New Mac Pro release date, rumours and leaked images

[deconstruct60]

Originally Posted by spoonie1972

Link to dual-xeon TB mobos, please!

Link to dual-xeon ExpressCard mobos please!

Essentially, it is the same issue. There is a very limited market for folks who want to attach laptop oriented peripherals to servers (and workstations).

There is a huge difference between can be done and market driven features actually incorporated.

eSATA ( Firewire/USB 3.0/USB 2.0) drives are already extensively used to "sneaker net" large amounts of data from place to place. Instead of working backwards ( buy TB drive, buy TB Mac , buy TB Mac Pro) it is far more flexible and straightforward to incorporate a TB Mac into a eSATA ecosystem by just buying something like:

http://www.sonnettech.com/product/ec...underbolt.html
(especially those transitioning from old MBP's that had Expresscard capabilities )

or

http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?id=10574


I really wouldn't expect Xeon E5 class motherboards from the general PC market to picket up Thunderbolt until the Haswell revisions in 2014. By then it should be more clear that TB does (or doesn't) have momentum and that embedding a GPU onto the board has broad enough utility to offset the limited loss in flexibility. Another iteration (2014 ) of the mobile class GPUs should result in GPGPU performance that respectable versus adding an additional CPU package ( should be crossing the 700-900 GFLOPS range by then by midrange offerings by then. ).

Workstations were among the last PC classes to get USB 3.0 (arrived with Sandy Bridge for HP, Dell, etc. models ). The design iterations are slower and often more conservative. Intel does a core IO chipset bump only after entire tick/tock cycle. Thunderbolts absence right now along is no more "doom and gloom" about Thunderbolt as the lack of USB 3.0 prior to Sandy Bridge versions.

[theSeb]

Originally Posted by Icaras

After owning the 2010, 2011, and now the 2012 iMacs, I can confidently say that the 2012 iMac is the coolest and quietest running iMac of the two designs, so I think Apple nailed thermal efficiency in the new design despite being in a 40% smaller enclosure. So I think the new the new fan cooling system works great. No compromises from what I see.

To note, I am running a 3.4 i7, 680MX, and fusion drive on the 27" top end. The machine always stays cool to the touch during normal processes and when fans are running, the machine never gets hot, only warm. In contrast, my 2010 and 2011 iMacs would burn up during intense workloads, while I have yet to see my 2012 get to that point.

Overall I'm pretty impressed with the redesign and would argue against the form over function complaints. Furthermore, keeping the ODD outside the system gives the iMac AIO design one less reason to take it to the shop.

Do you have actual CPU and GPU temps? It would be interesting to see.

[calaverasgrande]

Originally Posted by snberk103

To connect to the TB peripherals that were purchased to work with the MBP?

In essence, a MP needs a legacy TB port because someone with a portable system is likely investing in other stuff TB ports.

this is the point I have been trying to make.
Most Mac Pros do not exist in a void. They are part of a workflow which involves other Macs, PCs and multiple delivery media.
At my current job and my last job as well, the Mac laptops outnumbered the desktops 3 to 1 or better.

As I have stated elsewhere, at work we are already dealing with TB drives not being plug compatible with the latest Mac Pros. I have to go pick up the loaner 13" MBP and mount the drive to the Art Dept network (they are on their own subnet by themselves).

Of course TB confers no speed advantage over 1394, USB3.0 or esata when monuting a simple 7200rpm HDD. Heck most drives don't even exploit the full bandwidth of USB2.0 or firewire 400. But mac users tend towards the shiny, thinner, newer, higher tech stuff.

As far as the TB monitor point, if Apple can engineer TB ports into the Mac Pro, then there is no more reason to carry the non-TB monitor!
One less SKU!

[deconstruct60]

Originally Posted by calaverasgrande

this is the point I have been trying to make.
Most Mac Pros do not exist in a void. They are part of a workflow which involves other Macs, PCs and multiple delivery media.
At my current job and my last job as well, the Mac laptops outnumbered the desktops 3 to 1 or better.

Mainstream PCs have Macs outnumbered 9 to 1 or better. If talking about general markets then TB doesn't have deep traction. There was an artificial window while Apple withheld USB 3.0 from most of the Mac line-up but by end of 2013 that connectivity should be universally deployed.

Most folks who need "sneaker net" drives will the fastest but common interface for sneaker net. For example the Quad interface drives.




