Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Desktops > Mac Pro

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Jan 20, 2013, 03:21 PM   #51
derbothaus
macrumors 601
 
derbothaus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by goMac View Post
I actually rather like the Magic Mouse for pro work. Multiple virtual buttons is enough for me, and the scroll is better than any mechanical mouse.

Wouldn't touch it for gaming though.
MM is fine. The name not so much. I meant their lucite see through white and black pucks from circa 2001-2004? The ones with just the tension adjustment. Nice but unjustifiably simple and the company explanation, in a nutshell, was that their customers were idiots.
I wouldn't touch any wireless mouse for gaming. Razer had one that was supposed to be OK but I never tried it as I am not a fan of Razer in principle and in general. Build quality is suspect.
__________________
Mac Pro W3680, GTX 680, 12GB DDR3, SSD; MBP, 2.6GHz Core i7, 16GB DDR3, SSD; Eizo fs2333
derbothaus is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 21, 2013, 11:17 AM   #52
JLopez
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
hi,
someone has what month in 2013 to commercialize the new Mac Pro?! or simply all just "show off" and Apple simply abandoned the Mac Pro!! since sales of the new iMac are running high, thus not justifying the development and sale of the new mac pro!! it starts getting complicad!! (with these uncertainties by Apple, can equate abandonment pursuant to another workstation platform (HP / Dell). Hopefully Apple has some attention with the business sector and the official date of sale or otherwise of the new Mac Pro in the first months of this year.
JLopez is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 21, 2013, 11:52 AM   #53
kitkat99333
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
There is a very good reason a 'new' Mac Pro wasn't released in 2012, because the Xeon Chipsets can't use thunderbolt.

Thunderbolt hasn't been integrated into the chipset yet. It multiplexes a digital video signal and a PCIe signal into one stream which is then demultiplexed at each drop. This requires both a source for the digital video, and 4 second generation PCIe 2.0 lanes. Chipsets which have Intel's FDI can provide the video straight from the chipset (hence why the chipsets with integrated graphics can support thunderbolt) and theoretically it could be pulled out from almost any video card that has a DisplayPort or HDMI output without much difficulty. The PCIe lanes can be tapped from the chipset itself as most have 4-8 spare lanes which are usually fanned out into 1x and 4x slots. These lanes aren't multiplexed which means they'd have to be fed into an add-in Thunderbolt controller instead of a slot on the motherboard. This cannibalizes the user's ability to use add-in PCIe cards.

As soon as Thunderbolt is added natively it will most likely receive its own dedicated PCIe lanes which are multiplexed on chip. This doesn't cannibalize other PCIe expansion slots and reduces the complexity of the traces on the board.

In simple terms, until thunderbolt is added natively to the chipset ( presumably will be in the ivybridge-E and server grade processors line up) Apple won't release a 'new' generation Mac as they want there entire lineup to carry thunderbolt.
kitkat99333 is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 21, 2013, 12:00 PM   #54
Lesser Evets
macrumors 68030
 
Lesser Evets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by kitkat99333 View Post
There is a very good reason a 'new' Mac Pro wasn't released in 2012, because the Xeon Chipsets can't use thunderbolt.

In simple terms, until thunderbolt is added natively to the chipset ( presumably will be in the ivybridge-E and server grade processors line up) Apple won't release a 'new' generation Mac as they want there entire lineup to carry thunderbolt.
Exactly. And WHEN do the Ivy Bridge-E sets come out? Slated for Q3 '13. Which means you'll be lucky to see a new Mac Pro in July. More likely to see the new Pro out in Aug-Nov '13.

They'll be here, and they will probably be nothing more than a slight redesign with TB added. The only questions are WHEN does it arrive and HOW FAST is it in processing and overall benchmarks. Everything else is almost certainly nothing paradigm changing.
__________________
2x1.86 BSEL Pro 1,1; 5770; 16GB RAM
Lesser Evets is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 21, 2013, 12:06 PM   #55
kitkat99333
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lesser Evets View Post
Exactly. And WHEN do the Ivy Bridge-E sets come out? Slated for Q3 '13. Which means you'll be lucky to see a new Mac Pro in July. More likely to see the new Pro out in Aug-Nov '13.

