First look: Mac Pro and Apple Pro Display XDR [u]

12346

Comments

  • Reply 101 of 134
    SoliSoli Posts: 9,272member

    Since when was Mac Pro NOT for the top 1%?
    It wasn’t until 2013. There were affordable versions of the cheese grater. I bought one for under CAD$2500 in 2008.

    Even the cylinder was within reach of one-man shops and serious enthusiasts.

    So, in response to your question, I’d say the Mac Pro became a product for the 1% on Monday June 3, 2019.
    Yeah, that aspect is disappointing. There are many, many levels of Pro and Apple is saying that any level below the $11k mark should be satisfied with another Mac.

    Nothing would please me more than to buy this machine for $2-3k with much lower default specs (yet the same upgrade potential), and a 5k display (not 6k) for another $1500.
    How would that even happen? That logic board, PSU, and case are already pushing you beyond $2k for a retail price without an applicable CPU, a single stick of RAM, storage, or OS to run it. Why would Apple put all that work into that kind of machine just to sell an anemic version?
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 102 of 134
    lorin schultzlorin schultz Posts: 2,744member
    I have no complaints about or objection to the new Mac Pro. It’s not what I want, but that doesn’t mean Apple made a mistake.

    What I want is the same thing others have described — something between the mini and the Pro. It’s been six years since Apple told us we could work without PCIe cards and it’s still not true. A decent machine with an i9, four RAM slots, upgradable storage, and room for a couple PCIe cards would be very welcome.

    The new Mac Pro is awesome. Hopefully Apple will also soon offer a Mac Worker Bee.
    cgWerkswatto_cobra
  • Reply 103 of 134
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 2,298member
    Metriacanthosaurus said:
    Nothing would please me more than to buy this machine for $2-3k with much lower default specs (yet the same upgrade potential), and a 5k display (not 6k) for another $1500.
    Yeah, same here. The problem is that I'd just be spending an extra $4k to buy a system about the same speed as the one already on my desk, until I could afford to upgrade it (and who knows how much that would cost?). I'm clearly not the target market, at least in my present situation.

    But, one would think there should be an in-between option from what I have (2018 mini + eGPU) and the Mac Pro. I think that's why some are disappointed, and justifiably so. It's just misplaced to be mad at the new Mac Pro. It is, what it is supposed to be. The failure is in Apple management to produce a more appropriate product lineup.

    I also have no need for a reference monitor... but no one would be forcing me to buy it. The Mac Pro (or any other headless machine they might make) would work just fine with the monitor I currently have.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 104 of 134
    mike fix said:
    mike fix said:
    mike fix said:
    I used to buy the latest Mac when they came out and it was affordable for the performance.  Simply do yourself a favor and price out the gear that comes with the $6k machine and you'll quickly see you can insanely more power for the same money.  

    [parts list, including:
    $500 LGA 3647 motherboard
    $3100 Xeon W-3175x skylake 28 core processor]

    Yeah, you'll need to throw another few hundred bucks at it for cooling, etc.

    I think we all know that for the 28 core processor in the mac pro, that machine is going to cost well over $10k, most likely over $15k.  

    Even dumber is the fact that Apple could have gone dual socket.  Which for the PC you can, pretty much only doubling the price for the processor and you'd have 56 cores!  

    For $9500 you'd have 56 cores!  Stack in a few more of those NVIDIA cards are you'd be destroying worlds for a 3rd of the cost of an equivalent Mac Pro.
    There's a huge amount of ignorance on display here, and I haven't the energy to go through it all. But here are a few high points:

    - Your chip is previous-generation. You'd need the X3275M to match (almost) Apple's 28-core chip. That one costs about $7500.
    - Good luck finding a motherboard that supports 1.5 (or 2?) TB of RAM in 12 slots at that price. And that has 10GbE (much less two). And thunderbolt. And eight PCIe slots and a PCIe switch chip (which is insanely expensive). Etc. If you can even get close, you're probably looking at $1500-$2000.

    But the big LOL moment was your cutely naive "oh they could have stuck two CPUs in there". Know how much *those* cost? Because you can't use a Xeon W in a dual-socket system. The cheapest 28-core lists at $8700 but it's substantially slower than the Mac's 28-core CPU. To get something close (200MHz higher base clock, but 400MHz lower boost) you need to spend over $13k. Per chip, not per pair. So even if all you were going to do with those chips was hold them in your hands and dream of fast machines, it would still set you back >$26,000. Thousands more if you wanted them to work in an actual machine. You're not getting 56 cores for $9500.

    Of course any post that includes a parts list is completely missing the point of this machine.

    So. Less talking, more reading.

