New Mac Pro - 2018?

Discussion in 'Apple Desktop Hardware/Software' started by elvis, Apr 5, 2017.

  1. digitvll

    digitvll Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2019
    Messages:
    3
    Definitely much better monitor available at a better price. It would be for people who already run apple home products everywhere tbh.

    Fanboys ayyy
     
    thecondor likes this.
  2. holdennutta

    holdennutta Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2002
    Messages:
    7,361
    Location:
    Brisbane
    I guess that's the main take home point then really. Not a whole lot more needs to be said (but will).

    Unless, somehow Apple have created a monitor that IS as good functionally as the reference monitors for less. It's possible, if ?unlikely, I suppose.

    Lol - Teachers can't afford this shit. Even if they actually thought they needed it. Small sample size, obviously, but all my highschool mates have become doctors and solicitors. They're all the cheapest pricks on the planet and would never buy this shit either!
     
    thecondor likes this.
  3. Zee

    Zee Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2002
    Messages:
    10,471
    Location:
    SYD/MNL/SIN/SFO
    Photography is a hobby, and I steer clear of Adobe, there's only so much butt raping I can handle.

    My work is home automation, and I mainly deal with Savant (Mac), RTI (WIN), Fibaro (web interface), and Lutron (WIN). Savant is slowly making steps towards being programmable from a browser, and I can already program a basic system on an iPad. Fibaro is a Web interface, and it's reasonably powerful, and RTI will be stuck on Windows until humanity finally destroys itself.

    On top of that, I do some gaming, and that really is stuck with Windows for the foreseeable future - unless Elite: Dangerous and DCS are released on Linux.

    Z...
     
  4. OP
    OP
    elvis

    elvis Old school old fool

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    36,659
    Location:
    Brisbane
    I'll wait for objective reviews to talk about the technical capabilities of this monitor. 1600 nits peak / 1000 nits sustained is certainly impressive (assuming it's true). But peak/sustained brightness is only one of many factors to consider for a reference display. Spend a few minutes browsing consumer-facing (but still quite scientific) sites like HDTVTest or RTings, and you'll start to get a feel for just how deep the rabbit hole of display technology goes. Most of it is well over the head of average folk (even the OLED enthusiasts on these forums miss important points in their discussion threads).

    Don't forget either that we're on a cusp where Rec.2100 is just around the corner, speaking adoption wise. Pixel count is nice, but it doesn't mean squat when you start talking colour standards. Can these displays do true 10 bit processing? 12 bit? More? Or are they still dithering at the pixel driver level? I'm keen to find out.

    The issue here is more that Apple fans are largely ignorant to the goings on of the professional industries outside of Apple. If you do this for a living, you stay abreast of all vendors. The creative industries are enormous in scale, as are the vendors, suppliers and content producers within it. To assume even for a minute that Apple - a consumer computing company - lead the professional industries somehow, is quite laughable. Every day there are announcements more exciting and more bleeding edge than yet another midrange computer with yet another midrange monitor attached.

    Perspective is a wonderful and very grounding thing.

    That's my running joke across the two threads on Apple "Pro" equipment. This bit of gold in particular:
    Where the discussion was around the slipping standards of the MacBook Pro and how it was once a great bit of kit for high end users, but is now midrange at best.

    The same discussion weaved in and out of the Mac Pro discussion, many repeating the same sorts of things here. Lo and behold, we have the creative-industries-focused cheese grater back on offer. Sorry, teachers, lawyers and accountants. I guess you'll have to make do with LITERALLY EVERY OTHER COMPUTER ON OFFER THAT MEETS YOUR NEEDS.
     
    Last edited: Jun 4, 2019
  5. aokman

    aokman Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2001
    Messages:
    12,598
    Location:
    Melbourne
    You are smoking crack, name another 6K display for this price or another 6K display at all, name another monitor with 1600nits, name another monitor with 576 zone local dimming. How about 1,000,000:1 contrast ratio?

    I get Apple hate is trendy but you guys take it to a fuking new level sometimes. This is a very high end reference class display that is competing the likes of EIZO etc.
     
    [KEi]SoVeReIgN likes this.
  6. boneburner

    boneburner Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2009
    Messages:
    2,074
    Oh I think the panel is actually impressive - and can immediately think of workflows where multiples of this monitor would save time and money. I retain my right to scoff at the overpriced stand and adaptor tho.

    edit: an example from the writeup over @ ArsTechnica

    " Even at $5,000, the XDR is priced such that every person along every step of the path from a shoot to the final color correction in a video or film production can have it. Normally, only the last person in that chain has the ultra-high-end monitor, which means they'll be doing countless hours of work to correct image issues that were not visible to people earlier on in the process."

    And the last person monitor they are alluding to are professional reference displays that can cost $30,000 - $50,000.

    edit 2: wait - there is a monitor that uses 9,000 watts !! - that's insane! "Dolby Pulsar is a prototype UHD reference monitor. It is capable of 4,000 nits so 4x higher than the XDR but is also has peak power draw of 9,000 W" :wired:
     
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2019
  7. aokman

    aokman Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2001
    Messages:
    12,598
    Location:
    Melbourne
    HDR / XDR is no BS, people think its just a crappy CCFL lighting a panel from the edge. This display is using a 576 LED array that has to punch through what looks like 5 filter layers and the LCD while maintaining 1000nits constantly without overheating and 1600nits for bursts or partial coverage.

