2010/2012 cMPs with certain graphics cards will run macOS 10.14 Mojave

[XNorth]

It is very interesting Apple is releasing software for a Mac that doesn't work on it as originally built and requires hardware that hasn't been sold by them. I agree that they are cooking up something special.

The likely rationale for Apple to support 2010/12 cMPs with Metal-only Mojave is to keep pro users holding on to the cMP happy until the new mMP arrives. It wouldn’t make sense for Apple to cut off complete support for pros in the interim.

This could mean Apple will finally optimize new AMD GPUs for the cMP. Maybe I should have kept that Vega FE.

 

[h9826790]

It wouldn’t make sense for Apple to cut off complete support for pros in the interim.

The 6,1 is there, and it's supported natively. So, I don't think this argument is valid.

Also, in Apple's point of view, the iMac Pro is also for pros.

 

[MoerBoer]

Much much better IMO. However, the RX560 also not necessary has proper driver support.

Oh I didn't know that. I remember reading the RX 570 / 580 show correctly in about this Mac on 10.13.4 and up. I just assumed the RX 560 would also work.

 

[Razzerman]

The likely rationale for Apple to support 2010/12 cMPs with Metal-only Mojave is to keep pro users holding on to the cMP happy until the new mMP arrives. It wouldn’t make sense for Apple to cut off complete support for pros in the interim.

That's pretty much what I thought. Totally unlike apple to consider users of older machines, but in this case, there doesn't seem to be a reason to other than keeping the cMP users sweet until the mMP is ready. Good news for a change

 

[XNorth]

The 6,1 is there, and it's supported natively. So, I don't think this argument is valid.

Also, in Apple's point of view, the iMac Pro is also for pros.

Many pros hated and skipped the 6,1 given its limitations. Same for iMac Pro.

Whether it’s for pro users or not, there’s a chance Apple will improve drivers for off the shelf AMD GPUs.

 

[thomasthegps]

I think the chances are actually a lot higher than that. I really can't see Apple issuing a recommendation for cMP users to buy a card that won't allow for FileVault, Recovery, etc. It's one thing for users to buy those cards on their own without Apple's blessing. But if Apple is actually going to recommend card(s) cMP 5,1 users to buy I think there is a strong chance they will figure out a way for those cards to be usable in the EFI environment.

I could be wrong of course, but their wording "recommended Metalcapable GPU" gives me hope. I just can't see Apple recommending something that provides for a neutered experience on their Pro-level desktop (or any of their devices really).

Recomended probably just means 7950 or GTX 680.

 

[h9826790]

Many pros hated and skipped the 6,1 given its limitations. Same for iMac Pro.

Whether it’s for pro users or not, there’s a chance Apple will improve drivers for off the shelf AMD GPUs.

I know, I have no interested in both 6,1 and iMac Pro either. But that's not necessary what Apple believe. If they have same mindset as us. We should have the 7,1 long time ago with the latest hardware, PCIe slots, and UEFI GPU support.

 

[thomasthegps]

It's time for Mac Pro users to create a petition demanding Apple to add an NVME and GOP driver to the firmware. Why should we be forced to abandon are working Mac Pros when all they need is a firmware that allows them to use modern GPUs and NVME storage.

 

[h9826790]

It's time for Mac Pro users to create a petition demanding Apple to add an NVME and GOP driver to the firmware. Why should we be forced to abandon are working Mac Pros when all they need is a firmware that allows them to use modern GPUs and NVME storage.

May be it's time to sue Apple. How can they demand a cMP that they never shipped to get proper support in 10.14

 

[DearthnVader]

It's time for Mac Pro users to create a petition demanding Apple to add an NVME and GOP driver to the firmware. Why should we be forced to abandon are working Mac Pros when all they need is a firmware that allows them to use modern GPUs and NVME storage.

Apple isn't going to cut there own throat, they want to sell you new HW, not have you get more use out of HW they sold you 8 years ago.

Of cource it would be nice.

 

[Razzerman]

Apple isn't going to cut there own throat, they want to sell you new HW, not have you get more use out of HW they sold you 8 years ago.

I think it's precisely because apple want to sell new hardware (in the form of the mMP) to the cMP users that they are allowing support for these older machines. Would there be any other reason for them to do so?

 

[XNorth]

Recomended probably just means 7950 or GTX 680.

Probably. Also keep in mind that Mojave will support NVMe and next gen GPU in the mMP. This could all tickle down to the 5,1 and eliminate/minimize the need for patches.

 

[thomasthegps]

Apple isn't going to cut there own throat, they want to sell you new HW, not have you get more use out of HW they sold you 8 years ago.

Of cource it would be nice.

Maybe a petition signed by many Mac Pro owners would motivate Apple to release a new firlware with what we want.

 

[weckart]

Maybe a petition signed by many Mac Pro owners would motivate Apple to release a new firlware with what we want.

That firmware will probably come with a MP 7,1 attached.

Petitions had better come with lots of $$$$$ if you want Apple to take notice.

 

[frou]

Probably. Also keep in mind that Mojave will support NVMe [...] in the mMP. This could all tickle down to the 5,1 and eliminate/minimize the need for patches.

Doesn't the iMac Pro and presumably mMP use an Apple ARM coprocessor as the disk controller? The crossover with ancient cMP chipset is probably minimal.

 

[XNorth]

Doesn't the iMac Pro and presumably mMP use an Apple ARM coprocessor as the disk controller? The crossover with ancient cMP chipset is probably minimal.

