Apple Offers Developers a Closer Look at the New Mac Pro

[GermanyChris]

Backups should probably not be in the same machine, not sure if that's what you meant. But I see what you are saying, 3 drives worth of data, 3 as mirrors is an edge case. But also at the limit of what the box can take.

No I have my data in the box, the backups of that data are in the NAS, and the really important stuff sits on various drives in anti static bags on a shelf. The stuff I do at home for work is on archival DVD's. Now those 15TB need to come out of the box and into an into another additional enclosure. The DVD and BluRay need to come out and in to two more enclosures. This is hardly an elegant solution. This is Apple externalizing costs.

 

[fortysomegeek]

No I have my data in the box, the backups of that data are in the NAS, and the really important stuff sits on various drives in anti static bags on a shelf. The stuff I do at home for work is on archival DVD's. Now those 15TB need to come out of the box and into an into another additional enclosure. The DVD and BluRay need to come out and in to two more enclosures. This is hardly an elegant solution. This is Apple externalizing costs.

Sounds like you are a one-man shop. This Pro, I think, is designed more for studio/agency type pros. People who work in network; shared environments. This is how Apple got their feedback. They probably surveyed a lot of "pro-shops" and this is how 90% of them work.

The duties of archiving and bluray backups are usually relegated to older,lesser machines in the inventory like mac minis and iMacs. An external bluray cost less than $100 and it can be shared across 60 machines. Sounds more advantageous to me in "my workflow". My portable BD-R cost me $40 from Frys on sale.

And for a multi-station, agency workflow, the move to external storage is better all the way around. If you were an editor working on a 20GB file, you'd work on an external RAID and make your edits. You unplug the tbolt cable and give the drive to your colorists to color grade. The whole transaction and hand over takes less than a minute to unmount and unplug and remount on the colorist machine. Same thing for backups. You hand the data to an archivists.

Having everything on the internal drive means you have to copy over the network a large 20GB file in my editor-colorist example above. That is a lot of wasted time moving files around for collaboration. Storing it external is betteer for multi-users.

And in an agency workflow, keeping a smaller drive for the workstation is ideal. The entire Adobe CS and Final Cut install only takes up 40GB. YOu want the smaller drive for easier provisioning, cloning, and imaging. If the workstation you are working on dies, you move to the next one and you are up and running. Having 3-4 internal drives in a tower is counter-productive. But I guess that is how a lot of one-man shops work.

 

[twoodcc]

my only concern is it looks like it will only have 1 processor and only 4 ram slots, vs 2 processors and 8 ram slots.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

BD is not good for shuttling.
It is good for distribution and archiving.

Is it really good for archiving? I've had so many CD-R and DVD-R discs go bad over the years, it's not even funny (the dye used in the discs oxidizes and breaks down and then the disc becomes unreadable). Compare that to my Quantum SCSI hard drives in my Amiga 3000 that are now 23 years old and they are still fully operational with all the data intact. I'd sooner archive to external hard drives than an optical format at this point. I only burn discs to use in the car or someone's disc player.

 

[NT1440]

Is it really good for archiving? I've had so many CD-R and DVD-R discs go bad over the years, it's not even funny (the dye used in the discs oxidizes and breaks down and then the disc becomes unreadable). Compare that to my Quantum SCSI hard drives in my Amiga 3000 that are now 23 years old and they are still fully operational with all the data intact. I'd sooner archive to external hard drives than an optical format at this point. I only burn discs to use in the car or someone's disc player.

If you're going to use a disc, might as well use an MDisc because they don't degrade in UV like regular optical media.

 

[Irishman]

Honestly, what pro is going to buy a machine with ZERO NuBus slots?

NuBus! It's funny cause I'm old enough to remember it!

 

[capuzino]

my only concern is it looks like it will only have 1 processor and only 4 ram slots, vs 2 processors and 8 ram slots.

But the 1 processor will be many times faster (at tops) than the last generation
Mac Pro's 2 processors. Also, this system supports faster RAM and bigger ram sticks. So I'd still say no reason to worry.

 

[Umbongo]

But the 1 processor will be many times faster (at tops) than the last generation
Mac Pro's 2 processors. Also, this system supports faster RAM and bigger ram sticks. So I'd still say no reason to worry.

A 12-core Ivy Bridge processor at 2.7GHz is going to be pretty similar to the existing 12-core 3.06GHz Mac Pro in CPU performance - unless the cooling design is going to let it turbo boost up a lot. The wording on the Mac Pro page supports this I think, not really talking about CPU performance.

If they offer a single 4-core model then that will see massive improvements as they are 3.7GHz plus the Ivy Bridge improvements, but for 12 cores at to a degree 6 cores there aren't going to be big improvements.

 

[toke lahti]

Is it really good for archiving?

Ask national archive.
First years optical disks had problems but since then they have been more reliable than hdd's.

 

[macboywonder]

I feel your pain ArtMooney.

I am an avid (adjective, not the software) video editor and use Final Cut, Motion, FCPX, and Adobe apps.

One word: HACKINTOSH

I was, am, and will always be a big Apple fan. However, due to the limitations and lack of features, I opted to build a world class Hackintosh. For less than $1500, I've built a BEAST of a computer with the capabilities to do updates in realtime like a regular Mac. With the money I saved, I even built a 1 to 7 DVD duplicator machine in the same case, making it a true video editing system.

I don't ever comment on threads like this, but I felt the need to after reading your situation. Good luck.

Look! It's the Mac Pro X! Just what everyone wanted - a smaller, lighter stationary computer that is only expandable via an expensive cable that no one supports.

We need tools, not shiny cases. I need expandability, not a table cluttered in expensive cables that don't plug into anything. I don't need a smaller, lighter stationary computer. I need more places to put hard drives, video cards and ram as I can afford it. I need a disk drive. Apple is killing me. For what I needed, wanted and waited patiently for so long for - I got not one single thing I can use. I understand trying to be innovative if they've found a new way to make an old tool better - but changing things we've all come to know, love and need into something useless and unrecognizable just for the sake of change is exasperating (see; Final Cut X). Sure, it's pretty. It'll look great under a table every time I accidentally kick it or get my foot tangled up in one of the 20 cables laying in a rat's nest next to it. Looking forward to the clutter of hard drive caddies, a RedRocket card enclosure, the bare LG BluRay writer tethered via a USB cable, the adapter array full of FireWire ports to access cameras and drives containing legacy projects…oh, wait, never mind. It also just occurred to me - how am I going to mount that thing in a rack??? How is any of this going to attach to shared storage when I'm gonna have to wait 2 years for a 3rd party to invent an impossibly expensive Fibre channel adapter? Seriously, does anyone there actually use these products when they're designing them or listen to customers - or do they look at the suggestion cards and do the opposite???

Not that any of this really matters because without a working version of Final Cut, I don't need one anyway. So, thanks for saving me a bunch of money I guess? 3 - 4K monitors. For who??? The high school students using FCPX won't be able to afford it, nor will they need that much real-estate to edit YouTube videos.

God help Apple this is a disaster. They do know 'Pro' is short for 'professional' right?

I'm so depressed. I waited for 5 years to get nothing I can use or wanted.

 

[Mago]

I can't stop to laugh...

1st proSumer is not An PRO User, seems there some proSumer arguing against the new mac pro...

Facts :

Cd/dvd: an real pro only use such antiques accidentally. Most REAL PRO use external removable hdd to move his data, a few move data using an pro pendrive Dvd/bd/cd are things only used when exceptions need it, so no deal not having an cd/DVD drive.

Pci-e expansion? This is an mac or an pc? Pci-e adapters for Mac are very specific and Rare, and are Pci-e 1x or 4x, for such very rare exception (and mean some very specific interfaces used in research and special telecommunication) still can use an external thunderbolt to Pci-e box, stoll no deal very rare exception.

Lack of...

Internal storage? What's is Pci-e SSD? Apple sure will offer 1tb ssd with mac pro. But via thunderbolt there are lots of practical (most bus powered) solutions from 256gb to 24TB, 1tb ssd internal is enough for the system and every app now and in the feasible future, and data is good on an external removable unit you can store in a safe or just grown as you need.

Actually the mac pro is the most expandable pc on the market no other systems let's you have 6 tb2 port that can daisy chain upto 36 x 24TB storage unit... That's insane.

 

[twoodcc]

But the 1 processor will be many times faster (at tops) than the last generation
Mac Pro's 2 processors. Also, this system supports faster RAM and bigger ram sticks. So I'd still say no reason to worry.

depending on the application, more cores are sometimes better than fewer faster cores. and more ram is always better, with more ram slots allowing more ram than fewer ram slots. at&t has terrible commercials about this concept

 

[AidenShaw]

Lack of...

Internal storage? What's is Pci-e SSD? Apple sure will offer 1tb ssd with mac pro. But via thunderbolt there are lots of practical (most bus powered) solutions from 256gb to 24TB, 1tb ssd internal is enough for the system and every app now and in the feasible future, and data is good on an external removable unit you can store in a safe or just grown as you need.

Oooh - just imagine the Apple tax on a 1 TB PCIe SSD....

And please list all of these bus-powered T-Bolt external disks....

Actually the mac pro is the most expandable pc on the market no other systems let's you have 6 tb2 port that can daisy chain upto 36 x 24TB storage unit... That's insane.

Apple offers a total of 96 Gbps of expansion (and at this point, we don't know if it is over-subscribed, so the actual deliverable bandwidth might be half of that).

Dell and HP offer more than 512 Gbps of expansion via PCIe V3 slots. More than 5 times the Mac Tube Pro.

Those 36*24 TB have to share the bandwidth that 18 SSDs could saturate - in the best possible case.

And your comment is insane, because a single GbE port or FC HBA could access billions of petabytes of NAS or SAN storage.

 

[Squishy Tia]

my only concern is it looks like it will only have 1 processor and only 4 ram slots, vs 2 processors and 8 ram slots.

I can't stop to laugh...

1st proSumer is not An PRO User, seems there some proSumer arguing against the new mac pro...

Facts :

Cd/dvd: an real pro only use such antiques accidentally. Most REAL PRO use external removable hdd to move his data, a few move data using an pro pendrive Dvd/bd/cd are things only used when exceptions need it, so no deal not having an cd/DVD drive.

Pci-e expansion? This is an mac or an pc? Pci-e adapters for Mac are very specific and Rare, and are Pci-e 1x or 4x, for such very rare exception (and mean some very specific interfaces used in research and special telecommunication) still can use an external thunderbolt to Pci-e box, stoll no deal very rare exception.

Lack of...

Internal storage? What's is Pci-e SSD? Apple sure will offer 1tb ssd with mac pro. But via thunderbolt there are lots of practical (most bus powered) solutions from 256gb to 24TB, 1tb ssd internal is enough for the system and every app now and in the feasible future, and data is good on an external removable unit you can store in a safe or just grown as you need.

Actually the mac pro is the most expandable pc on the market no other systems let's you have 6 tb2 port that can daisy chain upto 36 x 24TB storage unit... That's insane.

@twoodcc: Even though it's a single CPU design, it can accomodate up to twelve cores. At least that's what Apple says. I'm still trying to find the exact CPU they would be using since none of the E5 series on Intel's site shows that many cores, and none of the Xeons in that family are of very high clock rates except one at 3.3 GHz.

@Mago: That "expandability" Apple's touting? There's a flaw in the design, if they are using Falcon Ridge and still running the controller at PCIe 2.0 x4, which is the stated speed for Thunderbolt 2's connection interface with the motherboard.

You see there are six ports on the Mac Pro. That means three controllers with a pair of ports per controller. But if you do the math, PCIe 2.0 x4 is 2 GB/sec, 500 MB/sec less than what is touted as the per device speed of 20 Gb/sec (2.5 GB/sec). So a single controller can't even feed one of its two ports at maximum speed. Even without overhead it can't reach the 2.5 GB/sec rated for each port.

Will that work for SSDs in a RAID, if it's a two or three SSD RAID 0, yes. Anything more and you've just saturated the bus after overhead. This in itself isn't really a bad mark for the design since only a relatively small fraction of the targeted user base will be running multi-SSD RAIDs from these ports.

The real issue is that the design can't even put out enough throughput to meet Apple's claims in its advertisement/promo for the Mac Pro. Three controllers at PCIe 2.0 x4 link width combines for a staggeringly low 6 GB/sec maximum before overhead. Assuming you're running six separate devices at the same time that consume lots of bandwidth, the very best you'll get out of each is TB1's throughput due to the PCIe 2.0 interface.

And PCIe 2.0 x4, being 2 GB/sec or 16 Gb/sec, just barely squeaks by on the 4K display requirement of 15.5Gb/sec, and that assumes no overhead.

Those TB2 ports everybody keeps saying is the be all and end all of expandability - they're woefully underpowered in terms of bandwidth. If it were PCIe 3.0 x4 you could get full speed out of at least one of the two ports while still providing full TB1 speed to the second port on the controller. Not so with PCIe 2.0 x4. Even at PCIe 3.0 x4 each controller would get only 4GB/sec, less than the 5 GB/sec that two ports supposedly could use in total per TB2 specifications.

So does everybody here still think this design is all it's cracked up to be? I was sure hoping for pie in the sky for performance on all fronts for what was put into this Unobtainium Cigar Tube. There's what appears to be non-replaceable GPUs, and no telling whether or not there will be a general purpose GPU as a BTO option, TB2 ports that barely offer better than TB1 speeds and can't even fulfill TB2 speeds on any single port (unless Apple has a PCIe 3.0 controller nobody's heard of yet), no eSATA to speak of (really?), and a CPU family that tops out at 3.3 Ghz, and that's for the quad-core version based on Intel's own ARK site.

It's a "pro" machine if you are using it simply for raw compute power. For anything else, I would venture to say it's laughable and Apple's going to lose a ton of customers with the design limitations inherent to this machine's conventions.

 

[GermanyChris]

But the 1 processor will be many times faster (at tops) than the last generation
Mac Pro's 2 processors. Also, this system supports faster RAM and bigger ram sticks. So I'd still say no reason to worry.

It'll be a bit faster than the old 12 core not many times.

The system supports 1866 vs 1333 OK and that will get me what in real life. (Anand did a test)

You could likely put 32GB DIMM's in the old MP but OSX is 96GB or 128 GB depending on your flavor so there was no real point now with half the slots you're stuck . 32GB DIMM's run $700 to $1000 each, now if I need to be near the OSX RAM ceiling (4@32=128) in need to spend $2800 to $4000 to do it with the old I could hit it spending less than $1200 (8@16GB=128).

 

[Squishy Tia]

Aaaaaaaaand Geekbench has their first set of benchmarks out for the new Mac Pro.

Can we say "trashtastic"?

Oh, and here's something to celebrate our new overlord the Dark Helmet Thermal Core Heatsink with.

Also, even though the benchmarks lack FirePro tests, MacVidCards has determined that the 7970 cards = FirePro 9000, only a lot freaking cheaper.

I'm really hoping some of the design flaws get tweaked and overcome, but for anything outside OpenCL work, this doesn't exactly bode well for the new Mac Pro.

 

[xbjllb]

Aaaaaaaaand Geekbench has their first set of benchmarks out for the new Mac Pro.

Wow, they got it that much higher with one card instead of two?

Not bad at all.

 

[Squishy Tia]

Wow, they got it that much higher with one card instead of two?

Not bad at all.

By one card do you mean CPU? There is only a single CPU socket in there. And they couldn't even complete the tests due to what they believe is thermal issues.

Sad thing is, most of the really high marks on the Geekbench scores require special software to make use of those instructions. Real world performance isn't going to be anywhere near as stellar, especially on multicore systems if throttling keeps occuring due to heat.

 

[barkmonster]

I can't stop to laugh...

1st proSumer is not An PRO User, seems there some proSumer arguing against the new mac pro...

Facts :

Cd/dvd: an real pro only use such antiques accidentally. Most REAL PRO use external removable hdd to move his data, a few move data using an pro pendrive Dvd/bd/cd are things only used when exceptions need it, so no deal not having an cd/DVD drive.

Pci-e expansion? This is an mac or an pc? Pci-e adapters for Mac are very specific and Rare, and are Pci-e 1x or 4x, for such very rare exception (and mean some very specific interfaces used in research and special telecommunication) still can use an external thunderbolt to Pci-e box, stoll no deal very rare exception.

Lack of...

Internal storage? What's is Pci-e SSD? Apple sure will offer 1tb ssd with mac pro. But via thunderbolt there are lots of practical (most bus powered) solutions from 256gb to 24TB, 1tb ssd internal is enough for the system and every app now and in the feasible future, and data is good on an external removable unit you can store in a safe or just grown as you need.

Actually the mac pro is the most expandable pc on the market no other systems let's you have 6 tb2 port that can daisy chain upto 36 x 24TB storage unit... That's insane.

What you stated are clearly NOT FACTS, they're opinions and that means ignoring how wrong they are is perfectly acceptable but I thought I'd respond anyway.

1) Cd/dvd: - ANYONE uses HDDs for backup, memory sticks for moving DVD sized amounts of data around and occassionally uses a DVD for installing software (that still comes on DVD) or burning CDs/DVD. It's not an exclusive realm of the self proclaimed "Pro".

2) Pci-e expansion: - Not only do Macs support the standard uses for PCIe expansion (Additional I/O, audio/video cards etc...), but they use them with cross-plaform cards that are so freely available you'd be living with your head in the sand if you claimed otherwise. As for Thunderbolt to PCIe systems, not only do a lot of PCIe cards need Thunderbolt specific drivers to actually function via Thunderbolt but the expansion systems range from over £400 for 1 PCIe to Thunderbolt enclosure that doesn't support either a powerfeed or full-length cards to nearly £900 for one that does and supports 3 cards. This is not a benefit, this is not a "feature" to be bragging about, this is not a "rare" circumstance.

Lack of...

3) Internal storage: - You don't know what PCIe SSD is? That's a joke and explains why you think there'll be a 1Tb SSD included. As for your genius Thunderbolt fills every gap solution, the cost of even a basic Thunderbolt enclosure is 4 or 5 times the cost of the drive it includes and unless it's one of the RAID systems with SSDs, Firewire 800 or NAS enclosures offer similar performance for far less money. As for bus powered, that's one of the flaws of Thunderbolt for storage connections, it would need a power-feed because unlike USB/Firewire, it doesn't carry enough to power the enclosures.

4) Actually the mac pro is the most expandable pc on the market no other systems let's you have 6 tb2 port that can daisy chain upto 36 x 24TB storage unit... That's insane?

THAT is insane. Do you know how much that would cost compared with simply adding internal drives on SATA 6Gb/s interfaces?

 

[Blue Fox]

The old Mac Pro was a brilliant, useful design that got the job done for professionals. This new abortion is a useless paperweight. Sure, it's great if I need to cut wedding videos or GoPro video - but I promise you you will never see one in a legit post house. Ever.

Because most post houses are already using PC's anyway. If I ever managed to get my design and photography off the ground into my own business, I may consider a brand new Mac Pro. But I ususally opt for the (equally) non-internally upgradable 27" iMac, and for all of my video editing, photography, and design work, it's done fantastically well.

 

[linuxcooldude]

Is it really good for archiving? I've had so many CD-R and DVD-R discs go bad over the years, it's not even funny (the dye used in the discs oxidizes and breaks down and then the disc becomes unreadable). Compare that to my Quantum SCSI hard drives in my Amiga 3000 that are now 23 years old and they are still fully operational with all the data intact. I'd sooner archive to external hard drives than an optical format at this point. I only burn discs to use in the car or someone's disc player.

Using a new M-Disk technology you can permanently ( 1000 Years ) archive data on DVD & Blu-ray disks.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

Using a new M-Disk technology you can permanently ( 1000 Years ) archive data on DVD & Blu-ray disks.

That sounds interesting (I just looked at their site), but exactly how do they know it will last "up to" 1000 years? I've seen car wax commercials that claim they put the car through 500 car washes and it still beads, but a car wash isn't the same thing as actual wear through TIME. I'm not saying it won't, but I'm always leery any time I see the words "up to" and claims that are far beyond any practical measurements (i.e. 1000 years is a LONG time and can involve a lot of variables that aren't so easy to predict). But not using dyes, etc. is a better sounding method. The next problem, of course, is that a 3TB drive takes up a lot of discs, even blu-rays (i.e. 3TB / 50GB = 60 Discs!). 200GB BD discs to be available in the future will get that down to 15 discs, but it's still a PITA for large amounts of archiving, IMO.

 

[linuxcooldude]

That sounds interesting (I just looked at their site), but exactly how do they know it will last "up to" 1000 years?

Actually the limiting factor is the polycarbonate plastic the recording media is housed in. But the actual recording medium is expected to last longer then that. I've talked to Barry Lunt, the inventor & co-founder of the company. He said their working on long lasting data retention on other storage like SSD Drives.

It also was tested by the Department of Defense for use in the military.

 

[GermanyChris]

Actually the limiting factor is the polycarbonate plastic the recording media is housed in. But the actual recording medium is expected to last longer then that. I've talked to Barry Lunt, the inventor & co-founder of the company. He said their working on long lasting data retention on other storage like SSD Drives.

It also was tested by the Department of Defense for use in the military.

people here will never but into optical media because Apple says it's not needed.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

people here will never but into optical media because Apple says it's not needed.

Odd how I have a nice external Memorex USB3 BD/DVD/CD drive connected to my Mac Mini. It even plays commercial BD discs just fine with VLC in real time.