They'll be here, and they will probably be nothing more than a slight redesign with TB added. The only questions are WHEN does it arrive and HOW FAST is it in processing and overall benchmarks. Everything else is almost certainly nothing paradigm changing.
We still have to assume, Ivybridge-E will have native thunderbolt support. The company I work with works close with intel and nothing has suggested so yet.

The company I work for has managed to design a non-refernce board for the X79 chipset with thunderbolt, so it is entirely possible Apple could do the same.

If a new model does come out, I would expect no re-design, but PCIe-3/USB-3/Thunderbolt added as-well as a CPU and GPU update.
kitkat99333 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 21, 2013, 01:15 PM   #56
Lesser Evets
macrumors 68030
 
Lesser Evets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by kitkat99333 View Post
If a new model does come out, I would expect no re-design, but PCIe-3/USB-3/Thunderbolt added as-well as a CPU and GPU update.
I excluded USB3 and PCI3 because I figured that was obvious to a new Pro. It would be odd if they made a new Pro sans TB, but it could be done.

My intuition is that they will redesign the interior a little and they will compress a lot of the boards down to something compact. It would follow the overall Apple design m.o. these days.
__________________
2x1.86 BSEL Pro 1,1; 5770; 16GB RAM
Lesser Evets is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 21, 2013, 01:19 PM   #57
xgman
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Maybe it's the "Mac Pro Math"

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lesser Evets View Post
Exactly.
They'll be here, and they will probably be nothing more than a slight redesign with TB added.
You're probably right.
__________________
{2012 27imac-3.4i7-680mx-32gb ram-768SSD+External TB Samsung840pro ssd + TB velociraptors-UAD Apollo/Marantz/Amphion/Bowers&Wilkins Sound-Impulse 61}
{ipads}{iphones}{LG G3}
xgman is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 21, 2013, 04:14 PM   #58
SnowLeopard2008
macrumors 604
 
SnowLeopard2008's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Silicon Valley
Send a message via AIM to SnowLeopard2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by fastlanephil View Post
Is there even a remote chance that Apple could go with AMD processors for the 2013 Pro Mac?

I remember when AMD was kicking Intel's rear end.
No. Intel has better performance at a better price. That said, AMD did ship the first multi-core processor on a single die and first 64-bit processor. But those times are long gone. Before, performance is what made the most different. Now, it's power consumption. AMD's current crop of processors are cheaper than Intel but the power consumption is significantly higher. The only competitive "weapon" they have is their APU technology which combines GPU and CPU into a single die. But the problem is, their CPU part is basically Core i3 level of performance and Intel's graphics technology is steadily improving, just look at Ivy Bridge.
__________________
Mac Pro | Thunderbolt Display | iPhone 6 | iPad mini | Apple TV | AirPort Extreme
SnowLeopard2008 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 21, 2013, 05:04 PM   #59
Phrygian
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by derbothaus View Post
MM is fine. The name not so much. I meant their lucite see through white and black pucks from circa 2001-2004? The ones with just the tension adjustment. Nice but unjustifiably simple and the company explanation, in a nutshell, was that their customers were idiots.
I wouldn't touch any wireless mouse for gaming. Razer had one that was supposed to be OK but I never tried it as I am not a fan of Razer in principle and in general. Build quality is suspect.
magic mouse is by far the worst, most non ergonomic mouse i have ever purchased. Whoever designed that thing either had some ****ed up hands or was a sadist.

Razer mouses are solid. Build quality is fine from my experiences with the naga. Sure steelseries is nice, but they don't produce a good multibutton mouse. As for the wireless vs wired gaming, the wireless razers are perfectly fine to use, but if the .01 second is actually going to make a difference, razer wirless mice can be used wired via usb anyway.
Phrygian is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 21, 2013, 06:34 PM   #60
derbothaus
macrumors 601
 
derbothaus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phrygian View Post
magic mouse is by far the worst, most non ergonomic mouse i have ever purchased. Whoever designed that thing either had some ****ed up hands or was a sadist.

Razer mouses are solid. Build quality is fine from my experiences with the naga. Sure steelseries is nice, but they don't produce a good multibutton mouse. As for the wireless vs wired gaming, the wireless razers are perfectly fine to use, but if the .01 second is actually going to make a difference, razer wirless mice can be used wired via usb anyway.
I don't use MM either.
I'm just too old school, I guess. Can't take the flashiness. IME 3.0 with 500Hz polling USB hack. No drivers. Win 6/11 setting. Perfect for me. Don't need any of that DPI sales garbage. 400DPI at 1920x1080 still a-ok. I could see the need for 800DPI at 27-30" screens but freakin 3200DPI? Almost as crazy as the other Razor's. 3 blades? 5 blades? How many blades you need to shave a face?
__________________
Mac Pro W3680, GTX 680, 12GB DDR3, SSD; MBP, 2.6GHz Core i7, 16GB DDR3, SSD; Eizo fs2333
derbothaus is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 21, 2013, 10:05 PM   #61
JavaTheHut
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by derbothaus View Post
I'm just too old school, I guess.
Hey if you were old school you'd be on a Trackball
JavaTheHut is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 22, 2013, 01:54 AM   #62
goMac
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phrygian View Post
magic mouse is by far the worst, most non ergonomic mouse i have ever purchased. Whoever designed that thing either had some ****ed up hands or was a sadist.

Razer mouses are solid. Build quality is fine from my experiences with the naga. Sure steelseries is nice, but they don't produce a good multibutton mouse. As for the wireless vs wired gaming, the wireless razers are perfectly fine to use, but if the .01 second is actually going to make a difference, razer wirless mice can be used wired via usb anyway.
MM is better for me ergonomically because I'm not flicking that scroll wheel as much. You can't hold it like a normal mouse (i.e. it's better if you don't try to rest your hand on it), but once you get over that, it's much better for things like coding than a traditional mouse.

I've got a Naga. I like it, but I actually have complaints about the build quality. Wireless seems flakey, it also feels like I have to charge it far too often, and I'm not sure it's also charging reliably.
goMac is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 22, 2013, 03:53 AM   #63
d-m-a-x
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by goMac View Post
MM is better for me ergonomically because I'm not flicking that scroll wheel as much. You can't hold it like a normal mouse (i.e. it's better if you don't try to rest your hand on it), but once you get over that, it's much better for things like coding than a traditional mouse.

I've got a Naga. I like it, but I actually have complaints about the build quality. Wireless seems flakey, it also feels like I have to charge it far too often, and I'm not sure it's also charging reliably.
The sideways scrolling drives me crazy in photoshop. Always preferred a Wacom 9x12. Good mappimg size for dual monitors
d-m-a-x is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 22, 2013, 04:11 AM   #64
thekev
macrumors 603
 
thekev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by kitkat99333 View Post
As soon as Thunderbolt is added natively it will most likely receive its own dedicated PCIe lanes which are multiplexed on chip. This doesn't cannibalize other PCIe expansion slots and reduces the complexity of the traces on the board.

In simple terms, until thunderbolt is added natively to the chipset ( presumably will be in the ivybridge-E and server grade processors line up) Apple won't release a 'new' generation Mac as they want there entire lineup to carry thunderbolt.
I think you're looking for reasoning in the wrong places. I doubt thunderbolt is any kind of priority in these, especially as they won't want to risk an extended development cycle on Ivy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kitkat99333 View Post
We still have to assume, Ivybridge-E will have native thunderbolt support. The company I work with works close with intel and nothing has suggested so yet.
Why would you assume that? It seems more likely that no new chipset will come with ivy. It's very common for workstation board designs to last for two cycles, meaning I don't expect thunderbolt or usb3 to be chipset native.

Quote:
Originally Posted by derbothaus View Post
I don't use MM either.
I'm just too old school, I guess. Can't take the flashiness. IME 3.0 with 500Hz polling USB hack. No drivers. Win 6/11 setting. Perfect for me. Don't need any of that DPI sales garbage. 400DPI at 1920x1080 still a-ok. I could see the need for 800DPI at 27-30" screens but freakin 3200DPI? Almost as crazy as the other Razor's. 3 blades? 5 blades? How many blades you need to shave a face?
The razor blade conundrum is a simple one. Whenever sales slow by more than 5%, it's time to add another blade before everyone just decides to grow a beard. With mice much like other consumer marketing, I wonder if they're being realistic with their numbers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by d-m-a-x View Post
The sideways scrolling drives me crazy in photoshop. Always preferred a Wacom 9x12. Good mappimg size for dual monitors
I disagree. They were designed for an era of 21" crt displays. Stretched across a couple larger displays, they feel way too jumpy at tha size. I wish I had a 24HD.
__________________
world's largest manufacturer of tin foil hats, none of that aluminum foil crap.
thekev is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 22, 2013, 11:46 AM   #65
d-m-a-x
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by thekev View Post
I think you're looking for reasoning in the wrong places. I doubt thunderbolt is any kind of priority in these, especially as they won't want to risk an extended development cycle on Ivy.



Why would you assume that? It seems more likely that no new chipset will come with ivy. It's very common for workstation board designs to last for two cycles, meaning I don't expect thunderbolt or usb3 to be chipset native.



The razor blade conundrum is a simple one. Whenever sales slow by more than 5%, it's time to add another blade before everyone just decides to grow a beard. With mice much like other consumer marketing, I wonder if they're being realistic with their numbers.



I disagree. They were designed for an era of 21" crt displays. Stretched across a couple larger displays, they feel way too jumpy at tha size. I wish I had a 24HD.
The 9x12 is pretty good actually. i have (2) 24" HPZR's. One of them is turned vertical as a pallette monitor, so the desktop space is not too wide.
At least it's not a track ball

Last edited by d-m-a-x; Jan 22, 2013 at 01:44 PM.
d-m-a-x is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 22, 2013, 01:07 PM   #66
goMac
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by kitkat99333 View Post
There is a very good reason a 'new' Mac Pro wasn't released in 2012, because the Xeon Chipsets can't use thunderbolt.
I don't think the chipset is related to the ability to include Thunderbolt. The only dependencies Thunderbolt has as far as I'm aware is a GPU and available PCIe lanes.

Thunderbolt logically acts as a PCI card to the computer.
goMac is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 22, 2013, 01:10 PM   #67
GermanyChris
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Here
Quote:
Originally Posted by JavaTheHut View Post
Hey if you were old school you'd be on a Trackball
Hey thats what I use but I'm not old school..
GermanyChris is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 22, 2013, 01:14 PM   #68
numbersyx
macrumors 65816
 
numbersyx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by All Taken View Post
Given that 6,1 Mac Pro references have been found in bootcamp for a while now and that 10.8.3 has support for 7XXX graphic cards I'd say that the extended testing of 10.8.3 coupled with it's new card support which can't be for Mac Mini, iMac etc - it's new Mac Pro time. I think we'll see it in February.
I wish.....

I suspect much later. Didn't Tim Cook say later in 2013 at one point???
numbersyx is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 22, 2013, 02:03 PM   #69
deconstruct60
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by numbersyx View Post
I suspect much later. Didn't Tim Cook say later in 2013 at one point???
relative to the timeframe of the comments, June 2012, now is later in 2013. It was later to the reference point present in the context of the original statement.

Can throw on top 10.8.2 updates for discrete USB 3.0 controller. Not only a Thunderbolt docking station (display) would need one but the Mac Pro also.
deconstruct60 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 22, 2013, 02:15 PM   #70
kitkat99333
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by goMac View Post
I don't think the chipset is related to the ability to include Thunderbolt. The only dependencies Thunderbolt has as far as I'm aware is a GPU and available PCIe lanes.

Thunderbolt logically acts as a PCI card to the computer.
No it doesn't, I suggest you read my technical explanation of thunderbolt as this is the kind of thing I do for a living.

TB currently must have a CPU with integrated graphics in order for it to work ( explained in my post above), even if this is then passed onto a discrete card, it must come through integrated graphics.
kitkat99333 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 22, 2013, 02:33 PM   #71
GermanyChris
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Here
Quote:
Originally Posted by kitkat99333 View Post
No it doesn't, I suggest you read my technical explanation of thunderbolt as this is the kind of thing I do for a living.

TB currently must have a CPU with integrated graphics in order for it to work ( explained in my post above), even if this is then passed onto a discrete card, it must come through integrated graphics.
You're going to be fun to have around here
GermanyChris is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 22, 2013, 02:38 PM   #72
goMac
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by kitkat99333 View Post
TB currently must have a CPU with integrated graphics in order for it to work ( explained in my post above), even if this is then passed onto a discrete card, it must come through integrated graphics.
Your explanation only says that discrete graphics must be somehow multiplexed back into the chipset. Unless I'm missing something from your explanation, the integrated graphics still have nothing to do with that. All you need to do is route the DP back to the GPU.

I agree that's not a trivial issue, but it still doesn't have much to do with the chipset. Apple's Thunderbolt Macs don't have any special support in the chipset, they're using the same chipset any PC has. The lack of presence of Thunderbolt in the chipset is why there is an entirely different processor for Thunderbolt.

Again, sorry if I missed something, but I read your explanation and didn't see any dependencies on the chipset beyond the most ideal implementation (which I agree with, what you're talking about is ideal.)
goMac is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 22, 2013, 02:51 PM   #73
deconstruct60
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Ivy Bridge is not a "magic wand" that solves the Thunderbolt issue.


Quote:
Originally Posted by kitkat99333 View Post
There is a very good reason a 'new' Mac Pro wasn't released in 2012, because the Xeon Chipsets can't use thunderbolt.
Funny how the X79 ( as derivative of the C600 chipset used with the Xeon E5 1600/2600 series ) manages to be a viable solution in your post less than an hour after this one (post #55 where your company composes a x79 solution to the problem that isn't a reference board. )


Quote:
Thunderbolt hasn't been integrated into the chipset yet.
Thunderbolt is unlikely to be integrated into the chipset (I/O hub). Two major reasons.

A. Need to be at the edge of the system. There is a max distance you can put the controller from the physical port. So inttegrating would drag an I/O or CPU package closer to the edge. That isn't a option for larger and hotter chips.

B. The GPU output probably won't go into the I/O hub chipset over time. The two necessariy ingredients for integrations are PCI-e lanes and displayPort signals. Both of those are present in more CPU packages than I/O hubs (old southbridge ) chipsets. Likewise if Thunderbolt tries to go faster PCI-e v3.0 would be a necessity which chipsets won't necessarily follow as fast with ( I/O relatively just got to v2.0 lanes).


Quote:
Chipsets which have Intel's FDI can provide the video straight from the chipset (hence why the chipsets with integrated graphics can support thunderbolt) and theoretically it could be pulled out from almost any video card that has a DisplayPort
Pretty sure on Intel's roadmap the CPU packages would be able to output Display Port directly. It was a stopgap to run the display through the I/O Hub.

Besides the ingrated GPU isn't material. A embedded discrete GPU can just as easily be hooked up (e.g., iMac and MBP 15" models. ). There is no need to get the signal off of a "video card".

Quote:
The PCIe lanes can be tapped from the chipset itself as most have 4-8 spare lanes which are usually fanned out into 1x and 4x slots.
In generic PC board designs. Not in mac ones. The recent Mac Pro's slots are hooked to the Northbridge chipset. The I/O Hub is not used small slots (i.e, bluetooth, eithernet, ) at all. It is hooked to embedded controllers but not sltots in the connotation you are getting at.


Quote:
These lanes aren't multiplexed which means they'd have to be fed into an add-in Thunderbolt controller instead of a slot on the motherboard. This cannibalizes the user's ability to use add-in PCIe cards.
Not. There is no slot limitation here in a Mac Pro design context.

What was formerly the Northbridge, high bandwidth PCI-e lanes , connection is subsummed into the Sandy Bridge (and Ivy Bridge same limitations) Xeon E5 design. There are 40 lanes per CPU package.
A 16, 16, 4, 4 ( the current mac pro PCI-e socket set up) could be fully realized just with CPU connections. That leaves the C600 series's x8 PCI-e lanes fully available for Thunderbolt controller use after zero slot use. That is the same limitation (use I/O Hub's lanes) the rest of the 2012 Mac line up labors under and they all manage to get a discrete Thunderbolt controller into the system solution.


Even if Apple went with a 16 , 8 , 8 , 4/4 , 4 set up where an x8 lane got assigned to the embedded GPU , the two x4 slots share a switched connection (like they do now on the current Mac Pro with a 36 lane limitation), and 4 got assigned to Thunderbolt it *still* wouldn't be a PCI-e limit to impair slots.

The much larger pressure to loose a slot is indirectly through the allocating x16 to an embedded GPU.


Quote:
In simple terms, until thunderbolt is added natively to the chipset ( presumably will be in the ivybridge-E and server grade processors line up) Apple won't release a 'new' generation Mac as they want there entire lineup to carry thunderbolt.
Ivy Bridge Xeon is extremely unlikely to bring anything to the solutions that Sandy Bridge doesn't already have. The I/O chipset isn't likely to change. The CPU packages are socket compatible so nothing there either (in terms of PCI-e lanes).

Apple's work for a Mac Pro oriented design would be a bit easier for the single CPU package model if there was an integrated GPU. The dual package configuration with 80 PCI-e lanes is hardly even close to being limited in PCI-e lane availability if Apple sticks to just 4 physical slots.
It wouldn't be surprising if there were Haswell or Broadwell versions of the E5 1600 series with integrated GPUs. The core count kept to the same 4-6 (maybe 8) core range and some additional transistor budget allocated to a substantially more GPGPU capable integrated option ( HD4500 or HD5000 derivative).



The C600 I/O chipset has x8 lanes which can be set x4 , ,x1 , x1, x1, x1 . It is really controllers battling for those limited x1 lanes than the x4 bundle if they choose to route Thunderbolt that way.

Ethernet , Bluetooth , Firewire , audio I/O, and system-management I think are the current 5 or so usages. USB 3.0 would probably cause two of those to be bumped to a shared switched connection (e.g., audio and system-management). Or Apple could swap USB 3.0 for Firewire (not like they haven't booted it from other 2012 revisions).

In short, in most Apple designs over the last 6-9 years there has always been a couple "left over" lower bandwidth PCI-e lanes left unused.

Last edited by deconstruct60; Jan 22, 2013 at 02:57 PM.
deconstruct60 is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 22, 2013, 03:05 PM   #74
deconstruct60
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by kitkat99333 View Post
TB currently must have a CPU with integrated graphics in order for it to work ( explained in my post above), even if this is then passed onto a discrete card, it must come through integrated graphics.
Only if you have hooked the TB's controllers DisplayPort inputs solely to the I/O Hub's DisplayPort's outputs. There is no technical requirement that the PCI-e and DisplayPort have to be delivered by the same physical source chip.

It is easier to do ( routing of the signals can be easier). Certainly can slavishly copy from the Intel reference design (so very little design thought processes involved. )

Last edited by deconstruct60; Jan 22, 2013 at 03:11 PM.
deconstruct60 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 22, 2013, 03:15 PM   #75
scottrichardson
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Ulladulla, NSW Australia
Quote:
Originally Posted by deconstruct60 View Post
Only if you have hooked the TB's controllers DisplayPort inputs solely to the I/O Hub's DisplayPort's outputs. There is no technical requirement that the PCI-e and DisplayPort have to be delivered by the same physical source chip.

It is easier to do ( routing of the signals can be easier). Certainly can slavishly copy from the Intel reference design (so very little design thought processes involved. )

Hey there. In simple terms, how do you see the Thunderbolt working on a new mac pro with dedicated graphics cards? Will TB Cables be plugged into the MDP ports on the GPUs? Or will they be connected to the I/O panel with the other ports and somehow have video being sent back to that port too?
__________________
Mac Pro 8 Core 2.93Ghz 32GB RAM, 2 X SSD 840 PRO 512GB RAID 0, 2 x 24" LED, GTX660 2GB GPU. MacBook Air 13" 2012 i7 2GHz, 256GB SSD, 8GB RAM.
scottrichardson is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Desktops > Mac Pro

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Waterfield Designs Debuts 'Mac Pro Go Case' for Transporting 2013 Mac Pro MacRumors Mac Blog Discussion 43 Jun 11, 2014 04:45 PM
Mac Pro 2013 VS Mac Pro 2008 speed tests thomasfalke Mac Pro 25 Feb 25, 2014 08:03 PM
Can you use a 2013 Retina MacBook Pro as a second monitor to the new Mac Pro? FFArchitect Mac Pro 1 Jan 5, 2014 06:23 PM
Apple Updates Final Cut Pro X with 2013 Mac Pro Compatibility, 4K Content MacRumors Mac Blog Discussion 106 Jan 1, 2014 07:50 PM
Photography Setup: Retina MacBook Pro vs. 2013 Mac Pro Blue Hour Buying Tips and Advice 13 Oct 28, 2013 07:24 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:44 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC