Mac Pro 7,1 - using two 43" 4k tvs for monitors

Question

Mac Pro 7,1 - using two 43" 4k tvs for monitors

Am about to make this purchase and need some help to see:

7,1 Mac Pro, 8 core, 1TB SSD, 32G or 64G Ram, and a AMD Radeon Pro 580X.

Would like to run it with two 43" 4K OLED or QLED UHD TVs as monitors( Probably Visios or Samsungs)

I do NOT do video production, or high end photo rendering. Nor am I a serious gamer.

I will be using this rig for the following personal, non-commercial activities:

MANY cross-linked Excel Work books with as many as 50 worksheets in each with TONS of 'complex formatting' charts'.
McDraft 2D drafting/design
Watching Cable TV
TBird Email app
FireFox browser with 3-4 windows open at one time
Would expect to have a mix of 12 to 16 windows open same time.
Looking for fast calculation speed, good text resolution, and very snappy refresh rates on monitors

In other words, lots of multi-tasking of fairly low-demand apps, swiftly processed, and quickly displayed.

Note: The main reason for not using more cores or higher end GPUs is budget.

Am looking to make this set up work for my needs for next 8-10 years, and if technology or OS advances too much, then necessary incremental upgrades would be considered at later date.

Am 78 yo, and this would be my 13th Mac/Apple, since 1984 (36 years!) and hopefully my last.

You thoughts and ideas on this will be greatly appreciated!

Posted on Feb 4, 2020 7:48 AM

Reply

Answer 1

Feb 4, 2020 9:02 AM in response to john from palm harbor

That setup would work very well for what you described, and be wildly expensive as well.

The graphics cards in every Mac sold today can handle multiple external displays without ANY perceptible slowdown whatsoever. 2D graphics is simple, even when doing 2D CAD.

If you are not doing Video editing or Photo editing, there is no such thing as a "too slow" graphics card. Running multiple external displays is really easy for any display card. The reason Users pay more is to support GPU computations for things like shaders and renderers and cross-fades and 3D fly-through.

In my opinion, you should consider a 6-core high-end Mac mini as a solution.

Reply

Answer 2

Feb 4, 2020 6:25 PM in response to john from palm harbor

john from palm harbor wrote:

Storage options:

As to SSD, I don't think I need need much. Only using 130GB on a 256GB SSD, and have about 120GB of head room

System 32GB

Apps 26GB

Docs 22GB

IOS Files 8GB

iCloud files 7GB

iTunes GB

Photos 4GB

So, I'll probably go with base 256GB SSD storage, at no added cost.

You agree?

128GB is so tiny Apple should not even be selling it.Your 256 today looks a little tight. I think you will be happier in the long run with al least 512-ish drive size.

That is the lest deadly of all the choices, because you can always connect another drive.

Reply

Answer 3

Feb 4, 2020 2:09 PM in response to Grant Bennet-Alder

hanks very much for that suggestion.

You've been helping me for 10-12 years – always with great advice.

So, if I go with a "...high-end Mac mini," which you suggest I consider, a couple of questions occur to me.

Which processor to select for my needs as stated?:

3.0GHz 6‑core i5 w/Turbo Boost up to 4.1GHz?
3.2GHz 6‑core i7 w/ Turbo Boost up to 4.6GHz plus Hyper-threading? ($200 more)

Your thoughts?

Am figuring 16 GB of ram should be plenty for what I'm doing, with no loss of speed? ($200 more than base of 8GB). ??

Look right to you?

Storage options:

As to SSD, I don't think I need need much. Only using 130GB on a 256GB SSD, and have about 120GB of head room

System 32GB

Apps 26GB

Docs 22GB

IOS Files 8GB

iCloud files 7GB

iTunes GB

Photos 4GB

So, I'll probably go with base 256GB SSD storage, at no added cost.

You agree?

Video support:

Am not sure which output ports and possible dongles to use for best monitor results to a pair of HDMI-input 43" TVs, but with a liitle advice it sounds pretty straight-forward.

Other than these follow-up questions, I think your idea looks like a right good clear path for me, and much cheaper than I imagined.

Around $1,500 rather than $6,000. Yippee!

Excellent advice, Graham!

Cheers,

John

Reply

Answer 4

Feb 4, 2020 6:19 PM in response to john from palm harbor

john from palm harbor wrote:

Which processor to select for my needs as stated?:

3.0GHz 6‑core i51. w/Turbo Boost up to 4.1GHz?

3.2GHz 6‑core i7 w/ Turbo Boost up to 4.6GHz plus Hyper-threading? 1. ($200 more)

Your thoughts?

Multiple processors is a Classic unsolved Computer Science problem. For anything except Video compression, "More than a handful is wasted". Either of those processor choices will work fine for you.

Reply

Answer 5

Feb 4, 2020 6:21 PM in response to john from palm harbor

john from palm harbor wrote:

Am figuring 16 GB of ram should be plenty for what I'm doing, with no loss of speed? ($200 more than base of 8GB). ??

Look right to you?

16GB is a LOT more than 8GB, and if you end up occasionally needing more, it will be simulated on your drive. I think that's a good amount, if not editing Videos with regularity.

Reply

Answer 6

Feb 4, 2020 6:36 PM in response to john from palm harbor

john from palm harbor wrote:

Video support:

Am not sure which output ports and possible dongles to use for best monitor results to a pair of HDMI-input 43" TVs, but with a liitle advice it sounds pretty straight-forward.

That machine will have no problem with 4K displays. The Machine has one HDMI 2.0 port, which, with the correct high-speed cable can drive a 4K TV.

Any ThunderBolt-3 to HDMI 2.0 rated for 4K cable will let you connect the second TV via HDMI. If either TV has a DisplayPort family input, that is preferable and runs cooler.

Apple has a fancy adapter that provides a "regular USB-A" port and a charging port as well as HDMI. A slight caution, only the newer model supports HDMI 2.0, as described in this article

About the Apple USB-C Digital AV Multiport Adapter - Apple Support

.

Reply

Answer 7

Feb 5, 2020 3:44 AM in response to Grant Bennet-Alder

Many thanks, Grant.

john

Reply

Mac Pro 7,1 - using two 43" 4k tvs for monitors

Similar questions