Where are the 6-core Mac Pro at 3.33GHz in the 'store'???

I'm trying to configure a 6-core Mac Pro at 3.33GHz with some extras but, it's nowhere to be found at the online store!... What gives??
Thanks

Thanks... But when I go to the buy page this is all i get....
http://store.apple.com/ussmb_78313/browse/home/shop_mac/family/macpro
It shows only the 3 models i mentioned earlier. Does it matter where you are located... (i'm trying this from Aruba)

Similar Messages

  • Which is faster at rendering and compressing hd video... the new iMacs or the 8 core Mac Pro

    the new iMacs or the 8 core Mac Pro

    the 5770 is listed as 2010 only as well. The "anomolies" are with HDCP copy protected content:
    Mac Pro: Using ATI Radeon HD 5770 graphics card with Mac Pro released before 2010
    This may be the same story.

  • HT3770 Where are 1,1 (2006) Mac Pros?

    Bought as a full 64bit system and now even Apple is not  listing it as it would:
    http://support.apple.com/kb/HT3770
    So no Mountain Lion support on a +2,5K€ system boutght as a 64bit one?
    Com'on Apple stop playing with those iThings and go back to Mac computers...

    Maybe you guys are just not getting the point.
    I bought it as a full 64bit computer and now the same company -Apple-  is telling her users that "sorry, that was not true!"
    The questiion is why should I upgrade buying a new Mac Pro if my actual config is just working as aspected and should work as a full 64bit config? Is just a silly Apple decision of not supporting a system that even today is better that some new non-Pro models. AAMOF I can even run Windows 7 64bit on it.... but not because Apple support it... of course you have to hack a bit just because Apple decided to give no support for such a config.
    That is a stupid move most of all because the current MacPro models are just "old": no USB3, no Thunderbolt, no SDXC slot, old video cards ... but of course same old price... in the mean time that price should have been lowered a lot (maybe up to 30-40% in those config whitout a super Xeon config). At an updated price I would have bought a new Mac Pro already (at least 8 months ago). New Xeon CPUs are coming... we'll see what's going to happen.
    Very old-school Mac user here guys... one of those user who always supported Apple especially when things were not going as well today.
    There is only one absolute certainty: Apple is no more investing in the Pro market. And it is a real shame.

  • New 8 Core Mac Pro Question

    What will the 8 Core Mac Pro do for Aperture? I know you need 4 gig of ram and the ATI video card. I am just curious about what processor to purchase.
    I find that Exporting images from a wedding of 800 or so images takes about 2.5 hours on my G5 Dual 1.8 with 3 gigs of ram. I would really like to speed up the Export process!
    I will also be using Photoshop CS3 when it ships. Will Actions that I have written run faster on the 8 Core Machine?
    I just need some buying advice.
    Kevin Hawkins

    How much Aperture alone sees today is not so much the point as is what happens with real world performance. Real world it is not just about the theoretical limit of what Aperture sees; apps and the OS/RAM/GPU/CPUs all work together, and folks typically do have more than one app open at a time. My expectation is that although certainly fully functional with 4 GB, the kind of users that run Aperture on a MP will find that greater than 4 GB of RAM is clearly beneficial.
    Anecdotal reports also seem to indicate that Mac Pros have an inherent need for more RAM than previous boxes needed.
    Also OS 10.5/Leopard is due soon enough that we should be planning new box configurations based on our expectations of what impact Leopard and Aperture v2 will have on RAM utilization. My strong opinion is that we will be able to take advantage of more RAM as 2007/2008 play out.
    In any event 4 or 5 (1 Apple plus 4 third party) GB of RAM is an excellent place to start, and RAM always gets cheaper and is easy to retrofit later. IMO we should buy only 2 GB sized DIMMs to facilitate maximum future expansion.
    -Allen Wicks

  • Where can I purchase new Mac Pro in RSA?

    Where can I purchase new Mac Pro in RSA?

    Use the link here to find a Reseller...
    http://www.apple.com/za/buy/

  • 12 Core Mac Pro client fails to connect to xsan

    Dear all, hopefully someone can shed some light on this problem.
    We have an xsan system running with clients and MDCs running 10.6.6, XSAN 2.2.1. We have just purchased a new 12 core Mac Pro but we cannot get the machine connected as a client. XSAN admin sees the machine, but fails to write the configuration files on the client. We have tried running the client in 32 and 64 bit modes.
    Has anybody else had the same problem? We do have one other 64 bit 8 core Mac Pro (early 2009) client connected without a problem.
    Any advice would be greatfully received.
    Richard

    Problem solved. Someone had unplugged the metadata ethernet cable!

