or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Developer secretly tested new Mac Pro for weeks inside Apple's 'Evil Lab'
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Developer secretly tested new Mac Pro for weeks inside Apple's 'Evil Lab' - Page 4

post #121 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post


That's a lot higher than I expected, but you're right they wouldn't be terribly cost effective. Typically these drivers are highly tuned for OpenGL, which most Windows games don't use.
In the case of Apple, they don't tune the drivers for anything. Well maybe reliability, but Apples drivers really don't excel at anything. Not to be negative but when Linux GPU drivers do as well or in some cases out perform Apples it looks pretty pathetic.
Quote:
The hardware itself tends to be at least similar, especially in recent years. I remember the Quadro 4000 really tailing the 5870 according to barefeats, but the only article I found just now was this one.

Yes in many cases the drivers made all the difference. At this point I'm not sure how much the FirePro chips stand out from the desktop chips. Both AMD and NVidia have strived to support compute more robustly in their chips but I'm not sure AMD has done things like NVidia has with their compute chips. Frankly AMDs architecture is so much better for compute they don't need to specialize the way NVidia has.

If and it is a big IF, Apple has addressed the driver issues this could be a very interesting machine for a wide array of users.
post #122 of 176
Quote:
If and it is a big IF, Apple has addressed the driver issues this could be a very interesting machine for a wide array of users.

 

Who knows, maybe I can consign my signature to oblivion if true.

 

I guess with Haswell's Iris chip going into the Mini and the GPU improvements in the recent iMacs (a machine I used to pan for Apple's lacklustre gpus...) and the simply mouth wetting dual GPU in the upcoming Pro...

 

Will we finally be able to slay the GPU dragon that Macs come with mediocre gpus?

 

That's the hardware.

 

But like you say...

 

'IF' Apple has address the optimisation of Open GL on Macs.  It's alright having 4.1...which gives feature parity to Direct X 11 according to what Marv' said in another thread.

 

However, we know Open GL on Mac Vs Windows on the same card has show a pathetic difference in the past.

 

So, WILL this particular dragon be slain?

 

Could we have the holy trinity of Kick Ass ('My Ass') Mac Pro, dual GPUs (for the 1st time!) AND update GL? (WITH optimisation?)

 

Is it too much to hope for?

 

Lemon Bon Bon.

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply
post #123 of 176
Quote:
If I ever buy one of these I will have to resist the desire to tear one apart to see how it is put together. I'm sure a tear down will lead to a nerdgasm.
 

'Desire'.  

 

Why...Mr. Wizard...is that genuine Mac lust from you?  Tearing down and disrobing a Mac Pro...

 

Ps.  Very impressed with the bang for buck all round from the new Macbook Airs.  Incredible battery life, significant gpu boost and SSD that writes at 800mbs?  What the hell is going on?  *Pinches himself.

 

Lemon Bon Bon.

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply
post #124 of 176
Quote:

Okay, I was just indulging in some Hardware Porn, but I SWEAR I was not touching myself inappropriately…

 

lol.  Nice to see people getting excited about the Mac platform.  The new Mac Pro.  

 

Its 'Vader Pro' sex, folks.  Wanting the Vader breathing as the Pro boot up sound? :P

 

Seriously, it's nice to see excitement and discussion being vigorously generated all across the net for the Mac Pro.  After all that the 'Pro' is dying talk...this is an emphatic rebuttal Apple style.  The king is dead, long live the king.  Once you've got people satirising you...you KNOW you've got them.

 

If APPLE, IF they can just get ONE model to reach out to Mac users and Windows users in an accessible way to GET them onto the Pro ladder.

 

It's game on.  Even IF they have to realign the iMac's pricing model to do so.  I'd like the entire iMac line to be moved DOWN £200+.  Bring in the Pro at a much steeper start.  Do the upsell.  Apple will make up margins on the Apple 4k monitor they'll undoubtably sell at decent wonga.  

 

Reel people in with surprisingly shallow entry prices and make up the premium/margin on selling the hotly anticipated 4k monitor (retina studio?  We KNOW it's coming, right?)

 

Lemon Bon Bon.

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply
post #125 of 176
Someone uploaded the Pixar/Foundry session here:



It might get pulled by Apple but it's not really a developer session so maybe not. There's nothing in it besides a demo of the Mac Pro.
post #126 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

Someone uploaded the Pixar/Foundry session here:



It might get pulled by Apple but it's not really a developer session so maybe not. There's nothing in it besides a demo of the Mac Pro.

And a Triple Scoop of CPU/(GP)GPUs Goodness…!!! ;^p

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 #127 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

Someone uploaded the Pixar/Foundry session here:



It might get pulled by Apple but it's not really a developer session so maybe not. There's nothing in it besides a demo of the Mac Pro.