[quote]
As I have stated elsewhere, at work we are already dealing with TB drives not being plug compatible with the latest Mac Pros. [quote]

There are highly specialized walled gardens folks can create for themselves but that is hardly representative rationale of adding a required feature to the Mac Pro.

Of the following list of the TB drives than half the SATA drives can be ejected.

Seagate GoFlex [ Ejectable $245 ]
http://www.seagate.com/external-hard...c-thunderbolt/

Seagate Desktop [ Ejectable ~$360-400 ]
http://www.seagate.com/external-hard...c-thunderbolt/

Lacie LittleBig [ non ejectable ~$499 ]
http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?id=10549

Lacie Rugged [ USB 3.0 $199 ]
http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?id=10599

Lacie RAID various versions [ ejectable $499+ ]
http://www.lacie.com/products/range.htm?id=10061

Promise J4 [ non-ejectable $400+ ]
http://www.promise.com/storage/raid_...sn1=40&rsn3=62

Promise J2 [ non-ejectabe $499 ]
http://www.promise.com/storage/raid_...sn1=40&rsn3=60

Promise R4 $6 [ ejectable $600+ ]
http://www.promise.com/storage/raid_...tistic=pegasus


At least half of these have no problem dropping a SATA drive into something like

http://www.amazon.com/Thermaltake-5-...ef=pd_sxp_f_pt


So it isn't even the TB drive market that is at issue. Just a subset of the TB drive market. And at those average prices, and even if a frequent occurrence, a mere $599 Mac Mini would work just fine as a dedicated sneaker-net data ingest station at a cheaper cost than several of those drives; let alone a Mac Pro.

This is a very narrow, highly transitory issue. No PC oriented shop is going to be forced into buying Mac Pro with Thunderbolt if a small subset of their customers have TB drives. This is far more if there is an Apple kool-aid drinking shop they'll want an Apple kool-aid Mac Pro. Even Apple isn't primarily focused marketing wise on kool-aid shops. By definition kool-aid shops will buy what they are told to buy.

But mac users tend towards the shiny, thinner, newer, higher tech stuff.

TB drives are neither more shiny , thinner, newer , nor (as single function, single disc ) more high tech.

Nor does Apple particularly add hardware just because it is shiny or newer. USB 3.0 was certainly 'new' in 2011 it was no where to be found on Mac hardware.

As far as the TB monitor point, if Apple can engineer TB ports into the Mac Pro, then there is no more reason to carry the non-TB monitor!
One less SKU!

The 27 iMac can be a monitor so two less SKUs.

They probaly won't because the 27 iMac serves a differen function. The TB "display" is really a docking station. Apple has plenty of room for a real 27 Monitor. A real monitor as in:

no mag safe power cord (or extra large power supply).
more than one video input connector ( 2 mini DP or 1 mini one full size DP or 1 mini , one DVI , one full size DP ... etc. ). That means no semi-permanently attached video cable.
A simple industry standard USB hub.
Better than industry standard backlighting ( perhaps high gamut LED backlight if want to goose the price point).


A $799 monitor would like sell in significant number versus their $999 docking station. For those that may need two or three it is far more cost effective. Few in a multi-monitor set up need a 3rd Ethernet port or a 8th Firewire port. A monitor would serve a different function than a docking station does.


A mini DP monitor would still be a compatible chain ender on a Thunerbolt chain but it is also useful on a wider set of computers. That is exactly way there has been no huge flocking to producing TB monitors/docking stations by the overall market.


If Apple released a Westmere Mac Pro with 1 year old video cards but with Thunderbolt ports it would be a failure in the market. Thunderbolt is not a critical mass feature for the Mac Pro. There are minor niches it allows entry to but it isn't a show stopper.

[calaverasgrande]

[QUOTE=deconstruct60;16652376]Mainstream PCs have Macs outnumbered 9 to 1 or better. If talking about general markets then TB doesn't have deep traction. There was an artificial window while Apple withheld USB 3.0 from most of the Mac line-up but by end of 2013 that connectivity should be universally deployed.

Most folks who need "sneaker net" drives will the fastest but common interface for sneaker net. For example the Quad interface drives.




[quote]
As I have stated elsewhere, at work we are already dealing with TB drives not being plug compatible with the latest Mac Pros.

There are highly specialized walled gardens folks can create for themselves but that is hardly representative rationale of adding a required feature to the Mac Pro.

Of the following list of the TB drives than half the SATA drives can be ejected.

