Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by cohen777, Apr 18, 2017.
good article from mac360.com
I'll wait until it flies to call it a Phoenix. Nobody, probably not even anyone at Apple, knows what the mMP will be. From that article: "What’s coming in the future, we don’t know". How can you crow that it's a phoenix when it might be a dodo?
If Apple doesn't come up with a new Mac Pro that has the power and flexibility of the cMP tower - it will be dead on arrival. If it doesn't accept standard off-the-shelf PCIe graphics cards, it will be dead on arrival. (The MP6,1 D300/D500/D700 fiasco will mean that Apple will have a very hard time convincing pros to buy a system with single-source proprietary graphics.)
If it doesn't support CUDA, it will be dead on arrival - especially since OpenCL is now dead.
(Come on Apple - get rid of your nonstandard bastard EFI boot and use the UEFI standard that everyone else uses. EFI was deprecated in 2005.)
I guess I should give up on Alti-Vec at this point, as well.
people from Phoenix are Phoenicians
--- Post Merged, Apr 18, 2017 ---
heh, as far as i'm concerned, they're both dead.. (cuda & openCL)
i'm pretty sure the capabilities i was hoping to get from openCL (or CUDA) are just not going to come from there.
(the capability being real-time raytracing and/or photoreal rendering of 3D models *)..
i'm now thinking these capabilities are going to be born out of VR/AR technologies.
i'm not saying GPGPU itself is dead.. (and for all i know, this will be a very important factor with VR?)..
but i'm saying they're no longer something i'm interested in as a problem solver for my particular needs/wants.. better things on the horizon i'm thinking.
*edit- another way of expressing this ability to a wider audience would be something like:
an animator could simply move a character on screen in real time (this is already possible).. while they are doing that, they could basically screen-record their display and that's the final product.. no more stories of "i heard disney-movie part IV took 2 years to render omg"
--- Post Merged, Apr 18, 2017 ---
Do you want to meet up for a glass of wine at the GPUtech conference in early May?
There may be some VRWorks announcements that will interest you.
i like wine.. i like California.. i like you too..
but i don't like GPUs that much so i'm going to have to pass
Too bad - by 9 May the ATI fans will have to shift from touting the non-existent Vega against the GP100/GP102 to touting the non-existent Vega against the non-existent Volta GVxxx.
Unless we're surprised by Volta shipping in May.
haha. sounds fun.
Sure hope so! If it can essentially be a high-end workstation-class PC, but with macOS, then that would be SO incredible! (And obviously, being more beautiful below my desk than a PC). Seriously, video professionals such as myself just need a tower with PCIe slots, expandable internal storage, and user-upgradeable components. It's as simple as that!
Phoenix they better not macgyver some POS like the NMP is. Now with they can do it in away to have full size pci-e cards with an TB loopback system.
Good? It sets some expectations that really [sic don't] have a firm grounding.
1. Apple said nothing about 2018. They said not 2017, but that isn't necessarily a tag of 2018. ( Yes there would be a tons of even more pissed off folks if they slide through 2018. )
2. This isn't the first "die and reborn' experience. From 2010 to 2013 the Mac Pro went into a long comatose state. It was withdrawn from EU markets in early 2013 due to having a rather old, obsolete design constraint. I doubt Apple planned in 2010-2011 to be in that context if Mac Pro's were a major contributor to the projected Mac market.
3. With respect to modularity with an external display the current Mac mini is just as modular as the current Mac Pro. ( that display modularity was the context used in Apple's discussion). The implied premise that they will simply just bring back a relatively slightly modified version of the old enclosure is highly questionable. The Phoenix implies the return on the same bird; a regeneration. There is nothing but quicksand to support the "old case, reborn" premise in what Apple outlined in that round table.
4. "There was no way to add different GPUs or upgrade CPUs. " That isn't true. No way to trivially do a CPU upgrade with you normal trusty screwdriver? Yes. However, "no way" (i.e., impossible ) isn't true. There are/were turnkey services. There was no blockage in the design that barred Xeon E5 v3 or v4 (other than needed a new logic boards for new socket and PCH chipset). Nothing in Apple's commentary about the problems they faced said anything about that in the slightest. Nor are they particularly 100% blocked on the GPU class they started out with. They said couldn't fit a different class of GPUs, but blocked on same class ? Nothing in the commentary there either.
It is more a "form over function" driver from the user base than Apple. Standard PCI-e card form is a form ( not function) argument. It is not the function of the PCI-e data transmission connection nor the function of the GPU itself. It is picking a rigid form.
5. The article paints the Cube being withdrawn driven clearly by a sales failure. In Apple's commentary on the market for the current Mac Pro they said they didn't meet as many as they wanted to but that were some users that it worked for. The fact they didn't pulling after two years means that it was far closer to "mixed signals" than it was a very clear no by the whole targeted market. The equivalency with the "Cube" is not a tight fit at all.
Yes, there are a sizable number of people who have been stomping their feet in the "no" camp all along. The unsupported assumption is whether they are enough to be a viable market by themselves. Getting 100% of what they are asking for ( return of old case) probably isn't going to happen. There is a decent chance for a single, secondary GPU slot that can optionally hold a standard form card. But Apple selling what pragmatically would be a 'bare bones" like box where replace all of the major parts, that is unlikely.
Another evolutionarily iteration on design is far more likely than a regeneration of an old design. Technically, that isn't a Phoenix.