Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10   Go Down

Author Topic: New Mac Pro?  (Read 11373 times)

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13611
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
New Mac Pro?
« on: May 09, 2019, 02:17:23 am »

Would someone have any update on the new Mac Pro?

Apple is once again taking their time on this one...

Some people seem to think it will get announced during the Apple WW Developers conference between June 3-7.

Any views on this?

Regards,
Bernard

francois

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10841
Re: New Mac Pro?
« Reply #1 on: May 09, 2019, 04:23:03 am »

Let's hope for a possible announcement at the WWDC (June 3rd?)…
Logged
Francois

rdonson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3238
Re: New Mac Pro?
« Reply #2 on: May 09, 2019, 01:55:11 pm »

WWDC would be a great place to announce the new MacPro
Logged
Regards,
Ron

kers

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3382
    • Pieter Kers
Re: New Mac Pro?
« Reply #3 on: May 09, 2019, 03:47:39 pm »

If there is problem I could offer Apple my house to do te announcement...
Logged

francois

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10841
Re: New Mac Pro?
« Reply #4 on: May 10, 2019, 10:49:47 am »

If there is problem I could offer Apple my house to do te announcement...

Be sure to email Tim Cook about your house…  ;D
Logged
Francois

faberryman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 2404
Re: New Mac Pro?
« Reply #5 on: May 10, 2019, 11:51:07 am »

From what I've gathered reading the blogs, the new MacPro is likely to be so expensive, it will be out of the running for most of us.

kers

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3382
    • Pieter Kers
Re: New Mac Pro?
« Reply #6 on: May 10, 2019, 12:29:22 pm »

looking back into the future...

Apple's Phil Schiller WWDC Jun 13, 2013, 9
"Can't innovate anymore, my ass,"
presenting the trashcan macpro
The first macpro was offered on sale - jan 2014
-----
Apple insider   April 04, 2017
https://appleinsider.com/articles/17/04/04/all-new-mac-pro-with-modular-design-apple-branded-pro-displays-coming-in-2018
Breaking
All-new Mac Pro with modular design, Apple-branded pro displays coming in 2018
---
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/johnpaczkowski/apple-says-it-is-completely-rethinking-the-mac-pro
April 4, 2017
“We are completely rethinking the Mac Pro,” Phil Schiller, Apple’s SVP of worldwide marketing said during a recent roundtable with a handful of reporters at the company’s Machine Shop hardware prototyping lab. And it won't just be the computer. “Since the Mac Pro is a modular system, we are also doing a pro display. There’s a team working hard on it right now.”
And Schiller offered something even rarer: an apology. "The current Mac Pro ... was constrained thermally and it restricted our ability to upgrade it," he said. "And for that, we’re sorry to disappoint customers."

2018...
aug 2018... moved over to a hackintosh my first 'self designed' 10core-i9 macPro- replacing my 10 year old mac pro ( no regrets) gaining speed a factor 4-5
may 2019...
« Last Edit: May 10, 2019, 12:33:48 pm by kers »
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13611
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: New Mac Pro?
« Reply #7 on: May 12, 2019, 09:36:36 am »

From what I've gathered reading the blogs, the new MacPro is likely to be so expensive, it will be out of the running for most of us.

Just like high end Win workstations from HP and Dell can easily cross the 50,000 US$ barrier list price.

Cheers,
Bernard

smthopr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 601
    • Bruce Alan Greene Cinematography
Re: New Mac Pro?
« Reply #8 on: May 12, 2019, 01:18:06 pm »

I gave up a few years ago when I needed a MacPro for video work and there were issues with the graphics cards overheating and creating rendered images with glitches.  I bought a used HP workstation and it took a little while to learn the Windows OS, but now I don't think I'm going back to Mac for any high end workstations.  Windows 10 has been very stable.

I liked the Mac OS "experience" a bit better, but at this point, I don't trust Apple to fully support high end computers going forward...
Logged
Bruce Alan Greene
www.brucealangreene.com

JaapD

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 289
Re: New Mac Pro?
« Reply #9 on: May 16, 2019, 01:11:34 am »

Just like high end Win workstations from HP and Dell can easily cross the 50,000 US$ barrier list price.

Cheers,
Bernard

Whatever. Each and every time the iPhone/iPad centralized company loses with Mac ‘specs per dollar’ against the competition. Let’s face it, their Mac Pro roadmap is a disaster and a disrespect to its more than loyal customers.

