Mac Pro is expens-

>the Mac Pro isn't particularly good value
The CPU in it is probably quite expensive. Can't find the exact part on Intel's site, because it's probably new or slightly customised.

But we can find this W-series processor, which is similar, although it only has 16.5MB of L3 cache, opposed to the 24.5MB of cache in the $6k Mac Pro's 8-core chip.

ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/193739/intel-xeon-w-3223-processor-16-5m-cache-3-50-ghz.html

That chip apparently costs $750 according to this: wccftech.com/intel-xeon-w-cascade-lake-cpu-28-core-56-thread-64-pcie-lanes/

But it looks to me like bigger caches are quite expensive. We can find these similar processors, in the Gold series (slightly different series), which have a very similar cache (24.75MB; the Mac Pro's is 24.5MB), as well as similar clock speeds (one is slightly lower, the other is higher), and the same number of cores and threads. The one clocked lower than the Mac Pro is $2,200, while the one clocked higher than the Mac Pro is $2,900.

ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/193954/intel-xeon-gold-6234-processor-24-75m-cache-3-30-ghz.html
ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/192442/intel-xeon-gold-6244-processor-24-75m-cache-3-60-ghz.html

So the chip in the Mac Pro might well be worth over $2,000, potentially. So maybe the Mac Pro isn't a terrible deal when you add up everything (also consider four Thunderbolt 3 ports, a 1.4kw power supply, eight PCIe slots, etc.). I don't know because I haven't added it up, but the chip alone looks fairly expensive.

I bet none of you know a single thing about reference monitors, do you?

Neither do I, but I don't pretend to, unlike you.

If you actually do then by all means go ahead, but these posts look distinctly fanboyish ("MY COMPANY GOOD, YOUR COMPANY BAD, WAHHHHHH") rather than objective and unbiased analysis.

>when it's about quality products for professionals, price doesn't matter
Oh the irony when anti-Apple shills will so often say "BUT IT'S MORE EXPENSIVE" and you say "yes, because it's a premium product with premium components", and they'll say "BUT COST BIG AND ME NO UNDERSTAND THINGS BEYOND THAT" - and now you say "when it's about quality, price doesn't matter". Man, the absolute irony.

Asspull Apple claims vs industry standards

Just admit you're too poor to afford a true OLED reference monitor iPoorfag. Don't worry, it's not for poorshits like you anyway.

i've used some for photography

Attached: 1558145904184.jpg (817x790, 72K)

wow, Jow Forums is uneducated.

Lol assuming everyone else does not know something because you yourself do not. Stay retarded.

mac pro is not expensive for its target audience

Do you actually know anything about reference monitors then? Or are you just full of shit?

Fair enough, and in what ways did those monitors differ from Apple's one? And did they cost 8 times the price of Apple's one, like the Sony in OP's pic does?

Why would they buy a 6k monitor? You can't even edit the 4k content you're working on without some distortion from scaling it up to 6k. They should have made the display an 8k.

You can view 4k footage at native resolution while also having other clips / the rest of your editing software in the surrounding area. A 4k monitor can't do that. And if you just want to watch the 4k footage by itself, you can do that, with black borders around the footage.

I think people who use this kind of equipment would have an extra monitor solely for displaying the UI and other stuff

Jow Forums, Jow Forums and the internet are pretty dumb. I hope you guys are mostly underage, but the fact that you are probably all grown men just makes me laugh.

>imagine paying 40 grand for a screen that is *guaranteed* to get yellowed in 5 years or less

>* The BVM-X300 does not cover the BT.2020 colour space in full

DROPPED

Sony >*

Least it comes with a fucking stand.

I don't think BT.2020 is a widely adopted standard yet tho
even this 30k EIZO monitor has 80% rec.2020
>eizo.no/coloredge/cg3145/

and that's the absolute cheapest option. That's why I never understood the point of 5k or 6k given their huge price point. You could just use a decent 4k panel and 1080p panel on the side for UI.

>when you buy an apple display xdr and a client creeps out by the holes and leave

if it's purely about resolution, doesn't Dell offer an 8k 31.5" monitor for like $3,500? What's the big appeal of this Apple monitor? Is it the OLED?

>oled for a computer screen
Might as well use a fucking crt senpai. Burn in on a monitor released after 2011 is garbage. Especially if its for your computer. You know, when you are on your desktop the most?

>Mac Pro
It's THE Mac Pro, stop using marketing newspeak.

The CPU in the Mac Pro is a Cascade Lake part that Intel announced two days ago.
Considering that Intel is increasing the prices because the low yields, I'm bet a pretty share of the price is in the CPU alone.

>spend $40k on Sony's monitor and have to buy a separate display for your UI as well
>or spend $5k on Apple's monitor and you can view it all at once
Hm.

How do retards like you people exist it’s not OLED and has never been OLED

Well, if you had ever edited video for a client with needs, you would understand why having your entire interface on a seperate screen (instead of right below the preview) is stupid. Also, it takes less energy and processing power to run Apple's reference-level 6K than a comparable 4K + 1080; yet it is more difficult on the eyes. There are a number of other reasons why having to use 2 monitors sucks; from Quality Control (color and motion-wise) to Ergonomics and space efficiency (most of Apple's customers have 10x10ft rooms in order to live somewhere they are welcome and afford their "computers")
Thus; the price gap...

Attached: wow.jpg (1080x1350, 296K)

Funny BT.2020 using quantum dots(over 98% cover in experimental screen) will become the norm in 1 or 2 years making Apple display obsolete.

It has a increible price for P3 color coverage, HDR, XDR and a fucking huge brightness of 1000 nits.

It's definitely NOT purely about resolution - also it's LCD, not OLED. It's about a combination of features that makes it suitable for pros. Very high contrast ratio, a really good colour accuracy I assume, plus it can get very bright, and display a very wide range of colours.

>The CPU in the Mac Pro is a Cascade Lake part that Intel announced two days ago.
Interesting. Like I say I wasn't able to find it on Intel's website.

>$40k on Sony's monitor
What crack are you on? Why would you spend it on that? OLED is not mandatory. If OLED is absolutely required for some reason, go ahead and get the Apple panel.

Which raises the question. Is apple using standard video format? Or are they going to use like some sort of proprietary connection.

No HDR1000 support
But this monitor get HDR part
tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/dell_up2718q.htm

Remember that 1,000 nits is how much brightness it can sustain, and it can reach 1,600 nits at peak.

>1600 nits at peak
Hope those fans can cool down the panel.

Apple screen isn't oled and its using Thunderbolt 3.
You even can connect it to your Macbook Pro if supports DP 1.4

That's my entire point mate. Why buy the $40k Sony thing when Apple's does much of the same thing for much less (I'm not a pro though so maybe there are good reasons why the Sony costs way more, I'm sure there are reasons).

>OLED
As people keep saying in this thread, Apple's display IS NOT OLED.

I think there's only one in there, but I'm sure Apple have done testing. And the swiss cheese holes on the back are meant to help with the cooling of course.

Presentation showed two fans if I remember correctly.
Here is a video. Look at 1:39. The expanded view says that the termal system has dual fans.
youtube.com/watch?v=IVXmACif6wI

well whatever. The one and only thing I'll give Apple is that they make decent screens. If this 6k screen is as good as they claim, kudos.

I'm gonna chime in here cause I've actually used the Sony x300 in a professional environment many times.

Things the Sony has that pros need:
2x quad-link sdi inputts with different settings for 4k and hd on each (colour space, eotf and more)
Built like a rock. The thing weighs probably 30kg and has 3x 80mm fans to keep it running all day.
Broadcast grade panel will be one of the most colour accurate displays out of the box but you still have control over white point and individual colour gain.
User memories, lan control and headphone jack for monitoring.

Shit picture but here it is (left) next to a pvm-a250 sitting on top of the best part of a million dollars of other gear

Attached: Screenshot_20190606-071757.jpg (1920x1080, 915K)

So whats in those server racks are workstation GPUs and CPUs?

Mac Pro base is expensive but it's upgradeable to a degree that cheaper workstations wouldn't go.

Oh, a display for actual professionals.

Doesn't sound too comfy compared to having it all on one screen.

>works with expensive video equipment
>has a potato camera himself
Ironic.

>I do not know anything
Then stop pretending that Apl's monitor is a steal.

>reference OLED video monitor guaranteed to accurately display all sorts of legacy video color spaces at various refresh frequencies is the same thing as the Appleshit that makes vague promise about supporting only five of the latest video color spaces and is IPS+LED and has 1,500:1 contrast ratio at most with dynamic contrast turned off (dynamic contrast interferes with video color validation work)

>getting butthurt by a brand when you don't actually know anything about the product in question
Pottery.

Apple's display has a 1,000,000:1 contrast ratio, so why are you trying to talk about something that you clearly know absolutely nothing about?

>1,000,000:1
that's actually dynamic contrast ratio and does not reflect real performance
static contrast ratio is what matters
the only displays that have 1,000,000:1 contrast ratio are either oled or expensive as fuck LCDs (EIZO has a 30k usd model)

Not really though, it should be really compared to servers in certain cases as well, not just workstations.

Also, any real workstation or server will have enterprise grade support, something apple simply isn't setup to handle.

>or expensive as fuck LCDs
Or apparently Applels new display.

Quick, someone post the $50 monitor stand that does 99% of what the Pro-Stand does.

no Apple's IPS display isn't the one capable of pulling off real 1mil to 1 contrast ratio

see >news.panasonic.com/global/press/data/2016/11/en161128-4/en161128-4.html

this particular panel is used in a couple of reference grade monitor (including the EIZO I mentioned earlier)

how do I know that the XDR display does not have this?
because the XDR display has 576 local dimming zones
and the panel above does not make use of any dimming zones

>posting the arabic pricing

Attached: 1559265550571.jpg (597x436, 65K)

Not really an expert but doesn't every panel use dimming zones, only that the pro ones have some crazy number in the thousands?
We don't know a thing about Apples algorithm yet, so despite the low number they might still make it usable. On the other hand, with OLED reference monitors there is the lack of brightness so it's not like it even has to be perfect, especially at their price point.

Would be pretty underwhelming if they worked together with all the pro's and couldn't at least deliver a "good enough reference monitor".

>imagine paying $40K for something that will earn you $millions, and you don't give a shit if you have to replace it in a few years.

>getting this butthurt about europe
It's funny because Europe is way more white than America (Britain is 87% white, while America is only 62% non-hispanic white). And yet Americans feel the need to project their insecurity about this onto Europe.

Nothing is more pathetic about this. The fact that you are SO insecure about people of different ethnicities living in your country. Lmao.

Attached: british pepe.png (500x481, 183K)

>what is population density
lmao, whatever you say Muhammad.

yeah what is it and what does that have to do with anything

>britain
>white

Attached: This pleases the anglo.jpg (313x313, 15K)

>Why does it matter that our capital is 99% shitskin now? We have ye olde towns in bumfuck nowhere with a wooping 300 actual british inhabitants!
Retard.

Based brainlet.

Fucking lmao this has nothing to do with anything you fucking idiot. Europe still has a higher percentage of white people, which doesn't really bother me, but clearly it bothers you.

Attached: british man.jpg (1024x681, 95K)

Attached: 1512937476735.jpg (452x798, 109K)

>has to use percentage because raw numbers will not do him any favours
inb4 amerimutt meme. I'm not even American, just laughing at your gigantic delusion, anglocuck.

Ay muy niño, you ask me how La Creatura came to be...

60% of London is white.
37% of Washington DC is non-hispanic white.