    The 3275w has an Intel recommended customer price of $4,449.00.

    The 3275w is an LGA 3647 socket, which there are several dual socket PC motherboards available that support 12 dimm slots.  

    If you want to compete on rendering where you buy mac pros and I buy PCs, we'll see who finishes fastesr and cheaper.  

    I'm not saying the Mac Pro isn't a great machine, it obviously is (and it better be for that price), it's just extremely overpriced for the majority of pros and their needs. 
    Reading comprehension FTW!

    Try again.
    Let's pick this up when the thing actually gets released.  
    Or you could just acknowledge that you picked the wrong CPU, then you picked the wrong CPU a second time.
    SoliJustSomeGuy1watto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 105 of 134
    mike fixmike fix Posts: 247member
    mike fix said:
    mike fix said:
    mike fix said:
    I used to buy the latest Mac when they came out and it was affordable for the performance.  Simply do yourself a favor and price out the gear that comes with the $6k machine and you'll quickly see you can insanely more power for the same money.  

    [parts list, including:
    $500 LGA 3647 motherboard
    $3100 Xeon W-3175x skylake 28 core processor]

    Yeah, you'll need to throw another few hundred bucks at it for cooling, etc.

    I think we all know that for the 28 core processor in the mac pro, that machine is going to cost well over $10k, most likely over $15k.  

    Even dumber is the fact that Apple could have gone dual socket.  Which for the PC you can, pretty much only doubling the price for the processor and you'd have 56 cores!  

    For $9500 you'd have 56 cores!  Stack in a few more of those NVIDIA cards are you'd be destroying worlds for a 3rd of the cost of an equivalent Mac Pro.
    There's a huge amount of ignorance on display here, and I haven't the energy to go through it all. But here are a few high points:

    - Your chip is previous-generation. You'd need the X3275M to match (almost) Apple's 28-core chip. That one costs about $7500.
    - Good luck finding a motherboard that supports 1.5 (or 2?) TB of RAM in 12 slots at that price. And that has 10GbE (much less two). And thunderbolt. And eight PCIe slots and a PCIe switch chip (which is insanely expensive). Etc. If you can even get close, you're probably looking at $1500-$2000.

    But the big LOL moment was your cutely naive "oh they could have stuck two CPUs in there". Know how much *those* cost? Because you can't use a Xeon W in a dual-socket system. The cheapest 28-core lists at $8700 but it's substantially slower than the Mac's 28-core CPU. To get something close (200MHz higher base clock, but 400MHz lower boost) you need to spend over $13k. Per chip, not per pair. So even if all you were going to do with those chips was hold them in your hands and dream of fast machines, it would still set you back >$26,000. Thousands more if you wanted them to work in an actual machine. You're not getting 56 cores for $9500.

    Of course any post that includes a parts list is completely missing the point of this machine.

    So. Less talking, more reading.

    The 3275w has an Intel recommended customer price of $4,449.00.

    The 3275w is an LGA 3647 socket, which there are several dual socket PC motherboards available that support 12 dimm slots.  

    If you want to compete on rendering where you buy mac pros and I buy PCs, we'll see who finishes fastesr and cheaper.  

    I'm not saying the Mac Pro isn't a great machine, it obviously is (and it better be for that price), it's just extremely overpriced for the majority of pros and their needs. 
    Reading comprehension FTW!

    Try again.
    Let's pick this up when the thing actually gets released.  
    Or you could just acknowledge that you picked the wrong CPU, then you picked the wrong CPU a second time.
    The Apple site says "W-based."
    https://www.apple.com/mac-pro/

    Please post a link to the processor you're saying Apple is using.
  • Reply 106 of 134
    crowleycrowley Posts: 6,018member
    mike fix said:
    mike fix said:
    mike fix said:
    mike fix said:
    I used to buy the latest Mac when they came out and it was affordable for the performance.  Simply do yourself a favor and price out the gear that comes with the $6k machine and you'll quickly see you can insanely more power for the same money.  

    [parts list, including:
    $500 LGA 3647 motherboard
    $3100 Xeon W-3175x skylake 28 core processor]

    Yeah, you'll need to throw another few hundred bucks at it for cooling, etc.

    I think we all know that for the 28 core processor in the mac pro, that machine is going to cost well over $10k, most likely over $15k.  

    Even dumber is the fact that Apple could have gone dual socket.  Which for the PC you can, pretty much only doubling the price for the processor and you'd have 56 cores!  

    For $9500 you'd have 56 cores!  Stack in a few more of those NVIDIA cards are you'd be destroying worlds for a 3rd of the cost of an equivalent Mac Pro.
    There's a huge amount of ignorance on display here, and I haven't the energy to go through it all. But here are a few high points:

    - Your chip is previous-generation. You'd need the X3275M to match (almost) Apple's 28-core chip. That one costs about $7500.
    - Good luck finding a motherboard that supports 1.5 (or 2?) TB of RAM in 12 slots at that price. And that has 10GbE (much less two). And thunderbolt. And eight PCIe slots and a PCIe switch chip (which is insanely expensive). Etc. If you can even get close, you're probably looking at $1500-$2000.

    But the big LOL moment was your cutely naive "oh they could have stuck two CPUs in there". Know how much *those* cost? Because you can't use a Xeon W in a dual-socket system. The cheapest 28-core lists at $8700 but it's substantially slower than the Mac's 28-core CPU. To get something close (200MHz higher base clock, but 400MHz lower boost) you need to spend over $13k. Per chip, not per pair. So even if all you were going to do with those chips was hold them in your hands and dream of fast machines, it would still set you back >$26,000. Thousands more if you wanted them to work in an actual machine. You're not getting 56 cores for $9500.

    Of course any post that includes a parts list is completely missing the point of this machine.

    So. Less talking, more reading.

    The 3275w has an Intel recommended customer price of $4,449.00.

    The 3275w is an LGA 3647 socket, which there are several dual socket PC motherboards available that support 12 dimm slots.  

    If you want to compete on rendering where you buy mac pros and I buy PCs, we'll see who finishes fastesr and cheaper.  

    I'm not saying the Mac Pro isn't a great machine, it obviously is (and it better be for that price), it's just extremely overpriced for the majority of pros and their needs. 
    Reading comprehension FTW!

    Try again.
    Let's pick this up when the thing actually gets released.  
    Or you could just acknowledge that you picked the wrong CPU, then you picked the wrong CPU a second time.
    The Apple site says "W-based."
    https://www.apple.com/mac-pro/

    Please post a link to the processor you're saying Apple is using.
    This one seems like the main contender:
    https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/193754/intel-xeon-w-3275m-processor-38-5m-cache-2-50-ghz.html


    It's the best match from the most recent Intel catalogue:
    https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/series/125035/intel-xeon-w-processor.html
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 107 of 134
    mike fixmike fix Posts: 247member
    crowley said:
    mike fix said:
    mike fix said:
    mike fix said:
    mike fix said:
    I used to buy the latest Mac when they came out and it was affordable for the performance.  Simply do yourself a favor and price out the gear that comes with the $6k machine and you'll quickly see you can insanely more power for the same money.  

    [parts list, including:
    $500 LGA 3647 motherboard
    $3100 Xeon W-3175x skylake 28 core processor]

    Yeah, you'll need to throw another few hundred bucks at it for cooling, etc.

    I think we all know that for the 28 core processor in the mac pro, that machine is going to cost well over $10k, most likely over $15k.  

    Even dumber is the fact that Apple could have gone dual socket.  Which for the PC you can, pretty much only doubling the price for the processor and you'd have 56 cores!  

    For $9500 you'd have 56 cores!  Stack in a few more of those NVIDIA cards are you'd be destroying worlds for a 3rd of the cost of an equivalent Mac Pro.
    There's a huge amount of ignorance on display here, and I haven't the energy to go through it all. But here are a few high points:

    - Your chip is previous-generation. You'd need the X3275M to match (almost) Apple's 28-core chip. That one costs about $7500.
    - Good luck finding a motherboard that supports 1.5 (or 2?) TB of RAM in 12 slots at that price. And that has 10GbE (much less two). And thunderbolt. And eight PCIe slots and a PCIe switch chip (which is insanely expensive). Etc. If you can even get close, you're probably looking at $1500-$2000.

    But the big LOL moment was your cutely naive "oh they could have stuck two CPUs in there". Know how much *those* cost? Because you can't use a Xeon W in a dual-socket system. The cheapest 28-core lists at $8700 but it's substantially slower than the Mac's 28-core CPU. To get something close (200MHz higher base clock, but 400MHz lower boost) you need to spend over $13k. Per chip, not per pair. So even if all you were going to do with those chips was hold them in your hands and dream of fast machines, it would still set you back >$26,000. Thousands more if you wanted them to work in an actual machine. You're not getting 56 cores for $9500.

    Of course any post that includes a parts list is completely missing the point of this machine.

    So. Less talking, more reading.

    The 3275w has an Intel recommended customer price of $4,449.00.

    The 3275w is an LGA 3647 socket, which there are several dual socket PC motherboards available that support 12 dimm slots.  

    If you want to compete on rendering where you buy mac pros and I buy PCs, we'll see who finishes fastesr and cheaper.  