Regards,
Jaap.
Logged

Dan Wells

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1005
Re: New Mac Pro?
« Reply #10 on: May 18, 2019, 04:21:50 pm »

I suspect (from reading a lot of Mac blogs) that we're looking at something like this - this is the machine I've posted about on MacRumors - others who read the tea leaves differently have posted other possibilities:

CPU: New Cascade Lake Xeon-W, 12 to 28 cores. These $1000-$3000 CPUs are cut-down versions of Intel's Xeon-SP server CPUs with the multiprocessing features removed. The advantage over the smaller LGA-2066 Xeon-W chips is that they can have more cores - Apple will offer options that exceed the 18 core maximum of the iMac Pro (which uses the smaller chips).

RAM:  6 channels, 6 or 12 slots, minimum 48 (6x8)or 96 (6x16) GB, maximum 384 (6x64) or 768 (12x64) GB. 8 GB DIMMs for these CPUs are substantially more expensive per gigabyte than 16 GB DIMMs, so Apple may start with the 96 GB configuration that's only a little more expensive.

Storage: Primary SSD array run from the T2 (or T3?) controller. Either PCIe x4, two channels (fast, 1 TB to 4 TB configurations) or PCIe x8, with four channels (really fast, with 2 TB to 8 TB configurations). The iMac Pro uses PCIe x4 with two SSD channels off the controller, and the Mac Pro will either be the same or a doubled version. T

There may also be a couple of standard (NVMe) or proprietary storage expansion slots, since the SSD run off the T2 is locked to the T2 chip and can't be expanded without reprogramming the security (Apple could give their stores tools to do it, but a user won't be able to). Right now, they won't expand the iMac Pro's T2 locked SSD at all, but they can replace it without replacing the motherboard, which means that the reprogramming tool exists somewhere.

GPU: AMD GPU in a proprietary Apple GPU Slot, probably with a second Apple GPU Slot free. The Apple GPU Slot is probably just a PCIe x16 slot with a small extension to pump the video out over Thunderbolt, but the size and shape of the GPU card will be nonstandard (including no rear panel ports). There are two reasons to make it nonstandard - one is that standard PC GPUs are inefficiently (and loudly) cooled with their big ol' fans. The Apple GPU Slot will use the computer's cooling (possibly liquid cooling) instead. The second is that Apple doesn't want to deal with NVidia GPUs, and an incompatible slot keeps them out.

Depending on the timing of the Mac Pro versus the timing of Navi, the baseline GPU will probably be a Vega 64, with Radeon VII and Instinct models as upgrade options. If Navi's ready, they'll use comparable Navi GPUs A second GPU will be optional, and will probably have to match the first. They will probably commit to offering GPU upgrades (but they said it was possible for the Mac Pro 2013 and the only upgrades that ever shipped were the higher end GPUs offered as BTO at release).

Ports and upgrades:
RAM should be user upgradeable and there will probably be a way of adding internal SSD storage (although upgrading the boot drive will at least require an Apple technician if they allow it at all, due to the T2). The CPU may well be unofficially upgradeable until Intel stops using the LGA-3647 socket (probably using other CPUs that Apple offers, possibly some that they don't). There is a slight chance the CPU is officially upgradeable as well. The GPU will probably be officially upgradeable, although parts availability may be an issue.

There may be a free standard PCIe slot - probably half length and low wattage - primarily for I/O boards of different types.

The primary port will be a bunch of Thunderbolt 3 ports (this is also why AMD CPUs are unlikely - they don't support Thunderbolt easily).
The most likely configuration is 6 ports on 3 buses (like the 2013 Mac Pro, but Thunderbolt 3 instead of 2). Either 4 ports on 2 buses (iMac Pro) or 8 ports on 4 buses would also be reasonable. There may be a way of bridging two Thunderbolt ports on different buses to support high-speed external PCIe boxes.

There will almost certainly be dual Ethernet ports, at least one of them 10 Gb. The most logical configuration is actually one 10Gb port to connect to the fastest things on your LAN (NAS units, servers, iMac Pros, MacBook Pros using TB3 to 10GbE adapters) and one 1 Gb port for Internet connectivity, printers, etc. There's no reason to go 10 Gb on the secondary port (since segmented networks where both segments are 10 Gb are rare - the usual reason to segment is to get the printer, etc. off the 10 Gb segment) , but Apple might, just to simplify things - the secondary port will just auto-negotiate 1 Gb speed, so there's no reason not to.