  • How to extend the time line for the premiere on mac pro mavericks

    how to extend the time line for the premiere on mac pro mavericks

    Wrong place.
    Try the Adobe Premiere forum.
    http://forums.adobe.com/community/premiere
    Good luck,
    x

  • Time machine only copies User Info and Users (Applications, Library, and System are missing) from my quad core Mac Pro.  45 Gb of 162 Gb are missing.  Any one having success with time machine copying all folders using Mavericks?   What do I need to do dif

    Time machine only copies User Info and Users (Applications, Library, and System are missing) from my quad core Mac Pro.  45 Gb of 162 Gb are missing.  Any one having success with time machine copying all folders using Mavericks?
    What do I need to do differently?

    The late, great Pondini was investigating that issue before he passed away.
    See here: https://discussions.apple.com/thread/5125969
    I think there might be information there on how to reset Time Machine to do a full backup. I think you basically have to reset it and start over.

  • How do i engage my 8 core mac pro to use all it's cores when using final cut pro and other applications that need processing power? at the moment they seem to be idle...

    how do i engage my 8 core mac pro to use all it's cores when using final cut pro and other applications that need processing power? at the moment they seem to be idle...

    First, did you use Setup or Migration Assistant? That can happen when coming from a PowerMac or sometimes even from another (Intel) Mac.
    Second, wait for the next version of Final Cut due very soon to ship (may have to wait for the ".1" of course to clean up any early issues.
    Final Cut Pro - Wikipedia
    There are a few apps that are better.  I think you can run multiple instances of Handbrake for one.
    I've read about and wanted to try PowerDirector 9 (Windows)
    PowerDirector 9 video software
    video editing software Wiki

  • Is the new Core i7 MacBook Pro as fast as my quad core Mac Pro?

    Hello,
    I'm wondering if someone could advise me about the relative power of my current Mac Pro (2 x 3 GHz Dual-Core Intel Xeon 8GB RAM), and the new 17" MacBook Pro (2.66GHz Core i7 8GB RAM). Is there a website that details such comparisons?
    The reason being that I'm thinking of exchanging my Mac Pro for a MacBook Pro, so that I would be able to have a more mobile system. If the processing speed, on tasks such as video encoding, was similar between these machines, then I am tempted.
    Other than processing speed, I'm wondering if there would be any disadvantages to going ahead with this swap. One thing that comes to mind is that I would need to unplug a number of cables when taking the MacBook Pro on the road, but as I wouldn't be doing so a lot I don't see this as a particular issue. In terms of storage, I would be getting external enclosures to house the SATA drives currently in my Mac Pro and connecting them to the Macbook Pro through FireWire 800, which presumably means slower transfers between the drives, but again, this isn't a particular concern as transfer speeds would still be pretty fast.
    My Mac Pro is connected to an Apple Cinema Display so obviously I would keep hold of that as a display for the MacBook Pro, and use my Apple keyboard/mouse as well.
    Are there any other disadvantages that I haven't considered?
    Thanks
    Nick

    OK. Here's some test results. The most intense process I use on my Macs is using Handbrake to encode either DVDs or mkv files to mp4 files which generally pushes all cores to the max. I am using the latest 64bit version of Handbrake on both Macs.
    So I took a sample mkv file of 65 seconds length and ran it using the same settings on both the Mac Pro (2 x 3 GHz Dual-Core Intel Xeon 8GB RAM) and the Macbook Pro (2.66 GHz Intel Core i7 4GB RAM), straight after starting up both Macs so that there was plenty of RAM to spare on both. I ran the test two times on each Mac and got similar results both times, with the best results on each machine being as follows:
    Mac Pro: max RAM used: 380MB, Time for encode: 102 seconds
    Macbook Pro: max RAM used: 495MB, Time for encode: 84 seconds
    This was for a 2-pass encoding with Turbo first pass to 2200kbps MP4 file from 720p mkv file.
    So the Macbook Pro is coming in considerably quicker for this particular task. I'm not sure why the Mac Pro used less RAM, and whether this is the main factor in the time difference. Like I said, there was plenty of unused RAM on both Macs when I ran the test. I am no expert on the inner workings of Macs!
    Needless to say though, I am happy with the results and very happy with the new Macbook Pro.
    Nick

  • Why are there so many problems with the early 2008 Mac Pro ???

