Apple Confirms Mac Pro Is Dead, No Future Models Planned

[bigglow]

Last tower Mac I bought was a Quicksilver 2002 PowerMac G4 that we got upon release week in January 2002.

We never used the internal expansion slots.

Wish we bought a iMac 17" G4 instead.

If a Mac Studio equivalent (not PowerMac G4 Cube) was made available I'd be keen to buy that.

 

[deconstruct60]

Why not 2 ultras in this thing and keep it alive.

Two Ulras inside ( even if not tightly coupled) would make the sytsem more expensive. At some point more expensive means too few users buying it and that leads to the product being dropped. Apple probably has a minimal cut off on just how few systems they will make. The Mac Pro 2019 already had a 'low volume' tax on it. Even lower volume would be an even higher tax . At some point that becomes a death spiral.

From Mac Pro 2013 --> Mac Pro 2019 there was a 100% increase in the entry price levels. Apple lost some of the old classic userbase with that move. To move even higher is just even more losses.

 

[FilthyMuppetInnuendo]

...both will be upgradable. …pop them in the Mac Ultra body like a PCI card, and you can add multiple G1 cards if you wanted. Essentially making a modular upgradable Mac...

Interesting to see that the xMac fans aren’t all dead. Not sure why, given Apple’s entire history, but here’s one!

From Mac Pro 2013 --> Mac Pro 2019 there was a 100% increase in the entry price levels. Apple lost some of the old classic userbase with that move. To move even higher is just even more losses.

Yeah, the 2019 started where the 2009 stopped. That was upsetting.

 

[SDAVE]

Why not 2 ultras in this thing and keep it alive.

Cost: $30,000

The 2006-2010 Mac Pro's starting prices were $2,499 and were very upgradeable, that's what made it special.

The 2019 Mac Pro was $5,999 which was terrible. The base CPU was terrible and going to 12-28core cost an arm and a leg (makes sense since Intel was selling the 28core at $7,000 retail). The CPU was already dated by the time it came out.

 

[deconstruct60]

The Apple Silicon Mac Pro was $1,000 more than the Intel one.

Apples-to-Apples comparison it is (oK 'was' ) cheaper. The way to get to $1,000 cheaper Mac Pro 2019 is to make the SSD smaller than the MP 2023. Make the RAM smaller than the MP 2023. And make the GPU much lower performing than the MP 2023.
Once you even up the RAM, SSD, and GPU (minimal W5700 class)

MP 2019 tech specs
https://support.apple.com/en-us/docs/mac/508176
RAM Min 32GB
SSD 256GB ( probably good enough to run a hypervison... or just plain ignore if a T2 'hater'. The capacity here is deliberately low to help hit that lower entry price point. Four years later playing that 'game' would be even more dubious than it was in 2019. )
GPU Min 580X or late in life W5500X (even a W6600X crept substantive closer)
P-cores 8

MP 2023 tech specs
https://support.apple.com/en-us/111343
RAM Min 64 GB ( twice the amount)
SSD min 1 TB ( four times the amount . And Apple's $/TB prices was the same as 4 years previous. )
GPU min ... better than W5700X
P-cores 16 ( twice the amount along with some useful E cores thrown in. )

If you bought from Apple a MP 2019 16 core , 64 GB RAM (or better) , 1TB SSD , and a W5700 then you were not paying less than the MP 2013 entry price. What Apple stopped doing is selling 'empty container' configurations; not that the pricing for what they sold themselves changed.

 

[daneoni]

...and with that, the best looking display (Pro XDR) and the best looking computer tower (Mac Pro) are no more

 

[deconstruct60]

Is the M5 Ultra even confirmed? If not, then I wonder whether this announcement might foreshadow other changes in the Mac desktop line.

It is not 100% confirmed , but would be relatively 'easy' to do. If different between a Pro and Max is the size of the GPU chiplet attached. ... Just attach an incrementally 'bigger than Max" chiplet and call it "Ultra". It would necessariy have to be a complete doubling. Just 'bigger' than Max.

Perhaps, without the Ultra, we're going to see a new Mac Studio that switches to just the M5 Pro and Max, with the Mac mini being limited to just the M5 (like the current iMacs).

