4 ms·

On the flip side over in Linux land I built an 8 core 16T desktop with 64GB of RAM and two 27” 4K HDR monitors for less than half the price of the base Mac Pro.

On the flip side over in Linux land I built an 8 core 16T desktop with 64GB of RAM and two 27” 4K HDR monitors for less than half the price of the base Mac Pro. Oh and it has an RTX2080 which beats an RX580 so badly it’s practically attempted murder. I bet the apple tax I really do (typing this on a 5th gen mini) but the base model is hilariously expensive and in a world where I can buy a 12 core/16T for 499 that beats a 1200 intel cpu obsolete before its released (and that 12C will drop straight in). They’ll sell, apple stuff always does but unless you need macOS’s for some reason I don’t see how.

JBorrow 7y ago
Not to come out over-defensive, but your base configuration (I guess?) doesn't include a GPU, I bet your caches are significantly smaller, and also no ECC ram. I also bet your storage is considerably slower.
- liquidify 7y ago
  ECC ram can actually be a negative in certain use cases. Recording studios don't like the extra latency the ECC adds for MIDI for example.
  - spamizbad 7y ago
    ECC does not add latency and MIDI isn’t even sensitive to additional clock cycles in buffered memory (we are talking Nanoseconds here)
    - copperx 7y ago
      Audioland is a magic place where even different brands of hard drives can "affect the sound quality." I'm not even a bit surprised by these outlandish claims of ECC RAM latency affecting MIDI timing.
  - justinclift 7y ago
    Sources?
- noir_lord 7y ago
  No that price included a RTX2080 which is a pretty decent card and better than the base config in the new Mac Pro. Platform supports ECC all Ryzens do, though it’s on the board vendors to support it officially. Cache size no idea, will not that the new 3900X would obliterate the sky lake Xeon (12 cores vs 8 and comparable or better IPC) on in the Mac Pro base confit, it’s an 8 core older architecture against AMD’s new best consumer processor and its 499 vs intels neatest equiv at 1100, it’s not even remotely close at the moment.
  - JBorrow 7y ago
    My point was that ECC ram is twice as expensive. Cache is super expensive (your consumer chip will have significantly less), so are PCI lanes (again, consumer chips have significantly fewer of these), and also your Ryzen chip doesn't have AVX-512 support which is important for e.g. video work.
fetus8 7y ago
And what 27" 4K HDR monitors are you using? I've been looking for something similar for a while and haven't seen much with those base specs...
- noir_lord 7y ago
  LG 27UK650’s, good for the price.
floatboth 7y ago
More like Xeon tax. The new Mac Pro has a ton more PCIe lanes and DDR4 channels. It's a completely different league, it can't be directly compared to mainstream platforms that only have dual-channel and 16-24 lanes. EPYC would've been a better value, but it's still not cheap. Big computers with lots of memory and I/O capacity will always look ridiculously expensive next to mainstream desktop.
- ascii_only 7y ago
  No, even with Xeon and buying from big OEMs it still will be twice as cheap.
  - acdha 7y ago
    Do you have a quote for that? It was true for a while on cost/performance because the previous Mac Pro was never upgraded but outsight of that anomalous period the major players tend to be fairly competitive if you’re comparing equivalent parts.
    - ascii_only 7y ago
      Dell Precision 5820 Tower - Intel Xeon W-2145(8c,ht), 32gb ecc, Quadro P4000, 256gb NVMe - 3600$
- noir_lord 7y ago
  New ryzens have 24 and pci express 4.0. Support ecc as well.
- cbsmith 7y ago
  Don't worry, by the time this baby ships, you'll be able to get Ryzen 3900X's that are PCIe 4.0 instead of the Mac Pro's PCIe 3.0. Only 24 lanes, but that's all you'll need.
- dethac 7y ago
  Threadripper exists for PCIe + DDR4 (less than the reported 2TiB because of no RDIMM support, but theoretically could hit 2 TiB if people start producing 256GB UDIMMs. But... 64 lanes of PCIe 3.0. 32 cores. 64 threads with SMT. 80MB of cache (think of all the locality!). 256GB of RAM support (if you're using more, you're probably doing scientific compute and you're probably better off on Linux anyway, I'd assume). ECC support. 1700 USD. Quad channel RAM. Xeon W-3175X? 48 lanes of PCIe 3.0. 28 cores. Probably no more Hyperthreading after Zombieload. 512GB RAM support. ECC support. $3000 USD. Hexa channel RAM. And better yet? Competent TR motherboards with all the RAM/GPU/whatever support you need go as low as 400 CAD. Also, if you're less Mr. Moneybags, the 2920X exists. 12C/24T, same memory and IO capacity. 650USD. But wait, there's more! TR 1900X is older, but: 8C/16T, 64 PCIe 3.0 lanes, quad channel RAM. Same kind of memory support: 256GB. 300USD. A far shot from "ridiculously expensive" considering 300 USD (or even 650 USD) is less than some mainstream desktop CPUs. The 9900K is 490USD. The 9980XE is 2000USD. Also, TR3 with PCIe 4.0 is on the horizon, and Zen 2 with PCIe 4.0 is here. 24 lanes of PCIe 4.0 has equivalent bandwidth to 48 lanes of PCIe 3.0: same as the Xeon W-3175X. Big computers with lots of memory and IO capacity can be decently cost effective. You just can't ask Intel.
jwr 7y ago
Well, that's cool, but that's comparing Apples to Linux-Oranges, I guess. I do have a Linux box with a fast Intel CPU and it's nice and fast, but a Mac it ain't. I'm happy to pay more for a Mac machine, if only for the fact that I get an OS with working copy/paste in all applications. I won't be buying the Mac Pro anytime soon, though, I'm not willing to pay that much. But there are people who are and I'm glad there is something being offered there.
- bscphil 7y ago
  >if only for the fact that I get an OS with working copy/paste in all applications That's such an oddly specific reason to require MacOS. Can you say more? I can't say I've ever had a problem with copy/paste in Linux, in any application. If this issue were serious enough to me to consider doubling my computer's price tag, I'd at least first look at Hackintoshing, which tends to be pretty solid these days when you can pick out specific hardware in advance.
  - your-nanny 7y ago
    I suspect the issue is that in Linux the copy paste comnands are specific to each application, which can be annoying when copy pasting between multiple alplications., without a lot of configuring.
    - bscphil 7y ago
      Hmm, that sounds like a possibility, though as a practical matter every UI application I can remember using on Linux uses Ctrl-C / Ctrl-V, and terminal applications use Ctrl-Shift-C / Ctrl-Shift-V - because Ctrl is for sending signals to applications (like Ctrl-C). That's universal enough that I don't see any issue. (Actually I prefer it to the way Apple separates Cmd and Ctrl, which I find infuriating because of the awkward finger positioning it requires.)
      - your-nanny 7y ago
        Ctrl-Y, a la emacs. E.g. Matlab uses that by default.
ksec 7y ago
>On the flip side over in Linux land I built an 8 core 16T desktop with 64GB of RAM and two 27” 4K HDR monitors for less than half the price of the base Mac Pro. I am betting at half the price of Mac Pro, it doesn't include support for ECC, and hence Memory aren't ECC, the CPU aren't Server Grade ( Even on the AMD side you will need to use at least EPYC ), motherboard aren't Server Grade, with less PCI-E slot and not a decent case with decent power supply. Yes Ryzen supports ECC, but it is not tested as such, and broad vendor have to do their testing as well. And testing is expensive. ( Hence why Server Grade CPU are expensive ) Honestly I love AMD and loathe Intel. But these kind of comparison all over the internet is like saying I could get a 500hp Nissan GTR over 500hp Ferrari at half the price, but why did we not ever see that argument in Cars forum and only on tech forum.

JBorrow 7y ago

Not to come out over-defensive, but your base configuration (I guess?) doesn't include a GPU, I bet your caches are significantly smaller, and also no ECC ram. I also bet your storage is considerably slower.

liquidify 7y ago
ECC ram can actually be a negative in certain use cases. Recording studios don't like the extra latency the ECC adds for MIDI for example.
- spamizbad 7y ago
  ECC does not add latency and MIDI isn’t even sensitive to additional clock cycles in buffered memory (we are talking Nanoseconds here)
  - copperx 7y ago
    Audioland is a magic place where even different brands of hard drives can "affect the sound quality." I'm not even a bit surprised by these outlandish claims of ECC RAM latency affecting MIDI timing.
- justinclift 7y ago
  Sources?
noir_lord 7y ago
No that price included a RTX2080 which is a pretty decent card and better than the base config in the new Mac Pro. Platform supports ECC all Ryzens do, though it’s on the board vendors to support it officially. Cache size no idea, will not that the new 3900X would obliterate the sky lake Xeon (12 cores vs 8 and comparable or better IPC) on in the Mac Pro base confit, it’s an 8 core older architecture against AMD’s new best consumer processor and its 499 vs intels neatest equiv at 1100, it’s not even remotely close at the moment.
- JBorrow 7y ago
  My point was that ECC ram is twice as expensive. Cache is super expensive (your consumer chip will have significantly less), so are PCI lanes (again, consumer chips have significantly fewer of these), and also your Ryzen chip doesn't have AVX-512 support which is important for e.g. video work.

fetus8 7y ago

And what 27" 4K HDR monitors are you using? I've been looking for something similar for a while and haven't seen much with those base specs...

noir_lord 7y ago
LG 27UK650’s, good for the price.

floatboth 7y ago

More like Xeon tax. The new Mac Pro has a ton more PCIe lanes and DDR4 channels. It's a completely different league, it can't be directly compared to mainstream platforms that only have dual-channel and 16-24 lanes. EPYC would've been a better value, but it's still not cheap. Big computers with lots of memory and I/O capacity will always look ridiculously expensive next to mainstream desktop.

