MacPro future and C4D


According to the latest rumours Apple is questioning if they will keep the MacPro line alive. I assume that a lot of C4D users on OSX rely on MacPro hardware. With Intel expected to release 16 cores in a couple of months I was hoping for a killer MacPro for C4D.
What will be the options if Apple indeed kills the MacPro? iMac? MacMini? Or is a switch to Windows an inevitable step? I do a lot of landscaping with heavy scenes, so very fast hardware is a must for me.

These are still rumours, I know, but Apple is not very Pro oriented anymore so it could be reality soon…



I actually just made the switch to Windows from a MacPro about 3 months ago. It honestly isn’t nearly as bad as I remember, W7 has come a long way. I’m running a i7 2600k @ 4.5ghz and 24GB of RAM obv on Windows 7 and I have to say its treating me fairly well. My Cinebench 11.5 score for the CPU was 8.65 which is right below the 8C/16T Xeons and way ahead of the 12C AMD Opteron. GPU side I’m running one GTX 590 and my Cinebench scores there were off the charts. Considering price vs performance its miles ahead of Apple, I paid around $2200 for the whole rig w/ a new IPS display, the same rig on Apple’s side was more than double. Only thing that scares me is viruses, so I bought Webroot for protection and its awesome, not intrusive at all and lays very quietly in the background as far as resources go. Anyway thats just my opinion and I am in fact an Apple fanboy, just stating that I am fairly impressed with this rig/Windows this time around.


There isn’t much point on talking about rumors. If they kill the mac pro they may as well present another desktop rig to replace it.


I switched on cost reasons and built one just like bretwalters13 because I don’t see Apple giving much love to the pro desktop line when their consumer electronics and laptops are the money makers. Intel’s chip selection is not going to help the mac pro cost in the near future, and Apple won’t make a pro with a non-Xeon chip at this point.

Plus I got frustrated with the continually evolving series of Apple adapters that get phased out between 2.5 year updates to the Mac Pro.

Windows 7 has been remarkably smooth and I like some things better (especially after Lion came out). You know about asking for a mac version of a plugin? I don’t do that anymore. :slight_smile:

Rumors or no, one can clearly see the direction Apple is headed. They killed shake, introduced FCPX and recently only just put FCP7 back on sale after realizing they killed their pro features and those people were vocal. Their pricing on the single processor towers is staggering (the dual proc machines are decently competitive).

I might come crawling back if they introduce an x-mac lower cost expandable tower, but I learned a while ago to buy what I need and what I can afford versus hoping Apple will make what I need and then struggling to be able to justify the cost.


Thanks Venkman and Brett!
I realise it’s way too soon to jump to conclusions, but it’s good to know there is an alternative.
I guess we have to wait and see what Apple will do when Intel delivers their next generation chips.



I read about it here

Not a bad idea to be proactive at this stage if you are considering upgrading your rig. I just got a 12 core last year as my main rig, so should be good for a year or 2, but my other mac is an already aging 2008 8 core macpro.

I can imagine making the switch to windows if I needed to for my home rig in another year or so. As a macuser since 1987, its a hard pill to swallow, but we need to be flexible and adapt I guess.

Feeling pessimistic about Apple’s future in the pro market also–but time will tell.


Yup, here is the list of upcoming chips. If cost is a factor, consider this:

Those machines won’t get cheaper. I wouldn’t count Apple out just yet, but with a new CEO, perhaps we’ll see them redouble their efforts to town the pro market. I’ve switched multiple times, I can do it again.


Just a thought

Thunderbolt is just about pointless if you haven’t the data to put through it.
Why have an interface capable of such vast data rates if you are just going to surf the web or save a bunch of photos. I think there’s an on going strategy.

Machines will keep getting faster and smaller, what was considered a workstation a few years ago is now a dinosaur. I’d be surprised if they didn’t rationlise the whole line, change the box and bring out some sort of hi performance iMac as soon as technology allows.



Facing the reality of the main focus of apple on the mobile market I’m also one of those switcher Custom built Pc under Win 7.
So fare all I can say is everything run more than smooth and never had crash or dodgy bug.
I just made sure that this workstation stays a maximum away from internet
I use my macbook for that.
Not mentioning that building a good pc workstation’ll neraly be twice as cheap comparing to the mac way.


Laptops and Mac Minis won’t ever hold 32 Gb Ram, thus the need for a big machine.
You may be able to get good graphics and cpu performance in a smaller enclosure.
As the richest tech company I expect flagship products even if they are not as profitable as the rest. Thunderbolt only means more boxes on your desk.
Apple have not even finished Quicktime 10 and have pretty much abandoned all pro software, this would not surprise me at all.
Even a rumour of this nature which does not sound ridiculous should be cause for concern.


If there is a strategy, it’s a secret. That was one other frustration with Apple. Never knowing when or if something will be updated or if a new tech will help me solve a problem I have/work faster. I understand why they are so secret. It’s just hard to plan for company purchases around rumors which may or may not come true.


Seeing the increase in single CPU performance future iMacs should handle normal work just fine. Anyone who needs top of the line performance will have to switch to PCs or, depending on problem, switch to cloud based services.


