Apple should have gone AMD

The video reviews Apple’s 2019 Mac Pro, arguing that the Xeon W based architecture was a poor choice for modern high end workstations. It systematically compares the Mac Pro against AMD based systems, including Ryzen 9 3950X and Threadripper 3970X, to determine if Apple’s hardware choices deliver real advantage in professional workloads. Early on the hosts set up a variety of benchmarks, including Cinebench and Puget Bench for After Effects, to put to the test how the Mac Pro performs relative to AMD competitors and older Mac Pro configurations. They highlight that the base Mac Pro 6k model, with 32GB of RAM and eight cores, lags behind considerably in CPU-heavy tasks, while memory configurations and GPU options complicate the upgrade decision. The analysis emphasizes that Apple’s focus on specific accelerators and high memory capacity may not align with the needs of most high-end users, particularly those who require GPU-accelerated workflows. The hosts propose practical configurations, recommending a mix of RAM upgrades and GPU approaches (dual graphics cards or aftermarket options) depending on whether users need current performance or future upgrade paths. In conclusion, the video argues that for many potential buyers the Mac Pro is not the right machine, and if someone must choose, the Threadripper or Ryzen paths often offer better price-to-performance and upgrade flexibility. The hosts also discuss the potential reasons behind Apple’s hardware strategy, suggesting it could be about software optimization, chip architecture decisions, or strategic partnerships, rather than a simple misstep. Overall, the video blends teardown insights with real-world benchmarks to guide professionals toward more cost-effective, future-proof options, while acknowledging that a small subset of highly specialized users might still find the Mac Pro appealing for its unique ecosystem and expansion capabilities.

Topics · technology · hardware · consumer-electronics · reviews · benchmarks · workstation