Traditionally, each heat-producing component in a desktop computer-CPU(s), graphics chips, memory, and so on-has had its own heat sink, and sometimes even its own fan. Instead, the 2013 Mac Pro offers most of its expansion options on the outside: Turn the cylinder around, and youРІР‚в„ўll find a compact panel that hosts a slew of ports and connectors: four USB 3.0 ports, six Thunderbolt 2 ports (two each on three independent controllers), two gigabit ethernet ports, an HDMI 1.4 (audio+video) port, a 1/8-inch analog/optical-digital line-out jack, and a 1/8-inch headphone/headset jack.Р”В«ut Apple also reduced the Mac ProРІР‚в„ўs size with some clever engineering. Apple achieved this size reduction in part by doing away with many things professional-level computers have traditionally reserved internal space for: multiple bays for hard drives, multiple slots for graphics and expansion cards, and space for an optical-drive (or two).

It truly is a tiny computer given its capabilities. It even looks somewhat silvery in bright light. As we noted in our first impressions, while AppleРІР‚в„ўs PR videos and images make the new Mac Pro look like a dark, metallic gray-almost black-itРІР‚в„ўs really closer in color to the new Space Gray finish of AppleРІР‚в„ўs current iPhone and iPad models. Apple has done away with the massive enclosure of the 2012-and-earlier Mac Pro: The new Mac Pro is instead a small cylinder with a beautiful, unibody exterior made from a single block of aluminum. If youРІР‚в„ўre reading this, chances are you know all about the new Mac ProРІР‚в„ўs design, but hereРІР‚в„ўs a refresher. YouРІР‚в„ўll have to decide if AppleРІР‚в„ўs new approach is right for you. The best I can do is tell you what the new Mac Pro is, what it does, and how well it does those things. IРІР‚в„ўm not here to tell you which view is right or wrong, because real people with real jobs and real needs hold each. Thanks to its diminutive profile and attractive design, the Mac Pro is clearly meant to be a computer for your desk, rather than something you hide under your desk Both sides can make a good case: Depending on your particular uses and needs, the new Mac Pro may be exactly what you want (a state-of-the-art, multi-core-processor, workstation-GPU computer that doesnРІР‚в„ўt waste space and resources on expandability you may never use), or nothing like what you need (a workhorse tower with tons of bays and slots for expansion). Others thought it was a slap in the face of РІР‚СљrealРІР‚Сњ pro users. Some people thought the new computer was a brilliant design that embraced current trends in high-end computing. The short answer is, РІР‚СљIt depends.РІР‚Сњ When the new Mac Pro was announced this past summer, the initial reactions were, to put it mildly, polarized. Does it live up to its name as a professionalРІР‚в„ўs Mac? Whatever you call it, itРІР‚в„ўs the companyРІР‚в„ўs new flagship computer-its halo car, if you will-and weРІР‚в„ўve been putting it through its paces. Apple calls it the Mac Pro (Late 2013) a snarky reviewer might call it the Mac Pro (Almost 2014).

Higher-end configurations quickly get expensiveР”В«ack in June, when Apple gave us a preview of the new Mac Pro, the company said it would ship РІР‚Сљlater this year.РІР‚Сњ Here we are, just a few days shy of 2014, and the new Mac Pro has arrived.

Single-core performance not substantially better (and sometimes worse) than that of other current Macs.

I was initially excited about the 2013 Mac Pro until I saw what it offered for its high price. The last factor was poor timing that couldРІР‚в„ўve been fixed with regular updates, but the first two are simply major design flaws by making the wrong choices for this product.Р”Р„s I read MarcoРІР‚в„ўs post, I kept nodding my head while thinking РІР‚Сљyep, very true.РІР‚Сњ The reasons he listed above are why I went with a 5K iMac instead of a Mac Pro. Less than a year after its release, it missed the desktop Retina revolution started by the 5K iMac, and it was beaten handily in single-threaded performance by a CPU generation that Apple never updated it to use. It was designed to accommodate exactly two GPUs with relatively low heat output each, but CPU-heavy users didnРІР‚в„ўt need the second GPU, and GPU-heavy users needed hotter-running GPUs (and often just one really hot one).3 So the only configuration it was offered in was either overspecced (and overpriced) or underpowered for most Mac Pro customers. (The 2016 MacBook Pro has the same problem.) It was more expensive than its predecessor, while also removing major features that many of its customers still needed. Some of the leading factors that led to its failure:

Apple mac pro late 2013