    Hi everybody out there using Mac Pro's early 2008,
    I found out there is a lot of problems with the early 2008 Mac Pro.
    My early 2008 Mac Pro has been repaired ones under warranty and now it stopped working again ! Also see under: Mac Pro early 2008 no chime and does not start up. Why is this ????
    It worked well for about 2 years and then it just fails and i had this failing issue twice already !!! Is this just a BAD Apple product or how do you think I need to approach this. Let’s face it, these machine don’t come cheap and you at least expect them to work without problems for 4-5 years. What is happening here ???
    Cheers, Kavango

    go to a black screen after 15 minutes or a couple hours
    That is probably an indication that you need to find a new graphics card.
    RE: Mac Pro Replacement Graphics cards
    1) Apple brand cards,
    2) "sold in the Apple store" cards, and
    3) "Mac Edition" cards ...
    ... show all the screens, including Boot up screens, Safe Mode, Installer, Recovery, debug screens, and Alt/Option boot screens. At this writing, these choices include:
    1) Apple brand cards:
    • Apple-firmware 5770, about US$250** works near full speed in every model Mac Pro, Drivers in 10.6.5
    • Apple-firmware 5870, about US$450
    2) "sold in the Apple store" cards
    • NVIDIA Quadro 4000, about US$1200
    • NVIDIA Quadro 5000, about US$2500
    3) "Mac Edition" cards -- REQUIRE 10.8.3 or later:
    • SAPPHIRE HD 7950 3GB GDDR5 MAC Edition, about US$480** Vendor recommends Mac Pro 4,1
    • EVGA GTX 680 Mac Edition, about US$600
    The cards above require no more than the provided two 6-pin aux power connectors provided in the Mac Pro through 2012 model. Aux cables may not be provided for third-party cards, but are readily available.
    If you are Meet ALL of these:
    • running 10.8.3 or later AND
    • don't care about "no boot screens" etc AND
    • can re-wire or otherwise "work out" the power cabling, THEN:
    You can use many more cards, even most "PC-only cards"

  • Around the web where are there lists of mac magazines?...

    Around the web where are there lists of mac magazines?... besides macworld and macaddict.

    http://www.macmagazines.co.uk/
    http://www.magazine-group.co.uk/magazine/computers-technology/apple-mac
    http://www.icreatemagazine.com/
    Try google. Unless you live in China .There is much more on the web.

  • Quod Core Mac Pros - What performance are you getting?

    I'm trying to work out whether the performance I'm getting out of my new Mac Pro is correct. Yesterday, the machine ran out of memory running sixteen sample based virtual instruments, two audio tracks and Izotope Ozone on the master bus. This seems pretty pathetic performance to me. I should be getting more out of the machine than this, surely?

    ben wright1 wrote:
    I'm trying to work out whether the performance I'm getting out of my new Mac Pro is correct. Yesterday, the machine ran out of memory running sixteen sample based virtual instruments, two audio tracks and Izotope Ozone on the master bus. This seems pretty pathetic performance to me. I should be getting more out of the machine than this, surely?
    16 sample based instruments? Like what?
    Are you using Logic 9?
    If you read the boards.. L-9 seems to hitting the memory wall, not necessarily the computer.
    pancenter-

  • Need help improving XP SP3 performance on 4-core Mac Pro 2009

    I'm running Windows XP SP3 under Boot Camp 3 (Mac OS X v. 10.6.2). Currently, XP is on a second partitioned HD, but it was previously running on a drive all its own with the same problems which are:
    When I boot into Windows the sound stutters quite a bit. I updated the Realtek drivers and used the Apple USB device (24" LED speakers) but nothing completely got rid of the static/stuttering.
    The real problem comes when running Left 4 Dead. Whenever I get to a new part of any level (where zombies are) the graphics freeze for up to a few seconds and the sound gets glitchy, repeating broken staticky snippets. I don't have other games installed but I get similar performance when watching a YouTube video in Firefox.
    Is this normal for Windows on a Mac Pro or do other Mac Pro Boot Campers run Windows smoothly? I have seen YouTube videos of Windows running smoothly on MacBook Pros and iMacs. Just wondering if I'm doing something wrong.
    Finally, I'm running two graphics cards, an ATI 4870 and an NVIDIA GT120. I've run with both on, one off, the other off, the NVIDIA removed, the NVIDIA installed. No matter what I do, the video glitchiness is always pretty bad. (The audio is also bad.)
    Thanks in advance for any info or pointers.

