Apple Building 2TB Solid State Drives for Next Mac Pro Release?

[cdpage]

A Mac pro? Finally!?!

What I would like to see are real OPTIONS.

there should be ONLY 1 model Mac Pro to choose from. not this good better best CRAP.

Select the one and only MAC PRO

Select Processor
Select RAM
Select HD 1/2/3/4
Select Graphics Card
Select Optical 1/2

DONE!

 

[milo]

Apple tried it and it failed... it was called the Cube

The cube was neither cheap nor did it have any open slots.

If anything, apple's did a reasonably priced tower (at one point they had PPC towers around $1500) and they sold quite well.

 

[deconstruct60]

What I would like to see are real OPTIONS.

there should be ONLY 1 model Mac Pro to choose from. not this good better best CRAP.

Select the one and only MAC PRO

Select Processor
Select RAM
Select HD 1/2/3/4
Select Graphics Card
Select Optical 1/2

DONE!

That is exactly how the "classic" MBP 15" is now. The options didn't increase. The "good" and "better" options were collapsed into one. What you could buy didn't really change. The array of standard configurations for purchase in the retail stores did.

Apple still sells far more Macs through 3rd parties and retail than through the BTO system at the Online store.

Besides that is largely how it is set up for the Mac Pro now. There are just three top level categories.

One CPU package ( config options )

Two CPU packages ( config options )

Pre-installed server software ( config options. )


Bluntly the "BTO" options are cleaner that way for the first two. The RAM configs are dependent upon the number of packages. They could build a page that dynamically adds and substractions the correct options but it is far simpler to just segment them. The two are segmented on price.

Very similar issue with the server. There are just options that folks targeting a server will select that deskside workstaiton users won't. Jamming all of that into one supersized complexity page doesn't make it any clearer.

 

[Mike Valmike]

Guys, this is probably why Apple bought that Israeli SSD engineering firm. I'm sure it will be a self-contained RAID-0-style cluster of smaller SSDs, like maybe eight 256GB SSDs. Given the market price trajectory of such a thing, if the new Mac Pro comes in October, I would expect a 2TB SSD BTO as described here to cost $1200 or so. It's not as far out of market reach as you guys are assuming.

 

[AidenShaw]

The benefits of ECC memory support, lower CPU temps, stability, symmetric multiprocessing, hot-swap, management, and ability to run multiple sockets is good for business use. Core i-Series are great for consumer devices, like the MacBook Pro or iMac.

All multi-core systems do symmetric multiprocessing (SMP) - what do you mean?

And multi-socket Xeons are NUMA systems, which can hurt performance. (e.g. an 8 core single socket (1x8) can beat an 8 core dual-socket (2x4) if all else is equal.)

 

[ssgbryan]

"Most People" only use the computer for reading email, the web and watching videos. For that the Macbook Air or iPad is what they should have.

The MP is best used by that rare person who is creating digital content of some type. Apple used to depend on these people for business but at some point they figured out there were a LOT more consumers than producers and they should sell to the larger market.

At some point a consumer type application will come along that really does need 12 cores and 2TB of fast storage. I guess is that this app will be a general purpose AI. It will likely take a LOT more than 12 cores and 2T but when the software is up to the task in 25 years, hopefully the required "kilo-core" processor will be affordable.

The poster was right today most consumers do NOT need even a MP to do the kinds of thinks that use a computer for. But later they might do different things with their computer. For example my computer will have a wireless camera speaker and microphone in every room and I will be able to do a hands free phone call and the sound will follow me around the house. I might ask my computer "Did you see where I put my car keys?" then the computer's voice says "on the table, under your backpack." Then As I leave I tell it "And if Jim calls tell him Yes I'll see him at 4:00 but if he wants to change the time or something forward him to my cell phone."

The above app might be "standard" for most people in 25 years and a good reason to justify those 1,000 core processors.

I don't think you understand the hobbyist 3d market.

The software is very inexpensive. And there are a lot of us. And an iMac simply isn't going to cut it.

Poser 9/2012 runs $250/499 - $125/250 or so for an upgrade (or a sale, SmithMicro puts Poser on sale on a regular basis - it will use every core & every meg of memory.

