iMac or Mac Pro

[squint]

If I don't have a display, and I need to buy a computer, and I want to be able to load songs with a lot of tracks/REs in Reason, should I get an iMac or a Mac Pro if I'm spending around $2,750? Can I get a fast-enough iMac?

Here's the iMac I was looking at:

4.0 GHz quad-core Intel Core i7, Turbo Boost up to 4.2 GHz
32GB 1867MHz DD3 SDRAM - four 8GB
3TB Fusion Drive
AMD Radeon R9 M395X with 4GB video memory

Why would I buy a Mac Pro instead?

I figure I can sell the iMac easily if they do end up updating the Mac Pro to something good, and I can buy that later.

[marcuswitt]

If I don't have a display, and I need to buy a computer, and I want to be able to load songs with a lot of tracks/REs in Reason, should I get an iMac or a Mac Pro if I'm spending around $2,750? Can I get a fast-enough iMac?

Here's the iMac I was looking at:

4.0 GHz quad-core Intel Core i7, Turbo Boost up to 4.2 GHz
32GB 1867MHz DD3 SDRAM - four 8GB
3TB Fusion Drive
AMD Radeon R9 M395X with 4GB video memory

Why would I buy a Mac Pro instead?

I figure I can sell the iMac easily if they do end up updating the Mac Pro to something good, and I can buy that later.

From my perspective and based on my practical experience I'd say that the iMac is the machine you should buy because it is more than powerful enough to handle plenty of tracks, instruments and effects in Reason. Additionally, my recommendation is not to buy that iMac with 32GB of RAM because Apple's prices for RAM modules are rediculously high. For about 120 bucks more you can get four 16GB modules from a 3rd-party-vendor, which the newest imac model is compatible with. And having more RAM is never a mistake. Good luck and have fun with your new machine.

[squint]

Do I pull out the two 4GBs and put the four 16GBs? What is a good brand? Crucial?

Doesn't RAM really only help with big sample libraries and such? Are there even any REs that are all that demanding from that perspective?

[squint]

Looks like it doesn't support four 16GBs.. the max you could do is four 8GBs.

[tronam]

If I don't have a display, and I need to buy a computer, and I want to be able to load songs with a lot of tracks/REs in Reason, should I get an iMac or a Mac Pro if I'm spending around $2,750? Can I get a fast-enough iMac?

Here's the iMac I was looking at:

4.0 GHz quad-core Intel Core i7, Turbo Boost up to 4.2 GHz
32GB 1867MHz DD3 SDRAM - four 8GB
3TB Fusion Drive
AMD Radeon R9 M395X with 4GB video memory

Why would I buy a Mac Pro instead?

I figure I can sell the iMac easily if they do end up updating the Mac Pro to something good, and I can buy that later.

That's the iMac I'm running and it runs everything I throw at it without a hitch -- Beautiful display too. Both the iMac and Mac Pro are past due for an update though. The iMac is usually refreshed annually and is now past the 12 month mark. Mac Pro is past the 3 year mark. If you can hold out a little longer, I'd recommend it.

I typically go to Crucial.com for all my 3rd party ram needs. OWC does have modules allowing for 64GB in the iMac though they're a bit on the spendy side and might be overkill for most user's needs. I went all SSD for my iMac and wouldn't go back. The days of feeling compelled to max out my RAM to compensate for slow spinning disks is behind me.

[squint]

Thanks Tronam. I just can't wait any longer.

You said you went SSD. Does that mean you've never tried a Fusion drive? I do have two 1TB SSD drives that I was using with my Hackintosh. I have them in a USB bay thing that I'm assuming I could use with my new iMac. Would the speeds not be the same though since I'm using them as external drives?

Should I not get the Fusion drive?

[FlowerSoldier]

Get the fusion drive. I believe the HD in the iMac is only a 5400 rpm - not exactly cutting edge stuff.

[squint]

The Fusion drive is only 5400rpm? Should I be worried? I use a lot of audio tracks. Lots of tracks with lots of little audio clips spread out everywhere.