Seagate GoFlex [ Ejectable $245 ]
http://www.seagate.com/external-hard...c-thunderbolt/

Seagate Desktop [ Ejectable ~$360-400 ]
http://www.seagate.com/external-hard...c-thunderbolt/

Lacie LittleBig [ non ejectable ~$499 ]
http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?id=10549

Lacie Rugged [ USB 3.0 $199 ]
http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?id=10599

Lacie RAID various versions [ ejectable $499+ ]
http://www.lacie.com/products/range.htm?id=10061

Promise J4 [ non-ejectable $400+ ]
http://www.promise.com/storage/raid_...sn1=40&rsn3=62

Promise J2 [ non-ejectabe $499 ]
http://www.promise.com/storage/raid_...sn1=40&rsn3=60

Promise R4 $6 [ ejectable $600+ ]
http://www.promise.com/storage/raid_...tistic=pegasus


At least half of these have no problem dropping a SATA drive into something like

http://www.amazon.com/Thermaltake-5-...ef=pd_sxp_f_pt


So it isn't even the TB drive market that is at issue. Just a subset of the TB drive market. And at those average prices, and even if a frequent occurrence, a mere $599 Mac Mini would work just fine as a dedicated sneaker-net data ingest station at a cheaper cost than several of those drives; let alone a Mac Pro.

This is a very narrow, highly transitory issue. No PC oriented shop is going to be forced into buying Mac Pro with Thunderbolt if a small subset of their customers have TB drives. This is far more if there is an Apple kool-aid drinking shop they'll want an Apple kool-aid Mac Pro. Even Apple isn't primarily focused marketing wise on kool-aid shops. By definition kool-aid shops will buy what they are told to buy.




TB drives are neither more shiny , thinner, newer , nor (as single function, single disc ) more high tech.

Nor does Apple particularly add hardware just because it is shiny or newer. USB 3.0 was certainly 'new' in 2011 it was no where to be found on Mac hardware.






The 27 iMac can be a monitor so two less SKUs.

They probaly won't because the 27 iMac serves a differen function. The TB "display" is really a docking station. Apple has plenty of room for a real 27 Monitor. A real monitor as in:

no mag safe power cord (or extra large power supply).
more than one video input connector ( 2 mini DP or 1 mini one full size DP or 1 mini , one DVI , one full size DP ... etc. ). That means no semi-permanently attached video cable.
A simple industry standard USB hub.
Better than industry standard backlighting ( perhaps high gamut LED backlight if want to goose the price point).


A $799 monitor would like sell in significant number versus their $999 docking station. For those that may need two or three it is far more cost effective. Few in a multi-monitor set up need a 3rd Ethernet port or a 8th Firewire port. A monitor would serve a different function than a docking station does.


A mini DP monitor would still be a compatible chain ender on a Thunerbolt chain but it is also useful on a wider set of computers. That is exactly way there has been no huge flocking to producing TB monitors/docking stations by the overall market.


If Apple released a Westmere Mac Pro with 1 year old video cards but with Thunderbolt ports it would be a failure in the market. Thunderbolt is not a critical mass feature for the Mac Pro. There are minor niches it allows entry to but it isn't a show stopper.

I am with you on apples monitors. if you buy a $1000 LED display from any other manufacturer they bowl you over with the number of input options. With Apple you get one input which is only an asset in that you dont have to worry about which cable to get.

As far as all that other stuff. You are just being silly. Yes there are TB drives that you can pop the Sata drive out of. But in a real workplace I do not think it is realistic to expect people to take apart drive carriers to access the data. Most people would be scared to touch the actual hard disk!
In general most of your arguments hark back to the floppy disk era.
The reality is that in business we buy computers to suit the application they are used for. TB isn't requirement for anything yet, but due to departmental inertia, in the next fiscal year or two I expect TB to be the primary highspeed external connection on most Macs, as it is on the rMBP.
There are ways to work around that of course, but I am talking about people that cant be bothered to carry the TB to VGA adapter they need to throw video up in the conference room. So I carry it for them.
Right now we use firewire for major tansfers. Sure esata is faster, but Macs do not come with that. USB3 only helps if you dont have a Mac Pro.

[xgman]

Originally Posted by Icaras

After owning the 2010, 2011, and now the 2012 iMacs, I can confidently say that the 2012 iMac is the coolest and quietest running iMac of the two designs, so I think Apple nailed thermal efficiency in the new design despite being in a 40% smaller enclosure. So I think the new the new fan cooling system works great. No compromises from what I see.

