4 ms·

32 M1 cores may well be the most powerful desktop you can get. The only equals it might have are the top-end Zen3 chips. IMHO this would be more fitting for th

by api 6y ago

32 M1 cores may well be the most powerful desktop you can get. The only equals it might have are the top-end Zen3 chips. IMHO this would be more fitting for the Mac Pro's price. Intel Mac Pros have always been grossly underpowered for something so expensive. It should be the most powerful desktop you can get for that tag.

Yetanfou 6y ago
> . It should be the most powerful desktop you can get for that tag. It should not, the most powerful machine you can get tends to be the one you build yourself from components sourced from competing suppliers. This is one of the reasons people build 'Hackintosh' machines, trading design and branding for raw power.
- neogodless 6y ago
  I think you misunderstood the parent comment. They are suggesting that if you're paying the massive premium that Apple charges for the Mac Pro workstation, it should be the most powerful desktop available. The actual situation is more like what you're saying, but that isn't what the word should means.
  - Yetanfou 6y ago
    No, it isn't a misunderstanding, just a statement of fact. If you want the highest price/performance ratio branded products are usually not the place to go, especially not products from companies which produce "luxury" goods. You pay for the branding, the marketing, the right to be part of the community of users just like you pay for the hardware. Those who built 'Hackintosh' style systems spend less money but more time getting their systems up and running.
WanderPanda 6y ago
The thermals might rather fit an iMac instead of a Mac Pro though :D
gameswithgo 6y ago
you can get a 64 core threadripper so....
- api 6y ago
  Yeah, forgot about that beast. That would beat it. A multi-chip Epyc or high-end Xeon would beat it too, but that'll set you back almost as much as the Mac Pro. A 32-core pro would still win hands down in power efficiency. A 64-core Threadripper or a multi-Epyc would be a nice extra space heater in cold climates though.

by api 6y ago

Yetanfou 6y ago

> . It should be the most powerful desktop you can get for that tag. It should not, the most powerful machine you can get tends to be the one you build yourself from components sourced from competing suppliers. This is one of the reasons people build 'Hackintosh' machines, trading design and branding for raw power.

neogodless 6y ago
I think you misunderstood the parent comment. They are suggesting that if you're paying the massive premium that Apple charges for the Mac Pro workstation, it should be the most powerful desktop available. The actual situation is more like what you're saying, but that isn't what the word should means.
- Yetanfou 6y ago
  No, it isn't a misunderstanding, just a statement of fact. If you want the highest price/performance ratio branded products are usually not the place to go, especially not products from companies which produce "luxury" goods. You pay for the branding, the marketing, the right to be part of the community of users just like you pay for the hardware. Those who built 'Hackintosh' style systems spend less money but more time getting their systems up and running.

WanderPanda 6y ago

The thermals might rather fit an iMac instead of a Mac Pro though :D

gameswithgo 6y ago

you can get a 64 core threadripper so....

api 6y ago
Yeah, forgot about that beast. That would beat it. A multi-chip Epyc or high-end Xeon would beat it too, but that'll set you back almost as much as the Mac Pro. A 32-core pro would still win hands down in power efficiency. A 64-core Threadripper or a multi-Epyc would be a nice extra space heater in cold climates though.