    I'm not saying the Mac Pro isn't a great machine, it obviously is (and it better be for that price), it's just extremely overpriced for the majority of pros and their needs. 
    Reading comprehension FTW!

    Try again.
    Let's pick this up when the thing actually gets released.  
    Or you could just acknowledge that you picked the wrong CPU, then you picked the wrong CPU a second time.
    The Apple site says "W-based."
    https://www.apple.com/mac-pro/

    Please post a link to the processor you're saying Apple is using.
    This one seems like the main contender:
    https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/193754/intel-xeon-w-3275m-processor-38-5m-cache-2-50-ghz.html


    It's the best match from the most recent Intel catalogue:
    https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/series/125035/intel-xeon-w-processor.html
    If that's true, there are 3 differences (Linked page highlights them):
    https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/compare.html?productIds=193754,193752

    The name, the price ($7453 vs $4449), and max memory size (2tb vs 1tb).  It's weird that Apple is maxed at 1.5tb.    
  • Reply 108 of 134
    SoliSoli Posts: 9,272member
    mike fix said:
    crowley said:
    mike fix said:
    mike fix said:
    mike fix said:
    mike fix said:
    I used to buy the latest Mac when they came out and it was affordable for the performance.  Simply do yourself a favor and price out the gear that comes with the $6k machine and you'll quickly see you can insanely more power for the same money.  

    [parts list, including:
    $500 LGA 3647 motherboard
    $3100 Xeon W-3175x skylake 28 core processor]

    Yeah, you'll need to throw another few hundred bucks at it for cooling, etc.

    I think we all know that for the 28 core processor in the mac pro, that machine is going to cost well over $10k, most likely over $15k.  

    Even dumber is the fact that Apple could have gone dual socket.  Which for the PC you can, pretty much only doubling the price for the processor and you'd have 56 cores!  

    For $9500 you'd have 56 cores!  Stack in a few more of those NVIDIA cards are you'd be destroying worlds for a 3rd of the cost of an equivalent Mac Pro.
    There's a huge amount of ignorance on display here, and I haven't the energy to go through it all. But here are a few high points:

    - Your chip is previous-generation. You'd need the X3275M to match (almost) Apple's 28-core chip. That one costs about $7500.
    - Good luck finding a motherboard that supports 1.5 (or 2?) TB of RAM in 12 slots at that price. And that has 10GbE (much less two). And thunderbolt. And eight PCIe slots and a PCIe switch chip (which is insanely expensive). Etc. If you can even get close, you're probably looking at $1500-$2000.

    But the big LOL moment was your cutely naive "oh they could have stuck two CPUs in there". Know how much *those* cost? Because you can't use a Xeon W in a dual-socket system. The cheapest 28-core lists at $8700 but it's substantially slower than the Mac's 28-core CPU. To get something close (200MHz higher base clock, but 400MHz lower boost) you need to spend over $13k. Per chip, not per pair. So even if all you were going to do with those chips was hold them in your hands and dream of fast machines, it would still set you back >$26,000. Thousands more if you wanted them to work in an actual machine. You're not getting 56 cores for $9500.

    Of course any post that includes a parts list is completely missing the point of this machine.

    So. Less talking, more reading.

    The 3275w has an Intel recommended customer price of $4,449.00.

    The 3275w is an LGA 3647 socket, which there are several dual socket PC motherboards available that support 12 dimm slots.  

    If you want to compete on rendering where you buy mac pros and I buy PCs, we'll see who finishes fastesr and cheaper.  

    I'm not saying the Mac Pro isn't a great machine, it obviously is (and it better be for that price), it's just extremely overpriced for the majority of pros and their needs. 
    Reading comprehension FTW!

    Try again.
    Let's pick this up when the thing actually gets released.  
    Or you could just acknowledge that you picked the wrong CPU, then you picked the wrong CPU a second time.
    The Apple site says "W-based."
    https://www.apple.com/mac-pro/

    Please post a link to the processor you're saying Apple is using.
    This one seems like the main contender:
    https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/193754/intel-xeon-w-3275m-processor-38-5m-cache-2-50-ghz.html


    It's the best match from the most recent Intel catalogue:
    https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/series/125035/intel-xeon-w-processor.html
    If that's true, there are 3 differences (Linked page highlights them):
    https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/compare.html?productIds=193754,193752

    The name, the price ($7453 vs $4449), and max memory size (2tb vs 1tb).  It's weird that Apple is maxed at 1.5tb.    
    128 GiB × 12 = 1536 GiB = 1.5 TiB

    Why do you find that weird?
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 109 of 134
    HwGeekHwGeek Posts: 15member
    mike fix said:
    I used to buy the latest Mac when they came out and it was affordable for the performance.  Simply do yourself a favor and price out the gear that comes with the $6k machine and you'll quickly see you can insanely more power for the same money.  