[QVprod]

Just to give other options. You can buy a used Mac Pro and save quite a bit of money. Xeon Processors, 4 internal hard drive bays, and expansion slots. Completely user upgradable and parts (aside from video cards) are cheap.

For example:

8 core Xeon Processor 3.33GHz for $1,469 (USD) 2009 model https://eshop.macsales.com/item/Apple/MP09D33C2W32/

12 core Xeon Processor 3.4GHz for $2,779 2010 model https://eshop.macsales.com/item/Apple/MP10D9C16T1/ If you already have a decent screen

[squint]

ok I should prolly say, I work at Apple and get 25% off plus an additional $500 off (once every 3 yrs), if I buy from Apple. would I still save money elsewhere? or, if you were me, would you still buy an older model?

[QVprod]

Wow that means you'd get a pretty much maxed spec iMac for only $1562.50! Provided that you're buying the user upgradable model, like previously stated, you'll save even more money by not buying the hard drive and ram from Apple. Amazon has great prices on those. And you would already have a screen.

What you would miss with the first mac I posted for example is less cores and no internal space for other hard drives, built in optical drive (if that matters to you) and overall expandability of a desktop tower, PCIe slots...etc.

On the Other hand you would already have a quite powerful Mac and you may or may not need 8 cores depending on how many cpu hungry REs you use. You also get 2 thunderbolt slots, which older Mac Pros don't have, which is supposed to be as fast PCIe and can chain devices, and 4GB video card, which is great if you happen to do any video or graphic work.

I don't use many RE in Reason as I use plugins in Studio One, and I do quite well with a 2006 Mac Pro with a quad core (2 dual core) 2.66GHz Xeon processor.

With your discount, It would be hard to turn down the iMac. Without the discount, I'd buy a used Mac Pro.

[tronam]

ok I should prolly say, I work at Apple and get 25% off plus an additional $500 off (once every 3 yrs), if I buy from Apple. would I still save money elsewhere? or, if you were me, would you still buy an older model?

If you're going to use your discount then I'd definitely make it count by waiting until the upcoming refresh.

[squint]

Thanks everyone for the info. Tronam: Ha cool. Yeah, I definitely considered that, but I just really need to get going on this album. I've had it more or less finished for a year now, and it just needs some finishing touches. I don't have a personal computer at all right now, so I just need something. I was really hoping the Mac Pro would be updated and then I'd get one of those.

[Karim]

I I would venture to suggest you the latest iMac. I own in the studio a Mac Pro 2009 8-core 16 giga and I in May I bought an iMac i7 4.0 GHz . Reason the performances are high ( eg. 35 antidotes without a glitch .. nothing). I will highly recommend (please use el capitan for the moment).

I have a little converter Thunderbolt - SVGA for cabling a second monitor. All woorks smoothly..
The boot is super fast. less then 10 seconds

[squint]

Cool ok thank you!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[tumar]

The Fusion drive is only 5400rpm? Should I be worried? I use a lot of audio tracks. Lots of tracks with lots of little audio clips spread out everywhere.

If Mac is 27", then fusion drive HD part is 7200 rpm. Smaller iMac 21" gets 5400.
Ram could be upgraded only in iMac 27". I bought ram made by Sk Hynix, which is reliable vendor (it has been official Apple supplier since I can remember).

[squint]

Would it be better to get the SSD drive and then use external SSD drives via USB? I already have two 1TB SSD drives and the USB bay for them.

I'd just prefer to not have to deal with ejecting disks and all that, and I like having as few cables as possible.

[tronam]

Would it be better to get the SSD drive and then use external SSD drives via USB? I already have two 1TB SSD drives and the USB bay for them.

I'd just prefer to not have to deal with ejecting disks and all that, and I like having as few cables as possible.