Again, I don't give a shit about this, but you clearly do, and it's hilarious.

Why are you projecting your own insecurities onto other countries? All it does is show how insecure and butthurt you are.

Holy shit this is funny. "B-b-but we have more white people overall, even though they are a much smaller proportion of the population!" - lmao, why are you so insecure? You even used percentages yourself here you fucking idiot: How are you so stupid?

Attached: Screenshot 2019-06-06 at 01.44.41.png (2114x1040, 654K)

I used a hyperbole, retard. Good thing to know that you don't even know English anymore.
And I'm not even American, already said you so.
Also, cute how you're feigning to be uninterested but clearly tries to research about the subject.
>london is 60% white
lmao sure

Jesus fuck, how did the thread turn into Jow Forums brainlets spewing their cancer on the wrong board again?

Okay, let's solve this diplomatically.

James, go back to crying over Brexit. Food and medicine won't stockpile itself, mate. Your Queen commands it.

Cletus, there might be a Huawei sale at the nearest Walmart, go check it out. Orange daddy won't hurt you if you grab it in the next weeks.

Probably bait but professionals need hd-sdi, centralised clock synchronization, etc... Much more than a display with usb ports.

I don't understand who these display are for, it's like upscale prosumer but not good enough to warrant the premium price. The fact that there isn't a standard VESA mounting system is the worst part, people haven't forgotten the iMac pro VESA bracket debacle.

>still claims I'm an American
Why do you cucks are always so petty? Why are you pretending to be le based centrist, too?
No wonder you guys are letting your own countries getting invaded by subhumans fucking lmao

>centrist
>based
You must be American.

newfag
>>>reddit

11x Bpu4000
8x hdcu2500
3x hdcu2000
10x aja ki pro ultra plus recorders
Coms and audio distribution

Only had my phone on me. I own a 1dx and 5d though

Maybe the base macpro is such bad value to stop people from actually buying the base model and upgrading it and with some upgrades (from apple) it makes more sense.

>posting Jow Forums shit and calling others newfags
So you're a zoomer too!

> computer = monitor

Attached: 1521769655807.png (649x732, 594K)

Yep, 100% certified newfag.

Unironically, what is the target market of the Mac Pro?
I would assume people who work in 3D modelling for large projects like movies and simulations. I doubt your average freelance graphic designer would ever need a computer with those specs, nevermind the price.
It feels like the major buyers of these will be large businesses in the sector yet it looks like something designed for individual consumers. The whole thing doesn't make any sense to me from a commercial perspective. Apple fanboys have a surprising ability to prove us all wrong and buy whatever crap gets tossed at them, but this time they really pushed it with the price tag. This will be a huge flop won't it?

Due the upgradability even small companies can easy afford a few and then add things in the long run. And given how much money some yt content creators make, they easy could get them too.

Though Apple kinda shot themselves in the foot by offering the iMac Pro which would serve poorfags much better for much less.

Fucking brainlet OP. That's a professional broadcast monitor used by film/TV studios.
It's literally THE most accurate image quality you can get. It's 100% NOT for consumers.

youtube.com/watch?v=ESzWY0hW85Y

You're really stupid, aren't you?

This

What's the best film in 2018??

I laff @ u thinking u better laffing. Instead sad!

I've been waiting to see how long it took someone on Jow Forums to point this out. That was a long wait.

>No SDI connector for cameras or equipment, No 3DLUT build ... centralised clock synchronization
It's a computer monitor, not a standalone. It doesn't have internal 3D LUT because the computer's GPU handles that.
A studio of effects artists don't need camera capture capability on their displays. For the one guy who does, you buy a blackmagic ultrastudio to handle the SDI and clock resync.

The XDR, mac pro and ultrastudio add up to roughly the same/less than an X300, except you get editing/compute ability too. It won't completely replace a BVM, obviously, but it's a modular solution to account for the "everything but" cases. And there's a lot of those.

They are not competing with Sony. They are selling products based on the branding only.