?!?!!?

So this is kinda old news but mac is doing a huge overhaul on its Mac Pro desktop line
http://www.apple.com/mac-pro/
I'm actually legitimately interested in how its going to go. I don't like Mac for many reasons, but I do like how they tend to push research and development on a lot of frontline hardware. They sped up the popularity of the SSD quite a bit with their overpriced pieces of shit.

This new design is even bigger
I like how the case is laid out from a good use of space standpoint, but I'm skeptical about it being able to provide enough cooling for that much stuff. It's also so small that I'd be worried about the long term effects of the "hot parts" in it

the pci-e connection to drive space is also neat (the current system uses a SATA port). I'm not sure why this hasn't been done before as it seems somewhat obvious

if it launches really well and holds up over time I'll be worried about how this effects desktops in general. the new pro's size and efficiency is only possible because it was engineered specifically for that. i like custom made computers that can swap parts, if i wanted a super efficiently small desktop that can only be engineered and manufactured i'd buy a laptop

i never thought of pcie storage, its kindve weird, it should be faster then normal ssd through sata though, theoretically at least, but i dont think youll see much of a difference
Id be interested to see benchmarks comparing them

Actually i like pcie ssds instead of sata, sata is pretty old now, damnit seren, now i want my new computer to have pcie drives

Their chart for "Acoustical level under load" is completely retarded
dB's are a logarithmic scale. so 30 vs 15dB's is a difference of 1.5 orders of magnitude, and the chart makes it look as if its not even a factor of 2.


Couldn't get the image to display for some weird reason. normally i have no trouble posting screen shots

EDIT: oh woops, i just realized that chart says dBa, maybe those work completely differently than normal decibels, if so, i say thats dumb and no one should use those. And if they do, their abbreviation should be wildly different from dB

EDIT2: and that chart is probably still completely misleading. cuz no chart ever was used to faithfully represent data.

ach wrote:

EDIT2: and that chart is probably still completely misleading. cuz no chart ever was used to faithfully represent data.

the worst part is there's a different amount of space between every set of 2 of the bars, except for the very first bar in each column which is a set of 1. who the hell thinks of these things

Dba is stupid, its the subjective measurement of sound, like when you measure the weather and the temperature is 40F but theres strong winds so the windchill makes it feel like 30F, the temperature is like db, the windchill is like dba
Theres no absolute way to convert between db and dba since dba changes based on certain frequencies (like how windchill changes based on wind speed even though the temperature stays the same)
And since that chart doesnt give you a frequency its basically useless

But fans are rated in dba for some stupid reason, so with my experience in hearing cpu fans and knowing that the rating of fans usually vary from about 15-30dba the difference between 15 dba and 30 dba to my ear is about half like the chart says