    [parts list, including:
    $500 LGA 3647 motherboard
    $3100 Xeon W-3175x skylake 28 core processor]

    Yeah, you'll need to throw another few hundred bucks at it for cooling, etc.

    I think we all know that for the 28 core processor in the mac pro, that machine is going to cost well over $10k, most likely over $15k.  

    Even dumber is the fact that Apple could have gone dual socket.  Which for the PC you can, pretty much only doubling the price for the processor and you'd have 56 cores!  

    For $9500 you'd have 56 cores!  Stack in a few more of those NVIDIA cards are you'd be destroying worlds for a 3rd of the cost of an equivalent Mac Pro.

    - Your chip is previous-generation. You'd need the X3275M to match (almost) Apple's 28-core chip. That one costs about $7500.
    - Good luck finding a motherboard that supports 1.5 (or 2?) TB of RAM in 12 slots at that price. And that has 10GbE (much less two). And thunderbolt. And eight PCIe slots and a PCIe switch chip (which is insanely expensive). Etc. If you can even get close, you're probably looking at $1500-$2000.


    I just saw interesting new MB with upto 3TB support and many PCIe slots- only $499!:
    Just make yourself and Hackintosh with the new Xeon W if they will start selling on online PC stores.
    https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16813183686

  • Reply 110 of 134
    mike fixmike fix Posts: 247member
    Soli said:
    mike fix said:
    crowley said:
    mike fix said:
    mike fix said:
    mike fix said:
    mike fix said:
    I used to buy the latest Mac when they came out and it was affordable for the performance.  Simply do yourself a favor and price out the gear that comes with the $6k machine and you'll quickly see you can insanely more power for the same money.  

    [parts list, including:
    $500 LGA 3647 motherboard
    $3100 Xeon W-3175x skylake 28 core processor]

    Yeah, you'll need to throw another few hundred bucks at it for cooling, etc.

    I think we all know that for the 28 core processor in the mac pro, that machine is going to cost well over $10k, most likely over $15k.  

    Even dumber is the fact that Apple could have gone dual socket.  Which for the PC you can, pretty much only doubling the price for the processor and you'd have 56 cores!  

    For $9500 you'd have 56 cores!  Stack in a few more of those NVIDIA cards are you'd be destroying worlds for a 3rd of the cost of an equivalent Mac Pro.
    There's a huge amount of ignorance on display here, and I haven't the energy to go through it all. But here are a few high points:

    - Your chip is previous-generation. You'd need the X3275M to match (almost) Apple's 28-core chip. That one costs about $7500.
    - Good luck finding a motherboard that supports 1.5 (or 2?) TB of RAM in 12 slots at that price. And that has 10GbE (much less two). And thunderbolt. And eight PCIe slots and a PCIe switch chip (which is insanely expensive). Etc. If you can even get close, you're probably looking at $1500-$2000.

    But the big LOL moment was your cutely naive "oh they could have stuck two CPUs in there". Know how much *those* cost? Because you can't use a Xeon W in a dual-socket system. The cheapest 28-core lists at $8700 but it's substantially slower than the Mac's 28-core CPU. To get something close (200MHz higher base clock, but 400MHz lower boost) you need to spend over $13k. Per chip, not per pair. So even if all you were going to do with those chips was hold them in your hands and dream of fast machines, it would still set you back >$26,000. Thousands more if you wanted them to work in an actual machine. You're not getting 56 cores for $9500.

    Of course any post that includes a parts list is completely missing the point of this machine.

    So. Less talking, more reading.

    The 3275w has an Intel recommended customer price of $4,449.00.

    The 3275w is an LGA 3647 socket, which there are several dual socket PC motherboards available that support 12 dimm slots.  

    If you want to compete on rendering where you buy mac pros and I buy PCs, we'll see who finishes fastesr and cheaper.  

    I'm not saying the Mac Pro isn't a great machine, it obviously is (and it better be for that price), it's just extremely overpriced for the majority of pros and their needs. 
    Reading comprehension FTW!