Likely. Assumption or hope is 10.14 will make any crossover possible with firmware and drivers. This makes sense if Apple intends Mojave as a bridge to allow/motivate/incentivize its base of loyal cMP users to migrate to the mMP. Would be a good marketing move.

 

[bsbeamer]

I think it's precisely because apple want to sell new hardware (in the form of the mMP) to the cMP users that they are allowing support for these older machines. Would there be any other reason for them to do so?

There is a vague "legal" argument based on the dates of some mid-2012 Mac Pro 5,1 machines sold. Extending that to the 2010 models requires almost no additional work since they are the same base machines (some are same/nearly the same stock configs). I'd like to believe this is a goodwill gesture to the Pro community, but there is probably something else behind it.

 

[frou]

Could someone with a GTX 680 running High Sierra please open System Information and share the value of:

Hardware > Graphics/Displays > GTX 680 > Metal

Specifically, the name of the "feature set"

 

[tsialex]

Could someone with a GTX 680 running High Sierra please open System Information and share the value of:

Hardware > Graphics/Displays > GTX 680 > Metal

Specifically, the name of the "feature set"

EVGA GeForce GTX 680 Mac Edition

Supported, feature set macOS GPUFamily1 v3

 

[frou]

EVGA GeForce GTX 680 Mac Edition

Supported, feature set macOS GPUFamily1 v3

Nice - thanks. AFAIK that is the highest possible value.

 

[PowerMac G4 MDD]

Hmm, that's actually bad for GT 120 owners. I keep a GT 120 on the side, in case I need boot screens. I suppose I'll first update to High Sierra and make sure my 5,1-flashed 4,1 goes through with its OS-related firmware update; then, I'll update to Mojave when it's released. I'd assume that Mojave would include that same firmware update, yet it cannot run on my Mac if the GT 120 is being used.

Heck, I don't remember if I can even successfully install OSX on my Mac Pro whilst running a non-flashed GPU. Well, maybe I can blindly select the installer—or, I could burn it to a DVD and have it spin up automatically during the process of booting the Mac. Alternatively, I could install from another Mac, to the Mac Pro's drive.

 

[h9826790]

Hmm, that's actually bad for GT 120 owners. I keep a GT 120 on the side, in case I need boot screens. I suppose I'll first update to High Sierra and make sure my 5,1-flashed 4,1 goes through with its OS-related firmware update; then, I'll update to Mojave when it's released. I'd assume that Mojave would include that same firmware update, yet it cannot run on my Mac if the GT 120 is being used.

Heck, I don't remember if I can even successfully install OSX on my Mac Pro whilst running a non-flashed GPU. Well, maybe I can blindly select the installer—or, I could burn it to a DVD and have it spin up automatically during the process of booting the Mac. Alternatively, I could install from another Mac, to the Mac Pro's drive.

I believe you make it too complicated. The GT120 EFI should still work, will still display, but may be just no acceleration for the OS UI. You can still upgrade the firmware with GT120 regardless the firmware is for 10.13 or 10.14. Also, you should able to install 10.14 with just the GT120 installed, unless the installer check for a METAL compatible GPU.

But even if METAL compatible GPU is required for installation. A GT120 + METAL supported GPU combo should still works like the current setup. But just don't expect to use the GT120 for anything once boot to desktop (but it should still display).

 

[bsbeamer]

Maybe by the end of the week we'll have some clarity about METAL being a requirement or heavy suggestion for MacPro 2010/2012?

This latest report on Mojave and OpenCL/OpenGL has me concerned with professional video software on Mac moving forward. This will impact all of Adobe's video software and probably DaVinci Resolve (and many others). Metal performance on Adobe is terrible compared to CUDA or OpenCL.

https://www.macrumors.com/2018/06/05/apple-deprecates-opengl-opencl-gaming/

 

[deconstruct60]

I know, I have no interested in both 6,1 and iMac Pro either. But that's not necessary what Apple believe. If they have same mindset as us. We should have the 7,1 long time ago with the latest hardware, PCIe slots, and UEFI GPU support.

They don't have the exact same mindset (i.e., that probably would have never done the MP 2013 or iMac Pro in the first place), but the relatively open discussions they had in April 2017 and 2018 indicate that they do know there is a substantive set of folks who are in the "won't every buy" camp. Apple isn't likely going to 100% reverse course ( 100% only off the shelf parts and maximum Windows PC hardware compatibility ), but going back to something closer to the what the folks sitting on pre-2013 Mac Pros are sitting on matches what they have discussed so far (mainly what were some "painted into corner" restraints they'll avoid in next iteration. That doesn't mean there will be no Apple constraints. )

Apple isn't going to build a HP Z / Dell 7xxxx / Lenovo workstation clone box with slots. As long as UEFI is dragging along BIOS that isn't going to be super high on their priority list either.

 

[MisterAndrew]

Hmm, that's actually bad for GT 120 owners. I keep a GT 120 on the side, in case I need boot screens. I suppose I'll first update to High Sierra and make sure my 5,1-flashed 4,1 goes through with its OS-related firmware update; then, I'll update to Mojave when it's released. I'd assume that Mojave would include that same firmware update, yet it cannot run on my Mac if the GT 120 is being used.

Heck, I don't remember if I can even successfully install OSX on my Mac Pro whilst running a non-flashed GPU. Well, maybe I can blindly select the installer—or, I could burn it to a DVD and have it spin up automatically during the process of booting the Mac. Alternatively, I could install from another Mac, to the Mac Pro's drive.

Flashed GT 640 would be Mojave equivalent of GT 120.