or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Apple offers sneak peek at new cylindrical Mac Pro assembled in the USA
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple offers sneak peek at new cylindrical Mac Pro assembled in the USA - Page 6

post #201 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarenDino View Post

It's a BUTT PLUG !!!!

Your girlfriend must have a REALLY big butt!

post #202 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

I really wish somebody would explain how this can be a downgrade. 

 

It's a downgrade because a spec bump Mac Pro is either equal or superior.

 

  • CPU would be the same.  Updated to the same Xeon CPUs.
  • PCIe would be the same.  The spec bump would include the extra lanes and all three slots could be configured as x16 slots and had lanes left over for 4 TB2 slots. 
  • GPU would be as good or better.  Why?  Because you can choose which GPUs you wanted including the ones provided here.  More importantly there are some jobs that will require nVidia instead of ATI.  Better CUDA support vs OpenGL on the apps you use.  Or the drivers are broken for certain apps.
  • Memory would have been better.  8 slots vs 4.  It means memory is cheaper if you don't max or you can max higher.  Same memory bandwidth speeds.
  • Storage would have been better.  Remove the optical and replace with 2 PCIe SSD blade slots that are just as fast.  Still have 4 bays for HDDs and SSDs.
  • Expansion would have been better.  3 slots + 4 TB2. Each slot is worth 2 TB2 ports.  And if you don't need dual GPUs but do want a Rocket and some other high speed card (say a Xeon Phi) then you can have that running twice as fast as with TB2.
  • Longevity would have been much better.  What are the two common things you can do to make a computer last longer?  Add RAM and replace the GPU.  You can only add half the RAM and can't update the GPUs at all.  64GB or even 128GB sounds like a lot today but 3 years from now it won't.  Being capped at 4 slots will suck.  My 3 year old MBP CPU and GPU wise is okay, especially since I stuck a SSD in.  Being capped at 8GB is what makes the machine obsolete for me.  I NNED 16GB so I have to refresh this year.  For a user that is memory starved 64GB is merely okay today and 128GB optimal.  Three years from now being stuck at 4 slots and 128GB is likely going to suck.

 

In what ways are the new Mac Pro superior?

 

  • Size.
  • Cool Thermal strategy.
  • Looks.
post #203 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hudson1 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by ajmas View Post

Does anyone know if the outer case is in metal? I hope they aren't using any plastic for the outer shell.

Everything I've seen says metal.

It seems to be quite shiny on the upper case but matte on the inner case. This is it with the lid down:



The plastic display case is adding its own reflections but you can see at 0:43, it's very reflective like chrome - easier to keep clean I suppose. This is it with the lid up:



I personally like the matte metal style of the interior.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar 
Have all the "external-only expansion is better" crowd thought about what they are going to do with all the extra enclosures, cables, power bricks, cooling fans, and noise that they are going to start collecting?

People will buy what they need. The Mac Pro only had 3 expansion slots and if they used adaptor cards, they can be low powered converters e.g extra Gigabit Ethernet ports are small Thunderbolt adaptors.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar 
And by the way, does each of those Thunderbolt connectors get its own dedicated 20 Gbps bandwidth, or is it all shared?

They used 3 separate controllers so yes they should have 20Gbps per port. The iMac's two ports share a single controller and manage to get full bandwidth each.

The current Mac Pro PCI is x16, x16, x4, x4 with the first x16 used by the GPU.
This one is essentially six x4. Although displays use some of it (can use HDMI to avoid this for some setups), the total available bandwidth should be comparable and will increase further in future.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 
Pricing will make or break this machine.

It looks like a single socket motherboard so they'll save money by having a single model and single CPU options are actually cheaper than dual ones. Apple's current high end uses dual $1440 but a single 10-core is something like $1800.

The 6GB FirePro that supports Crossfire is over $3k:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814195116

It looks like the top config has two so 12GB of video memory but potentially expensive. AMD is having some financial problems just now though and they have lowered prices for the consoles so they might have given Apple some good prices on these. Say they have a $2k 12-core CPU + $2.5k per top GPU, that's at least $7k for the top model and there will have to be an SSD + RAM + profit margin. The low-end can easily start at quad-core, 4GB RAM, 256GB SSD, dual entry FirePro e.g:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814195106

They may have an in-store service to allow you to upgrade GPUs later on. I'm not sure they'll be able to hit the $2500 entry price given the design. $3k-10k seems more likely but it comes down to the GPU options. They may allow you to use a single low-end GPU.

For OpenCL apps, it will be well worth the price though. Remember Final Cut Pro encoding is OpenCL based. The Adobe CS Suite is too. Blackmagic said their software is fast on it. I think Pixar and The Foundry will have some neat OpenCL demos tomorrow.
post #204 of 308

It is pretty awesome looking and frankly if you weren't in the market for a Mac Pro but a Mac Pro Mini you'll be ticked pink.  It's everything I'd hope the Mac Pro Mini to be except for the ATI GPUs.

 

I just wish they didn't kill the Mac Pro to make it happen. 

post #205 of 308

Couple of comments I found today regarding the power of this computer:

 

First from Adobe on CreativeCow.net: 

Quote:
We support OpenCL on AMD cards with CC. We also support Dual GPU for rendering. Premiere will max out these systems when the ship. 

Cheers

Dave

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
David McGavran, Adobe Systems Incorporated
Senior Engineering Manager Adobe Premiere Pro
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Then from Black Magic:

 

 

Quote:
We have been testing with DaVinci Resolve 10 builds and this screams. Its amazing and those GPUs are incredible powerful. I am not sure what I can say as I am only going off what Apple has talked about publicly here in the keynote for what I can say right now, however there is a whole new OpenCL and DaVinci Resolve 10 has had a lot of performance work done to integrate it and its really really fast. Those GPUs are very powerful and have lots of GPU memory so this is the Mac we have been waiting for! We have lots of Thunderbolt products too so video in and out is taken care of. 

We will have more details once the guys get back from WWDC and we get some more info from Apple on what we can talk about etc.

Overall we could not be happier!

Regards,

Grant Petty
Blackmagic Design

Not bad.  Obviously some people in the pro industry are not concerned.

post #206 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

Disappointed. Scaled down for all the wrong reasons.
What are these reasons may I ask?
Quote:
Originally Posted by IronHeadSlim View Post

Isn't it Six Thunderbolt 2 ports?

(The Keynote stream had 6 Firewire 2 ports)
It is 6 thunderbolt, however in this market there is about a 98% to 2% ratio on accessories for the ports so 8 USB and 4 thunderbolt would may have been better.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rhyde View Post

No slots?
No optical drive?
No support for RAID (hard drives)?
More of a Mac maxi rather than a Mac Pro.

Granted, SSDs are amazing fast. But if you need bulk storage (and you want it inside the box), this will be disappointing.

I can understand lack of optical drive on "non-Pro" machines, but for those who produce video having to attach an external drive is just a bit of fugliness that is not needed here. Given that people who typically use Mac Pros tend to work with large data files (and may need to mail them to clients in some form other than electronic), the lack of a built-in optical drive should raise some eyebrows.

No slots? Gee, one thing that has kept Mac Pro units working as long as they have in the past has been the ability to swap in new graphic cards. TB2 may help a little, but it's not quite the same as a 16x PCIe slot. Further, there are other devices people might want to add to a new Mac Pro (or, more likely, pull out of an existing Mac Pro and stick in the new one) that the lack of slots will be problematic.

Cylindrical? Crap! A device that could have been easily rack-mounted would have been much more practical. Even if that wasn't in the cards, cylindrical is going to create space problems on desktops and other rectangular areas where Mac Pros currently set. Someone in Apple's industrial design department should have made this a little more "industrial". Granted, the Mac Pro user is *far* from Apple's demographic (which seems to like "thin is in") but you think they would have done a better job of designing something for the Pro users. Heck, I'd much rather they stuck with the old case. Pro users don't need something that would look good in a museum -- they need something practical. Cylindrical fails that. If this is an example of "can't innovate my ass", I'd prefer less innovation, thank you.

OTOH, the performance does look pretty damn good. Mac Pro users will be forced to upgrade on that point alone.
There are always disadvantages...
post #207 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


It seems to be quite shiny on the upper case but matte on the inner case. This is it with the lid down:



The plastic display case is adding its own reflections but you can see at 0:43, it's very reflective like chrome - easier to keep clean I suppose. This is it with the lid up:



I personally like the matte metal style of the interior.
People will buy what they need. The Mac Pro only had 3 expansion slots and if they used adaptor cards, they can be low powered converters e.g extra Gigabit Ethernet ports are small Thunderbolt adaptors.

They used 3 separate controllers so yes they should have 20Gbps per port. The iMac's two ports share a single controller and manage to get full bandwidth each.

The current Mac Pro PCI is x16, x16, x4, x4 with the first x16 used by the GPU.
This one is essentially six x4. Although displays use some of it (can use HDMI to avoid this for some setups), the total available bandwidth should be comparable and will increase further in future.
It looks like a single socket motherboard so they'll save money by having a single model and single CPU options are actually cheaper than dual ones. Apple's current high end uses dual $1440 but a single 10-core is something like $1800.

The 6GB FirePro that supports Crossfire is over $3k:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814195116

It looks like the top config has two so 12GB of video memory but potentially expensive. AMD is having some financial problems just now though and they have lowered prices for the consoles so they might have given Apple some good prices on these. Say they have a $2k 12-core CPU + $2.5k per top GPU, that's at least $7k for the top model and there will have to be an SSD + RAM + profit margin. The low-end can easily start at quad-core, 4GB RAM, 256GB SSD, dual entry FirePro e.g:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814195106

They may have an in-store service to allow you to upgrade GPUs later on. I'm not sure they'll be able to hit the $2500 entry price given the design. $3k-10k seems more likely but it comes down to the GPU options. They may allow you to use a single low-end GPU.

For OpenCL apps, it will be well worth the price though. Remember Final Cut Pro encoding is OpenCL based. The Adobe CS Suite is too. Blackmagic said their software is fast on it. I think Pixar and The Foundry will have some neat OpenCL demos tomorrow.

 

Where do you get 12GB Marvin? These aren't twin W9000 GPGPUs on-board. It's a combined 6GB DDR5 with 4096 stream processor cores. With the impending next generation GCN 2.0 architecture stamping out this next couple of months this might be the Volcanic Cores completely skipping the W9000/S10000 series all together.

Phil specifically mentioned 6GB DDR5 and 4096 streams processor cores. Essentially dual 2048 stream processor cores sharing a unified 6GB DDR5 similar in kind to perhaps the new PS4 sharing 8GB DDR5 on their GPGPUs. All speculation, but those GPGPUs are definitely a designed for Apple Mac Pro only solution.

These are definitely Apple original designs with AMD:

http://cdn.thenextweb.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/2013/06/IMG_8197.jpg

 

http://cdn.thenextweb.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/2013/06/IMG_8203.jpg

 

Unless a 3rd party vendor works with Apple these are it for the new Mac Pro.

 

Definitely haven't seen designed GPGPUs like this ever.


Edited by mdriftmeyer - 6/10/13 at 8:34pm
post #208 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post

It is pretty awesome looking and frankly if you weren't in the market for a Mac Pro but a Mac Pro Mini you'll be ticked pink.  It's everything I'd hope the Mac Pro Mini to be except for the ATI GPUs.

I just wish they didn't kill the Mac Pro to make it happen.

The major differences in this design are two things:

1. PCI slots are replaced with Thunderbolt ports with PCIe2 x4 equivalent bandwidth each.
2. GPUs probably aren't user-replaceable.

Some people believe that those things make this a dumbed down Mac Pro but there's not really a large distinction. It already ships with fast GPUs so there shouldn't be an immediate need for GPU changes - they might even have BTO NVidia options. It's highly unlikely people would upgrade GPUs every year because the performance doesn't change that much. Maybe after 2 years but again not if they spent a few thousand on the original ones. After 3 years, sell the machine second hand and get a new model. I don't get the fascination some people have with holding onto hardware forever. You get a new warranty with a new machine. There are a few stories around about people with older Mac Pros and failing capacitors or power supplies and they get upset that Apple isn't jumping at the chance to fix their 4-6 year old machines they spent $4k+ on. It still runs out of warranty no matter how much it costs.

If you really need PCI cards, there are options for a box:



but that's just a backup option when the computer can't handle certain kinds of processing natively (the performance of this machine should handle a lot of things natively) and when there isn't a Thunderbolt equivalent for what's needed. The benefit of Thunderbolt peripherals is they are plug and play and they can be shared with another machine.

I think the core problem is that people still refuse to accept a Thunderbolt port as a viable replacement for a PCI slot and that perception needs to change. There are enough demos that show it is a suitable replacement. As soon as an example comes up where it's not suitable, a solution will be found - worst case a driver is needed - but there's nothing really been found lacking with Thunderbolt options.
post #209 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

Where do you get 12GB Marvin? These aren't twin W9000 GPGPUs on-board. It's a combined 6GB DDR5 with 4096 stream processor cores.

That's what it sounded like from the marketing:

"Not only does it feature a state-of-the-art AMD FirePro workstation-class GPU with up to 6GB of dedicated VRAM — it features two of them"

Maybe just worded confusingly but on what interface would the memory sit for it to be shared fast enough by both? Anandtech says:

"The cylindrical computer will also come standard with two workstation-class ATI FirePro GPUs, each with 384-bit memory busses and 528Gbps of memory bandwidth."

http://arstechnica.com/apple/2013/06/at-long-last-apple-announces-new-mac-pro-with-cylindrical-design/
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

Phil specifically mentioned 6GB DDR5 and 4096 streams processor cores. Essentially dual 2048 stream processor cores sharing a unified 6GB DDR5 similar in kind to perhaps the new PS4 sharing 8GB DDR5 on their GPGPUs.

They definitely added the stream processors together. Maybe AMD built a shared memory system for them, that probably would be the best setup for computation and 6GB is plenty of memory anyway. They also haven't said you can get just one GPU - it's dual-GPU as standard.
post #210 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


You are simply full of yourself. Once video professionals grasp what is in this machine they will be falling all over themselves to buy one. In the end upgrading video cards is becoming a thing of the past because the payoff isn't there anymore.

GPUs really don't change that fast at the extreme end, and you wouldn't be able to upgrade the cpu very far anyway. Ivy EP cpus should work, but anything after that will be a different chipset again. I won't be too excited until I have all the details. This includes support from software developers and stable well supported storage options. It's not easy for me to see how the synergy will work out so far given that this is a pretty drastic change. They mentioned the Foundry and Pixar. I know how to use Nuke. I don't regularly use it, and I don't personally have it on my own machines. I am more interested in support from Adobe and Autodesk. It's just one of those things where the announcement is cool. The potential performance is obvious. I just want to see how things work out. I don't have to buy a machine on day 1. I think the update cycles will still be somewhat long as it still uses the Xeon EP schedule which isn't a strict 12 month refresh.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


The major differences in this design are two things:

1. PCI slots are replaced with Thunderbolt ports with PCIe2 x4 equivalent bandwidth each.
2. GPUs probably aren't user-replaceable.

I think you really called it on this one. A couple of your predictions were true. One was the use of single parts only in a 12 core configuration, although you suggested it would be only one configuration (not sure that part was terribly serious in conviction though). The other portion was the thunderbolt ports. As I previously mentioned, they're not trying to export gpus over thunderbolt connections. That is still a silly concept when comparing the cost of initial engineering (including thunderbolt certification requirements) and manufacturing to potential performance levels. I have no idea what the overall motivation was here, as I don't know what the cost and performance of a single 12 core looks like relative to the cost of implementing a dual solution. It's important to note that they migrated to the use of workstation gpus. Those can be slower in some apps, faster in others. On Windows they're much more stable for certain things and allow for large amounts of ram if you wish to handle computation.

 

I'm actually quite interested in this if they get real GPGPU support from software developers and get their OpenGL implementation to where it should be. Thunderbolt was still designed for notebooks more than anything. It's just being leveraged back, which I did acknowledge as a possibility. It allows for one set of peripherals to be marketed to a larger audience, but I'm skeptical that the new mac pro would be the thing to push that. I think many of those ports are designed for 4k displays which might saturate an entire port. I think much like other big changes, it will be interesting to see what this looks like a few months into its release. The early unveiling does allow developers some amount of lead, as Apple's ecosystem would now be completely thunderbolt driven. In terms of upgrading gpus, workstation gpus don't change very fast. They are not upclocked and rebranded each year, although sometimes you'll have high end performance options show up later at some of the extreme price points. If we get strong gpus and really well tuned drivers for once, I don't think it will be a big deal. In the end it will still come down to how much it costs to configure a computer setup to spec and how much money you can make with it. If they are able to take certain features and make them more mainstream eg HPC GPGPU calculations leveraged into a desktop box, that in itself should motivate long term purchases. I would not expect huge day 1 orders if the pricing model is aimed predominantly at the budget range of multiple user environments.

post #211 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by rezwits View Post

I don't know I have been trying to get info on Xeons, I got it twisted with the chips that allows 4 Processors on board I think I don't know, been up all night, misread maybe.  So it's DUAL PROC?  wow I didn't see that, I could have swore I read about 12-core haswell or something, whatever maybe not, I don't know, but I didn't see how you could put two in the Cylinder? on the Apple site breakdown... we will see I suppose...  I could have swore in the conference he said has Haswell, but I don't know

 

http://www.engadget.com/2012/10/17/intel-roadmap-reveals-10-core-xeon-e5-2600-v2-cpu/

 

According to Fudzilla, the Haswell-E will have from 12 to 16 cores, a TDP of 130 W, and support for DDR4 memory that promises to deliver exponentially more bandwidth than previous generations of processors.

 

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2314287

 

well I don't know

Laters...

Awww, geez, you're absolutely right. It's clear from the overview on apple.com that it's just one CPU. This sucks.

post #212 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

That's what it sounded like from the marketing:

"Not only does it feature a state-of-the-art AMD FirePro workstation-class GPU with up to 6GB of dedicated VRAM — it features two of them"
That is what it sounds like to me "up to" 6GB for each GPU. This is one of the reasons I don't understand the negativity over this machine, if our interpretations are correct this is one extremely powerful machine in its "up to" configuration.
Quote:
Maybe just worded confusingly but on what interface would the memory sit for it to be shared fast enough by both? Anandtech says:

"The cylindrical computer will also come standard with two workstation-class ATI FirePro GPUs, each with 384-bit memory busses and 528Gbps of memory bandwidth."

http://arstechnica.com/apple/2013/06/at-long-last-apple-announces-new-mac-pro-with-cylindrical-design/
They definitely added the stream processors together. Maybe AMD built a shared memory system for them, that probably would be the best setup for computation and 6GB is plenty of memory anyway. They also haven't said you can get just one GPU - it's dual-GPU as standard.

I don't think it is shared memory, that would crimp GPU performance significantly. On the other hand AMD is pushing hard on GCN and heterogeneous computing so who know we may see something different.
post #213 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post

It's a downgrade because a spec bump Mac Pro is either equal or superior.
That spec bump Mac Pro doesn't exist though.
Quote:
  • CPU would be the same.  Updated to the same Xeon CPUs.
Actually the old Mac Pro might be better. After all this machine is a single socket machine.
Quote:
[*] PCIe would be the same.  The spec bump would include the extra lanes and all three slots could be configured as x16 slots and had lanes left over for 4 TB2 slots. 
Actually I'm not sure about that. This is only important though if you believe internal expansion is important. Frankly I would have preferred at least one PCI Express slot. However Apple doesn't see it that way.
Quote:
[*] GPU would be as good or better.  Why?  Because you can choose which GPUs you wanted including the ones provided here.  More importantly there are some jobs that will require nVidia instead of ATI.  Better CUDA support vs OpenGL on the apps you use.  Or the drivers are broken for certain apps.
That really doesn't matter because the vast majority of Mac users go with what Apple supplies and don't reconfigure their machines.
Quote:
[*] Memory would have been better.  8 slots vs 4.  It means memory is cheaper if you don't max or you can max higher.  Same memory bandwidth speeds.
That may be the case this year but eventually RAM will be soldered on the motherboard.
Quote:
[*] Storage would have been better.  Remove the optical and replace with 2 PCIe SSD blade slots that are just as fast.  Still have 4 bays for HDDs and SSDs.
Storage wouldn't be significantly different if you as a user are already using external arrays.
Quote:
[*] Expansion would have been better.  3 slots + 4 TB2. Each slot is worth 2 TB2 ports.  And if you don't need dual GPUs but do want a Rocket and some other high speed card (say a Xeon Phi) then you can have that running twice as fast as with TB2.
While this may be true I suspect Apple is taking a different focus. In a nut shell I think Apple is stressing computational ability first and foremost.
Quote:
[*] Longevity would have been much better.  What are the two common things you can do to make a computer last longer?  Add RAM and replace the GPU.  You can only add half the RAM and can't update the GPUs at all.  
I will give you RAM upgradability for this go around but that is a feature that is going away in the future. As for the GPU I really don't see the value in GPU upgrades anymore. This especially the case in a machine like this where most of the cost will be in the GPUs.
Quote:
64GB or even 128GB sounds like a lot today but 3 years from now it won't.  
Three years from now we may have Mac Pros running on completely different memory architectures.
Quote:
Being capped at 4 slots will suck.  My 3 year old MBP CPU and GPU wise is okay, especially since I stuck a SSD in.  Being capped at 8GB is what makes the machine obsolete for me.  I NNED 16GB so I have to refresh this year.  For a user that is memory starved 64GB is merely okay today and 128GB optimal.  Three years from now being stuck at 4 slots and 128GB is likely going to suck.
We don't even know if or when Mac OS will address their architectural memory limits.
Quote:
In what ways are the new Mac Pro superior?
  • Size.
  • Cool Thermal strategy.
  • Looks.

You need to look at this machine again thinking more about the future than the past.
post #214 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

Disappointed. Scaled down for all the wrong reasons.

 

Mmm... I don't agree. I'm starting to think the old box was big for all the wrong reasons.

This is the core of the computing machine: welded to a single thermal management solution. Clever, elegant, and functional.

 

Why internalize everything from hard drives to optical drives into a big box when many users just need lots of speed and raw computational power? I think this is the future of the Pro desktop, a design for the next 5 years. You won't miss slow HDDs or optical media in 5 years. That'll be a distant memory.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #215 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

We don't even know if or when Mac OS will address their architectural memory limits.

True. Currently capped at 96GB.
post #216 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwmac View Post

 

I guess my current Mac Pro will have to do a little longer service than I had hoped and when it it time to upgrade I will likely build my own Mac which apparently is easier than ever now or look to buy an iMac for the very first time ever. It would be very tempting to build my own since I love my monitors now and could reuse my Geforce 670 and all 4 of my current hard drives in my Mac Pro which would save a lot of money. I had never before  considered building my own Mac but maybe it i time. I don't blame Apple nor am I angry. I am a little disappointed but it was expected and I saw the writing on the wall. I am curious to see the prices and configurations though. In a way maybe they did me a favor since I miss my old tinkering days and being able to upgrade my own computer to my heart's content. 

 

 

Building your own Mac Pro is a very simple thing to do, just make sure to buy OSX compatible components. I'm going to wait to see the price of this thing before I make any decision but if I can build a machine with comparable performance for 800 or less I'll skip it as well. The Intel Xeon is a very expensive chip, with AMD's new 12 & 16 core CPU's having decent performance at a fraction of the cost building a machine for 800 or even 1,000 less isn't so far fetched. The Intel Xeon's still reign supreme but these new AMD's come pretty close. The new Mac Pro is a beautiful machine but if it's outrageously price I just won't be able to justify the purchase especially when it will be just a hobby machine myself.

 

 

AMD 12 Core

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113304

 

AMD 16 core

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113306


Edited by Relic - 6/11/13 at 4:48am
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
post #217 of 308

When are you getting yours?
 

post #218 of 308
lol
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
post #219 of 308

Awesome

As some suggest I am curious on the price.  I also think Apple is headed in the right direction with the use of Thunderbolt for expandability.  This makes expansion EZ.  I am not convinced on the arguments for Video Cards/CPU/RAM...The software has improved to the point where these are not as important as they once were.  Please not I did not say they weren't important, just are not big issues with today's technology at least on the Apple side.  Yes, even for Pro users.  Based on the size of this unit I am betting the price will let you buy 2 for close to the price of the old one.  Yes I may be dreaming on this part but the thing is small.

 

Based on some of the posts Apple has made people uncomfortable with this design.  Sometimes that is good as it means innovation is happening right in front of us.

post #220 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by TechProd1gy View Post

As some suggest I am curious on the price.  I also think Apple is headed in the right direction with the use of Thunderbolt for expandability.  This makes expansion EZ.  I am not convinced on the arguments for Video Cards/CPU/RAM...The software has improved to the point where these are not as important as they once were.  Please not I did not say they weren't important, just are not big issues with today's technology at least on the Apple side.  Yes, even for Pro users.  Based on the size of this unit I am betting the price will let you buy 2 for close to the price of the old one.  Yes I may be dreaming on this part but the thing is small.

 

Based on some of the posts Apple has made people uncomfortable with this design.  Sometimes that is good as it means innovation is happening right in front of us.

 

No way that two of the new Mac Pro models are going to be equal in cost to one of the outgoing Mac Pro models. A fully loaded new Mac Pro could actually be pushing around 10k, what with the expensive 12-core CPU & equally expensive ATI workstation FirePro GPUs. I would figure an entry level model; say a quad-core E5, 8GB RAM, 128GB SSD & lower-end ATI workstation FirePro GPUs; call it around 2k…

Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
post #221 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post

It's a downgrade because a spec bump Mac Pro is either equal or superior.
  • CPU would be the same.  Updated to the same Xeon CPUs.
  • PCIe would be the same.  The spec bump would include the extra lanes and all three slots could be configured as x16 slots and had lanes left over for 4 TB2 slots. 
  • GPU would be as good or better.  Why?  Because you can choose which GPUs you wanted including the ones provided here.  More importantly there are some jobs that will require nVidia instead of ATI.  Better CUDA support vs OpenGL on the apps you use.  Or the drivers are broken for certain apps.
  • Memory would have been better.  8 slots vs 4.  It means memory is cheaper if you don't max or you can max higher.  Same memory bandwidth speeds.
  • Storage would have been better.  Remove the optical and replace with 2 PCIe SSD blade slots that are just as fast.  Still have 4 bays for HDDs and SSDs.
  • Expansion would have been better.  3 slots + 4 TB2. Each slot is worth 2 TB2 ports.  And if you don't need dual GPUs but do want a Rocket and some other high speed card (say a Xeon Phi) then you can have that running twice as fast as with TB2.
  • Longevity would have been much better.  What are the two common things you can do to make a computer last longer?  Add RAM and replace the GPU.  You can only add half the RAM and can't update the GPUs at all.  64GB or even 128GB sounds like a lot today but 3 years from now it won't.  Being capped at 4 slots will suck.  My 3 year old MBP CPU and GPU wise is okay, especially since I stuck a SSD in.  Being capped at 8GB is what makes the machine obsolete for me.  I NNED 16GB so I have to refresh this year.  For a user that is memory starved 64GB is merely okay today and 128GB optimal.  Three years from now being stuck at 4 slots and 128GB is likely going to suck.

In what ways are the new Mac Pro superior?
  • Size.
  • Cool Thermal strategy.
  • Looks.

It's simple. If you don't like it, don't buy one.

Apple has decided that pro users don't want the internal expansion as much as external - and there's probably some truth to that. For example, let's say you've got a big rendering project or scientific computing with massive RAID storage. Even with the current MacPro, you're limited in storage. In addition, if there's a computer failure or you want to upgrade your computer, getting all the data transferred can be a lot of work. WIth the new one, you can swap in a newer computer (or replacement for hardware that has to go to the shop) without losing data - all you need to do is restore your apps and OS from your Time Machine backup.

They're essentially separating the storage from computing - which makes a lot of sense at the high end. As for the rest, I think you'll find that most Mac Pros do not have much (if anything) in the way of internal expansion cards that can't be simply replaced with a TB solution. For the very tiny number of people who have specific PCI cards that can't be replaced with TB, there are expansion boxes. But why make ALL customers pay for an expensive, massive system in order to satisfy the desire of a tiny number to avoid using an expansion box.

Added to that are cooling issues. The Mac Pro was pulled off the shelves in Europe due to cooling fan issues. That problem goes away with this new design.

Whether you like it or not is completely irrelevant - unless you can show us why your expertise is greater than Apple's.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #222 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curtis Hannah View Post

It is 6 thunderbolt, however in this market there is about a 98% to 2% ratio on accessories for the ports so 8 USB and 4 thunderbolt would may have been better.

I'm 100% certain the Phil simply flubbed his lines when he said "Firewire 2" instead of "Thunderbolt 2". And why would you want fewer Thunderbolt ports on a "Pro" machine? As for USB, I don't see any reason to add more of them. You can turn them into as many as you need with hubs.

post #223 of 308

And you can spruce up your desk by sticking a silk flower arrangement inside your Mac Pro.

 

You know, you just know, that someone, somewhere is going to do something like this.

post #224 of 308
There is a large market for workstations that go under desks. Think financial traders. This will enable Apple to go after that market. I think I'd prefer the old case. I guess I'll wait for DDR4 and hopefully 2.5" SAS drives. (is that too much to hope for?)
post #225 of 308

You know one thing I just thought of, is now days with everything shrinking, like mother boards, SSDs shrinking, processors, etc, if they would have used the old mac pro case, they would have done crazy things.  Things like 16 SSDs, 4 processors, and what not.  I mean if they would use the exact same case but taken everything out.  Child please, how many mac minis could you stack inside of a carved out Mac Pro case? hey thats not a bad idea :)  Probably like 24?  That case was huge compared to todays shrunk down technology.

 

Technology get's smaller no matter what you do...

Adobe Systems - "Preventing the Case-Sensitive revolution everyday..."
Reply
Adobe Systems - "Preventing the Case-Sensitive revolution everyday..."
Reply
post #226 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by rezwits View Post

You know one thing I just thought of, is now days with everything shrinking, like mother boards, SSDs shrinking, processors, etc, if they would have used the old mac pro case, they would have done crazy things.  Things like 16 SSDs, 4 processors, and what not.  I mean if they would use the exact same case but taken everything out.  Child please, how many mac minis could you stack inside of a carved out Mac Pro case? hey thats not a bad idea :)  Probably like 24?  That case was huge compared to todays shrunk down technology.

 

Technology get's smaller no matter what you do...

Actually, I thought the better size comparison between the new and old MacPro would have been to show a couple of stacked rows inside the case of the old behemoth - not sure of the exact size, but probably 4x4 would have fit and driven the point home even more than putting it aside the old case.

post #227 of 308
Originally Posted by nht View Post

In what ways are the new Mac Pro superior?

 

  • Size.
  • Cool Thermal strategy.
  • Looks.

 

And every single effing specification of the machine. 

 

Are you just pretending to be this blind?

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #228 of 308

I wonder if this will lead to 'one size fits all'.  This case is small enough that with different 'innards', it could replace the Mini and iMac ( - connected to an ACD or a 4K monitor.)  Maybe this is the xMac / MacPro Mini we've been looking for.

 

That would reduce Apple's cost of manufacturing.  Since this may be built in the US, maybe all Macs (using this configuration) will eventually be built in the US.

 

Where will future monitors be assembled (probably not built)?


Edited by sequitur - 6/11/13 at 10:17am
ADS
Reply
ADS
Reply
post #229 of 308
Nice machine but it is not a Pro...
post #230 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by lucaseve View Post

Nice machine but it is not a Pro...

Of course it's not ...if you have a ridiculously narrow definition of "Pro" 

He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #231 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by lucaseve View Post

Nice machine but it is not a Pro...

Seriously…?!?

 

The amount of compute power this tiny package has blows away ANY previous pro machine from Apple.

 

The main thing most folks are having problems with are the requirements of external units for any expansion. Get over it…

Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
post #232 of 308
Originally Posted by lucaseve View Post
Nice machine but it is not a Pro...

 

When launched, it will be the most powerful single computer on the market. Just shut up.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #233 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by lucaseve View Post

Nice machine but it is not a Pro...

Of course it's not. We don't anthropomorphize machines. It's just one of the most powerful PCs on the planet, and the only one that built to run OS X for Pro USERS.

post #234 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post

I think you really called it on this one. A couple of your predictions were true. One was the use of single parts only in a 12 core configuration, although you suggested it would be only one configuration (not sure that part was terribly serious in conviction though).

I didn't expect the PCIe storage, which Wizard69 was quite keen on. I figured they might have issues with disk management tools but they must have it working ok, presumably under Bootcamp too. They even beat the 8" cube in size, which is amazing considering what's inside it. 8" ^ 3 = 512 cubic inches. The Mac Pro cylinder is π x 3.3 ^2 x 9.9 = 339 cubic inches - just 2/3 the volume of the cube and a smaller footprint than the Mini. I bet it's relatively light too with no heavy 3.5" drives inside.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post

The other portion was the thunderbolt ports. As I previously mentioned, they're not trying to export gpus over thunderbolt connections. That is still a silly concept when comparing the cost of initial engineering (including thunderbolt certification requirements) and manufacturing to potential performance levels.

I still think Thunderbolt GPUs are a perfectly viable option but not for computer manufacturers. Nvidia might get no sales from Apple this year but could make up for it a little by allowing their GPUs to work over TB for CUDA apps. The performance is fine - there's very little performance hit for a GPU on x4 vs x16.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post

I have no idea what the overall motivation was here, as I don't know what the cost and performance of a single 12 core looks like relative to the cost of implementing a dual solution.

The top CPUs that Apple uses are $1440 each - that tends to be the limit so $2880 total of a $6200 Mac Pro goes to Intel. One of the fastest single CPU options is the E5-2687W, which is an 8-core Sandy Bridge CPU and costs $1885. I reckon the new Mac Pro will offer the Ivy Bridge equivalent of that. Two of them score 25 in Cinebench:



so one would be 12.5 vs 16 for the current top-end 12-core Mac Pro. So if you add another 4 cores, that takes the score to 18.7 and then add on the boost from the Ivy Bridge architecture, let's say 30% for the Xeons as it's not being allocated to an IGP (presumably, though it's not clear yet how they are getting the video out over Thunderbolt) and you end up just over 24 and the price of that chip could easily be $2000-2200 ($600-800 less than the dual CPU option) and of course they only need a single-socket motherboard, which is cheaper.

Some people would point out that getting a score of 48 by using two of the chips is better but Apple wouldn't use two $1885 CPUs, it would likely be 2 x 8-core vs single 12-core. The Mac Pro scores 16 so assuming the same 30% boost and 8c vs 6c, that would mean 8-score x 8c/6c x 1.3 Ivy Bridge x 2 processors = 27-28 vs 24. Not that big of a deal IMO for the price difference.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post

I'm actually quite interested in this if they get real GPGPU support from software developers and get their OpenGL implementation to where it should be.

One of the announcements today is that The Foundry's Mari is coming to the Mac, the following video shows it used on the dinosaur in Peter Jackson's King Kong:



http://www.thefoundry.co.uk/articles/2013/06/10/536/mari-is-coming-to-the-mac/

That's what Pixar uses for Monsters U, which is likely why they are both demoing today. I think software developers are seeing the benefits of using OpenCL or at least GPU performance. OpenCL isn't GPU-exclusive either, it helps on the CPU side too just like Alti-Vec did. There's enough support already to justify it IMO with Apple's FCP apps and Adobe apps. Other computationally expensive apps will get there:



Even when you look at real-time game graphics now like in the game Remember Me released this month, some of the visuals look like concept art:

http://barbarella.deadendthrills.com/imagestore/rememberme/2560/cellinahell.jpg
http://barbarella.deadendthrills.com/imagestore/rememberme/2560/nonsmoking.jpg
http://barbarella.deadendthrills.com/imagestore/rememberme/2560/historyofthefarright.jpg
http://barbarella.deadendthrills.com/imagestore/rememberme/2560/blacklake.jpg
http://barbarella.deadendthrills.com/imagestore/rememberme/2560/cranekick.jpg
http://deadendthrills.com

These are just high res screenshots done in-game. Apple isn't just designing the Mac Pro for today but for where things are going in a few years.
post #235 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by lucaseve View Post

Nice machine but it is not a Pro...

 

 

If you think so, and there are some here who don't agree (and others who do), for the sake of a discussion would you care to say why?

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #236 of 308

One day we will use 128 core or 256 core chip blocks, that have 4-8 thunderbolt3 ports, as small as an iPhone and that will be PRO.  This Mac is a... pretty PRO and for REAL even...  It's ultra future forward thinking and abandons tons of OLD technology, embracing as much of the LATEST and greatest Tech possible.  

 

Steve Jobs would be proud, because of how much DITCHING of the old tech it is doing.  And at the heart this is Apple and how Apple has always been.  If you're not used to that then you're supporting the wrong company.  I mean every time they drop things like floppies, adb, scsi to ata, and no optical, and PCI to PCIe, etc it's TECH!!!!! gees

Adobe Systems - "Preventing the Case-Sensitive revolution everyday..."
Reply
Adobe Systems - "Preventing the Case-Sensitive revolution everyday..."
Reply
post #237 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by go4d1 View Post

There is a large market for workstations that go under desks. Think financial traders. This will enable Apple to go after that market. I think I'd prefer the old case. I guess I'll wait for DDR4 and hopefully 2.5" SAS drives. (is that too much to hope for?)

Yea, I can guarantee you will never see one of these in a brokerage firm used for trading. Our traders all have Sun/HP workstations with Matrox cards running 6 or more monitors and I have visited over 80 other firms with same configuration. CPU performance isn't the most important factor as most of our trading GUI's are remotely displayed from servers, so these would be a complete overkill.

When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
post #238 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic View Post

Yea, I can guarantee you will never see one of these in a brokerage firm used for trading. Our traders all have Sun/HP workstations with Matrox cards running 6 or more monitors and I have visited over 80 other firms with same configuration. CPU performance isn't the most important factor as most of our trading GUI's are remotely displayed from servers, so these would be a complete overkill.


The other part might be incumbent software that might not run on a Mac without adjustment?

I'd think that the MP has plenty of display IO for that job.
post #239 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

I didn't expect the PCIe storage, which Wizard69 was quite keen on. I figured they might have issues with disk management tools but they must have it working ok, presumably under Bootcamp too.
From my perspective they had no choice no matter what the ultimate design of the new Mac Pro was or is. Flash on PCI Express would do more for a Pro workstation these days than extra cores. I could however see professionals literally wearing out the flash storage much faster than the average consumer. Thankfully the flash is on a plug in module. Apple should have offered two slots though as it looks like the machine can easily handle it.

As far as flash on PCI Express goes, what I wasn't expecting is this technology in the Mac Book Airs. That is a bold move on Apples part and makes for a very impressive Air upgrade.
Quote:
They even beat the 8" cube in size, which is amazing considering what's inside it. 8" ^ 3 = 512 cubic inches. The Mac Pro cylinder is π x 3.3 ^2 x 9.9 = 339 cubic inches - just 2/3 the volume of the cube and a smaller footprint than the Mini. I bet it's relatively light too with no heavy 3.5" drives inside.
Weight wise it might surprise you large extruded aluminum heat sinks can be surprisingly heavy. There is a lot of metal in this machine, it is a wonder of engineering.
Quote:
I still think Thunderbolt GPUs are a perfectly viable option but not for computer manufacturers. Nvidia might get no sales from Apple this year but could make up for it a little by allowing their GPUs to work over TB for CUDA apps. The performance is fine - there's very little performance hit for a GPU on x4 vs x16.
I'm not sure why you continue to believe this. Apps take a big hit from the bandwidth limitations of PCI Express in many cases so going TB is a huge step backwards. In many cases the bandwidth issues of PCI Express coupled with data movement overhead leads to the realization that sometimes it is faster just to use the CPU.

Of course the exact nature of the computations impact this, in some cases you could trickle the data over to the GPU with no problem. Given that I think it is very informative that Apple built this machine to support two GPUs and one CPU. It says a lot about what they think is Important and where it is important to keep that hardware.

In other words it is no accident that Apple put two high performance GPUs inside this tube.
Quote:

The top CPUs that Apple uses are $1440 each - that tends to be the limit so $2880 total of a $6200 Mac Pro goes to Intel. One of the fastest single CPU options is the E5-2687W, which is an 8-core Sandy Bridge CPU and costs $1885. I reckon the new Mac Pro will offer the Ivy Bridge equivalent of that. Two of them score 25 in Cinebench:
I'm hoping that before we get to the "up to" model we will have a more modest processor option. Also the 12 core model I believe is a dual chip in package implementation. That will likely cost big time.
Quote:



http://www.thefoundry.co.uk/articles/2013/06/10/536/mari-is-coming-to-the-mac/

That's what Pixar uses for Monsters U, which is likely why they are both demoing today. I think software developers are seeing the benefits of using OpenCL or at least GPU performance. OpenCL isn't GPU-exclusive either, it helps on the CPU side too just like Alti-Vec did. There's enough support already to justify it IMO with Apple's FCP apps and Adobe apps. Other computationally expensive apps will get there:
OpenCL has had very strong industry acceptance. Of course some people seem to think that means instant software. It is interesting that more and more pro apps are coming to the Mac. I can actually see this new Mac Pro as encouraging even more software developers to the platform. It will be a well known performance computing platform.
Quote:


Even when you look at real-time game graphics now like in the game Remember Me released this month, some of the visuals look like concept art:



These are just high res screenshots done in-game. Apple isn't just designing the Mac Pro for today but for where things are going in a few years.

I think many of the detractors just don't get this. If you look towards the past then sure this Mac Pro has limitations. If you look forward though this is a platform with staying power. Consider what this platform will be capable of with the next Process shrink, faster RAM and more internal storage.

Currently though I'm just hoping that the low end option is affordable. This is a big unknown. If Apple can't deliver a machine with this architecture, at a reasonable price, they should seriously think about a Haswell desktop variant. Maybe one of those Haswell 85 watt chips paired with one of AMDs Southern Islands GPUs. I just have this fear that this machine will be priced high and effectively out of reach.
post #240 of 308
I wan it I wan it I wan it!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Apple offers sneak peek at new cylindrical Mac Pro assembled in the USA