That doesn't make much sense. There is little rationale for cutting down the number of placements for the M5 Pro. It is already highly limited to just the MBP 14/16 (which only different in screen size). If the MBP stays on yearly updates then the M5 Pro is dead in 12 months without a Mini Pro deployment to boost SoC unit numbers.

If the M5 Pro got hot enough to blow out the new reduced Mini's thermals that would be a problem , but likely if matching the MBP 14" constraint zone then probably OK.

Apple can still make something bigger than a Max and still have the same line up. No Ultra ( more I/O , more GPU , more CPU cores ) for studio is similarly 'bad'. But the Ultra won't be able to be 'churned' on 12 month cycles. If a > 2 chiplet design it is going to be more expensive and have even less unit direct revenue sales.

 

[zephonic]

RIP Mac Pro, my 4,1>5,1 rocked along for a very solid 10+ years.


Inevitable, and I’m not as sad about it as I would have been in 2019.

 

[deconstruct60]

The only selling point of the Mac Pro is PCIe expansion slots. Those enable expandability and compatibility, but Apple Silicon and newer versions of macOS kills compatibility (older expansion cards drivers may not work on new OS), and that kills the only reason of keeping Mac Pro.

Thunderbolt still enables PCI-e card usages. Apple Silicon did not block PCI-e cards in general at all. What did happen is two things.

First, 'zombie' drivers that had no updates and no active development got dropped. Moving to 64-bit only did something very similar and that was on Intel macOS. ( probably a planned precursor to moving to macOS on Apple Silicon to make the move cleaner. ). Also pre Apple Silicon move was move from I/O Kit to DriverKit for third party drivers. Again for cards with active developers working on driver updates this was not a hard move. For 'dead in the water' cards this was a problem. Again that move was made on Intel . If Intel macOS had lasted a bit longer those drivers in that deprecated I/O Kit class would be gone also; independent of Apple Silicon.

Apple tends to kill off "old stuff". Carbon is dead. 32-bit apps are dead. Rosetta is dead (and Rosetta 2 is visibily ending). They are generally not fixated on the past for multiple decades.. There are PCI-e cards dying of fthe Thunderbolt expansion lists , but that is largely due to underinvestment in general on Mac drivers and not the Mac PRo. (**)

Second, Apple did chop off GPUs. Now for some, those are the only PCI-e cards that matter. that is as much about kicking Intel and AMD GPUs out of the overwhelming most of the Mac line up ( everything but Mac Pro) that left number much there. Throw on top Intel's demonstrative debacle of Arc driver roll out.... ( trying to do too much in a everything for everybody move) and making things more simplier for Apple and 3rd party developers was the better ecosystem move. The folks who viewed the Mac Pro primarily as a nice contrainer for their favorite GPU card are left out, but 'entire Mac ecosytem' view those are a fringe of the fringe set of users.

(**) There is a small set of PCI-e cards which have bandwidth requirements too high for THunderbolt. Apple has been lacking there even with the MP 2019 ( which showed up with PCI-e v3 just when most of the competition was rolling out PCI-e v4. And now is at v5 (while MP 2019 only nominally makes v4 ) ). The > 100GbE cards missing on Macs was also an Intel era thing. Apple Silicon brings now 'new' there in terms of trailing edge adoption of higher aggregate bandwidth next gen solutions. Apple's main interest in v4 is to deliver same bandwidth on fewer lanes. That isn't an 'Apple Silicon' thing that is more an Apple view in general.

 

[Tdude96]

Here's a theory, Apple kills off the 'Pro' branding for its computers? I mean the flagship desktop is now called Studio, so what if they ditch the Pro moniker and call the max models Ultra instead? It would fit with the other branding then... Studio Ultra, MacBook Ultra?

I doubt that'll happen, but it'd be kinda nice.

Is the M5 Ultra even confirmed? If not, then I wonder whether this announcement might foreshadow other changes in the Mac desktop line. Perhaps, without the Ultra, we're going to see a new Mac Studio that switches to just the M5 Pro and Max, with the Mac mini being limited to just the M5 (like the current iMacs).