    Try again.
    Let's pick this up when the thing actually gets released.  
    Or you could just acknowledge that you picked the wrong CPU, then you picked the wrong CPU a second time.
    The Apple site says "W-based."
    https://www.apple.com/mac-pro/

    Please post a link to the processor you're saying Apple is using.
    This one seems like the main contender:
    https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/193754/intel-xeon-w-3275m-processor-38-5m-cache-2-50-ghz.html


    It's the best match from the most recent Intel catalogue:
    https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/series/125035/intel-xeon-w-processor.html
    If that's true, there are 3 differences (Linked page highlights them):
    https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/compare.html?productIds=193754,193752

    The name, the price ($7453 vs $4449), and max memory size (2tb vs 1tb).  It's weird that Apple is maxed at 1.5tb.    
    128 GiB × 12 = 1536 GiB = 1.5 TiB

    Why do you find that weird?
    You don't find it weird that Apple didn't opt for 256gb DDR4 2933Mbps?  Which could have given them 2tb with 8 slots.  Seems weird to me.  
  • Reply 111 of 134
    mike fix said:
    Soli said:
    mike fix said:
    crowley said:
    mike fix said:
    mike fix said:
    mike fix said:
    mike fix said:
    I used to buy the latest Mac when they came out and it was affordable for the performance.  Simply do yourself a favor and price out the gear that comes with the $6k machine and you'll quickly see you can insanely more power for the same money.  

    [parts list, including:
    $500 LGA 3647 motherboard
    $3100 Xeon W-3175x skylake 28 core processor]

    Yeah, you'll need to throw another few hundred bucks at it for cooling, etc.

    I think we all know that for the 28 core processor in the mac pro, that machine is going to cost well over $10k, most likely over $15k.  

    Even dumber is the fact that Apple could have gone dual socket.  Which for the PC you can, pretty much only doubling the price for the processor and you'd have 56 cores!  

    For $9500 you'd have 56 cores!  Stack in a few more of those NVIDIA cards are you'd be destroying worlds for a 3rd of the cost of an equivalent Mac Pro.
    There's a huge amount of ignorance on display here, and I haven't the energy to go through it all. But here are a few high points:

    - Your chip is previous-generation. You'd need the X3275M to match (almost) Apple's 28-core chip. That one costs about $7500.
    - Good luck finding a motherboard that supports 1.5 (or 2?) TB of RAM in 12 slots at that price. And that has 10GbE (much less two). And thunderbolt. And eight PCIe slots and a PCIe switch chip (which is insanely expensive). Etc. If you can even get close, you're probably looking at $1500-$2000.

    But the big LOL moment was your cutely naive "oh they could have stuck two CPUs in there". Know how much *those* cost? Because you can't use a Xeon W in a dual-socket system. The cheapest 28-core lists at $8700 but it's substantially slower than the Mac's 28-core CPU. To get something close (200MHz higher base clock, but 400MHz lower boost) you need to spend over $13k. Per chip, not per pair. So even if all you were going to do with those chips was hold them in your hands and dream of fast machines, it would still set you back >$26,000. Thousands more if you wanted them to work in an actual machine. You're not getting 56 cores for $9500.

    Of course any post that includes a parts list is completely missing the point of this machine.

    So. Less talking, more reading.

    The 3275w has an Intel recommended customer price of $4,449.00.

    The 3275w is an LGA 3647 socket, which there are several dual socket PC motherboards available that support 12 dimm slots.  

    If you want to compete on rendering where you buy mac pros and I buy PCs, we'll see who finishes fastesr and cheaper.  

    I'm not saying the Mac Pro isn't a great machine, it obviously is (and it better be for that price), it's just extremely overpriced for the majority of pros and their needs. 
    Reading comprehension FTW!

    Try again.
    Let's pick this up when the thing actually gets released.  
    Or you could just acknowledge that you picked the wrong CPU, then you picked the wrong CPU a second time.
    The Apple site says "W-based."
    https://www.apple.com/mac-pro/

    Please post a link to the processor you're saying Apple is using.
    This one seems like the main contender:
    https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/193754/intel-xeon-w-3275m-processor-38-5m-cache-2-50-ghz.html


    It's the best match from the most recent Intel catalogue:
    https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/series/125035/intel-xeon-w-processor.html
    If that's true, there are 3 differences (Linked page highlights them):
    https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/compare.html?productIds=193754,193752

    The name, the price ($7453 vs $4449), and max memory size (2tb vs 1tb).  It's weird that Apple is maxed at 1.5tb.    
    128 GiB × 12 = 1536 GiB = 1.5 TiB

    Why do you find that weird?
    You don't find it weird that Apple didn't opt for 256gb DDR4 2933Mbps?  Which could have given them 2tb with 8 slots.  Seems weird to me.  
    It's not just the two "M" (the "M" stands for "medium memory support" up to 2TB) processors at the high end that Apple doesn't offer the maximum supported. The most RAM you can get from Apple in the configurations with "normal memory support" (no letter, up to 1TB) is 768GB.

