I did re-read it and the main article doesn't list any specs for the demo machine they used.
The current 12 core Mac Pro costs $3799. They're not suddenly going to jump to a price of $10k. They would be a laughing stock.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Allowed Developers to Test a Prerelease Mac Pro Hidden Inside a Metal Box
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I did re-read it and the main article doesn't list any specs for the demo machine they used.
The current 12 core Mac Pro costs $3799. They're not suddenly going to jump to a price of $10k. They would be a laughing stock.
You are right, the CPUs are not that much faster. But the GPUs are that much faster. Also they are now using GPUs to do some of the calculations that were done in the CPU.
Which was being done on macs and PCs before the advent of the new Mac Pro. Current software is already doing this (in the case of realtime feedback in engines like in the current Lightwave and Modo, and countless other 3rd party engines like Arion, iRay, and newer version of vray).
I still don't believe that there is this remarkable increase that artists haven't seen. CPU+GPU acceleration is common now, with artists building PCI boxes stuffed with nvidia hardware to do today what apple seems to be bragging about doing later this year.
Here's Arion's demo from 2010 using outdated hardware:
I"m supposed to believe that Apple's new GPUs are seeing a massive leap over a modern day dual nVidia Titan setup and a blazing fast overclocked 4-6 core? Nah. More B.S.
I don't know what the comparison was (I was not there), but you specifically referred to CPUs in your previous post. Although perhaps gnasher can tell us.
But this quote from the article:
Seems to indicate that it's pretty damn fast.
Last edited:
The difference is the Mac Pro really does look like a trash can whereas Safari was never really very snappy to being with, IMO and it certainly wasn't getting snappier 99% of the time people posted that crap, which they've been doing for YEARS and YEARS (whereas this thread is only a few weeks old).
I actually think it looks better without the cover. It looks more like a reactor or something without the top being covered. Perhaps they should have used a clear cover?
Safari was way faster than the previous versions. It still feels faster than chrome on my rMBP. The mac pro looks like a battery to me.
I can't remember the last time I had this much "Techno Lust"....and sadly...for a product my wife will surely say we don't need (I have a MBP and she has a MB)....But "accidents do happen" 
If this thing performs half as good as it looks it will be a winner!
If this thing performs half as good as it looks it will be a winner!
I cannot wait to test one of these out. We are planning on getting one for our graphics/video dept at my office once they hit the stores.
Safari, especially when you use it on a Retina MBP, always freezes up when you browse Facebook. I really don't know why. The iPad's mobile Safari is much smoother than it.
Yes, great I would assume. But exactly how good is up for debate at the moment. As those are not really gaming GPUs. They are better for other actual work. In saying that I think they'll kick the crap out of anything the iMac offers.
I don't understand this. People keep saying this but I don't know what this means.
Every benchmark I've seen that compared workstation GPUs to gaming GPUs show them virtually equivalent for gaming, with the gaming GPUs much slower for 64-bit FP processing.
Do you have any sources/benchmarks that show otherwise? please provide.
You do know that the actual chips are the same, and that the only difference between workstation GPUs and gaming GPUs are drivers that enable certain workstation features, right?
Additionally, Apple writes the drivers, and has no reason to limit features on this, since they're not selling lower-end GPUs than this. (apparently this dual GPU setup is going to be the base/only model, which is pretty intense..)
Yup, My original post was about the CPU not being a quantum leap ahead of the current gen. You brought up the GPUs here:
https://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=17434959#post17434959
I'll take damn fast! I'll happily believe it is faster than older systems (one would hope!).
But I cannot believe an increase from "12 hours of waiting" to "real time". There is no way that leap is happening over a top of the line systems out now. We have never seen a leap like that from one gen to the next. If that happens some day, I'll be the first to sing its praises when I verify it myself, then plunk down my credit card to buy one for home and one for work!
before that, it's just reality distortion field.
What CPU did they test with?
Hello,
Perhaps this is a foolish question, but I was of the understanding that the next-gen 12-core XEONS won't be available until the fall.
If this is true, then how were these new Mac Pro's able to be tested? Did Apple use two 6-core Xeons temporarily or something?
Or would Intel have provided samples to them? Actually, now that I think about it, I guess that probably makes the most sense.
~Sean
Hello,
Perhaps this is a foolish question, but I was of the understanding that the next-gen 12-core XEONS won't be available until the fall.
If this is true, then how were these new Mac Pro's able to be tested? Did Apple use two 6-core Xeons temporarily or something?
Or would Intel have provided samples to them? Actually, now that I think about it, I guess that probably makes the most sense.
~Sean
Seriously?
Companies generally allow manufacturers to prototype/test with prototype parts.
It generally takes 6 months to a year after initial manufacturing for an IC to be available to the public.
Fall is when it the Xeon will be released to the general public.
Nope, I don't think so either. The Xeons are going from being cousins of Sandy E to being cousins of Ivy E. As far as I know, that will come with a nice speed boost, but nothing quite that big.
I suspect whoever made that statement was working on hardware gear or some new kind of program to do that.
I feel we are talking past each other here. I brought up GPUs because you specifically only mentioned CPUs. We do not know what they compared against making the 12h to realtime claim. Yes I agree, simply moving a head one or two generations of the CPU will not see that dramatic shifts in performance, which is why I brought up GPGPUs and OpenCL. Not knowing the context, what was compared and tested it's hard to tell what they actually where saying.
6 TB2 ports..total bandwidth is?
Do you think possible to use 2 or 3 TB2 ports to drive a special box
with a full length Gpu Card?
Current model Mac Pro
...would anyone be advised to buy the existing Mac Pro...?
now that we know what's coming...
- given it's probably more versatile for future upgrades
- how long before the existing model becomes obsolete(finding components)
- or is it possible to live without thunderbolt..?
cheers !
...would anyone be advised to buy the existing Mac Pro...?
now that we know what's coming...
- given it's probably more versatile for future upgrades
- how long before the existing model becomes obsolete(finding components)
- or is it possible to live without thunderbolt..?
cheers !
I was flipping out until I saw it's only 2x the speed of three-year-old hardware. Pathetic.
**** you, Apple.
**** you, Apple.
If this is the only configuration that they will offer, this machine probably won't work for me unless they have a way to use all that GPU power for DSP without me having to write the software. SAD! I really love OS X...
For a slower drive, why would you waste money on hooking it up via TB when it would be fine on dirt cheap USB3?
True, and some monitors have display port built in, I'm using it with my 2009 mac pro and dell monitors.
I'm not sure why you're so confused, chassis have existed for years and people use them all the time for things like running Pro Tools cards hooked up to laptops.
What card is that specifically? If that functionality isn't already available as an external device, it likely will be at some point.
Actually, it has been linux only for years.
A bigger increase would be nice, but that's on Intel's end. PCs are using the same chips so the speed increase has been the same on that side as well. The big advantages for this new machine are the GPUs and the fast SSD.