 

Cheers Marv', you diamond geezer.

 

:)

 

Enjoyed that.  That new Pro is working like a beauty.  Killer software in Mari too.  Mac OS 10.9 looking very stable there.  Killer combo.

 

Just wow.

 

Were you watching Mr. Wizard? :P

 

Lemon Bon Bon.

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply
post #128 of 176

If this is a sign of things to come for pro software on the Mac...  Mari looks like a gold standard, a class of its own.  It's killer for it to come 'back' to the Mac.  

 

Sure, the software is in another league, clearly capable of some heavy duty stuff.  But you still need something like the new Pro to shift it...especially considering the size of some of those textures.  

 

Looking forward for an influx of other super-high end software to make its way over.  Maybe 'Mari' will act as a signpost in that regard to other developers.

 

The Foundry guy made some play of the dual GPUs in the Pro to really handle this high intensity level of texturing in Mari.  All moving around in real time smooth as butter.  Way in excess of 30 fps to me.  'Teh Snappy.'

 

Historically, I've been used to this kind of stuff being really slow and kludgy.  Like the Pixar guy says, you'd have your colour, bump, specular/diffusion, texture maps in different layers in Photoshop and import them into your 3D into different channels and kind of hope at render stage it was 'ok.'

 

But you can do that and tweak in Mari on the fly.  Very cool stuff.

 

Lemon Bon Bon.

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply
post #129 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

Someone uploaded the Pixar/Foundry session here:

It might get pulled by Apple but it's not really a developer session so maybe not. There's nothing in it besides a demo of the Mac Pro.

 

Thanks for the link. That was great. It also looks like it ran really fast. There wasn't any point of comparison for a meaningful test, but the guy from the Foundry seemed really impressed with it. I was a little surprised to see the guy from Pixar using photos to paint. That never seemed like something they would do to me given the look of their characters on screen. I thought painted surface scans might be a possibility. Years ago I know some companies used to scan clay models for the basis for a lot of their textures. The way animation has gone in a lot of areas makes me think of deformable armature puppets.

post #130 of 176
There are many videos covering the technology reviewed at WWDC. If you are interested in where Apple is going, viewing a few of the videos will go a long way to clearing things up. Unfortunately I have not gotten to this specific video though, so no comments other than to express caution.

The overhaul to Maericks for example is very interesting and does bring up a concern or two. Mavericks will be a major attempt at power savings in the UNIX kernel, it will be very interesting to see how well it works overall.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post

Thanks for the link. That was great. It also looks like it ran really fast. There wasn't any point of comparison for a meaningful test, but the guy from the Foundry seemed really impressed with it. I was a little surprised to see the guy from Pixar using photos to paint. That never seemed like something they would do to me given the look of their characters on screen. I thought painted surface scans might be a possibility. Years ago I know some companies used to scan clay models for the basis for a lot of their textures. The way animation has gone in a lot of areas makes me think of deformable armature puppets.
post #131 of 176
Here's the funny thing with the so called Pro users.

They've been whinging and moaning about the lack of expansion in this thing and yet here's someone who have actually USED this thing and they have only ever had their software on the Mac for 8 weeks and they're saying this is the fastest they have ever seen it running. They would have been running on PCs with PCIe expansion and yet can't get it to run faster than this unit with "no" expansion capabilities.

Think about that for a moment. The time required to get to the point where 7 teraflops is too little is going to be a long time. Add grid array functionality and you won't need upgrade functionality for a very very long time.

Once again a case of Pro users not really understanding the technology. In fact so poorly do they understand it they're still seem to be stuck in the olden days as seen by the Final Cut Pro X storm in a teacup.
post #132 of 176

Holy crap Apple charges a small fortune for their Mac Pro memory, 1900 bucks for 64GB1eek.gif? You can buy Kingston 64GB (4x16GB) DDR3 ECC PC10600 for 750.00 now.

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 #133 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post

I was a little surprised to see the guy from Pixar using photos to paint.

Not the color channels. The photos were just for the bump/displacements. They used vector brushes for the color channels. If they'd used scans, they wouldn't be able to easily adjust for scenarios like he demoed with it stretching during animation.

They've scanned clay models for movies though. Some scanning gets used for photorealism:



1:22 shows the digital result. They've used that to make digital doubles for actors in movies e.g King Kong listed at number 9 here:

http://www.creativebloq.com/3d-tips/cgi-movie-moments-1234014

"Weta doubled its capacity in terms of render farm and disc space, and took on roughly 25 per cent more people to create King Kong. The team used a Maya, RenderMan and Shake pipeline, and created custom software for the ape's fur. Since Ann gets thrown about, Weta also had to use a digital double for Naomi Watts in these scenes."

http://gl.ict.usc.edu/LightStages/
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darryn Lowe 
Here's the funny thing with the so called Pro users.