To note, I am running a 3.4 i7, 680MX, and fusion drive on the 27" top end. The machine always stays cool to the touch during normal processes and when fans are running, the machine never gets hot, only warm. In contrast, my 2010 and 2011 iMacs would burn up during intense workloads, while I have yet to see my 2012 get to that point.

Overall I'm pretty impressed with the redesign and would argue against the form over function complaints. Furthermore, keeping the ODD outside the system gives the iMac AIO design one less reason to take it to the shop.

ditto

[macines]

http://www.macrumors.com/2013/01/14/...rty-resellers/

Do you think this could be an indication for the next Mac Pro update?

Think we`ve seen apple release the two of them alongside.

[jorgefilemon]

i want the mac pro fanless!, is that even possible?

[simsaladimbamba]

Originally Posted by jorgefilemon

i want the mac pro fanless!, is that even possible?

Possible yes via liquid cooling, but very, very unlikely.

[Tesselator]

You can totally run Xeon systems fanless there's no problem there. But if you did you would want a PCI bridge case and external HDDs. Also the system would be less user upgradable because it would require specific components that were in the main case. Ram, wireless, and so on.

On hot days or in hot rooms the procs would likely be speeding down a lot. That functionality is already built into all modern Xeons I've looked at. They can control their temperatures by reducing their speed - and a fanless system would have to make heavy use of that feature. With a ≥ 12-core system I doubt you would notice the difference very often unless you were rendering or processing video etc..

A Xeon grade setup could totally go fanless but the chances of Apple doing that are just about zero. NASA probably has use for such implementations but most of Apples customers just don't. So it would be kinda silly of Apple to design a box like that.

Now I could see a box the size of the current pro with just a single larger (than current) exhaust fan and better engineered (shrouded) air-flow control. That's totally doable. Any decent GPU would still come with its own fan of course though.

[xgman]

from macbidouille today (translated):

Mac Pro Xeon Apple expects most certainly will arrive in the third quarter
By Lionel - 22/03/2013 8:46:41 CET - Category: Apple

One may ask why Apple pushed not to leave the Mac Pro since 2010. If the lack of interest in what Steve Jobs called trucks is certain, we continue to believe that there is also behind technical issues, particularly for the management of Thunderbolt in these machines, which is a puzzle without a name .
The situation will soon change thanks to Intel. The company will start its first Xeon out soon which will feature a graphics, which will make a first adding Thunderbolt connector on a motherboard much easier.
The Xeon E3 with a graphic part will be available soon but it will be the beginning of the third quarter for the E5, dual CPU configurations necessary to arrive.

Of course, Apple may be entitled to a scoop from Intel and propose its Mac Pro faster. We believe that these same Xeon with the graphics were first created at the request of Apple.

[PowerPCMacMan]

I'll believe it when I see it... though really I am not stressing a need for the 2013 Mac Pro due to the fact as of right now I am using my MP as a big file server and print server with once in a while doing a big encoding job and or movie.

But most of the time it acts as a server.

[deconstruct60]

Originally Posted by xgman

from macbidouille today (translated):

The company will start its first Xeon out soon which will feature a graphics, which will make a first adding Thunderbolt connector on a motherboard much easier.

Start soon?? How about two years ago......
"... The Xeon E3-12xx line of processors, introduced in April 2011,
... "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xeon#Sa...dge-based_Xeon

Or a about year ago
" ... Also introduced today, the Intel Xeon processor E3-1200 v2 product family is an entry-level server and workstation processor based on Intel’s leading 22-nanometer (nm) process technology. ..."
http://newsroom.intel.com/community/...eon-processors

The Xeon E3 with a graphic part will be available soon

the Xeon E3 v3 ( third versions ) will be available soon but this wasn't and isn't a credible blocker.


the Xeon E3 is not on the evolutionary path from the Xeon 3000 ( 3500 and 3600 ) systems. I'm not sure who keeps trying to sell that kool aid but isn't true. The E3 is a new class Intel set up.

mainstream desktop lines ---> Xeon E3
Xeon 3000 series ---> Xeon E5 1600
Xeon 5000 series ---> Xeon E5 2600

but it will be the beginning of the third quarter for the E5, dual CPU configurations necessary to arrive.

E5 1600 v2 ( single socket solutions) are likely more of a impediment to schedule than the 2600 variants. Again not really a blocker, the curent versions of these solutions are already available.

. We believe that these same Xeon with the graphics were first created at the request of Apple. [/I]

that's pretty funny since they haven't used them in two years.

There is small chance there are some kind of variant Xeon E5's with GPUs. That seems very unlikely. The socket between current and these upcoming v2 (Ivy Bridge E5) is exactly the same. If there were some"unused" video out pins on it someone likely would have mentioned something by now.

Eventually Intel probably will weave them into the Xeon E5 series. Just isn't very likely to be for the Ivy Bridge shrink on the evolution path.

[PowerPCMacMan]

of the above mentioned posts in this thread, we will just have to wait and see. We can speculate and imagine all we want but nothing is known as of yet since it may not even be in the design room yet.

[cosmos]

Originally Posted by PowerPCMacMan

of the above mentioned posts in this thread, we will just have to wait and see. We can speculate and imagine all we want but nothing is known as of yet since it may not even be in the design room yet.

We will have to wait for the release, but if they are going to release it (I believe they will), it is past the design phase.

I expect a rack mountable design to satisfy the xServe community as well as Pro users. There will be design constraints that will anger many, but will carry on the Mac Pro for professional use. Anything less and Apple will signal that they are catering just for the consumer market.

[BDM STUDIOS NL]

One More Thing:

Our smallest and fastest Mac Pro ever! "-D

[McGiord]

Seriously do you believe that Apple will release a Mac in 2013 that can be open and the owner can add whatever fits?

[BigJohno]

Originally Posted by simsaladimbamba

Possible yes via liquid cooling, but very, very unlikely.

remember all the leaks from the watecooled G5's.

[deconstruct60]

Originally Posted by McGiord

Seriously do you believe that Apple will release a Mac in 2013 that can be open and the owner can add whatever fits?

They haven't done that in years, if ever, so why would it be true in 2013.

Whatever physically fits isn't a criteria they design to. There is more than just physical compliance that is involved. Probably not a 300+W card. Probably not anything that is very high I/O ( Infiniband. ). Probably not SAS drives (although that would be new. )

However, a box that has 3-4 PCI-e card slots , CPU packages in sockets, 4+ storage drive bays (whether all 3.5" is toss up), and ECC DIMM slots? Probably yes. They have implied as much several times on a consistent basis.

What will also come though is a move toward a new box where some stuff isn't removable. I don't think the box doesn't have to be in a state where it is all or is not removable. The "middle" is where they are likely moving. An embedded (non -removable) GPU that doesn't necessarily obviate a 2nd (or 3rd) GPU on a PCI-e card is likely to support delivering Thunderbolt on the box. Chucking 5.25" bays for some 2.5" bays would block 5.25" devices but not particularly impair the Mac Pro in a major way for the vast majority of buyers.

[BDM STUDIOS NL]

Anyhow I'm very excited about it and can't wait for that defying moment when Cook says, "Ladies and Gentlemen, One More Thing" and the new Mac Pro will be revealed!

[muziksculp]

Hmmm.... So, Are we there yet ?

How much longer for the new Mac Pro to show up ?

Hopefully soon.

(Really tired of waiting for this)

[Wardenski]

Originally Posted by muziksculp

Hmmm.... So, Are we there yet ?

How much longer for the new Mac Pro to show up ?

Hopefully soon.

(Really tired of waiting for this)

I'm really tired of hearing how people are getting tired of waiting for a new Mac Pro.

[muziksculp]

Originally Posted by Wardenski

I'm really tired of hearing how people are getting tired of waiting for a new Mac Pro.

What else were you expecting to hear ?

How joyful people feel about Apple's passive and slow attitude towards the Mac Pro ? Don't think that makes any sense, I'm sick and tired of the secrecy, and slow development on this front. Everything Pro is lagging behind at Apple.

I wouldn't be surprised if they announce that threre is No Mac Pro this year

[McGiord]

What do you think would be more likely to happen, an updated Mac Pro or a Mac Mini with a discrete video card?

The Mac I do really want is the "intermediate" one.

[Bubba Satori]

Originally Posted by McGiord

Seriously do you believe that Apple will release a Mac in 2013 that can be open and the owner can add whatever fits?

No.

----------

Originally Posted by McGiord

What do you think would be more likely to happen, an updated Mac Pro or a Mac Mini with a discrete video card?

The Mac I do really want is the "intermediate" one.

Neither.