People have claimed to see an Ultra identifier for release in 2026, however MacRumors (after a Gurman article a little while back began hedging and rather than saying M5 Ultra, now say M5 or M4 Ultra. Going with M4 Ultra would be exceptionally disappointing.

jumped to an iMac Pro which I loved and felt was the spiritual successor to the SE/30 which was my favorite Mac ever

I'm jealous. I very much wanted an iMac Pro when they came out, but there was no way to justify the purchase at the time.

I think Apple concluded it wasn’t feasible to keep producing Ultra processors and that the vast majority of Mac customers are served by its existing lineup.

🤔 The Studio comes in an Ultra configuration...at least for now, and there are a ton more people with those than with Mac Pro M2 Ultra, with plenty clamoring for the M5 Ultra.

 

[KPOM]

I doubt that'll happen, but it'd be kinda nice.


People have claimed to see an Ultra identifier for release in 2026, however MacRumors (after a Gurman article a little while back began hedging and rather than saying M5 Ultra, now say M5 or M4 Ultra. Going with M4 Ultra would be exceptionally disappointing.


I'm jealous. I very much wanted an iMac Pro when they came out, but there was no way to justify the purchase at the time.


🤔 The Studio comes in an Ultra configuration...at least for now, and there are a ton more people with those than with Mac Pro M2 Ultra, with plenty clamoring for the M5 Ultra.

The Studio is essentially the trash can Mac Pro done right. Hence there is no need for a bulky Pro with lots of redundant PCIe slots.

 

[NeekonMike]

Last time these large Macs looked cool was the G4 generation.

 

[SDAVE]

...and with that, the best looking display (Pro XDR) and the best looking computer tower (Mac Pro) are no more

Pro XDR was probably expensive to make with the perforated design, and 32" screens at that level aren't cheap. The stand at $999 was insane too.

Apple did a good job by dropping the price to $3299 and making a better screen. I wish it was like $2499, though.

 

[SDAVE]

The Studio is essentially the trash can Mac Pro done right. Hence there is no need for a bulky Pro with lots of redundant PCIe slots.

PCIe slots are not redundant my friend, creative professionals need to put in cards from ProTools, BlackMagic, etc. Now they have to get external enclosures and connect via TB5 or find other external solutions. Also TB5 is only PCIe x4, and you can't put in lets say 8 NVME's on a single PCIe x16 card and get 30,000MB/sec (some people need that).

 

[Jeeve Stubbs]

Like the Pro Display XDR, the Mac Pro was an unjustifiably expensive device, with unreasonably expensive accessories, that sold poorly all along. Most geeks who wanted a tower with slots could get a much better deal with a Windows PC and the vastly superior number of apps, programs, and accessories available for Microsoft's OS. And for those who absolutely wanted a Mac computer, the Mac Studio offered as much hardware power, if not more, for a better price and a more practical size.
The only question at this point is why the Cook administration waited so long to get real and pull the plug.

 

[Flint Ironstag]

Mac Studio takes its spot and should fit almost anyone who had a Mac Pro or who needs a Mac Pro. But disappointing to hear a Mac desktop being discontinued.

Please link to Studio with 32TB NVME and 100+ TFLOPs of GPGPU.

Today you can buy a Mac mini that is more powerful.

OK.

 

[Flint Ironstag]

PCIe slots are not redundant my friend, creative professionals need to put in cards from ProTools, BlackMagic, etc. Now they have to get external enclosures and connect via TB5 or find other external solutions. Also TB5 is only PCIe x4, and you can't put in lets say 8 NVME's on a single PCIe x16 card and get 30,000MB/sec (some people need that).

And it's not just creative professionals. I do stuff that eats GPU power. I have clients doing research - they have PCIe cards capturing data from all kinds of instruments.

@KPOM people are out there doing all kinds of things with their Macs. Just because you can't imagine it, doesn't make it any less so. Please stop applying your limitations to us. The entire point of the Mac Pro is to unleash your imagination and bring massive projects to life.