So, my big beef with moving to Windows is that in my experience, Windows still sucks at serious multitasking. I constantly run like 10 apps at once in OS X and each one feels like it is the only task running- even when something is tracking in the BG and a render is pegging all the processors in the BG, it’s still fluid and rock solid.

That has not been my experience in Windows, and I believe it’s due to the client/server nature of OS X vs the way Windows handles tasks and processes. Am I wrong? Do people have good experiences doing an absurd number of things at the same time in Windows?

This is how my brain works, so maybe I am in a minority and it’s not as big a deal to others out there.

I do however, hate the way Apple does video cards and drivers for said cards. The lack of selection and price hikes are ridiculous. So that would be better on the windows side.

[B]Also, this is absolutely not a start-a-mac-vs-pc-fight post- I have seriously considered moving to Windows for some time for hardware reasons and a handful of software ones.

Also, I should mention that I have built PCs for years and very seriously know my way around Windows, so it’s not like I’m just ignorant about it, but I do use it way less than OS X, thus the question.



To all of you considering switching to Windows I can report my experience. I used to be a hardcore Mac user and switched to Windows with XP. Today, with Win7 there’s really nothing I miss but a lot I like with Win. I still use Macs for my private internet surfing needs. In my opinion it’s really nothing but to accustom to the new system. Some things are better other worse, but in general it’s not much of a difference. So I don’t miss OSX at all.

The only thing I will really miss is the nice product design and manufacturing quality of the Mac Pro hardware. There’s nothing comparable out there . Or does someone maybe knows about a PC manufacturer doing things as good as apple, hardware-quality wise?

Best mnu


When you say “hardware-quality”, are you talking about the actual electronic components? Or the case?

The internal electronic parts in a Mac Pro are identical, or nearly identical to the PC parts. The Mac Pro uses the same Intel CPU’s, nvidia/ATI GPU’s, not sure who Apple uses for their HDD’s, but im sure its either Hitcahi, WD, or Seagate. The RAM could be supplied by any of the major memory manufacturers, or it could be the lowest bidder that supplies OEM’s. All of these parts are available for PC’s as well, be it a OEM machine, or custom built.

Apple basically does the same thing that every other OEM does… they take 3rd party hardware, and put it in a proprietary case.


I have a theory that if you’re not crashing your machine you’re not working hard enough :stuck_out_tongue:
We’re not fanboys, we’re professionals, and I can safely say I’d jump over to OSX if it was faster than a win7 machine, they are on such similar hardware nowadays it doesn’t matter anymore. having said that… If you’re into the hardware side of things, you can customise to perfectly suit your needs with a win7 machine for less cash, it’s a little less versatile with the macs.
It’ll be interesting to see what comes of this, but I don’t think there’s an imminent threat to OSX being used as a pro platform, it’s just what that platform will run on - cloud is my guess.

@mnu: it’s the insides that count to me more than the shiny shiny aspect :slight_smile: The parts of a mac are actually no better quality than you can buy from anywhere else, they’re just good at boxing it up!



I’m referring to the case. It’s important, too. Think of a car. The engine is most important, but it’s nice to have doors that close with small gaps. Ask BMW, it’s important, too.

What I don’t understand why there is no PC manufacturer that creates products of the same quality as Mac Pros. And I mean the whole product.

Of course the chips are the same. I’m not a total moron…



I haven’t used them but the Boxx stuff looks pretty solid.

For my last build I used a Cooler Master case which is not that pretty but pretty well made and nice to work in (loads of space, great cable management and ventilation).
Re aesthetics of the case, I couldn’t really care to be honest, I look at the screen when I work, not the case ; )



I’m in front of a Mac pro right now. The only thing it has going for it is 12 cores.
Duplicate the object I’m working with more than twice and I need display tags just to preview the animation. Material edits are giving me that dreaded pinwheel thing and upwards of 30 second delays and this is a scene with less than 100k polys.

My PC workstation doesn’t do this, just like it doesn’t get viruses, doesn’t ever see a BSOD and doesn’t sound like a vacuum cleaner. A few simple solutions and good hardware will ensure that your PC experience is just as user friendly as a Mac.

The open GL speed enhancements aren’t just slight, they’re massive. Navigating a 8million poly scene happens in real time on a $300 GPU and seeing as you spend 90% of your time in the editor view navigating a scene, I’d say that’s a pretty substantial thing.

Or you can build a 16 core Hackintosh and continue to live the dream.

For me, I get why people want to do AE and 2D tasks on a Mac, but 3D, really?


The Mac Pro is just a regular machine with a daughterboard system. One mainboard with slots to add daughterboards, a slot for a GPU, and some trays on the bottom that slide out to access the board with the RAM and CPU’s.

Why would a PC manufacturer want to do that when most, if not all mainboards are made as one large board ready to go? All you have to do is plug in a CPU, GPU, RAM, PSU and you’re ready to go.

My BOXX is made out of aluminum and uses all high quality parts. The only difference is the layout of the components. I really dont see how “layout A” can be considered higher quality than “layout B”.

And your car analogy is a little off base, because my PC does not have any large gaps in the doors.

And I was not implying that you were a moron. I was simply asking, because your question about “hardware quality” can be referring to a wide and broad range of things.