    It is weird that Apple isn't offering 256GB DIMMs. I don't know. Maybe cost? Or supply? I'll guess it will be an option in the future, but for now they can't do it, for whatever reason. If you want to max out the RAM, you'll have to supply it yourself.

    Note that all these processors are exact matches to current Intel products once you realize Apple is adding the L2 and L3 cache totals together to get that spec. User Pylons figured this out.

    EDIT: I agree with Pylons that it would be nice if Apple were to offer the non-M 24-Core and 28-Core CPUs as well, for use cases that would like those processors but don't need more than 1TB RAM.
    edited June 9
  • Reply 112 of 134
    thttht Posts: 3,249member
    mike fix said:
    Soli said:
    mike fix said:
    crowley said:
    mike fix said:
    mike fix said:
    mike fix said:
    mike fix said:
    I used to buy the latest Mac when they came out and it was affordable for the performance.  Simply do yourself a favor and price out the gear that comes with the $6k machine and you'll quickly see you can insanely more power for the same money.  

    [parts list, including:
    $500 LGA 3647 motherboard
    $3100 Xeon W-3175x skylake 28 core processor]

    Yeah, you'll need to throw another few hundred bucks at it for cooling, etc.

    I think we all know that for the 28 core processor in the mac pro, that machine is going to cost well over $10k, most likely over $15k.  

    Even dumber is the fact that Apple could have gone dual socket.  Which for the PC you can, pretty much only doubling the price for the processor and you'd have 56 cores!  

    For $9500 you'd have 56 cores!  Stack in a few more of those NVIDIA cards are you'd be destroying worlds for a 3rd of the cost of an equivalent Mac Pro.
    There's a huge amount of ignorance on display here, and I haven't the energy to go through it all. But here are a few high points:

    - Your chip is previous-generation. You'd need the X3275M to match (almost) Apple's 28-core chip. That one costs about $7500.
    - Good luck finding a motherboard that supports 1.5 (or 2?) TB of RAM in 12 slots at that price. And that has 10GbE (much less two). And thunderbolt. And eight PCIe slots and a PCIe switch chip (which is insanely expensive). Etc. If you can even get close, you're probably looking at $1500-$2000.

    But the big LOL moment was your cutely naive "oh they could have stuck two CPUs in there". Know how much *those* cost? Because you can't use a Xeon W in a dual-socket system. The cheapest 28-core lists at $8700 but it's substantially slower than the Mac's 28-core CPU. To get something close (200MHz higher base clock, but 400MHz lower boost) you need to spend over $13k. Per chip, not per pair. So even if all you were going to do with those chips was hold them in your hands and dream of fast machines, it would still set you back >$26,000. Thousands more if you wanted them to work in an actual machine. You're not getting 56 cores for $9500.

    Of course any post that includes a parts list is completely missing the point of this machine.

    So. Less talking, more reading.

    The 3275w has an Intel recommended customer price of $4,449.00.

    The 3275w is an LGA 3647 socket, which there are several dual socket PC motherboards available that support 12 dimm slots.  

    If you want to compete on rendering where you buy mac pros and I buy PCs, we'll see who finishes fastesr and cheaper.  

    I'm not saying the Mac Pro isn't a great machine, it obviously is (and it better be for that price), it's just extremely overpriced for the majority of pros and their needs. 
    Reading comprehension FTW!

    Try again.
    Let's pick this up when the thing actually gets released.  
    Or you could just acknowledge that you picked the wrong CPU, then you picked the wrong CPU a second time.
    The Apple site says "W-based."
    https://www.apple.com/mac-pro/

    Please post a link to the processor you're saying Apple is using.
    This one seems like the main contender:
    https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/193754/intel-xeon-w-3275m-processor-38-5m-cache-2-50-ghz.html


    It's the best match from the most recent Intel catalogue:
    https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/series/125035/intel-xeon-w-processor.html
    If that's true, there are 3 differences (Linked page highlights them):
    https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/compare.html?productIds=193754,193752

    The name, the price ($7453 vs $4449), and max memory size (2tb vs 1tb).  It's weird that Apple is maxed at 1.5tb.    
    128 GiB × 12 = 1536 GiB = 1.5 TiB

    Why do you find that weird?
    You don't find it weird that Apple didn't opt for 256gb DDR4 2933Mbps?  Which could have given them 2tb with 8 slots.  Seems weird to me.  
    There are 3 memory controllers in the Xeon W-3xxx series, while Intel is limiting memory support to 1 TB and 2 TB depending on model, which don’t happen to be a convenient factor of 3*2^x. How would you do it?

