Possible Upcoming Mac Pro Reference Discovered in OS X El Capitan

[LordVic]

Sure I understand that... but 95% of the freelance ones I've ever used in companies only ever had 1 hard drive installed and it was the stock 7200rpm spinner! Most were not remotely set up right at all.

The only people that really filled them are the enthusiasts or single workstation owners. But of course everyone will have their own opinions and needs... but external for me is a way more adaptable system... I do however agree they should have 2 internal slots for the super fast SSD internally...

There is always this of course..
https://eshop.macsales.com/shop/SSD/OWC/Aura-for-Mac-Pro/

But it looks like we are going to have a fundamental shift in storage soon. RAM speed long term storage is coming and it's look like it will be cheap and potentially with HUUUUGE sizes.

Yeha, I'm not fundamentally against external expansion as the options here, and I do think that the Mac Pro could be a powerhouse for those who can take advantage of it's internals. It's just the Apple's "its our way or we don't care about you" mentality that has sprung up regarding their PC business over the last, 5ish years.

its like using soldered memory in a desktop computer (iMac's and Mac Minis) with absolutely no technical reason for it. Sure, makes sense in a laptop where you're looking for extreme portability and make sacrifices, But in desktop, non mobile?

Or using ULV laptop parts in desktops where battery drain and heat is a significantly less concern.

I think there absolutely could be a place in Apple's lineup for both the cheese grater computer tower and the new Mac Pro.

except that the Cheese grater PC, or the upgradable PC at all, is not in Apple's corporate roadmap due to financial incentives instead of practical ones. it has been painfully clear that Apple wants you to throw out (trade in) your previous computers and buy new ones every 2-3 years and not hold onto them for longer periods of time.

I wouldn't go as far as to say it's "planned obsolescence". But it's definitely a hinky practice that I find questionable.

 

[prowlmedia]

Are you not missing any CUDA gpu stuff? Those 3D applications use CUDA and OpenCL right? (if i am wrong, let me know)

Not really. The only Cuda only application is the 3D elements in After effects, which I don't use. I use Cinema 4D and the plug in for After effects.

GPU rendering is actually pretty limited. You have to know what you can or can't do from the outset and it involves a lot of compromises and cheats. But I'd just build a eGPU render farm in windows if I ever needed one. Nothing wrong with windows really - just don't want to be using it from my general work OS.

 

[prowlmedia]

Yeha, I'm not fundamentally against external expansion as the options here, and I do think that the Mac Pro could be a powerhouse for those who can take advantage of it's internals. It's just the Apple's "its our way or we don't care about you" mentality that has sprung up regarding their PC business over the last, 5ish years.

its like using soldered memory in a desktop computer (iMac's and Mac Minis) with absolutely no technical reason for it. Sure, makes sense in a laptop where you're looking for extreme portability and make sacrifices, But in desktop, non mobile?

Or using ULV laptop parts in desktops where battery drain and heat is a significantly less concern.

I think there absolutely could be a place in Apple's lineup for both the cheese grater computer tower and the new Mac Pro.

except that the Cheese grater PC, or the upgradable PC at all, is not in Apple's corporate roadmap due to financial incentives instead of practical ones. it has been painfully clear that Apple wants you to throw out (trade in) your previous computers and buy new ones every 2-3 years and not hold onto them for longer periods of time.

I wouldn't go as far as to say it's "planned obsolescence". But it's definitely a hinky practice that I find questionable.

It is planned obsolesce for sure... but you have to remember that Apple are all about the experience and they produce the hardware and the software, so are ultimately responsible when it goes wrong. Which is FAR FAR less than any windows machine... because the drivers and configurations are finite they can build for their 12 current configs and go back happily and support for the last 6-8 years.

Dell and HP don't support anything after 3 years really... For one thing parts might sudden stop being made! My old Dell GPU failed after 2 years and they couldn't give me an identical one... I got an better one, but then we are into Tech Driver territory. I may know how to do that stuff but 75% of people don't... nor care how a machine works. Just that it works.

We on this site are Geeks by Nature.... Most Artists I work with really wouln't know how to install some RAM or dare even open a machine up.

Planned Obsolescence is a good thing in a lot of ways.. It allows you to keep current and not chasing your Driver tail all day or caring about the crap under the hood and lets you get on with your work safe in the knowledge when there is an OS update it's not going suddenly all stop working. My mac pro has never crashed out. Apps do for sure.... but it's never in 6 years just pinged out... my windows 10 build machine - 8 weeks old has done this about 3-4 times. I think due to crappy Asus Motherboard drivers... but y'know it's windows... could just be doing it for no reason at all

 

[LordVic]

Its absolutely though one of the YMMV things, I do agree with you on the "chasing drivers" situation. For geeks like us, it's not a problem, but when you get that call from your father at 7am because he upgraded windows and for some reason no longer can print, you start to get the understanding of how it works.

However, anecdotally, I have had OSx crap out on me. In fact, I've probably had my OSx install on my MBA crash and freeze more frequently than Windows 8 did on the same hardware.

Ran amazingly on Mountain Lion. Mavericks was absolutely horrible. Yosemite got better, but I'm finding a lot more beach balls again on El Capitan.

Could be time to retire it though. it's a 2011 MBA. the screen is busted and I'm using it as an HTPC on my big screen. I don't need another laptop, so If i were to replace it, I'd want a Small computer, similar to the Mini, but the price point for the hardware is not worth it. Especially in canadian prices which were raised 30% this year. $599 base price is a LOT for the Mini. Especially that once tax is added in, ti's a $675 (base) computer. To get into the 8gb ram and SSD model, I'm looking at 1089 (1,230.57).

 

[Roykor]

Not really. The only Cuda only application is the 3D elements in After effects, which I don't use. I use Cinema 4D and the plug in for After effects.

GPU rendering is actually pretty limited. You have to know what you can or can't do from the outset and it involves a lot of compromises and cheats. But I'd just build a eGPU render farm in windows if I ever needed one. Nothing wrong with windows really - just don't want to be using it from my general work OS.

I thought C4D is leaning a lot on CUDA in the live render window. I am sticking my nose into C4D lately (still learning the basic basics )

 

[Roykor]

Dell and HP don't support anything after 3 years really... For one thing parts might sudden stop being made! My old Dell GPU failed after 2 years and they couldn't give me an identical one... I got an better one, but then we are into Tech Driver territory. I may know how to do that stuff but 75% of people don't... nor care how a machine works. Just that it works.

We on this site are Geeks by Nature.... Most Artists I work with really wouln't know how to install some RAM or dare even open a machine up.

U know too that there are a lot of users on Windows which are doing fine. And there are a lot of users here with problems with there macs too with parts that might sudden stop working. If you search you will find problems with the aftersales to with Apple. The benefits that PC haves over Macs is that you can buy a new part and pick it up in hours. Not to be an ass, in the end, they are just print plates with chips on it, right?

Even an geek can install ram. Geeks know the way to youtube tutorials very good open, click, close. installed. If you can put on your pants by youself, you can install ram in a mac computer too. Specially macs are very easy

ps, does DELL ore HP do not have better warranty levels for there workstations?

 

[kwikdeth]

When in 2016? I doubt the new Mac Pros will ship until at least the beginning of next year.

Often major builders will get shipments of processors before the official launch date or the ship date.... Apple already probably has at least samples of them.

indeed and entirely possible. Apple has gotten their hands on pre-release CPUs for previous mac pros.im not sure when exactly they will be released (TMK they are late already) but they're definitely on the road map. Pretty sure TB3 will be on the Purleys which are still a few months out.

I know that Xeons and CPUs in general are a quagmire of code numbers and levels.. but there are already Xeons with thunder bolt 3 shipping - even mobile ones - ThinkPad P70 has a Xeon and TB3.

those are E3-based laptops, the E3 chips are basically i-Series CPUs with ECC memory support.
"These machines are the first equipped with the new Intel Xeon Processor E3-1500M v5 product family, for lightning-fast performance and enhanced reliability for critical workstation applications," Lenovo said in a statement.

m-series (used in new macbook): low power mobile chips
i-series: consumer cpus, max 4 cores, laptop & desktop variants
e3 series: mid-range workstations and servers. i-series with ECC support and frequently no integrated graphics (although some do have them), max 4 cores generally.
e5 series: high-end workstations and servers. more of everything. pci lanes, memory lanes, larger cache, core counts higher than 4, ability to use more than one CPU (2x00 series cpus)
e7 series: super-high end workstations, servers, and clusters. quad and octo-processor support (4x00 and 8x00 series CPUs), massive cache, massive cores.

 

[kwikdeth]

Yeah, the mini PCIe card supports USB 2.0 through the connector along with PCIe. It still is a port, just internal. I think the main reason is legacy input compatibility. The Bluetooth chip fakes a USB HID keyboard/mouse until it is properly initialized.

prior to the emergence of integrated wifi/bt chips, Apple's internal bluetooth was always on the USB bus.

 

[sudo1996]

If you check Geekbench, the 2009 Mac Pro still beats every Mac that isn't a Mac Pro in terms of multi-core 64-bit performance. That includes all the latest iMacs! That's what made me realize how lame those i7s are for workstation use. I knew Xeon had an advantage, but I didn't realize it was that big. No wonder they cost a fortune.

 

[sudo1996]

I have a bank of 5 "cheese grater" Mac Pros in the room next to me serving as a render farm. I'd love to be investing in new technology, but I also like that I can buy better technology off eBay cheap. I just bought two more cheese graters a few weeks ago. I know of another creative agency doing the same in my town. They stuff them with Nvidia cards for Octane GPU rendering. I use the CPUs at a purchase cost of $40 per Ghz. The current trash can Mac Pros run you over $200 per Ghz (cost/(cores*Ghz)). Also, you can't even get a machine as fast, in CPU terms, today from Apple as you could from Apple 5 years ago. So I bought a 5 year old Mac Pro off eBay for $1700 that outperforms the closest competing new Mac Pro which is slower and would cost you over $7000.

Wait a sec. You aren't measuring performance in GHz, are you? You have to benchmark them. The clock speed doesn't mean anything by itself.

I think Geekbench is a good measure of this: https://browser.primatelabs.com/mac-benchmarks
There's nothing that can outperform the 12-core 2013 Mac Pro here. Maybe if you load it up with newer CPUs.

 

[LordVic]

If you check Geekbench, the 2009 Mac Pro still beats every Mac that isn't a Mac Pro in terms of multi-core 64-bit performance. That includes all the latest iMacs! That's what made me realize how lame those i7s are for workstation use. I knew Xeon had an advantage, but I didn't realize it was that big. No wonder they cost a fortune.

That doesnt say much when the majority of Apple's lineup uses laptop components. Yes, Even their desktops, iMac's are using LV and ULV grade components.

I Don't think there's a single Mac computer anymore that uses any of intel's desktop grade part.

if the Mac pro wasn't the best performing computer in their lineup, there would be serious issues.

 

[sudo1996]

That doesnt say much when the majority of Apple's lineup uses laptop components. Yes, Even their desktops, iMac's are using LV and ULV grade components.

I Don't think there's a single Mac computer anymore that uses any of intel's desktop grade part.

if the Mac pro wasn't the best performing computer in their lineup, there would be serious issues.

You're referring to the GPU and disk. Geekbench tests CPU and RAM only. iMacs definitely have desktop-grade CPUs in them. I just checked on EveryMac.

Also, if you're going Mac-only, that's really all that matters. You're stuck with whatever Apple offers.

 

[LordVic]

You're referring to the GPU and disk, which are not tested by Geekbench. iMacs and Mac minis have desktop-grade CPUs in them. I just checked on EveryMac.

No, they absolutely do NOT have a desktop grade CPU in them.

The Mac Mini's ship with Intels' Dual Core Low Voltage CPUs.

Intel produces generally 3 levels of their "i" series CPU's.
A full Voltage desktop part. usually with the Wattage of 75-95w. except for the i3, all of these are quad core.
a Low Voltgae Mobile / Laptop part roughyl around 25w TDP
and an Ultra low Voltage Ultrabook / Ultra portable CPU roughly 15w TDP.

Apple uses a combination of the ULV CPU's and LV CPU's in almost every single Apple device.

Currently in the Mac Mini Lineup, you have the following CPU options:
Lowest: i5-4260U http://ark.intel.com/products/75030/Intel-Core-i5-4260U-Processor-3M-Cache-up-to-2_70-GHz?q=4260U
Next upgrade: 55=4278U http://ark.intel.com/products/83508/Intel-Core-i5-4278U-Processor-3M-Cache-up-to-3_10-GHz
Highest Option: i5-4308U (28w) http://ark.intel.com/products/83507/Intel-Core-i5-4308U-Processor-3M-Cache-up-to-3_30-GHz?q=4308U

All of these are ULV based CPU's. you can tell due to the product model number which includes the "U" (which i've bolded)

on the iMac, you only get desktop CPU's on the expensive models.
21.5 model MK452XX/A: i5-5675R http://ark.intel.com/products/87714
27 Model MK462XX/A and MK472XX/A: i5-6500 (the first actual Desktop CPU Apple has available)
27 Model MK482XX/A: i5-6600 http://ark.intel.com/products/88188 or i7-6700K http://ark.intel.com/products/88195/Intel-Core-i7-6700K-Processor-8M-Cache-up-to-4_20-GHz?q=6700K

and just for comparisons the Non retina versions:
21.5 MK142XX/A: i5-5250U http://ark.intel.com/products/84984
21.5 MK442XX/A: i5-5575R http://ark.intel.com/products/87714

In these cases. the R is intels marking for 5th gen mobile package CPU (it's not a LV CPU, but not a full desktop one, But contains the ugpraded graphic processor)
the K model in the i7 is an unlocked CPU.

edit: an interesting note if you look at the ARK pages, Intel's recommended prices actually make the ULV's more expensive than the standard CPUs'. Which leads to beg the question, WHYYYYYYY is Apple purposely using laptop grade components and paying more. for a desktop computer.

 

[dwarg]

Wait a sec. You aren't measuring performance in GHz, are you? You have to benchmark them. The clock speed doesn't mean anything by itself.

1. Yes there are a lot of other factors. 2. I wasn't looking at clock speed by itself, I said Price / (Ghz*Cores)
3. My benchmark of choice is Cinebench, as I use C4D for a living.

So yes, if I don't mind paying 5 times the price, I can get very good performance out of a modern "can't innovate my ass" trash can "Mac Pro." Or I can buy 4 of the top of the line old machines (trick them out with RAM and SSDs) and leave that trash can at the dump.

 

[navaira]

WHYYYYYYY is Apple purposely using laptop grade components and paying more. for a desktop computer.

I hate disappointing you but it's not Apple who pay more for the desktop computers.

 

[SSDGUY]

I just noticed today that the Macpro is not shown on the Mac features page. At the very bottom they include the Mac Mini in the Mac "family" shot, but no Mac Pro. It's still on the top nav area and has its own page, but I find it so odd that it's not included in the Mac promo page. It's like they introduced this new radical design (along with the statement "can't innovate, my ass.") and then just let it wither. Did the pro community offend Apple somehow? Why the passive/aggressive teasing and then silence delivered to those who got excited about this machine, along with the hope for an updated display to go with it? http://www.apple.com/mac/

 

[SSDGUY]

I just noticed today that the Macpro is not shown on the Mac features page. At the very bottom they include the Mac Mini in the Mac "family" shot, but no Mac Pro. It's still on the top nav area and has its own (very old) page, but I find it so odd that it's not included in the Mac promo page. It's like they introduced this new radical design (along with the statement "can't innovate, my ass.") and then just let it wither. Did the pro community offend Apple somehow? Why the passive/aggressive teasing and then silence delivered to those who got excited about this machine, along with the hope for an updated display to go with it? http://www.apple.com/mac/

 

[Xteec]

I just noticed today that the Macpro is not shown on the Mac features page. At the very bottom they include the Mac Mini in the Mac "family" shot, but no Mac Pro. It's still on the top nav area and has its own page, but I find it so odd that it's not included in the Mac promo page. It's like they introduced this new radical design (along with the statement "can't innovate, my ass.") and then just let it wither. Did the pro community offend Apple somehow? Why the passive/aggressive teasing and then silence delivered to those who got excited about this machine, along with the hope for an updated display to go with it? http://www.apple.com/mac/

Been like this for a while.

 

[Xteec]

Which leads to beg the question, WHYYYYYYY is Apple purposely using laptop grade components and paying more. for a desktop computer.

To make it slimmer, cooler and quieter. You assume the market is full of people who value what we nerds value. It's not. That market generally builds their own PCs. The market of people who want to tinker but also run OS X and also don't want to hackintosh is extremely small.

 

[kwikdeth]

WHYYYYYYY is Apple purposely using laptop grade components and paying more. for a desktop computer.

because its thinner!

 

[kwikdeth]

Wait a sec. You aren't measuring performance in GHz, are you? You have to benchmark them. The clock speed doesn't mean anything by itself.

I think Geekbench is a good measure of this: https://browser.primatelabs.com/mac-benchmarks
There's nothing that can outperform the 12-core 2013 Mac Pro here. Maybe if you load it up with newer CPUs.

whats funny there is that the "top performing" 12-core 2013 mac pro costs $7000 in the base configuration.
an upgraded tower mac, running X5690 (3.46ghz) cpus will keep even or possible even out-perform it in multi-core tests. You can buy X5690s off ebay for about $275 each. find a 2.26 mac pro on ebay, probably about $800, upgrade it with X5690s, total cost about $1350. so, you can have a machine that is as good or better in raw CPU performance, for about 1/6th the cost.

https://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/search?dir=desc&q=MacPro5,1+X5690&sort=multicore_score

 

[kwikdeth]

the real shame though is the current mac pro... if you look at GB results for dual E5s its just kind of sad. but, like somebody earlier said, this stuff isnt apple's core market. its kids and hipsters and old people who wanna look at pics of the grandkids. the days of apple making considerations for the tech-heads and power users are long gone. they are a consumer electronics business that just happens to have a solid base for their products thanks to their innovations in the PC business. there's nothing wrong with that and I wish them the best (and they do seem to be doing great considering their massive cash haul) but I cant help but feel a tinge of sadness looking at the state of things in 2015.

 

[SSDGUY]

the real shame though is the current mac pro... if you look at GB results for dual E5s its just kind of sad. but, like somebody earlier said, this stuff isnt apple's core market. its kids and hipsters and old people who wanna look at pics of the grandkids. the days of apple making considerations for the tech-heads and power users are long gone. they are a consumer electronics business that just happens to have a solid base for their products thanks to their innovations in the PC business. there's nothing wrong with that and I wish them the best (and they do seem to be doing great considering their massive cash haul) but I cant help but feel a tinge of sadness looking at the state of things in 2015.

Agreed. Too bad Apple couldn't throw the pro market some decent bones. They've got plenty of money to R&D that market to new heights and without blinking. The frustrating part is that they pretended to do this when the macpro came out.

 

[SSDGUY]

Agreed. Too bad Apple couldn't throw the pro market some decent bones. They've got plenty of money to R&D that market to new heights and without blinking. The frustrating part is that they pretended to do this when the new macpro came out.

 

[LordVic]

I hate disappointing you but it's not Apple who pay more for the desktop computers.

care to explain what you mean? The price I was takling about was Intel's price to manufacturers for bins of CPU's.

Intel generally charges more per ULV CPU than their desktop CPUs. I was not referring to the price of the desktop itself nor Apple's pricing model