    I have had success running boot camp on an 8-core Mac Pro from 2009. I have an ATI 4870.
    I initially used Windows 7 Beta (32bit) and then RC (64bit) and finally the shipping version (64 bit Professional).
    32-Bit crippled Crysis performance for me (only the demo). I was able to run the game with most settings all the way up (excluding Anti-aliasing), at 1920x1080 and it ran fine for about one minute before hitting the hard-drive for about 10 seconds. This thrashing occurred repeatedly and I have up - that problem was resolved when I moved to 64bit Windows.
    Other games I have played with no trouble are The Orange Box & Borderlands, each with maxed resolution and settings.
    Optical audio and the front headphones work fine for me - though the 4 conductor cord does not recognize the microphone (from an iPhone headset) in Windows, which gets me down as it would be nice to audio-chat in some games.
    Try these thing in this order if you can, and have not already:
    Patch the game (though if this is happening in Firefox as well, it seems like an OS problem)
    Update directX (I really have no clue here, I assume Windows does this automatically?)
    Try demos of other games
    Upgrade the OS to 64bit (Especially if you have over 3GB of ram
    Go from XP to 7 (I have had no trouble with Windows 7 on my machine)
    Try a DVI monitor (I am using a 21" Westinghouse, have never connected an Apple display)
    Good luck!
    Owen

  • 12 core Mac Pro does not improve render time over iMac quad core

    I'm rendering the same composition independently on two computers and they are basically rendering at the same rate, which is slightly better than 1 frame per second.
    The project settings and preferences are identical in each instance (with the exception of memory and multiprocessing, which I have experimented with ad nauseum). The composition includes no motion blur, no effects, just a couple of layers of chroma keyed .mov files (using keylight 2.0) and some still images. Neither machine is running any other applications, except occasionally Google Chrome, which seems to have no effect on performance.
    Both systems are running the latest version of After Effects CC (2014) and using the Classic 3D renderer.
    System 1 MAC PRO:
    Mac Pro 12 core 2.7 GHz Intel Xeon E5
    dual AMD FirePro 500D 3072 MB GPUs
    32 GB RAM
    OS X 10.9.4
    System 2 iMAC:
    iMac quad core 2.5 GHz Intel Core i5
    AMD Radeon HD 6750M 512 MB GPU
    8 GB RAM
    OS X 10.9.3
    As you can see, system 1 is vastly more powerful, and yet no combination of memory/multiprocessing settings can get the system to render faster than system 2.
    It doesn't seem to matter how much or little RAM I reserve for other applications (I have settled on 4 GB), or the number of CPUs I reserve for After Effects. The one setting that has improved performance is turning OFF render multiple frames. And even then it only brings the performance of the Mac Pro up to par with the iMac. I have cleared my cache, rebooted the computer, and read everything I can find online regarding the optimization of render settings.
    Here's a comparison of the respective CPU Loads:
    iMac
    Mac Pro
    With such a low CPU load, After Effects is obviously not utilizing the resources available to it on the Mac Pro. What a waste.
    Can anyone help?

    There's plenty of debate about the new Mac Pro vs a kitted out iMac.  Benchmarks show that some iMac After Effects processing can actually be faster than on a Mac Pro, depending on the content and some other factors.  If you're using software that has been optimised for the Mac Pro's GPU-centric architecture, like Final Cut Pro X, you will see great benefits.
    mac pro vs imac
    In my own facility recently we opted out of purchasing Mac Pros this year, and bought top-end iMacs instead.  The benefit to cost ratio simply didn't make sense for us right now.  Mac Pros are awesome machines, but a significant component of their cost is the dual GPUs, which are simply no benefit to After Effects.
    Reports say that the After Effects engineers are working on a major revamp of the After Effects processing system, so I'm betting you will realise far greater benefits from your Mac pro in coming AE versions.  For now, you may continue to see performance that is not spectacularly better than a souped-up iMac, depending on the type of processing involved.
    I've seen a few benchmarks that suggest the 8 core systems give better bang-for-buck than the 12 cores.  Try reducing your processors to 8 in After Effects and see if it makes a difference.  With 8 cores, allocate 3GB of RAM per core to leave some RAM for the OS.

Maybe you are looking for