Apple Mac Pro (Mid 2010) Review
by Anand Lal Shimpi on October 6, 2010 9:26 PM ESTFinal Words
The new Mac Pro isn’t significantly different from last year’s model, which isn’t a bad thing. Apple created a good formula with the original Mac Pro and with the Nehalem update fixed some of the remaining issues with its design.
The desktop is very easy to service and upgrade. You don’t get access to the PSU or optical drives, but storage is easy to swap as is memory. You can even swap CPUs if you have a lot of patience and learn from my mistakes. I’m happy with the chassis. It’s quiet and can accommodate most of what matters these days, a powerful GPU or two, a ton of memory and four SATA drives. I would prefer it if Apple would at least bundle 2.5” adapters and PCIe power cables with the Mac Pro. The system is so easy to upgrade yet unnecessarily painful to acquire parts to do so on your own. I get that the typical Mac Pro customer won’t be doing this on their own, but it never hurts to ask.
Compliments about the system aside, it’s rare to see an Apple product go this long without some sort of a refresh. There is room for a styling upgrade, for some tweaks with the add-in card retention plate - it’s just time to try something new. I’d expect to see that when LGA-2011 based Sandy Bridge arrives late next year.
I would still like to see Apple offer SSDs as standard, particularly in this price class. On top of that I'd like to see OS X get TRIM support and some faster SSDs as options in the Apple store. SandForce anyone?
As far as upgrading from a previous system goes, it makes sense for anyone hanging onto an old Power Mac G5 to bite the bullet and move to something more modern. Whether it’s an iMac or even a used Mac Pro, you’ll see a huge increase in performance.
If you have an original Mac Pro, an upgrade wouldn’t hurt either. It’s users who have the early 2008 Mac Pro with 8-cores or anything from 2009 that will find it harder to justify the upgrade. In fact, if you haven’t moved to an SSD yet you’re far better off buying one of those and waiting for Sandy Bridge rather than enjoy a marginal upgrade today.
The higher core count systems are interesting but it’s tough enough to justify eight cores. Making the case for 12 requires very particular applications/usage models. Ultimately if you need 12 cores you probably already know.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
84 Comments
View All Comments
Stas - Thursday, October 7, 2010 - link
No need for 750W PSU in the custom build. 500W would do just fine.$250 for a case... only Fortress 2, otherwise, GTFO. $150 LianLi would do just fine (oh, look, brushed aluminum, too O.O lol).
I say, you could build the custom for $1600 WITH the OS (especially if you shop around for MIR, coupons, etc.).
Nonetheless, very useful article. As a PC builder, I will forward this to my customers :D
DaveGirard - Friday, October 8, 2010 - link
If you actually put some newer GPUs in that machine and used them for rendering, you'd be cutting it too close at 500W.beammeup - Thursday, October 7, 2010 - link
So what Mac only workstation software is now out there that isnt available on a PC?Just wondering what the incentive is in a business environment to pay extra unless there are real tangible benefits to be had.
Also there is more price difference than just the GFX. The Dell comes with a 3 year warranty including on site support where as the Mac only comes with 1 year (its an extra $249 to upgrade that to 3 years)
xype - Thursday, October 7, 2010 - link
OS X? Apple Final Cut and Logic suites?mattgmann - Thursday, October 7, 2010 - link
nothing too special. Final Cut is the one everyone sites, but the fact is that premiere pro is just as, if not more capable. People just don't like (to learn) the interface.OSX is a cop-out excuse. It's just an operating system and doesn't increase productivity. In fact, it's horrific storage tools make file management a pain.
Stuka87 - Thursday, October 7, 2010 - link
The MacPro (And MacBook Pro) is used heavily in audio work as well. Take a step into most recording studios and you will see a Mac being used to edit and mix the tracks.Final Cut is used heavily in the movie industry, as is Aperture (photos are taken of the set, colors are adjusted, and once approved, the video is adjusted to match the colors in the photo).
DaveGirard - Friday, October 8, 2010 - link
No one uses Premiere in the professional world anymore. And it would just be a test of CUDA.seanleeforever - Friday, October 8, 2010 - link
final cut is pretty nice, but aperture is not a killer software.jags - Friday, October 8, 2010 - link
you really cannot argue with mac fanboys! they are pretty blind in their unwavering worship of apple. logic is NOT going to win here my friend.jags - Thursday, October 7, 2010 - link
Sorry this is a little out of context here and I apologize.This is a pretty good website and I come here frequently to check out new stuff. But is Anand a little obsessed with Apple or what? It seems Apple's the "only" thing he considers worth reviewing these days (for the most part). Come on, is everything else so low for you now? I know this is "anandtech" and you can write what you care about, but I am just asking.