Vue starts at $100 and the modules are $40 to $100 each, and same thing - will use every core & every scrap of memory.

 

[deconstruct60]

I can't agree, for a pro single user, the Bluray can be a good solution for archive. I don't think hard drives (NAS, SAS...) are a long term storage that have to be powered on...

There is nothing that changes archival functionality of a blue ray drive if it is external versus internal.

The question of optical drives is whether a large majority of the users who buy the system are going to use it or not. Not whether the could use it, but actual general usage patterns.

In large numbers, folks back-up to HDDs (either local or remote or both). Not tape. Not ODDs.

Sneaker-net file transfers are easy to do on 8, 16, 32GB flash drives.

LTO is good solution but expensive for single pro user.

Again "inside and part of the standard default configuration sold to most" is the real issue. Not whether LTO is a good solution for some users.

The long term archive is a big problem of these days.....

ARCHIVE IS A BIG PROBLEM!

There isn't a "new" problem with archive. The issue is that archives need to be moved or at least integrity checked over time. Since the media will change over time the device size and shape can change over time. With a sufficiently fast external connector that variance of size and shape can be accomodated externally. Also externals can be used on multiple machines by just moving it from location to location.


[quote
Yes but i'm talking for low end SINGLE CPU not multiple with great performance/price [/quote]

ECC is more drive by the amount of RAM than the single or multiple CPU packages. The more RAM you have the more likely going to get an error. Just like more disks, increased risk. Double and triple digit GB of RAM make ECC a prudent move.

If data have value then it is worth protecting.

i have 15 workstations with i7 and other 15 with Xeon and i regret to have spend more money in Xeons workstations.

It is likely Apples to Oranges comparisons. The primary difference is not being driven by Xeon / RAM but by functionality and long term performance being tossed by the i7s. Mainstream design i7's have only x16 PCI-e v3.0 lanes. A modern Xeon E5 class has x40.

If workload only really requires a single PCI-e card and relatively low I/O then the i7 is a better fit. But that isn't where the Mac Pro class machines have been primarily targeted.

In Apple's product mix mini and iMacs are targted at single GPU card workloads.

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Xeon+E5-2630+@+2.30GHz

This is an extremely dubious comparison. If comparing single socket Xeon E5 versus i7 then should be selecting a E5 1600 offering. Not a E5 2600 one. That benchmark is just misdirection.


The i7's that are derived from the basic workstation design are the same price as the E5 1600's.

Apple will probably never going to sell a Mac Pro with just one 2600 in it. That is just more than kind of silly. You pay more for a 2600 series so that you can pair them. If pay for the functionality and do not pair they have raised the system price and thrown that functionality out the window temporarily. It just doesn't make any sense as system.

The config is sold by some ( HP , Dell ,etc) as some kind of "future proof" system where later can install a second CPU package to make it a complete system. Apple isn't going to sell something that is incomplete and half done.

 

[Inconsequential]

You wright about the CPU price more or less, but memory and motherboard aren't. Just a preference for the price/performance.

Almost every PC Workstation motherboard have RAID support...
Hot swap hard drive pretty easy to implement with good design (look at Xserve RAID look)

I think that is an opportunity to Apple repair what they have done to the pros with the end of XServe and other things..

The memory and motherboard aren't the same price, for us. For Apple who would buy in bulk the differences would be very, very small and therefore given it is a high-end workstation and all high-end workstations have ECC memory, Apple will keep it.

Personally I hope that the Mac Pro doesn't change too far from it's current form factor and doesn't integrate Thunderbolt onto the GPUs, because that would complicate up the aftermarket GPU swapping.

Either way my 2009 Mac Pro has lasted far longer than I originally intended, so I'm rather happy with the lack of a new Mac Pro

 

[deconstruct60]

All multi-core systems do symmetric multiprocessing (SMP) - what do you mean?

Most likely that the scale better on workloads that scale up.

And multi-socket Xeons are NUMA systems, which can hurt performance. (e.g. an 8 core single socket (1x8) can beat an 8 core dual-socket (2x4) if all else is equal.)

