yes and for a 1 lane PCIe card they are fine -- but that's not the same as a 16 lane PCIe card… especially for v3
Last edited:
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Allowed Developers to Test a Prerelease Mac Pro Hidden Inside a Metal Box
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
yes and for a 1 lane PCIe card they are fine -- but that's not the same as a 16 lane PCIe card… especially for v3
Is there any video of this lunchtime session?
I hope the Foundry have 40% again when the port to OSX is for sale.
I hope the Foundry have 40% again when the port to OSX is for sale.
Well, then, by all means, please beat a dead horse!
I agree that the new Mac Pro looks good without the cover, and I am sure someone will create a clear cover that will replace the black one.
Video is dead. So far it's just a sneak preview, it makes sense that it will be released around the world when it finally comes out.
I absolutely agree. I also think that Apple could win over some hackintosh builders/users that way. Something with a GTX 660 Ti combined with an i5-3750K for the cheaper model and a GTX 670 or 680 along with an i7-3770K for the more expensive one would certainly look appealing to many people. The price must not be set too high though as many of the potential customers can build a hackintosh...
So how do you actually use this thing?
I'm looking at the purchase of a major computational workhorse in the near future. I've been holding off for a while, hoping that the new pro would be announced and that I could plug it in easily to the Mac heavy environment that I have going already. Now that it has been introduced, with all of its "inovation", I'm not exactly sure how it's supposed to work for my intended purpose.
I need something that can run software that reconstructs 3D movies from image stacks, constructs objects within the movies and tracks them over time (Bitplane, for those interested in that sort of thing). In a past life, I ran this with great success on a suped up Mac pro. From what I've read, the new version should run the software nicely (I assume better than the old pro), but there definitely wont be enough internal storage, which means that I'm relying on external TB2 drives, which no-one currently makes. Any upgrades to memory, video card (will I need this) etc will similarly depend on TB2 external versions, which don't exist.
Am I reading this right? To be actually functional, I'm going to have to wait additional months for third parties to start building the externals. I was really hoping that this was going to be something I could rack mount and connect some OWC drives to, but they don't seem to be in a rush to jump onto TB any time soon. I can't wait too much longer, so I may have to switch to a PC for this.
I'm looking at the purchase of a major computational workhorse in the near future. I've been holding off for a while, hoping that the new pro would be announced and that I could plug it in easily to the Mac heavy environment that I have going already. Now that it has been introduced, with all of its "inovation", I'm not exactly sure how it's supposed to work for my intended purpose.
I need something that can run software that reconstructs 3D movies from image stacks, constructs objects within the movies and tracks them over time (Bitplane, for those interested in that sort of thing). In a past life, I ran this with great success on a suped up Mac pro. From what I've read, the new version should run the software nicely (I assume better than the old pro), but there definitely wont be enough internal storage, which means that I'm relying on external TB2 drives, which no-one currently makes. Any upgrades to memory, video card (will I need this) etc will similarly depend on TB2 external versions, which don't exist.
Am I reading this right? To be actually functional, I'm going to have to wait additional months for third parties to start building the externals. I was really hoping that this was going to be something I could rack mount and connect some OWC drives to, but they don't seem to be in a rush to jump onto TB any time soon. I can't wait too much longer, so I may have to switch to a PC for this.
What sort of storage are you using now? If you need SSD speeds, TB1 should be fast enough for the fastest external single drives. If you're just using hard drives, USB3 is fast enough (and fast enough for some SSD). You'll only run into issues with drive speeds if you are running something like a fast raid or the really fast SSD on a PCIe card.
For memory, it has four slots (up to 128 gigs, very expensive but 64 isn't too pricey these days). If you need more than these two GPU, you might be out of luck. What video cards are you running now?
Aside from peripherals, you're going to have to wait a few months anyway since these machines aren't released yet, neither are the xeons or TB2 interfaces it uses.
Thanks for the replies. I'm slow coming back to this.
I didn't notice that the memory slots were accessible, though it would have been really dumb if they weren't. 64G would probably work. I'm quite sure that the new Pro will be very capable of running the software, and as the old Mac pro video card worked, surely this will too. My frustration is with the relativel lack of good peripherals to plug into it. You're right, TB1 or USB3 would both be fast enough, although (I don't think) that the USB can be daisy chained, limiting the number of things that clan be pugged into it (better not use a USB keyboard and mouse - this would horrify the apple designers). There are just so few TB external drives out there right now that are reasonable in price. I already have multiple rack-mounted drives, and the strange shape of this new Computation Tube won't exactly make it easy to incorporate. Until TB drives and other peripherals become more accessible, I'm not sure that it's a viable option. The pro market is willing to pay big dollars, but we expect some bang for the buck. This will be very fast, but the cost required to buy things to plug into it to make it functional will push it out of the window of viability, I think.
I didn't notice that the memory slots were accessible, though it would have been really dumb if they weren't. 64G would probably work. I'm quite sure that the new Pro will be very capable of running the software, and as the old Mac pro video card worked, surely this will too. My frustration is with the relativel lack of good peripherals to plug into it. You're right, TB1 or USB3 would both be fast enough, although (I don't think) that the USB can be daisy chained, limiting the number of things that clan be pugged into it (better not use a USB keyboard and mouse - this would horrify the apple designers). There are just so few TB external drives out there right now that are reasonable in price. I already have multiple rack-mounted drives, and the strange shape of this new Computation Tube won't exactly make it easy to incorporate. Until TB drives and other peripherals become more accessible, I'm not sure that it's a viable option. The pro market is willing to pay big dollars, but we expect some bang for the buck. This will be very fast, but the cost required to buy things to plug into it to make it functional will push it out of the window of viability, I think.
What about an "Aggregate bandwidth external device"?
I mean could an external box be driven by 2-4 TB ports together to
shrink the bottleneck?And in terms of Raw power
a dual FIRE PRO 9000 (?) System such as this Mac how well
it performs in terms of 3dMark benchmarks ?
Thank you so much.
I mean could an external box be driven by 2-4 TB ports together to
shrink the bottleneck?And in terms of Raw power
a dual FIRE PRO 9000 (?) System such as this Mac how well
it performs in terms of 3dMark benchmarks ?
Thank you so much.
I would note that the AMD FirePro W's support graphics and OpenCL simultaneously, which is something that the Nvidia Kseries doesn't, and now that Adobe has announced that it will be part of the OpenCL group, that will be a big deal to a great many users.
Perhaps 4K, OpenCL and TB 2 will be the ticket to this new Mac Pro's wide adoption and new TB products from 3rd parties. Definitely would work for me.
Apple could still make a single GPU version with fewer T-Bolt ports, for a much more attractive price.
But wait, there is no graphics card on this machine! The GPUs are built-in, and not changeable.
That is my major complaint with it. Sure, the specs sound impressive, but I don't like closed desktop machines. I want drive bays and a swappable graphics card. I don't care that much about the size of the box. If I wanted a closed system I'd buy a MBP or an iMac. I buy Mac pros precisely because I want the ability to add to it, upgrade it, etc.
They loose if someone like me ditches the eco system and I'm not likely to be the only one...
I idiotically want one to run a bunch of minecraft servers...
I know this is probably not the best tool for the job.
If I won the lottery I would use a second one as daily machine, on which I would bootcamp for some windows gaming. (I know this probably not the best tool for that job either)
I wonder how many watts an hour this thing will use?
My 2010 mac mini server is at 80% running two minecraft servers (one heavily modded). I reckon I could server a whole bunch of different flavour Minecraft servers with the new Pro.
I know this is probably not the best tool for the job.
If I won the lottery I would use a second one as daily machine, on which I would bootcamp for some windows gaming. (I know this probably not the best tool for that job either)
I wonder how many watts an hour this thing will use?
My 2010 mac mini server is at 80% running two minecraft servers (one heavily modded). I reckon I could server a whole bunch of different flavour Minecraft servers with the new Pro.