    Going with 8 DIMM slots, 4 slots per controller, means forgoing 1 memory controller and reducing memory performance by a 3rd. And having uneven slots per memory controller (if possible) typically means memory performance drops down to the lowest symmetric configuration.
  • Reply 113 of 134
    netrox said:
    ensoniq said:
    The new modular Mac Pro is going to ruffle a lot of feathers for a variety of reasons.  Apple being stingy about base storage on a $6000 computer is what annoyed me.
    Please stop this non-sense. There is a PC version of that machine and it costs $8000!!! Seriously, this is a Mac Pro we're talking about, it is a very expandable Mac machine and it comes with a premium price. Hardly stingy.
    So where is there a Mac Pro that falls between this new one and the Mac mini. Apple is saying if you are the 1% this is for you for the rest of there is Mac mini and iMac, come on. I have owned all the Mac Pros except the trash can and you could get an entry level model as low as $2500 and have an expandable machine. I will wait to win the lottery.
  • Reply 114 of 134
    HwGeekHwGeek Posts: 15member
    tenthousandthings said:
    Note that all these processors are exact matches to current Intel products once you realize Apple is adding the L2 and L3 cache totals together to get that spec. User Pylons figured this out.

    Of course they will use this trick to make the processors more compelling, but soon we gonna see 288MB EPYC's and Threadrippers so it's going to be outdated pretty fast.
    Good news for us who don't have over 20K to spent- today AMD will ANN the 16C 3950X with 4.7Ghz boost and just 105W TDP, let's see how the new Asrock X570 TB3 builds gonna be supported with Hackintosh.
    P.S: do you think the new XDR monitor will be supported with those systems?

    edited June 10
  • Reply 115 of 134
    techsavytechsavy Posts: 34member
    Apple really put there foot in it this time.
  • Reply 116 of 134
    AppleExposedAppleExposed Posts: 1,520unconfirmed, member

    Since when was Mac Pro NOT for the top 1%?
    It wasn’t until 2013. There were affordable versions of the cheese grater. I bought one for under CAD$2500 in 2008.

    Even the cylinder was within reach of one-man shops and serious enthusiasts.

    So, in response to your question, I’d say the Mac Pro became a product for the 1% on Monday June 3, 2019.

    Those were still for the 1%.

    Mac Pro was never for grandma or little Jimmy in 3rd grade.
    Soli
  • Reply 117 of 134
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 2,298member

    Since when was Mac Pro NOT for the top 1%?
    It wasn’t until 2013. There were affordable versions of the cheese grater. I bought one for under CAD$2500 in 2008.

    Even the cylinder was within reach of one-man shops and serious enthusiasts.

    So, in response to your question, I’d say the Mac Pro became a product for the 1% on Monday June 3, 2019.

    Those were still for the 1%.

    Mac Pro was never for grandma or little Jimmy in 3rd grade.
    No, but you're being obtuse if you don't get the point. I'm super-happy Apple gave the high-end-pro community what they were asking for. I'm not as happy that Apple hasn't better filled in the gap for the rest of us. Grandma or little Jimmy probably don't need either, and will be just fine with an iMac or iPad.
  • Reply 118 of 134
    chadbagchadbag Posts: 1,100member
    Apple will sell every one of the Mac Pros they make for the first X time.  Once they are no longer production limited, I am betting we'll see a downmarket derivative of the Mac Pro to satisfy the non-1% Pros.  Ie, a $3299 starting price or something, maybe only 4 PCIe slot, 8 DIMM slots, etc. in a similar case.  

    Why should they go "down market" before they saturate the high end market given that they will be production limited?
    mattinoztenthousandthings
  • Reply 119 of 134
    mike fixmike fix Posts: 247member
    chadbag said:
    Apple will sell every one of the Mac Pros they make for the first X time.  Once they are no longer production limited, I am betting we'll see a downmarket derivative of the Mac Pro to satisfy the non-1% Pros.  Ie, a $3299 starting price or something, maybe only 4 PCIe slot, 8 DIMM slots, etc. in a similar case.  

    Why should they go "down market" before they saturate the high end market given that they will be production limited?
    It'll take Apple 6 more years to figure that out and get it to market.  In the meantime, the 99% that just can't justify the cost of the 1% Mac Pro will have switched to PCs.
  • Reply 120 of 134
    HwGeekHwGeek Posts: 15member
    So what do you think about Ryzen 9 3950X 16C 4.7Ghz Boost @ $749?
    How many among you will go for Base $6000 MacPro instead of Ryzen 9 3950X/X570 TB3 Hackintosh?
    P.S- turns out 64C TR coming Q4, great timing to make 40K MacPro 28C owners angry.
    edited June 13
Sign In or Register to comment.