For single threaded constrained jobs yes. For contrived corner case memory loadings yes. ( all cores beating on a single limited range of memory). But for anything that actually engages 8 cores:

1. there is more memory bandwidth in the two package set up.
CPU packages don't just have x86 cores in them any more. Additionally packages bring more I/O. Twice as many memory controllers/channels. Twice as many PCI-e lanes as of the Xeon E5 class.

For those workloads. no it won't beat a single package set up. It will beat the crap out of a mainstream i7 with just two memory controllers.

2. Nevermind that there aren't any 8 core offerings in single package from Intel.

If trying to use E5 2600 as single packge offerings... LOL. Go ahead waste money. Wrong tool for the job.

Using the E5 1600 and 2600 in two slightly different configuration allows Apple to use most of the same core infrastructure for both variations. They get component buying scale and customer gets better price (or product at all). Apple isn't going to give on margins.

 

[ValSalva]

Apple DID NOT say there was a new Mac Pro coming in 2013, Tim Cook said they would have SOMETHING for Mac Pro users in 2013.

True. For all we know Apple will release a coffee mug that says "Pro User" and the Apple logo

 

[milo]

The question of optical drives is whether a large majority of the users who buy the system are going to use it or not.

Plenty of software still ships on disk. In the case of a laptop size and weight are major concerns. For a machine like the MP, it's going to be big no matter what, and an optical drive costs practically nothing (even a bluray writer). There is a good reason to leave it off other macs, but I can't really think of one for MP. At the very least they should make it an option or have a bay available for it.

 

[rainydays]

"Most People" only use the computer for reading email, the web and watching videos. For that the Macbook Air or iPad is what they should have.

The MP is best used by that rare person who is creating digital content of some type.

Yes, I pointed this out in my original reply. Mac Pro is for content creating professionals.

But given the possibility for people to document their lives in HD video and 24MP images nowdays, the demand for larger HDDs has gone up. But they certainly don't need a 2TB SSD.

 

[ApfelKuchen]

You can get an iMac with a 3TB Fusion Drive right now, so the notion that the rumored 2TB SSD drive for a Mac Pro is more likely a 2TB Fusion Drive seems silly. A 2TB SSD seems 100% logical. If your top of the line product hasn't had a serious refresh in years, you don't build something that barely passes the current mid-range product. Not if you want your deep-pockets clients to upgrade.

Configure multiple SSDs in a RAID array? Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks was a response to the shortcomings and economics of mechanical HDDs. SSDs (and solid-state memory as a whole) have their own failure modes, their own economics, and their own solutions. The reliability of solid-state memory is so much higher than that of disks that there seems little purpose to spending SSD prices to defend against data loss. When issues like seek times go away, so does the need to data stripe for improved performance.

Fast memory has to be treated differently than slow memory, and hardware, OS, and software will embrace that reality soon enough. When there's no need to emulate a hard disk, buh bye SSD. If you happen to have a substantial investment in RAID arrays? Upgrading those hard drives to SSDs may still make sense - probably the last time they'll have to be hot-swapped (like replacing an incandescent bulb with an LED).

That 2TB Fusion Drive? Yeah, you'll be able to get that, too, and somebody will use it as a backup solution.

 

[deconstruct60]

Plenty of software still ships on disk.

That is a misstatement of the issue. You have to point to software that exclusively ships on disk. That is rapidly tanking. There are non-comatose Adobe products that ship exclusively that way. Microsoft? Nope. Apple nope. VMWare Fusion comes with a DVD and USB drive.

Oracle which sells software that costs more than 2-3 Mac Pros completely dumped DVDs several years ago.

There is little to no incentive for smaller software house to put 3rd party middle men between them and the customers going the "must stock and inventory on retail shelves " DVD route. Adding more to the distribution complexity just increases costs. It doesn't add to the software vendors margins.

The Mac App store is the fastest growing segment of Mac software being sold at this point.

There are some corner cases to boot-and-repair-disk tools. But even those are dying off. I'm sure you can find a relatively small subset who are either highly Windows oriented or ship with humungous data libraries. Those are more hold outs than a significant representation of software being installed.

For a machine like the MP, it's going to be big no matter what, and an optical drive costs practically nothing (even a bluray writer). There is a good reason to leave it off other macs, but I can't really think of one for MP. At the very least they should make it an option or have a bay available for it.

What is going to more useful for more Mac Pro users.

1 ODD bay

or
2 2.5" bays

This isn't necessarily a push to make the Mac Pro substantially smaller. It is an opportunity to put more stuff of what most folks do want inside the box. Re-purpose the space to more modern functionality than is removal for size reduction.

If the two ODDs were traded for being able to have four 3.5" and two 2.5" internal and more PCI-e card room most Mac Pro users would probably take that swap.

 

[i make movies]

For everyone bemoaning about the Blu-Ray/optical drives, stop. Just stop. If they keep optical drives, great. If they add blu-ray, great. If they drop optical drives all together, great. The beauty of a MacPro is you can take out the drive if you don't want it, or you can buy an external one for less than 100 bucks if it doesn't have it. At this point, who cares?

For the price, yes, 2TB SSD will be expensive, but not as expensive as you might think. 3.5" is much larger than a 2.5" drive. 2.5" drive is a touch smaller than my iphone 4s and a 3.5" drive is about the size of a 350-400 page paperback book. Two 2.5" drives (maybe 3 drives, with some clever Tetris-ing) can easily fit inside a 3.5" enclosure.

 

[jmggs]

There is nothing that changes archival functionality of a blue ray drive if it is external versus internal.

It's about a workstation with full functionality...

It is likely Apples to Oranges comparisons. The primary difference is not being driven by Xeon / RAM but by functionality and long term performance being tossed by the i7s. Mainstream design i7's have only x16 PCI-e v3.0 lanes. A modern Xeon E5 class has x40.

If workload only really requires a single PCI-e card and relatively low I/O then the i7 is a better fit. But that isn't where the Mac Pro class machines have been primarily targeted.

In Apple's product mix mini and iMacs are targted at single GPU card workloads.

And comparing a imac and mac mini with a workstation its like Apples to Oranges comparisons. i can have a better workstation with same money not using Xeon for normal video editing with a proper Quadro card and good speed storage..

This is an extremely dubious comparison. If comparing single socket Xeon E5 versus i7 then should be selecting a E5 1600 offering. Not a E5 2600 one. That benchmark is just misdirection.


The i7's that are derived from the basic workstation design are the same price as the E5 1600's.

Apple will probably never going to sell a Mac Pro with just one 2600 in it. That is just more than kind of silly. You pay more for a 2600 series so that you can pair them. If pay for the functionality and do not pair they have raised the system price and thrown that functionality out the window temporarily. It just doesn't make any sense as system.

The config is sold by some ( HP , Dell ,etc) as some kind of "future proof" system where later can install a second CPU package to make it a complete system. Apple isn't going to sell something that is incomplete and half done.

They already sell a single CPU machine and i'm talking in a i7 CPU not Xeon and single socket! And talking about performance/price. Nothing more!

 

[mrhick01]

Gee whiz. Another story on the possible Mac Pro to keep folks holding onto that last bit of hope. It's unfortunate that folks NEEDING a Mac Pro get strung along because apple doesn't have the balls to come out and say for sure if it's coming or not. Why the little quip stories. People's livelihoods are on the line. I feel sorry for those hanging on praying for a Mac Pro to keep their business afloat. I know it sucks switching as I did it in 2010. Was a Mac nut, always telling folks Mac is the best platform. I gave up after 10 years of loyalty. As much as I doubt apple will make another one, I hope they do so those who need one can keep their life style going. Good luck.

For those that need a Mac Pro, what's stopping anybody from buying one?

If you need one for production, just buy the current model. If you're using it to make money, then get it and make your money.

If you're looking for the latest and greatest, when it comes out, sell your old one and buy the new one. What's the big deal?

 

[obiwan]

I think Mac Pros have really been overpriced for a while now, which is why most people tend to go for iMacs and MacBook Pros, unless they absolutely need the extra expansion.

Maybe by putting 2TB SSDs in, it will be Apple's way of justifying the high price tag.

 

[Rocketman]

Here's a better link for Xeon 2013 processor plans and details.

http://wccftech.com/search/xeon+2013/

Summary:

Intel’s high-end server platform “Brickland” would make its debut this year with the arrival of 22nm Ivy Bridge-EX processors. The Brickland platform would span over three generations of CPUs including Ivy Bridge-EX, Haswell EX and Broadwell-EX.

Ivy Bridge-EX – First Intel CPU To Enable 15 Cores

The Ivy Bridge-EX would be the high-end server offering by Intel based on its 22nm Ivy Bridge architecture using the highly efficient Tri-gate transistors technology. Ofcourse, being efficient isn’t the primary role of these CPUs, they also have to be marginally faster than older generations and to achieve this goal, the Ivy Bridge-EX would sport upto 15 cores and 30 MB of L3 cache. The top end Westmere-EX parts were only limited to 10 Cores on the flagship part but with Ivy Bridge-EX, server and workstation users would get the power of 15 high performing cores at their end.

Read more: http://wccftech.com/search/xeon+2013/#ixzz2MhcHw000

Besides that, note this:

http://wccftech.com/intel-delivers-architecture-discovery-intel-xeon-phi-coprocessor/

Rocketman

 

[milo]

You have to point to software that exclusively ships on disk.

Sure. Plenty of audio software. Just look at Spectrasonics, East West, and Native Instruments. Plus Motu and Steinberg. Not to mention there's plenty of software that's available as a download now but people still have the installers on disk (look at Logic audio - it's on the app store now but plenty of people bought it when it came on disk).

ship with humungous data libraries.

Bingo.

What is going to more useful for more Mac Pro users.

1 ODD bay

or
2 2.5" bays

3 A bay that can take either of those two.

And I'd like to see them include adapters for two SSDs for all drive bays. I do agree that most users don't need two optical bays any more, one would be fine.

For those that need a Mac Pro, what's stopping anybody from buying one?

The common sense urge to not get ripped off?

 

[barkmonster]

For those that need a Mac Pro, what's stopping anybody from buying one?

If you need one for production, just buy the current model. If you're using it to make money, then get it and make your money.

If you're looking for the latest and greatest, when it comes out, sell your old one and buy the new one. What's the big deal?

It's dated, underpowered and over-priced compared with alternatives, some of which Apple themselves sell for a fraction of the price if you only need the CPU power, not the expansion abilities. A lot of people would sooner wait or worse, jump to another platform and unless you've not been on here since last year, the Mac Pro isn't even available for purchase in it's current form in certain countries anymore

 

[MattInOz]

Would be too soon for this to be a Fusion of Flash/NAND SSD and a Slab Holographic SSD?

That would be cool and a great way to launch such a Holographic drive.

 

[Mike Valmike]

Configure multiple SSDs in a RAID array? Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks was a response to the shortcomings and economics of mechanical HDDs. SSDs (and solid-state memory as a whole) have their own failure modes, their own economics, and their own solutions. The reliability of solid-state memory is so much higher than that of disks that there seems little purpose to spending SSD prices to defend against data loss. When issues like seek times go away, so does the need to data stripe for improved performance.

I'm guessing this is in response to my post, even though you didn't quote me. I'm not saying it would be a RAID-as-we-know-it, but that the SSD itself would be a bunch of smaller SSDs with a drive controller that makes them recognized as a single drive, in a similar manner to what RAIDs do know (or more accurately a JBOD single volume). We already know Apple can ship a 768GB SSD on a stick. Why would they have an entire 3.5" drive enclosure to house an SSD only three times that size? They wouldn't. It would be to house a bunch of quarter-TB blocks of silicon. It's a cheaper way to accomplish the same thing, with distributed failure points, better thermal control, much lower bill of materials, and using known technology.

Heck, they kind of do this already: the 768GB stick is just three 256GB chips on a stick. (shrug)

 

[deconstruct60]

Sure. Plenty of audio software. Just look at Spectrasonics, East West, and Native Instruments. Plus Motu and Steinberg.

For expensive software packages a USB drive is a marginal increase in packaging costs. Some products in this class want you to have USB dongle anyway. The dongle can be large enough to hold a license key and the software. At this point it is starting to be hard to find a USB Thumb drive that is as small capacity as the nominal DVD (~4GB ).

I'm sure there are some low volume, "we ain't going to change" software vendors. They aren't going to drive future system designs.

If Apple had bought into Blu-ray optical storage there might be some traction along the the ODD solution dimension. These kinds of vendors could ship bigger product on fewer disks. That is dead in the water for anyone that is an OS X vendor though.

Not to mention there's plenty of software that's available as a download now but people still have the installers on disk (look at Logic audio - it's on the app store now but plenty of people bought it when it came on disk).

Either use some other machine in the portfolio with DVD to create a disk image or create one before trade in the Mac Pro.

Old disks aren't a show stopper. That may mean keeping around old machines but new ones there is much less leverage. driving forward while looking in the rear view mirror isn't work so good after a while.

Bingo

but note this is not the software. It is large data libraries that need to transported. There are other mechanisms for doing that through snail-mail and sneaker-net than just OODs.

If very large and increasing capacity is the primary factor, then USB Thumb drive has advantages.

3 A bay that can take either of those two.

I'm talking about increasing the number of read/write drives inside the Mac Pro. Not by jury-rigging them into 5.25" that are the wrong size/shape but by actually configuring support for more.

And I'd like to see them include adapters for two SSDs for all drive bays. I do agree that most users don't need two optical bays any more, one would be fine.

One is extremely likely gone.

Open question if Apple would want to move 2 or more of the 3.5" out of there current position to add more forward looking functionality (e.g, embedded GPU , VRAM and associated cooling as part of a Thunderbolt's DisplayPort subsystem). If those two get into a space budget allocation discussion/debate, ODD would likely loose.

----------

Here's a better link for Xeon 2013 processor plans and details.

http://wccftech.com/search/xeon+2013/

Summary:

Intel’s high-end server platform “Brickland” would make its debut this year with the arrival of 22nm Ivy Bridge-EX processors. The Brickland platform would span over three generations of CPUs including Ivy Bridge-EX, Haswell EX and Broadwell-EX.

Xeon -EX has jack squat to do with Mac Pros. Apple is never going to use those in an Apple Product.

Xeon -EP ( Xeon E5 1600 and 2660 ) series yes.

This other stuff is just noise in the context of Apple's move and the Mac Pro.

 

[deconstruct60]

It's about a workstation with full functionality...

A workstation with no built-in monitor is fully functional right?

And comparing a imac and mac mini with a workstation its like Apples to Oranges comparisons.

I'm not comparing an iMac and mini to workstations. Folks with lack of I/O needs are going downmarket in Workstations. At some point down market those are really just gussied up regular PC boxes. Going down market is heading toward iMacs and minis.

They aren't perfect replacements but there is also not a relatively huge market gap here either.

i can have a better workstation with same money not using Xeon for normal video editing with a proper Quadro card and good speed storage..

It isn't the Xeon that is making the difference in price. So labeling is a Xeon problem is not clarifying the issue.

They already sell a single CPU machine and i'm talking in a i7 CPU not Xeon and single socket! And talking about performance/price. Nothing more!

You have to get the performance correct before you can talk about performance/price ratios.

The chart you linked up showed at Xeon E5 2630 versus others (including at top end peformance numbers from a Core i7 3930K ). That is purely driving off into the swamp. Probably on purpose.


If actually trying to do a comparison it would be a chart with a i7 3930K and a Xeon E5 1650 on it.

3930K $583 per tray
http://ark.intel.com/products/series/63700

E5 1650 $583 per tray

http://ark.intel.com/products/series/63197

You also aren't going to find non overclocked performance numbers all that different. The price peformance is about the same.

If there is a difference in overall system price it is not the "Xeon". And frankly there would only be a relatively minor difference in RAM costs. The only drift there would be if went for higher double digit RAM sizes... which as I said increases need for ECC. There is a risk trade-off being added to the equation.