    The specs aren’t listed yet but I am expecting 500W at least power consumption to cover the panel and USBc charging.

    The nano etched glass may finally put to bed the gloss vs AG coating argument finally also!

    The fact the Mac Pro will be able to drive 8 of these buggers is staggering!
     
  8. OP
    OP
    elvis

    elvis Old school old fool

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    36,659
    Location:
    Brisbane
    These sorts of posts are boring. Stick to the facts, ma'am.

    It isn't. There are already video cards that can drive this many pixels on the market now (guess how supersampling and MSAA works?). And it's AMD who are driving the displays, not Apple.

    You're right, I can't. I can only name 8K monitors. You know, because that's an actual industry standard.

    Citation required. Where's the independent third party test data you're basing that statement off?

    All criticisms of any particular brand aside, you don't get powerful light output without high power draw (and high heat output). Even Apple can't bend the laws of physics.

    This is a "problem" for everyone. Home cinema enthusiasts especially are going to have to start watching their power bills when they start bringing home their VESA DisplayHDR 1000 certified and above TVs.

    Specific to the Mac Pro's 1400W power supply, we already had to downgrade several HP Z8 workstations to Z4s in certain on-set locations, because getting power to a film or TV set in remote areas was too difficult. I can see it being an issue for both the Mac Pro and its display.

    Inside a studio, less of a problem. Although even so, 1400W is about what 4 of our render nodes consume, so trying to justify that at scale for Mac Pros is going to have finance baulking at power bills again.
     
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2019
  9. GumbyNoTalent

    GumbyNoTalent Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2003
    Messages:
    7,384
    Location:
    Briz Vegas
    Can we just for 1 minute use some critical thinking, Apple don't make any of its electronic componentry they source it from vendors and sell to a price point to make a profit, and before you reply Foxconn is not Apple. Point being Apple only create the presentation layer and marketing the tech is someone elses kudos.

    * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_thinking
     
  10. holdennutta

    holdennutta Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2002
    Messages:
    7,361
    Location:
    Brisbane
    So you’re saying Apple just rebrands OEM gear? Yet you quote me as requiring critical thinking?

    Haha.
     
  11. aokman

    aokman Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2001
    Messages:
    12,598
    Location:
    Melbourne
    Not true, Apples iOS chips, T2 chips and a few others are internally designed. Yes they are fabbed externally but that is the same with everyone.
     
  12. OP
    OP
    elvis

    elvis Old school old fool

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    36,659
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Technically these are ARM architecture. But yes, Apple make serious modifications to that these days. And I agree with the consensus that Apple will eventually move away from ARM all together to their own architecture (not forgetting that "AIM" was a thing, and Apple a huge part of that).

    BUT

    That's a current phone. And we're talking current workstations. And while I'm certain one day Apple will be all-mobile (with a bit of help from cloud) and pushing what we consider today "high end workstations tasks" on their future tablets with their own 100% proprietary chips, that day is not today. And that thread is not this thread.

    This thread is about a Xeon W based workstation, which shares more with any other OEM Intel C422 workstation than it does a phone.
     
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2019
  13. GumbyNoTalent

    GumbyNoTalent Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2003
    Messages:
    7,384
    Location:
    Briz Vegas
    Only a half truth, they aren't 100% Apple designs, but Apple modifications under license, but I will conceed they have designed some chips.
     
  14. dirtyd

    dirtyd Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2006
    Messages:
    3,962
    Location:
    Melbs
    That's like saying AMD's chips aren't 100% theirs because use the x86 ISA.
     
  15. Perko

    Perko Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2011
    Messages:
    4,075
    Location:
    NW Tasmania
    What's wrong with saying that? All chip designers and makers cross-license, making what Gumby's saying out to be hypocritical is just more Apple exceptionalism/fanboi trash.
     
  16. OP
    OP
    elvis

    elvis Old school old fool

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    36,659
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Would it blow your mind if I told you Intel license x86_64 from AMD? :)

    (Seems this thread is devolving thanks to a complete lack of factual, objective Mac Pro information. Not unusual for this vendor, it seems).
     
  17. Perko

    Perko Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2011
    Messages:
    4,075
    Location:
    NW Tasmania
    It never evolved enough to devolve unfortunately.
     
  18. OP
    OP
    elvis

    elvis Old school old fool

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    36,659
    Location:
    Brisbane
    pepsimax likes this.
  19. dirtyd

    dirtyd Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2006
    Messages:
    3,962
    Location:
    Melbs
    Licensing IP is one part of making an ASIC, you still have to actually design the thing, and if you can do that on a modern fab you deserve 100% of the credit. But hey I'm just an apple fanboi/exceptionalist :lol:
     
  20. Sphinx2000

    Sphinx2000 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2001
    Messages:
    7,507
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2019
    pepsimax likes this.

Share This Page

Advertisement: