- Dec 7, 2017
I don't think Apple cares a thing about dual gpu's becoming a thing.Apple bet heavily on Dual GPUs gaining traction, and they lost big time on that one.
No. It's not dead.If the trashintosh was sold as a "pro" mini, then it would've been all right. There were plenty of PCIe cards for the classic mac pro. Many professionals built custom desks/racks/consoles for the cMP, and the new trashintosh wouldn't accommodate their professional audio and video cards, nor could their custom builds. Add to that that the thing literally cooked the electronics, and there was no user upgrade path meant the death of the trashintosh.
so back in 2009/10 apple had intels road map(id gess 2-4c main stream and 8c top end at under 4,000 a unit), AMD/Nvidia's road map as well as there vision of what apps will be in the next 10 years.Apple bet heavily on Dual GPUs gaining traction, and they lost big time on that one.
Still on sale doesnt mean it's good. I have to assume that they need to buy some time in order to make a new Mac Pro. Thermal design was the biggest issue and I dont doubt about it. Who would dare to make a workstation with a single fan to cool both CPU and GPU at once beside Apple? Technically it is a failure since a lot of people proved that Mac Pro 2013 overheat a lot because of poor cooling system.I don't think Apple cares a thing about dual gpu's becoming a thing.
The 2013 Mac Pro has 2 GPU's for a number of reasons. But, I don't think those reasons include gaining traction into whatever thing your thinking about.
No. It's not dead.
It's still on sale.
But, I would add that once the 2019 or next Mac Pro is finally released and it's not a box with PCIe slots like the cMP, then, I would concede to the opinion that the 2013 Mac Pro was a kind of failure.
MacRumor articles and blog posts do not = Apple admitted Mac Pro 2013 was a mess. Apple never admitted anything like that. People like to misconstrue what Apple actually suggested to serve their own preconceptions about what they want the Mac Pro to be. This sub-forum in particular is populated by the least representative Apple users on MacRumors by a long shot.
But the result was a mess lol. Being not able to update Mac Pro 2013 for 5~6 years? Really?MacRumor articles and blog posts do not = Apple admitted Mac Pro 2013 was a mess. Apple never admitted anything like that. People like to misconstrue what Apple actually suggested to serve their own preconceptions about what they want the Mac Pro to be. This sub-forum in particular is populated by the least representative Apple users on MacRumors by a long shot.
@orph touches on a number of issues about the miss-calculation on the GPUs, but more importantly, the larger changing market landscape and Apple's change of focus to iOS devices.
BTW, the 2013 Mac Pro is a great computer for what it is.
Totally agree that them not updating the computer for 5+ years is inexcusable no matter how it's dissected. But that doesn't have anything to do with the 2013 MP as a computer in itself.But the result was a mess lol. Being not able to update Mac Pro 2013 for 5~6 years? Really?
Why don't we talk about this in technical aspects?Totally agree that them not updating the computer for 5+ years is inexcusable no matter how it's dissected. But that doesn't have anything to do with the 2013 MP as a computer in itself.
(and FTR, I could bash Apple all day long for a long list of my grievances... I'm generally game for chatting about Apple, but it's just pointless trying to have a rational discussion around here... @deconstruct60 is one of the very few posters around here who really knows what he's talking about, and all his posts are completely ignored... none of the typical crowd wants to engage discussion with him because they're all in make-believe land while he's talking reality)
The 2013 Mac Pro wasn't/isn't a failure.
If, it was and is, then why would Apple still offer and sell it?
It just didn't get updated through all this time because of a number of things, one of which is an appropriate GPU for it.
And, then an appropriate GPU did finally arrive; aka Vega.
And, then the public announcement by Apple blaming their design of the 2013 Mac Pro as to why it hasn't been updated.
And, then they put a Vega GPU in an iMac; added "Pro" to it; sealed it; delivered it; done; and done.
And, made it very, very, very, very expensive!
And, oh, yeah, made it space gray!
Same thing with Vega20 and Vega16!
But, Apple didn't even bother making it a standard GPU and made it a BTO only. And, also made the option of Vega even more limited by only offering it to the highest tier priced MBP, making the price BTO option even higher....
It seems like Apple is purposely adding extra hoops and obstacle courses to the Vega line up for some reason....
And, if one reads between the lines from the public Apple apology of pointing the fingers unto themselves regarding the 2013 Mac Pro's thermal design; and the jumping through extra hoops of Apple products with this Vega GPU... and keeping in mind--the between the lines thing... it makes one wonder if Apple...
Why don't we talk about this in technical aspects?
1. Who would dare to put only one fan to cool 1 CPU and 2 GPU at once especially for a workstation? This thermal design already represents how Mac Pro 2013 is messed up. As a result, the average temperature is much higher than other computers with big air or water cooler. Both iMac Pro and iMac also have a design flaw because there is only one cooler to cool both GPU and CPU at once. At least iMac series are all in one computer so there is no other choice. In real life, Mac Pro 2013 had serious thermal issues. Mine crashed several times while I edit 4k videos.
2. Not upgradable? Gosh. You have to disassemble Mac Pro to upgrade CPU. GPU is totally impossible. Only 4 RAM slots. Only one internal storage. No PCIe slots. What should I expect from Mac Pro 2013? It wouldn't be a problem if it was Mac mini.
3. Apple designed Mac Pro 2013 for smaller size. Why do we need a compact workstation while workstation is meant for performance and stability? The truth is, Mac Pro 2013 died a lot. There is a guy who used 10 Mac Pro 2013 to edit a movie called Deadpool and yet all of them were crashed. https://create.pro/blog/deadpool-ed...re-pro-process-burned-through-10-mac-pro-61s/ Why do they have to rotate Mac Pro 2013 to edit?
Yes, I've thoroughly read through all of that at the time and since. You missed the part where you misconstrue what was said to fit your own agenda.
It's been talked about endlessly in thousands of posts. No more reason to "talk". You've listed the things important to you. That's not the Mac Pro Apple is interested in making. This has been explained ad nausea regarding Apple culture, Apple markets, Apple products, but again, there's just a bunch of people here who live in fantasy land. If you want the Mac Pro to be a HP Z800 workstation, buy a Z800 workstation. The chances Apple ever makes that type of computer again is fairly close to zilch.Why don't we talk about this in technical aspects?