There should be a few convenience ports - the most obvious is at least a couple of old-style USB-A ports, hopefully up front since the major reason to have them is for thumb drives. They will probably include a headphone jack, also for convenience sake. I personally think card readers are unlikely - SD will probably not be the only standard for much of the life of the machine. From a still photographer's viewpoint, SD plus XQD/CFExpress would be a good combination, but video folks use three or four others as well.

It'll be expensive (think iMac Pro, then a little more), but I don't think it'll be as expensive as some people on the Mac forums are saying (forum opinion ranges from $2999 starting price to $15,000 starting price). Intel did us a big favor with those new Xeon-W chips that are cut down versions of the server chips. I used to think it'll be a $6499 machine because it had to use a server chip - now I'm closer to $5499 to start.

$5499 Mac Pro: 12 core Intel Xeon-W, 1 TB SSD, 48 GB of RAM, Vega 64
or maybe it'll be $5999, but with a higher base configuration? 12 core Xeon-W, 2 TB SSD, 96 GB of RAM, Vega 64.

BTO options:

CPU: 16 core $500, 24 core $1500, 28 core (also higher clocks) $3000
GPU: Vega 64X $200, Radeon VII $500, Radeon Instinct $3000+
Second GPU: Has to match the first, Vega 64 $400,Vega 64X $900, Radeon VII $900, Radeon Instinct $3400+
RAM: 96 GB $300 (if not standard), 192 GB $2000, 384 GB (gulp!) $7000
Storage: 2 TB $400 (if not standard), 4 TB $2000, 8 TB (if offered) $4500

The base model is a desktop workstation that fills some high-end photographers' needs, especially if they also do video.  The smaller upgrades are relatively reasonable (a $6700 machine probably won't break the bank if $5500 is OK), while the top upgrades are for Hollywood. It tops out over $25000, but that's not for photographers...

 
Logged

faberryman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 2404
Re: New Mac Pro?
« Reply #11 on: May 18, 2019, 05:00:17 pm »

And the box?

Dan Wells

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1005
Re: New Mac Pro?
« Reply #12 on: May 19, 2019, 12:03:46 am »

As long as I know how I can expand it, the shape of the box (probably something weird and Apple-y) doesn't matter to me...

Expansion:

RAM - User upgradeable with standard registered ECC DIMMs - hopefully an easy hatch or "pull the case off and it's staring me in the face"
SSD (boot) - Either service center only or not allowed (T2 issue)
SSD (extra storage) - hopefully User upgradeable - either standard NVMe slots or some sort of (hotswap?) Apple module.
CPU - unofficially replaceable with other Intel LGA 3647 CPUs. On previous Macs, other CPUs Apple has used in the same model tend to work (to go from 12 to 28 cores, buy Apple's chosen 28 core CPU and drop it in). CPUs Apple hasn't used that would seem compatible (same generation and socket) are very hit or miss - let someone else try it first. Official processor upgrades are unlikely, but possible - Apple has occasionally done that.
GPU - User upgradeable, but part comes from Apple.
PCIe - If it exists, a half-length, 75 watt card will be user installable
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13611
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: New Mac Pro?
« Reply #13 on: May 19, 2019, 08:51:18 am »

Very interesting Dan.

The only thing I find surprising is the lack of double CPU. Otherwise is pretty much exactly what I was expecting.

Cheers,
Bernard

kers

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3382
    • Pieter Kers
Re: New Mac Pro?
« Reply #14 on: May 19, 2019, 10:00:51 am »

I think everybody that would like a Mac pro would be happy if they make a new version of the 2012 box.
and do it NOW ( i mean 4 years ago)

Somehow Apple always wants to make something wild and exciting and waits until the hardware is there to make it so..
( a car with square wheels)
In the mean time a PRO does not have a workable computer... how PRO is that?
« Last Edit: May 19, 2019, 03:00:56 pm by kers »
Logged

D Fuller

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 587
    • AirStream Pictures
Re: New Mac Pro?
« Reply #15 on: May 19, 2019, 01:57:03 pm »

As long as I know how I can expand it, the shape of the box (probably something weird and Apple-y) doesn't matter to me...

Expansion:

RAM - User upgradeable with standard registered ECC DIMMs - hopefully an easy hatch or "pull the case off and it's staring me in the face"
SSD (boot) - Either service center only or not allowed (T2 issue)
SSD (extra storage) - hopefully User upgradeable - either standard NVMe slots or some sort of (hotswap?) Apple module.
CPU - unofficially replaceable with other Intel LGA 3647 CPUs. On previous Macs, other CPUs Apple has used in the same model tend to work (to go from 12 to 28 cores, buy Apple's chosen 28 core CPU and drop it in). CPUs Apple hasn't used that would seem compatible (same generation and socket) are very hit or miss - let someone else try it first. Official processor upgrades are unlikely, but possible - Apple has occasionally done that.
GPU - User upgradeable, but part comes from Apple.
PCIe - If it exists, a half-length, 75 watt card will be user installable

Every time I see a post like this, I hear The Who singing “We won’t be fooled again” in my head.

I bought the 2013 MacPro partly on the promise of upgradability. My primary business is video, and GPUs are THE key component in color grading systems. Apple sold it as an upgradable system, but not one upgrade option has ever materialized (except a CPU upgrade if you initially bought a lower-spec CPU). To my way of thinking, that system is an abject market failure in terms of creating any upgrade options at all. I thought that Apple had a big enough market presence that a third-party eco system would evolve, but I was wrong.

Meanwhile, had I bought a PCI expansion chassis for my 2010 Mac Pro or switched to a PC platform, I could have upgrades GPUs twice in the 6-year interim.

I don’t think I’ll be buying a new Mac Pro with a unique, proprietary interface set.
Logged
business website: www.airstream.pictures
blog: thirtynineframes.com/blog

faberryman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 2404
Re: New Mac Pro?
« Reply #16 on: May 19, 2019, 04:44:19 pm »

I don’t think I’ll be buying a new Mac Pro with a unique, proprietary interface set.
If the upgrades are proprietary, I think it will be another failure. What we want is PC type upgradability that runs macOS, i.e., a box with slots. How long does it take to design a nice box?

Dan Wells

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1005
Re: New Mac Pro?
« Reply #17 on: May 20, 2019, 01:02:11 am »

In response to Bernard's question:

The problem with dual CPU is that Intel doesn't make dual socket capable versions of any CPU other than a few 4-12 core Xeon SP chips(almost all of which have low clock speeds) - the Xeon Silver line. They used to, but the move to Xeon SP eliminated the reasonable dual-capable Xeons. They do make multi socket capable versions of a bunch of desirable chips, but those are actually capable of going up to 8 sockets, not just 2 - Xeon Gold and Platinum.

Why not use 8 socket chips in a 2 socket motherboard?  Each individual chip is approximately 3x as expensive as an otherwise similar chip without the multiprocessing capability. A 28 core Xeon Platinum is around $10,000 (and you need two of them to get any benefit), while a nearly identical 28 core Xeon-W 3275 (same LGA-3647 socket, same 6 channel memory, same power requirement) with a slightly higher clock speed is around $3000 - the only difference is that the multiprocessing capability is turned off - which frees some power for higher turbo speeds.

The Xeon Silver chips make no sense for workstations because a single Xeon-W chip is both faster and cheaper than two Xeon Silvers (even a 16-core Xeon-W is probably faster than two 12 core Xeon Silvers due to clock speed differences, and the 24 and 28 core variants are no contest).

HP does use Xeon Gold and Platinum in workstations - but that's why the Z8 can go over $50,000 easily (and over $100,000 if you work at it). Apple will almost certainly prefer the $5500-$25,000 market (and they're unlikely to make a dual-socket motherboard for the tiny number of customers who'd go for ultimate performance). The only configurations that make any performance sense at all would be dual 24 core and dual 28 core, since a dual 16 core would be so close in performance to a single 28 core that it doesn't really matter.

For processors alone, a dual 24 core system would be about a $12,000 upgrade over a single 28 core system, and a dual 28 core would be around $17,000. I'd expect Apple to increment the price more like $17,000 and $25,000 - because it would require a new motherboard (and probably a power supply and other components) for a tiny number of systems.

Not worth it - except in one specific (unlikely, but not impossible) circumstance. If Apple is a big enough Intel customer, can they get some semi-custom dual-capable CPUs without the 8-processor capability? The traditional cost per CPU for dual-capable chips is about 125 to 150% of the cost of a similar single-processor only CPU, not 300%. At a 25% or 50% markup,  it might be worth it. HP couldn't get Intel to do it - they wouldn't use those 8-way CPUs with the 300% cost unless they had no choice...


In response to D Fuller and faberryman:
People have been asking Apple for a mid-priced box with PC type expansion for years, and Apple has consistently refused (the last one was the old Power Mac 7600). The old Mac Pro was priced well above the price of any iMac - the iMac has moved upscale over the years. Apple hates PC expansion for a number of reasons (some of them valid engineering considerations, while others are part of feuds in the industry).

1.) NVidia - Apple really, really doesn't want NVidia graphics on the Mac! NVidia has proven unwilling or unable to write a stable Mac driver, and Apple is very happy with the performance and stability of their AMD driver and doesn't want to take the effort to write an equivalent driver for NVidia - especially if it's for one system that won't even be a huge seller. Apple cares a LOT about system stability, and they've avoided most of Windows' stability problems over the years - in large part by using highly restricted Hardware Compatibility Lists. No NVidia is the most jealously guarded of all of those measures.

2.)Cooling and engineering - The standard PC graphics card is a huge engineering compromise. When the slot design of PC motherboards was worked out, no expansion card used very much power. They were designed to draw power from the slot and be cooled by the system fans. Nobody anticipated 300 watt GPUs - so hacks have been used to accommodate them - but no engineer would design a card from scratch that needed multiple external power connectors and several loud fans! Apple's GPU Slot will be a nice design that integrates properly with system power and cooling - but that means it won't be standard PCIe (it'll probably be some custom connector based on PCIe, but with extensions for Thunderbolt and power - and some sort of integrated cooling).

3.) Stability - Many PC graphics cards are overclocked to well beyond what Apple would consider stable on a Mac. Quadros and other workstation cards aren't - but a slotbox is going to tempt people to stick GeForces (or even standard AMD gaming cards) in there, and Apple doesn't want the support hassles.

4.) Gaming - Apple goes out of its way to be hostile to gaming on the Mac - and they reap stability benefits for doing so. To see what gaming does to the stability of otherwise comparable systems, look at the story of Windows 2000. Windows 2000 was by far the most stable Windows to that point (the first consumer-friendly version of NT). Its major drawback was that it wouldn't run games (unless they were very well behaved, ran in a window, and didn't access hardware directly). Windows XP a year and a half later was essentially 2000 with the game support finally ported over from DOS-based Windows 98 to the NT-based platform. It took Microsoft nearly 7 years (from the release of XP in late 2001 until Service Pack 3 was released in 2008) until XP was as stable as Windows 2000. Most of that instability was added by adding game support - games do all sorts of weird things. Apple keeps games in a VERY tight sandbox, and NVidia doesn't like that!
 
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13611
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: New Mac Pro?
« Reply #18 on: May 20, 2019, 01:35:39 am »

Thanks Dan, that does indeed make sense.

Cheers,
Bernard

D Fuller

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 587
    • AirStream Pictures
Re: New Mac Pro?
« Reply #19 on: May 20, 2019, 07:05:54 am »


2.) Cooling and engineering - ...  Apple's GPU Slot will be a nice design that integrates properly with system power and cooling - but that means it won't be standard PCIe (it'll probably be some custom connector based on PCIe, but with extensions for Thunderbolt and power - and some sort of integrated cooling).


This is what I thought about the 2013 design. The trouble is that if you really put it to work, the GPU Fails due, it seems, to overheating. So rendering a moderately-complex sequence out of Resolve regularly produces errors that require re-render. So regularly that many people resort to rendering stacks of frames rather than any video codec, so that the frames with errors can be re-rendered (and then the stack re-rendered to a video file in another piece of software). It’s a bloody inefficient way to work.

Apple has never offered a fix for this, or any upgrade to their original GPUs. Given that, why would anyone trust them to develop a product line that is anything other than appliance—good for what it’s capable of today, perhaps, but never likely to see any upgradability, even when it fails to perform.
« Last Edit: May 20, 2019, 08:19:21 am by D Fuller »
Logged
business website: www.airstream.pictures
blog: thirtynineframes.com/blog
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10   Go Up