4K 40" screen or iMac 5K for work with Excel ?. The other problem I have is that when I spend 16 hours at work with retina macbook , my eyes are ok. Using the 30'' Dell screen 2560/1440 my eyes are tired after 2 hours.
Thanks for your help on advance
Best regards
David

Currently you can only get 4 K at 30 Hz via HDMI. Some users have reported jerky curser movement because of the 30 Hz.
I would go for the 5K iMac. You can add a second screen at 4K.
FaceTime HD camera
Simultaneously supports full native resolution on the built-in display and up to 3840 by 2160 pixels on an external display
Support for extended desktop and video mirroring modes
The Mac Mini supports:
Support for up to two displays at 2560 by 1600 pixels, both at millions of colors
Thunderbolt digital video output
Native Mini DisplayPort output
DVI output using Mini DisplayPort to DVI Adapter (sold separately)
VGA output using Mini DisplayPort to VGA Adapter (sold separately)
Dual-link DVI output using Mini DisplayPort to Dual-Link DVI Adapter (sold separately)
HDMI video output
Support for 1080p resolution at up to 60Hz
Support for 3840-by-2160 resolution at 30Hz
Support for 4096-by-2160 resolution at 24Hz
The 2013 Mac Pro can use three and more displays:
Mac Pro (Late 2013): Using multiple displays - Apple Support
I would go for multiple screens

Home music recording- is the Mac Pro better for this than an iMac?

I know it seems like a daft question but if you were to recommend a Mac for a DECENT home studio and money were (within reason) nearly no object WHAT Mac would you recommend? I always believed that a good sized desktop would be better than an iMac or a MacBook Pro (which is what I have been using for just a hobby home recording set-up) but is this a myth?
Please advise because the Mac Pro looks SCARY. I mean- the options are vast but what DO I NEED as opposed to want? Thank you kindly for reading.

I guess there is nothing wrong with the set-up except that the MacBook Pro is mine and the musicians need their own as I need mine for work.
Ah, I see. I think an iMac should be sufficient. Just be sure to get more RAM than the stock 1GB. Apple's prices on RAM are pretty severe compared to other vendors, so I'd recommend adding RAM after purchase. If you search the iMac forum for "RAM UK", you should find recommendations on reliable vendors. Don't go with lowest price; there's nothing that can cause you fits with a computer system more than flakey RAM, so you want a vendor with a good reputation for quality. I'd suggest bumping the iMac to the maximum 4GB. As to screen size, I tend to prefer having two screens rather than one big one - you can put palettes on the second monitor - so if it's a choice and desk space is sufficient, consider a 20" iMac and a second 17" or 20" screen to go with it.
If you reckon the interface is enough to do the mic justice and that Logic Express or Pro would do when the musicians know and love Cubase then I am happy to help them learn more Mac-based software and get that instead as it is also cheaper and looks like it would make more sense to ME.
Unless they're wedded to Cubase, I'd think that Logic Express should work quite well. You may all want to take a trip to an Apple reseller and take a look at it.
Unless there is a reason to "upgrade" the interface I guess that is one less item to acquire
An upgrade would seem logical only if the Safire isn't giving the quality you want or there aren't enough inputs.
I'd call your recommendation but I am in the UK and will probably talk to the nice folk at Dolphin Music in Newcastle as that is where I got the interface.
I wasn't sure where you were. If you are located in or near Newcastle-On-Tyne, you can find a list of authorized resellers here, or if you're near Manchester or Sheffield or don't mind taking a paddle down, you can drop by an Apple Store. You can then perhaps preview Logic Express before you decide. You might want to call before you make a special trip just to make sure your dealer can indeed demo LE.
Final recommendation; get really good microphones. Garbage in, garbage out, as they say, and having the right microphone, one that's suited for the instrument that's being recorded, is vital. The Neumann is of course high quality, but if you haven't already purchased, check around. You can find really good mics for less than Neumann charges; unless things have changed, you pay a bit of a premium for their reputation. AKG used to make really good mics, quite well suited for piano and acoustic guitar in particular, and there are no doubt others as well (my knowledge of specific models is rather out of date).
Cheers.
Message was edited by: Dave Sawyer
EDIT: P.S. If you can find Mix Magazine or EQ Magazine, those are pretty good reading. Lots of tips, product reviews, etc. Also, you can read a brief review of Logic Express 8 here:
http://www.macworld.co.uk/digitallifestyle/reviews/index.cfm?reviewid=2370

What is better a imac or a mac pro

which computer is better a imac or a mac pro?

With Mac Pros you can add fiberoptic PCIe Cards. With iMacs you have to settle for Thunderbolt, which isn't bad, but not quite as fast. With Mac Pros you can have four built-in SATA drives.
With iMacs you are stuck with one, and based on the latest info from http://www.macsales.com/ the internal iMac hard drive is not removable! So if it dies, you are left with external drives and the built-in optical as your only choice. With Mac Pros, you can expand your RAM more.
With Mac Pros the processor is frequently more powerful if your software desires it, and your graphics processor can be too if you desire it. If you don't think you'll need it, after examing the machines at the Apple Store, the iMac is a great machine.

New iMacs better than my Mac Pro?

So would the new 27-inch iMac top of the line out in Dec 2012, be a better/faster station than my MAC PRO 3.0 early 2008 with 3TB storage, 12GB RAM and a ATI 5870 card?
I'd be editing both CS6 and Final Cut Studio 3 on it.

In case Allan was unclear: Absolutely not.
I have a early 2008 MacPro 8x 3.2GHz (16GB RAM / 8TB Storage I've upgraded to SATA3 and have dual 27" Samsung monitors and a 37" color grading monitor on an Matrox MSO2 mini. I wouldn't trade it for a pile of new iMacs.

Which one is better for me Mac Pro iMac?

Hi everyone I'm getting very extremely irrateted with my laptop vaio and desktop computer hp ... My problem is both of them always jams can't do my work loosing lots of lots of hours restarting, waiting etc... You got the picture...
This is what I do and my needs: I have an online beads store (I'm not very big for now but working on it when my computer cooperate ;) ) so that means I take my own pictures so that means lots of pictures to edit, download etc... I keep in touch with my clients via social network... When my clients wants something I have to respond fast... When my clients wants the product now, they want it now... When it take me forever to download my product for sell well I loose clients and business ... I tried evrything with my computers getting 2 exterior stockage so that I don't overload my computers trying to keep the speed but it doesn't work... So that's why I'm thinking going with apple product because I heard and had lots of good reviews on their product... (I have iPhone and iPad and for real I can see the difference the ipad2 works better and faster then my laptop and desktop lol) I know it will be a big investment for me to buy iMac or Mac Pro ...
Like I said I need speed for downloading my photos, products online, editing thousands so pictures ... Please help me I'm not a nerdy in computers I'm the kind of women that drives the car not repaired it lol so I need a reliable product that won't crush and bug every time but will help me enjoy my work and not curse :) evrytime I need the computer....
Tks you for your help and sorry for too much blabla

Rock and hard place - lets say there is a perfect storm - and you have been though too many OS "1.0" versions to know that new hardware + new OS and the "787Dreamliner" shake-down cruise.
A Mac Pro 2010 as a backup machine yes, backup machine, for $1800 that runs 10.6.8 and up, as I would never rely on or have just one computer for my business. And still get the next model when / if etc.
Even a new MacBook Pro Retina is quite a lot packed in - and portable - as a 2nd system.
Ideas for systems and performance upgrades:
http://www.macperformanceguide.com
Mac Pro: 4x4TB storage, SSD system, 48GB RAM, 6-core 3.33GHz processor - even though "old" is still solid mature and "known entity." Cutting edge is not ideal for a professional business. And custom 12-core 3.33GHz if money is not a burden.
iMac lets you outgrow but offers those Thunderbolt storage. But a Mac Pro can use large SAS storage arrays off ATTO PCIe controller. So it is only when sharing a TB box, which are still at this point more propritary and really if it doesn't support mini-SAS/SATA along with TB...

Better video cards for the new 8-core Mac Pro...?

I don't know a ton about video cards. I did some research and the internet says that the Nvidia GeForce GTX 295 video card is the best card out right now. Will it work in the 8-core macpro? If not, or if it's not the best, what is the best video card that will work in the 8-core macpro?
P.S.
Does anyone know how to tell exactly whether a video card is better from another? I mean I can guess a video card at 1792MB is going to be better then one at 512MB, but I've also heard that, for example, the ATI Radeon HD 4870 512MB is better then the NVIDIA GeForce GT 120 512MB, and apple charges more for it so it probably is better, but all that tells me is the name of the cards, and that they are both at 512MB, so from that without any other information I would assume they're exactly the same just made by different companies, but there must be some other details that would explain why it's better right? Thanks in advance

Well I found out the Quadro FX 4800 works on it, that looks pretty good.
It's a good card, but it has a different application focus.
What applications do you use?
Answering that helps determine what the best card is.
The 5800 is better though, will it work?
Better, how?
The spec's read better?
How about real world performance?
Benchmarks?
They are very similar in shape and such.
Shape has little to do with anything.
The ROM is the key.
If the card is not produced as "OS X compatible", it does not have Mac ROM and cannot be used.
If there is a Mac edition that is similar (same GPU series, similar architecture) the ROM may be flashed to Mac ROM.
Especially in Geforce cards, the ability to edit ROMs and even write portions of the ROM is necessary to be able to flash a card.
Even then, no guarantees.
Often a port on a flashed card won't work after flashing.
Seems the 5800 has a 10 bit display port, so if the card were flashable, the display port wouldn't work.
The ROM chip size of a card is also of concern.
Many cards require either a new, larger ROM chip to accept the Mac ROM (soldering), or, require a hacked, "reduced" ROM to be written to allow flash.
Invariably, there will be some feature loss with a reduced ROM, but a good hacker usually gets rid of superfluous stuff.
Cards with more VRAM than the Mac counterpart will often times lose the extra VRAM- it won't be read by OS X.
Then there is the EFI question, which often creates a final stumbling block for converting a card.
There are many pioneers who flash cards.
If a card is flashable, it has already been done.
The Quadro 4500, 4800, and 5600 have all been worked out.
As of yet, the 5800 hasn't been sussed out for flash (as far as I can find).
Flashing the card is easy.
Finding a physically compatible card and a compatible ROM are the hard parts.
The two best retail cards for the Mac Pro are the Geforce GTX 285 and the Radeon HD 4870.

MAC pro is BETTER??

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for