ascii_only 7y ago
No, even with Xeon and buying from big OEMs it still will be twice as cheap.
- acdha 7y ago
  Do you have a quote for that? It was true for a while on cost/performance because the previous Mac Pro was never upgraded but outsight of that anomalous period the major players tend to be fairly competitive if you’re comparing equivalent parts.
  - ascii_only 7y ago
    Dell Precision 5820 Tower - Intel Xeon W-2145(8c,ht), 32gb ecc, Quadro P4000, 256gb NVMe - 3600$
noir_lord 7y ago
New ryzens have 24 and pci express 4.0. Support ecc as well.
cbsmith 7y ago
Don't worry, by the time this baby ships, you'll be able to get Ryzen 3900X's that are PCIe 4.0 instead of the Mac Pro's PCIe 3.0. Only 24 lanes, but that's all you'll need.
dethac 7y ago
Threadripper exists for PCIe + DDR4 (less than the reported 2TiB because of no RDIMM support, but theoretically could hit 2 TiB if people start producing 256GB UDIMMs. But... 64 lanes of PCIe 3.0. 32 cores. 64 threads with SMT. 80MB of cache (think of all the locality!). 256GB of RAM support (if you're using more, you're probably doing scientific compute and you're probably better off on Linux anyway, I'd assume). ECC support. 1700 USD. Quad channel RAM. Xeon W-3175X? 48 lanes of PCIe 3.0. 28 cores. Probably no more Hyperthreading after Zombieload. 512GB RAM support. ECC support. $3000 USD. Hexa channel RAM. And better yet? Competent TR motherboards with all the RAM/GPU/whatever support you need go as low as 400 CAD. Also, if you're less Mr. Moneybags, the 2920X exists. 12C/24T, same memory and IO capacity. 650USD. But wait, there's more! TR 1900X is older, but: 8C/16T, 64 PCIe 3.0 lanes, quad channel RAM. Same kind of memory support: 256GB. 300USD. A far shot from "ridiculously expensive" considering 300 USD (or even 650 USD) is less than some mainstream desktop CPUs. The 9900K is 490USD. The 9980XE is 2000USD. Also, TR3 with PCIe 4.0 is on the horizon, and Zen 2 with PCIe 4.0 is here. 24 lanes of PCIe 4.0 has equivalent bandwidth to 48 lanes of PCIe 3.0: same as the Xeon W-3175X. Big computers with lots of memory and IO capacity can be decently cost effective. You just can't ask Intel.

jwr 7y ago

Well, that's cool, but that's comparing Apples to Linux-Oranges, I guess. I do have a Linux box with a fast Intel CPU and it's nice and fast, but a Mac it ain't. I'm happy to pay more for a Mac machine, if only for the fact that I get an OS with working copy/paste in all applications. I won't be buying the Mac Pro anytime soon, though, I'm not willing to pay that much. But there are people who are and I'm glad there is something being offered there.

bscphil 7y ago
>if only for the fact that I get an OS with working copy/paste in all applications That's such an oddly specific reason to require MacOS. Can you say more? I can't say I've ever had a problem with copy/paste in Linux, in any application. If this issue were serious enough to me to consider doubling my computer's price tag, I'd at least first look at Hackintoshing, which tends to be pretty solid these days when you can pick out specific hardware in advance.
- your-nanny 7y ago
  I suspect the issue is that in Linux the copy paste comnands are specific to each application, which can be annoying when copy pasting between multiple alplications., without a lot of configuring.
  - bscphil 7y ago
    Hmm, that sounds like a possibility, though as a practical matter every UI application I can remember using on Linux uses Ctrl-C / Ctrl-V, and terminal applications use Ctrl-Shift-C / Ctrl-Shift-V - because Ctrl is for sending signals to applications (like Ctrl-C). That's universal enough that I don't see any issue. (Actually I prefer it to the way Apple separates Cmd and Ctrl, which I find infuriating because of the awkward finger positioning it requires.)
    - your-nanny 7y ago
      Ctrl-Y, a la emacs. E.g. Matlab uses that by default.

ksec 7y ago

>On the flip side over in Linux land I built an 8 core 16T desktop with 64GB of RAM and two 27” 4K HDR monitors for less than half the price of the base Mac Pro. I am betting at half the price of Mac Pro, it doesn't include support for ECC, and hence Memory aren't ECC, the CPU aren't Server Grade ( Even on the AMD side you will need to use at least EPYC ), motherboard aren't Server Grade, with less PCI-E slot and not a decent case with decent power supply. Yes Ryzen supports ECC, but it is not tested as such, and broad vendor have to do their testing as well. And testing is expensive. ( Hence why Server Grade CPU are expensive ) Honestly I love AMD and loathe Intel. But these kind of comparison all over the internet is like saying I could get a 500hp Nissan GTR over 500hp Ferrari at half the price, but why did we not ever see that argument in Cars forum and only on tech forum.