 

[Yebubbleman]

Apple discontinuing the 2023 Mac Pro without a follow-up makes them having announced it to begin with all the more puzzling. If you weren't going to update the damn thing, and you weren't going to charge a more competitive price, let alone charge $3000 over the Mac Studio equivalent and only provide PCIe slots that can't accomodate GPU boosts or upgrades and two extra Thunderbolt ports as a feature bump, then what the hell were you even releasing it for?

There were better ways to market that Mac such that folks would want to buy it and they just...didn't do it.

If Apple had planned to move to an M5 Extreme or some other upper tier Mac SoC, the M2 Ultra Mac Pro would've made some sense as a transition product. But to be the last one? It was a lame note to end on and I think it would've made way more sense to just end it with the 2019 model; especially if the whole idea is that the Mac Studio is the future. Hell, they could've launched the Mac Studio with a Thunderbolt breakout box, left the 2019 Mac Pro to be sold up until 2024 and then cut it off there and it would've made way more sense.

Now that we know how the Mac Pro's story ends, it really deserved better writing.

 

[SDAVE]

Apple discontinuing the 2023 Mac Pro without a follow-up makes them having announced it to begin with all the more puzzling. If you weren't going to update the damn thing, and you weren't going to charge a more competitive price, let alone charge $3000 over the Mac Studio equivalent and only provide PCIe slots that can't accomodate GPU boosts or upgrades and two extra Thunderbolt ports as a feature bump, then what the hell were you even releasing it for?

There were better ways to market that Mac such that folks would want to buy it and they just...didn't do it.

If Apple had planned to move to an M5 Extreme or some other upper tier Mac SoC, the M2 Ultra Mac Pro would've made some sense as a transition product. But to be the last one? It was a lame note to end on and I think it would've made way more sense to just end it with the 2019 model; especially if the whole idea is that the Mac Studio is the future. Hell, they could've launched the Mac Studio with a Thunderbolt breakout box, left the 2019 Mac Pro to be sold up until 2024 and then cut it off there and it would've made way more sense.

Now that we know how the Mac Pro's story ends, it really deserved better writing.

At least they discontinued it, unlike the Trash Pro. They went silent on that for over 6 years with zero upgrades 🤣
Those were painful years for me, I had to build a Hackintosh to survive (I hated it). Did not want the iMac Pro, or the Trash Pro (this was around 2015-2018)

 

[deconstruct60]

At least they discontinued it, unlike the Trash Pro. They went silent on that for over 6 years with zero upgrades 🤣

They were not totally silent. There was a 'eventually we'll do something' in 4 years (April 2017). And a price cut.

https://www.macrumors.com/2017/04/04/apple-updates-mac-pro-and-more/

Almost 4 year gap between 2019 and 2023 Mac Pro too.

Those were painful years for me, I had to build a Hackintosh to survive (I hated it). Did not want the iMac Pro, or the Trash Pro (this was around 2015-2018)

The Mac Studio is better postioned to be a replacement than the iMac Pro was in 2017. Goofily they still have much of the 'painted into a corner' , self-imposed problems. Over reliance on Thunderbolt . One, and only one, internal drive. But at least the $3,000 screen is detached now. 🙂

 

[macduke]

MacBook Pro is next.

MacBook Studio is the redesign.

The writing on the wall was killing the Pro Display XDR for the Studio Display XDR. Now the Mac Pro for the Mac Studio.

Makes you wonder about the iPhone Pro and AirPods Pro. I think those might make more sense to transition to the Ultra line, like the Apple Watch Ultra. Basically just saying “This is the best one.” Studio makes more sense for creatives, but is kinda off for everyone else. The folding iPhone may complicate that, unless it has its own separate name. They also need to rename the iPhone 18e to iPhone 18 Neo next year. Neo is strong branding for them at the base. Do the same with the iPad.

As for the Mac Studio, I’d like to see a couple changes:

• Updated design that is a bit more premium than “big Mac mini” while including space black
• Yearly refreshes

Also they really need to clean up their chip naming conventions like this:

• M6
• M6 Plus
• M6 Elite
• M6 Ultra

This establishes a more clear hierarchy, moving away from the Pro naming as Apple seems to be doing, and eliminates the confusion of “Max”sounding like “Macs” phonetically. Plus is clearly above base. Elite is clearly above Plus but doesn’t have the finality of Ultra. I don’t know how a company with so many smart people can’t figure this out. Apple: I do consulting, you can afford me, DM me. I’ve got a lot more.

 

[deconstruct60]

Just had an upsetting thought.

Now the Mac Studio has no price floor.

They can kick it up wherever they want.

Huh? The Mac Pro was priced substantially above the standard configuration prices for the Mac Studio. (over $1K more . Studios are all BTO on the Apple web store now, but get some defaults just clicking either Max or Ultra). It might change the 'ceiling' , but it doesn't change the 'floor' pricing that was Mn Max driven. ( i.e., above $2K range of the old " 27 inch iMac " range that went $1,700-3,000 like range. The Studio still has that anchor. The Mini Pro isn't going to drift up because it has a sub $2k duties to cover. )

Whatever the "more than Mn Max" configuration becomes will likely get more expensive since there are even less unit sales in that zone now. The fewer Ultras they sell , the more expensive the Ultra is likely going to get. However, that is the top of the line up; not the entry point.

The Mac Pro had no "Mn Max" configuration option. It started with an "Ultra".

This likely means that top end Studo might go comatose longer than the 'bottom' half. Ultra version updates every two years while "Max" might update quicker. Depends upon how this new 'refactoring' of the Pro/Max (and likely Ultra) goes with the 'chiplet' decomposition used for all three.

P.S. The RAM and NAND pricing apocolypse probably means the highest end Studio will creep higher with more RAM and more NAND likely locked into the new configuration options. The prices for that stuff went up for Apple also. But that would have been true whether the Mac Pro stuck around or not. Even if Apple had parts for the Mac Pro ...which if they barely cover the Mac Studio... they wouldn't .

 

[innerproduct]

sad days. Also what a way to go. Just silently dropped on a Wednesday. A legacy dies while the 50 years celebrations are in full swing.
It is like silently pushing out grandpa of the car on the way to the party…

 

[deconstruct60]

MacBook Pro is next.

No. Apple has no problems selling high numbers of MBP's. The plain Mn MBP 14" probably sold multiple orders of magnitude more than the Mac Pro.

MacBook Studio is the redesign.

The rumors are for incrementally thinner MBP. Not bigger ( Mini versus Studio). Some luggable Mac laptop coming? Probably not.

The writing on the wall was killing the Pro Display XDR for the Studio Display XDR. Now the Mac Pro for the Mac Studio.

The Studio Display and Studio XDR basically share the same chassis. (minor difference in pedestal foot due to weight differences , but this is largely a move to share costs. ). Apple doesn't want to make multiple monitors. With the Thunderbolt display Apple dropped down to just one montor. They sold just one for years. Then went to zero ( backseat drove the LG UltraFine display... because didn't really want to do discrete displays ). Backtracked on XDR Pro ... but just one. Notcing a pattern??? The Studio Display came as result of large screen iMac disappearing. So two but not really because they had a choice. The XDR Pro was in 'zombie' state at that point (no improvements coming). Now down to 1.5 displays. It isn't quite as low as 1 but also a step away from being 2.

This has exceedingly little to do with the Mac Pro and its extremely low unit volume issues over last 1-2 years. Mostly likely Apple will sell more of the $1-2K cheaper Studio XDR monitors than they did of the Pro XDRs.

Folks drifting into the Mac Studio for local AI models inside the box are likely bigger than any Mac Pro refugees migration they will get from what is left of the Mac Pro userbase. The hyper-modularity folks ( want their own RAM DIMMS , own CPU package , own GPU card , etc.) aren't coming to the Studio. Lots of Mac Pro folks will just dig in can squat on what they got (not going to buy anything from Apple). [ shades of the folks who squatted on Mac Pro 2009/2012 for as long as possible]

 

[uczcret]

sad days. Also what a way to go. Just silently dropped on a Wednesday. A legacy dies while the 50 years celebrations are in full swing.
It is like silently pushing out grandpa of the car on the way to the party…

I'm sad about it as well but realistically how should they have gone about this? A tribute video on their homepage? Let's be real here.