They've been whinging and moaning about the lack of expansion in this thing and yet here's someone who have actually USED this thing and they have only ever had their software on the Mac for 8 weeks and they're saying this is the fastest they have ever seen it running. They would have been running on PCs with PCIe expansion and yet can't get it to run faster than this unit with "no" expansion capabilities.

Once again a case of Pro users not really understanding the technology.

It depends on which industry. Not every industry nor even every level of each industry has the same requirements. Some will be peripheral-based, others will be performance-based.

One thing Apple has done here is controlled the GPU expansion, which is the right thing to do because some people buy old Mac Pros not caring much about the CPU and upgrade to the latest GPUs without paying Apple at all. The people who can't do that now are understandably bothered by it.

Mac Pro buyers also like to hold onto machines for a long time and not upgrade and instead replace the CPU and/or add GPUs to prolong the life of their machine. This new model pushes them to keep buying a new one, which really isn't as big a deal as some people think, it's just not something they are used to doing.

Moving to Thunderbolt means some people with PCIe cards will have to figure out an alternative. The problem is those people are used to using PCI cards and so their immediate thought is that they need to buy a $1000 PCIe chassis. What they can (and should) do instead though is buy available Thunderbolt device replacements for their cards and sell the cards to Windows users. Some people who have expensive AV processing cards might find that these Mac Pros run the programs fast enough natively and can even get enough back from the sale of the PCI cards that the new Mac Pro costs them very little.

Once that barrier to using Thunderbolt is down, they will realise that all those same peripherals will run on a Mini, MBP and iMac and they might even branch out to using other form factors in addition to the Mac Pro or for some in replacement of it. There will be some struggles and complaints because it's change and there will always be people who resist change if there's not an immediate benefit but it just takes time to work itself out.

It's bad tasting medicine but it has the benefits that Thunderbolt peripheral sales will increase and lower in price, Mac Pro yearly sales will increase because people will be pushed to renew them rather than hold onto them and Mac Pros will be more reliable because people won't be overloading the PCIe lanes with dodgy cards. They may even be better value for money now that they've simplified the design.
post #134 of 176
Quote:
Holy crap 

Yep.  That about covers some of Apple's insane upsell prices.

 

Lemon Bon Bon.

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply
post #135 of 176

Commonly known in the UK as?  'Taking the p*ss.'

 

Lemon Bon Bon.

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply
post #136 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darryn Lowe View Post

Here's the funny thing with the so called Pro users.
Many of the so called pro users are so self absorbed they can possible see beyond what they have done for years.
Quote:
They've been whinging and moaning about the lack of expansion in this thing and yet here's someone who have actually USED this thing and they have only ever had their software on the Mac for 8 weeks and they're saying this is the fastest they have ever seen it running. They would have been running on PCs with PCIe expansion and yet can't get it to run faster than this unit with "no" expansion capabilities.
Please remember WWDC is as much about marketing as it is development. Beyond that ported can mean many things to many people.
Quote:
Think about that for a moment. The time required to get to the point where 7 teraflops is too little is going to be a long time. Add grid array functionality and you won't need upgrade functionality for a very very long time.
Actually I'd expect software developer will be able to max out the machine fairly quickly.
Quote:
Once again a case of Pro users not really understanding the technology. In fact so poorly do they understand it they're still seem to be stuck in the olden days as seen by the Final Cut Pro X storm in a teacup.

Exactly. Technological Luddites.

I still think that one of Apples goals here was to design a machine that they can sell at a low price relative to its real world performance. Sort of like in the way that they have taken the Air or iPad to market very aggressively. Once people realize what Apple has here they will have customers knocking at their doors constantly.
post #137 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

 

 

The funny thing is that when Apple ditched floppies, they were one of the first to adopt the optical drive in it's place. And now certain people are whining that Apple is ditching the optical drive. These people are no different than the people who were whining about the floppy being dropped more than a decade ago.

 

What the hell are you talking about?  Optical drives were common in PCs and Macs long before Jobs even came back. 

post #138 of 176
Quote:
Exactly. Technological Luddites.

I still think that one of Apples goals here was to design a machine that they can sell at a low price relative to its real world performance. Sort of like in the way that they have taken the Air or iPad to market very aggressively. Once people realize what Apple has here they will have customers knocking at their doors constantly...

*fingers crossed.

 

I remember many pundits thinking the iPad would land at £1000+.  It shocked me at £399.  ...and it got the retina as well.  It's a scream of a deal.

 

The desktop line isn't good value compared to that.  Not when you have margins 40% to a creaming 100% plus on upsell BTO.  (Look at Apple's memory or SSD options on the iMac...ass reaming stuff...and the £68 for a DVD player previously included...)

 

I'm hoping they turn the clock back and give us the £1500 entry 'tower' price for the Pro.  Lower would be nice.  You're saving £899 on the studio display if you think in iMac top end model/BTO terms...

 

So a 512SSD, and an extra GPU?  Possibly 6 core into the bargain?

 

Lemon Bon Bon.

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply
post #139 of 176
I walked past a small cylinder of plastic toys at ToysRUs the other day. I stopped, placed my hand across the top and then vertically along the side to measure it and discovered that it was slightly larger than the new Mac Pro. That shocked me.

I think the new Mac Pro is too small. Apple has committed themselves to exactly one internal design and to heck with anyone wanting something different.

A few inches taller, a few inches bigger around and Apple would still have wowed the crowd with the new design without shutting the door on possible configuration options.

What about a customer who wants more than 4 RAM slots?
What about a customer who wants a second CPU instead of a second GPU?
What about a customer who wants a second CPU in addition to a second GPU?
What about a customer who wants to replace their GPU in the future?
What about a customer who wants internal storage for something other than the OS and applications?
What about a customer who wants some other internal socket/slot/bay?

Apple's answer to all the above (and many more) appears to be "buy something from another manufacturer".

Given that the total Mac Pro market is quite small it seems crazy to cut off any significant number of potential customers.

As impressed as I am with PCI based SSD storage I don't see much practical benefit for end users. Sure the machine will boot faster, but you'll only do that once a month, and applications will launch faster, but again you'll only do that occasionally. What you really want the high speed for is opening and editing enormous media files. And where will those be stored? On slower external drives, of course.

There is one glimmer of hope for those who deal with files small enough to fit on an SSD. The second GPU card has solder points where the first one has a socket. That means it might be possible to configure a Mac Pro with two internal SSDs.
post #140 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by curveddesign.com View Post

 

I agree totally!  Just one AMD/ATI Fire Pro GPU that meets the specs on Apple's Mac Pro web page cost $2000 to 3000 itself!  And guess what, there are 2 of those standard in the new Mac Pro!

 

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

 

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814105004

 

My understanding, from reading others' comments over the past week, is that two factors will lower that price significantly for Apple:

 

1) Volume, obviously.  Apple will be paying much, much less because of that factor alone.s

 

2) These will not be the purely consumer versions, in some respects.  I don't quite understand all of that, but people seem to agree on it.

post #141 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bregalad View Post

What about a customer who wants more than 4 RAM slots?
What about a customer who wants a second CPU instead of a second GPU?
What about a customer who wants a second CPU in addition to a second GPU?
What about a customer who wants to replace their GPU in the future?
What about a customer who wants internal storage for something other than the OS and applications?
What about a customer who wants some other internal socket/slot/bay?

DDR4 will be along next year with double density so 4 slots isn't that big of a problem - obviously people who really want it would have to buy next year's model:

http://www.samsung.com/global/business/semiconductor/news-events/press-releases/detail?newsId=11701

"It also is set to expand the overall premium memory market with its most advanced 20nm-class based DDR4 DRAM products, which will be available sometime next year at densities up to 32GB."

For the dual CPU models, Apple generally didn't offer the fastest ones. The choice would have been 1x $1885 12-core (possibly a bit more) vs 2x $1440 8-core. The performance difference between two slower 8-cores and a faster 12-core isn't that significant.

For things using heavy CPU processing, it's possible to buy multiple machines. CPU processing doesn't need real-time feedback. Of course having two CPUs and two GPUs is better, as is having 4 CPUs and 4 GPUs but every manufacturer chooses to stop at a certain point and whenever that happens, someone will always ask 'why not just put in an extra...?'. When you get to the higher price points, the demand tails off so quickly that it's just not worth allowing for every possible preference.

I expect that the GPUs are replaceable but they are custom versions so Apple might have an upgrade program. It helps stop users upgrading their own GPUs without paying Apple any money and potentially breaking their machine.

They didn't say how big the internal storage options will be but you can get a lot more on even a 256GB SSD than just the OS and apps. When it comes to media projects, it's possible to copy them back and forth as needed. If someone needs more than 512GB-1TB of space for active projects then they'd get a Thunderbolt RAID drive or whatever. All of the options here are faster than what was available before.

PCI slots can be replicated over Thunderbolt, there are expansion chassis options e.g Magma 3T, Sonnet Echo Express etc. In general people would first look for a suitable Thunderbolt equivalent to any PCI card.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bregalad View Post

Given that the total Mac Pro market is quite small it seems crazy to cut off any significant number of potential customers.

Nobody is really cut off, you're talking about preferences for the most part. The biggest problem this design creates is with NVidia because AMD cards won't run CUDA code (or the sexy fairy demo - but they replaced that with a bald guy anyway). But developers should be using OpenCL and there seems to be a push for OpenCL support as it actually runs a lot faster on AMD cards.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bregalad View Post

As impressed as I am with PCI based SSD storage I don't see much practical benefit for end users. Sure the machine will boot faster, but you'll only do that once a month, and applications will launch faster, but again you'll only do that occasionally. What you really want the high speed for is opening and editing enormous media files. And where will those be stored? On slower external drives, of course.

It depends, for photography, the image projects can be large for stills (100MB+) but plenty will fit on the internal. For video, projects can be copied around as needed or just use Thunderbolt RAID. Thunderbolt RAID isn't slow at all - 600-800MB/s.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bregalad View Post

That means it might be possible to configure a Mac Pro with two internal SSDs.

A couple of people have mentioned that but I don't see why Apple wouldn't offer options up to at least 1.5TB anyway. There was a bogus rumour about a 3.5" 3TB SSD at one point but 1.5TB is only double what they offer in the Air. They might offer it for $1500. For less expensive compact storage, it's possible to put a 960GB Crucial M500 drive in a USB 3 enclosure for less than $800.
post #142 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


Not the color channels. The photos were just for the bump/displacements. They used vector brushes for the color channels. If they'd used scans, they wouldn't be able to easily adjust for scenarios like he demoed with it stretching during animation.

They've scanned clay models for movies though. Some scanning gets used for photorealism
 

I know clay models have been used for a lot of things. You come up with some of the best links though. That is a beautiful mocap setup. As for bumps and displacements, I understand them. I know what he was doing. I was just surprised they would use a lot of photo detail given Pixar's style. The lines seemed too hard.

 

Quote:

 

 

It's bad tasting medicine but it has the benefits that Thunderbolt peripheral sales will increase and lower in price, Mac Pro yearly sales will increase because people will be pushed to renew them rather than hold onto them and Mac Pros will be more reliable because people won't be overloading the PCIe lanes with dodgy cards. They may even be better value for money now that they've simplified the design.

It would have to be incredibly successful to really be a driving force in thunderbolt peripherals. Notebooks outsell everything else, and represent a much larger market, yet thunderbolt peripherals remain limited. I'm thinking specifically of the 15" notebooks, as they are likely sold to buyers with higher demands and/or lower price sensitivity. I know it's not evenly distributed, but it's difficult for me to think that the mac pro is what will push things forward in that regard. Don't get me wrong. I am happy that it's not cancelled.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


DDR4 will be along next year with double density so 4 slots isn't that big of a problem - obviously people who really want it would have to buy next year's model:
 

I don't think we'll see another until 2015. That is a likely haswell timeframe, as inte hasn't adhered to a 12 month cycle. If they're going with workstation gpus, those also typically show up later. I'm not sure I agree on the upgrades thing. If they're relying solely on a captive audience, that would not make for a stable line over the longer term. I am interested in seeing what shows up even if some of those hardware features are under-utilized.

 

 

Quote:
PCI slots can be replicated over Thunderbolt, there are expansion chassis options e.g Magma 3T, Sonnet Echo Express etc. In general people would first look for a suitable Thunderbolt equivalent to any PCI card.

I would probably pretend the chassis options do not exist. Full solutions should be a much better buy. I would want something that is tested as a unit if at all possible in that situation. That way everything fits. The cooling and power are both sufficient. You don't have weird surprises like a power supply that says 150W that peaks out at that yet can't maintain it. I doubt that is the case with the Magma and Sonnet ones given their price points. I don't think they would cut corners.

post #143 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon. View Post

*fingers crossed.

I remember many pundits thinking the iPad would land at £1000+.  It shocked me at £399.  ...and it got the retina as well.  It's a scream of a deal.
IPad is an amazing product that actually might be priced a bit on the high side considering what is inside. However usability wise it blows everything else out of the water.
Quote:
The desktop line isn't good value compared to that.  Not when you have margins 40% to a creaming 100% plus on upsell BTO.  (Look at Apple's memory or SSD options on the iMac...ass reaming stuff...and the £68 for a DVD player previously included...)
It depends a bit on the specific device or the build to order option. However I believe those high prices are there to encourage customers to go to third parties for upgrades.
Quote:
I'm hoping they turn the clock back and give us the £1500 entry 'tower' price for the Pro.  Lower would be nice.  You're saving £899 on the studio display if you think in iMac top end model/BTO terms...
To hit the low end price they need to have two types of video cards. I'm not sure they will go that route.
Quote:
So a 512SSD, and an extra GPU?  Possibly 6 core into the bargain?

Lemon Bon Bon.
Why so thin on the SSD? If you look at the Air BTO options the 512 GB SSD option is actually fairly priced. It isn't bargain basement but it is not as bad as it could have been considering Apples history.
post #144 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by EdRed View Post

My guess is the price will be in the $2.5K-$3.5K range. Give or take $0.5K.

I hear the pricing in in the $4K-$5.5K range and that without monitor.   It going be very, very pricey!  I don't think it going to sell; since most Mac Pro users love the current chassis box and just wanted the technology inside to be upgrade. 

post #145 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Wild View Post

I hear the pricing in in the $4K-$5.5K range and that without monitor.   It going be very, very pricey!

Do you mean this will be the price for the base configuration?

post #146 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Wild View Post

I hear the pricing in in the $4K-$5.5K range and that without monitor.  
So where did you hear that? By the way the Mac Pro never came with a monitor.
Quote:
It going be very, very pricey!  I don't think it going to sell;
An excessively high price would have people looking else where. Still everything about this machine is telling me that Apple is looking for a way to lower the cost of power.
Quote:
since most Mac Pro users love the current chassis box and just wanted the technology inside to be upgrade. 

Well that is baloney. The old chassis is a bit of a joke.
post #147 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Wild View Post

I hear the pricing in in the $4K-$5.5K range and that without monitor.   It going be very, very pricey!  I don't think it going to sell; since most Mac Pro users love the current chassis box and just wanted the technology inside to be upgrade. 


Given that you have no source of credible information, I'm going to wait and see on this one. If adequate volume was a problem before, that would completely kill it. Given that the specs in the presentation were "up to" I doubt anything entry level would justify such a price tag.

post #148 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Wild View Post

I hear the pricing in in the $4K-$5.5K range and that without monitor.   It going be very, very pricey!  I don't think it going to sell; since most Mac Pro users love the current chassis box and just wanted the technology inside to be upgrade. 

 

 

I know a few users (myself included) who were quite tired of the old model and wanted something smaller.

 

Do you have any data showing that "most" loved the current (actually, now old) chassis?  Link?

 

$4-$5 K.  Link?

 

 

Personally, with no data but my gut, I think this will sell quite well, if the so-called pros can get past their inhibitions about new ideas.

 

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 #149 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

 

 

I know a few users (myself included) who were quite tired of the old model and wanted something smaller.

 

Do you have any data showing that "most" loved the current (actually, now old) chassis?  Link?

 

$4-$5 K.  Link?

 

 

Personally, with no data but my gut, I think this will sell quite well, if the so-called pros can get past their inhibitions about new ideas.

 

Here is the link that you wanted - Leo Laporte : http://twit.tv/show/the-tech-guy/988

post #150 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Wild View Post

Here is the link that you wanted - Leo Laporte : http://twit.tv/show/the-tech-guy/988

lol.gif A radio show host describing it as a glorified media center and quite clearly guesses at the price without making any assessment of the components, says that the people he has spoken to don't like it, suggests it's form over function despite being more powerful than any previous Mac Pro and that what they should have done was simply update the old one because "Pro users aren't fanboys".

He said they haven't added anything compared to the old one and yet somehow this one will be magically double the price.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm 
It would have to be incredibly successful to really be a driving force in thunderbolt peripherals.

The current 250k per quarter volume is plenty. Think about it from the point of view of a Thunderbolt device retailer, where some devices have a specialised target audience. Say they are a small shop, they get a new audience of 20,000 customers per quarter selling a $500 device with 15% margins. That's $1.5m per quarter profit.

If manufacturers want to get rich, they'll all be hopping on the Thunderbolt bandwagon. They can get rich just by targeting a small subset of Mac Pro customers exclusively. Some of these people spend $5k on a PCI card to decode RED video. If RED was smart about it, they can make dedicated Thunderbolt devices and people could buy as many as they liked without needing a chassis and the resale value is better because they can target all Mac users.
post #151 of 176
I gotta admit, I want one of these for no reason whatsoever. A MacBook Pro has all the power I need.
post #152 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

So where did you hear that? By the way the Mac Pro never came with a monitor.
An excessively high price would have people looking else where. Still everything about this machine is telling me that Apple is looking for a way to lower the cost of power.
Well that is baloney. The old chassis is a bit of a joke.

mindrifter, who always has a lot of knowledge on Apple related matters, was saying there is 3K cost in the graphic and CPU processors used alone. So if I understood him correctly a 3.5k to 4k entry price maybe on the cards. After watching the video on the developer page of this beast in use I am saving hard 1smile.gif
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #153 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

mindrifter, who always has a lot of knowledge on Apple related matters, was saying there is 3K cost in the graphic and CPU processors used alone. So if I understood him correctly a 3.5k to 4k entry price maybe on the cards. After watching the video on the developer page of this beast in use I am saving hard 1smile.gif

Apple used to market the old Mac Pro as up to 12-cores but nobody suggested the entry price would be $6k. Apple has just marketed the top model so far as a 12-core + dual W9000, which are $3k each retail. An entry 4 or 6-core with dual W5000 ($430 each retail http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814195119 ) doesn't have to start anywhere near $3.5k.

It depends on what options they offer but like any computer retailer, they know the sales volumes drop off considerably, the higher up they go. They could easily have started the old Mac Pro at dual-processor models but they went to all the trouble of building a single-socket version in order to hit a $2.5k price point. The iMac pretty much tops out at $2.5k so starting at $3.5k just leaves a big price gap.

The best entry point for them would be somewhere between $2k and $2.5k. Going below $2k means they tread on iMac territory and although some consumers would be happy with that, Apple knows they'll lose the margins on a display sale that way and the machine they'd build couldn't top an iMac in performance. Going above the old entry point would make some people think they were paying more for less as some might have to buy supplementary Thunderbolt hardware. It also serves to cut down on the potential audience for the machine.

I think the original $2199 price was a pretty reasonable starting price and I'd like to see them reach that with a quad-core, dual W5000, 256GB SSD and 8GB RAM.

One great thing with the design is that it should be a single configuration page so you just spec a single model how you want and they'd have all the available processors and GPUs etc on the same page. I think it will scale all the way from $2-2.5k up to $15k.
post #154 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

Apple used to market the old Mac Pro as up to 12-cores but nobody suggested the entry price would be $6k. Apple has just marketed the top model so far as a 12-core + dual W9000, which are $3k each retail. An entry 4 or 6-core with dual W5000 ($430 each retail http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814195119 ) doesn't have to start anywhere near $3.5k.

It depends on what options they offer but like any computer retailer, they know the sales volumes drop off considerably, the higher up they go. They could easily have started the old Mac Pro at dual-processor models but they went to all the trouble of building a single-socket version in order to hit a $2.5k price point. The iMac pretty much tops out at $2.5k so starting at $3.5k just leaves a big price gap.

The best entry point for them would be somewhere between $2k and $2.5k. Going below $2k means they tread on iMac territory and although some consumers would be happy with that, Apple knows they'll lose the margins on a display sale that way and the machine they'd build couldn't top an iMac in performance. Going above the old entry point would make some people think they were paying more for less as some might have to buy supplementary Thunderbolt hardware. It also serves to cut down on the potential audience for the machine.

I think the original $2199 price was a pretty reasonable starting price and I'd like to see them reach that with a quad-core, dual W5000, 256GB SSD and 8GB RAM.

One great thing with the design is that it should be a single configuration page so you just spec a single model how you want and they'd have all the available processors and GPUs etc on the same page. I think it will scale all the way from $2-2.5k up to $15k.

I hope you are right but as to treading on iMac territory, I costed out a top of the line loaded 27" i7 iMac, to my shock it was around $4,000. Then I looked at the Geekbench scores compared to the last generation Mac Pro and new Mac Pro. This is why I've decided to wait for a new Mac Pro. I already have an ACD so I'd only need the Mac Pro alone (ok and some Thunderbolt toys). It would seem even if the price is at the higher end it is a way better investment than a high end iMac.
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #155 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bregalad View Post

Apple has committed themselves to exactly one internal design and to heck with anyone wanting something different.

How totally unlike what Apple has ever done in the past¡
Quote:
Given that the total Mac Pro market is quite small it seems crazy to cut off any significant number of potential customers.

Given the power of this thing, it seems crazy to think people would forgo it for something else that they know doesn't work as well.
Quote:
As impressed as I am with PCI based SSD storage I don't see much practical benefit for end users.

Because you do nothing of concern here.
Quote:
What you really want the high speed for is opening and editing enormous media files. And where will those be stored? On slower external drives, of course.

Or, you know, on the super fast storage you have internally. Because that's why it's there. And on the 20Gb/s Thunderbolt storage you attach to your computer. That's not fast enough? 1oyvey.gif

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already fucked.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already fucked.

 

Reply
post #156 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


How totally unlike what Apple has ever done in the past¡
Given the power of this thing, it seems crazy to think people would forgo it for something else that they know doesn't work as well.
Because you do nothing of concern here.
Or, you know, on the super fast storage you have internally. Because that's why it's there. And on the 20Gb/s Thunderbolt storage you attach to your computer. That's not fast enough? 1oyvey.gif

You know this may be the most condescending forum I've ever seen. "Because you do nothing of concern here" == how do you know?   "Given the power of this thing, it seems crazy to think people would forgo it for something else that they know doesn't work as well"  Yea -- everyone what to pay for exorbitant extras that they don't need and will never use. "Or, you know, on the super fast storage you have internally. Because that's why it's there. And on the 20Gb/s Thunderbolt storage you attach to your computer. That's not fast enough?"  no it is not fast enough for everything one might want to connect.  

post #157 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by mess View Post

You know this may be the most condescending forum I've ever seen.

Welcome to AppleInsider, don't you DARE besmirch the good name of our favorite fruit-related computer/lifestyle device(s) vending corporation…!!!

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 #158 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by mess View Post

how do you know?

How's that a question? It's extrapolated from your lack of knowledge of the benefits of PCIe storage. Who says it won't be up to a terabyte?
Quote:
Yea — everyone what to pay for exorbitant extras...

Or they can just plug in the stuff they already have. I imagine that unless you're just starting out in the industry (pick one), you'd have stuff on hand.
Quote:
...that they don't need and will never use.

Do they need to do their jobs? Then they obviously need them and will use them. Seems kind of silly not to, yeah?
Quote:
 no it is not fast enough for everything one might want to connect.  

That's why there are six of them, and two gigabit Ethernet to boot.

Is there a RAID array that can move data faster than 20Gb/s? Genuine question.

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already fucked.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already fucked.

 

Reply
post #159 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


It depends on which industry. Not every industry nor even every level of each industry has the same requirements. Some will be peripheral-based, others will be performance-based.

One thing Apple has done here is controlled the GPU expansion, which is the right thing to do because some people buy old Mac Pros not caring much about the CPU and upgrade to the latest GPUs without paying Apple at all. The people who can't do that now are understandably bothered by it.

Mac Pro buyers also like to hold onto machines for a long time and not upgrade and instead replace the CPU and/or add GPUs to prolong the life of their machine. This new model pushes them to keep buying a new one, which really isn't as big a deal as some people think, it's just not something they are used to doing.

Moving to Thunderbolt means some people with PCIe cards will have to figure out an alternative. The problem is those people are used to using PCI cards and so their immediate thought is that they need to buy a $1000 PCIe chassis. What they can (and should) do instead though is buy available Thunderbolt device replacements for their cards and sell the cards to Windows users. Some people who have expensive AV processing cards might find that these Mac Pros run the programs fast enough natively and can even get enough back from the sale of the PCI cards that the new Mac Pro costs them very little.

Once that barrier to using Thunderbolt is down, they will realise that all those same peripherals will run on a Mini, MBP and iMac and they might even branch out to using other form factors in addition to the Mac Pro or for some in replacement of it. There will be some struggles and complaints because it's change and there will always be people who resist change if there's not an immediate benefit but it just takes time to work itself out.

It's bad tasting medicine but it has the benefits that Thunderbolt peripheral sales will increase and lower in price, Mac Pro yearly sales will increase because people will be pushed to renew them rather than hold onto them and Mac Pros will be more reliable because people won't be overloading the PCIe lanes with dodgy cards. They may even be better value for money now that they've simplified the design.

Yes, it does depend on the industry the device is being used for -- I couldn't agree more.  It also depends on what direction the computing industry moves in…

 

Your other comments don't seem to reflect reality to me -- at least not yet.  I don't need all of that GPU power in my industry.  I could use it if someone would write the software to do complex DSP using it, but otherwise it is useless to me.  Also, I wouldn't mind buying a new machine every two or three years if the cost was at a disposable level. 

 

I would gladly move to Thunderbolt devices if the industry I work in would produce them as tools for my work, and I could find them for a reasonable price.  PCIe is still readily available at a reasonable cost.  When will these Thunderbolt devices arrive -- I'd like to know! Unfortunately it isn't right now and I'm in a position where I've waited far to long already…

post #160 of 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


How's that a question? It's extrapolated from your lack of knowledge of the benefits of PCIe storage. Who says it won't be up to a terabyte?
Or they can just plug in the stuff they already have. I imagine that unless you're just starting out in the industry (pick one), you'd have stuff on hand.
Do they need to do their jobs? Then they obviously need them and will use them. Seems kind of silly not to, yeah?
That's why there are six of them, and two gigabit Ethernet to boot.

Is there a RAID array that can move data faster than 20Gb/s? Genuine question.

It's really funny how one can take a statement and twist into something that is totally out of context isn't it? 

 

As for your genuine question, what if it isn't just storage we're talking about or what even if it is your favorite PCIe flash?  Sixteen (that's 16 -- not 6) lanes of PCIe in v3 gives us ~15 giga BYTES per second. Technology will continue to march on!

 

This machine is an amazing design and raises the bar to new heights, but as far as allowing it to be customized to a specific use/industry's need -- if this is all Apple is going to offer, they have missed most of us IMHO -- especially if it comes in at a cost that is not on the disposable level…

 

Oh and BTW you still sound condescending!


Edited by mess - 6/19/13 at 2:55pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Developer secretly tested new Mac Pro for weeks inside Apple's 'Evil Lab'