I went for a 512GB SSD in my 5K iMac and don't regret it for a second. Apple's flash drives are some of the fastest in the industry and I'd rather run my active files on a full SSD and store to external spinning disks than deal with a Fusion drive where you don't really get much control over what goes where. I think it's a poor substitute these days. It made a lot more sense several years ago when SSDs were far more expensive than they are now.

[squint]

Would it be better to get the SSD drive and then use external SSD drives via USB? I already have two 1TB SSD drives and the USB bay for them.

I'd just prefer to not have to deal with ejecting disks and all that, and I like having as few cables as possible.

I went for a 512GB SSD in my 5K iMac and don't regret it for a second. Apple's flash drives are some of the fastest in the industry and I'd rather run my active files on a full SSD and store to external spinning disks than deal with a Fusion drive where you don't really get much control over what goes where. I think it's a poor substitute these days. It made a lot more sense several years ago when SSDs were far more expensive than they are now.

So would you not use the two 1TB SSDs I already have externally via USB and go buy spinning disks for storing/accessing things like samples, Reason project files, etc?

Does using the SSDs via USB slow them down a lot?

Also, I think the external bay thing I have is USB 3.0... will the iMac even support 3.0 speeds?

[tronam]

Would it be better to get the SSD drive and then use external SSD drives via USB? I already have two 1TB SSD drives and the USB bay for them.

I'd just prefer to not have to deal with ejecting disks and all that, and I like having as few cables as possible.

I went for a 512GB SSD in my 5K iMac and don't regret it for a second. Apple's flash drives are some of the fastest in the industry and I'd rather run my active files on a full SSD and store to external spinning disks than deal with a Fusion drive where you don't really get much control over what goes where. I think it's a poor substitute these days. It made a lot more sense several years ago when SSDs were far more expensive than they are now.

So would you not use the two 1TB SSDs I already have externally via USB and go buy spinning disks for storing/accessing things like samples, Reason project files, etc?

Does using the SSDs via USB slow them down a lot?

Also, I think the external bay thing I have is USB 3.0... will the iMac even support 3.0 speeds?

That kind of depends on how fast is fast enough. Even if you hit the theoretical maximum throughput of the USB3 bus, the external drives still won't exceed much more than 500MB/sec and the 4 USB3 ports all share the same bus. The internal SSDs have real world performance 4x that. The downsides are of course cost and size, but for a computer I plan to have for a long time it was worth it for me. My last iMac lasted 6 years -- Actually, it still runs, but I just don't use it much anymore.

[squint]

So i'm assuming the 5700 RPM drive is more than 500MB/sec?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Raveshaper]

I would strongly not recommend an iMac. It's more or less the identical hardware components found in a MacBook Pro, but in a larger enclosure that sits on your desk. If you can get an MD104/LLA model with the non reflective screen variant, that would be the best model to have. You would need to increase the ram and get a data doubler to give it a dual SSD configuration, but there are other considerations as well. It will work with older hardware that isn't as expensive now that thunderbolt has been adopted. The aluminum housing is thicker and less susceptible to impact dents when compared to retina models. Also, it has a Kensington lock that prevents theft which can be very handy when doing things like leaving your setup for a moment while setting up or taking down your kit during a live show. Either desk-only option will limit your range of possibilities in terms of road use and mobile production, but if it's a discussion of which one would suit you best in terms of raw power for dollar, I would go with the iMac out of the two. Mac Pro shines in the graphics processing field, but either model should be sufficient in terms of audio. Mac Pro would be overkill, unless you want to do a lot of video and graphics work along side your audio production. Even then, you can save a lot of money building a superior Hackintosh that you can upgrade yourself.

[squint]

Thanks for the info. Never doing Hackintosh again. I got to a point where I just had enough. What if I got a maxed-out iMac for now, then just waited until they release a new Mac Pro, and sell the iMac and buy the Mac Pro when they do.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[tronam]

So i'm assuming the 5700 RPM drive is more than 500MB/sec?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No, the spinning drive would be much slower -- more like 100MB/sec.

[squint]

Ahh ok thanks


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk