Apple Continues to Work on All-New Mac Pro With Upgradeable Design

[saulinpa]

The iMac Pro is more likely to be updated than the Mac Pro -- especially if they go with a tight custom thermal design where you cannot just come out with a new version by popping out component parts and replacing them with newer generation ones with little worry about the fact that it changes the thermal balance. The Mac Pro cheesegrater case was great in that you could easily do that without that worry (less investment in upgrading the design). And not having to change the design makes it easier to retool the assembly line to new models (it takes a long time to redesign, reimplement assembly line automation for new processes). Simply put, the iMac Pro fits in to Apples vision more than any headless design unfortunately.

I'm missing something here. The 2013 nMP had a tight custom thermal design as well and has had no upgrades. Why would the reasoning with the iMac Pro go the other way and be more likely to be upgraded?

 

[Michael Scrip]

I'm missing something here. The 2013 nMP had a tight custom thermal design as well and has had no upgrades. Why would the reasoning with the iMac Pro go the other way and be more likely to be upgraded?

I'm assuming "nMP" means "new Mac Pro"

But I've also seen "cMP" which I'm guessing means "cylinder Mac Pro" (or is it "current Mac Pro" ?)

And I've seen "tcMP" which I can only assume means "trash can Mac Pro"

Can everyone get on the same page here?

I vote for the model identifiers (Mac Pro 6,1) or the year/model (2013 Mac Pro)

It's funny that the term "new" is still used anywhere in conjunction with this particular model... but that's a different story.

So what happens when there actually is a new Mac Pro? Will it be "nnMP" for "new new Mac Pro" ?

 

[cppguy]

Very few people need workstation-grade Xeon processors. A Threadripper machine would be enough for almost everyone, as long as it comes with proper cooling and a really high-end GPU. It just requires a bigger box rather than stupidly obsessed thinness. If they make a paper-thin desktop that is underclocked and throttled, with a mobile GPU, people will be so angry!

 

[MacSince1985]

I'm missing something here. The 2013 nMP had a tight custom thermal design as well and has had no upgrades. Why would the reasoning with the iMac Pro go the other way and be more likely to be upgraded?

One can hope that Apple learned from its mistake and designed a cooling system that can be more easily modified than the 2013 Mac Pro's.
The biggest reason for the iMac Pro not to get updates might be lack of demand. I have yet to meet someone willing to pay %5k to $13k for it.

 

[Larry-K]

Nope, sorry.

Yep, Sorry.

 

[PickUrPoison]

<snip>
An interesting side note is the recently released update for Logic Pro by Apple supports up to 36 cores (which is suspiciously just double the 18 core maximum in the iMac Pro) -- which makes me suspicious they will bring back the dual-processor option.

Updating Logic Pro to support 36 cores is indeed interesting. That does imply dual processor availability in the upcoming Mac Pro. Which also means Skylake-SP Xeons, not the W series of iMac Pro.

Those processors are so expensive (unless you need dual processors). It would add a couple thousand to lower end configurations with single processors, compared to using Xeon W.

I just don’t see that big a market for dual processor workstations. Anybody that needs them hasn’t been buying Apple, would they really try to enter the $20k-70k workstation market?

But it doesn’t make sense to support 36 cores in Logic Pro without a dual processor workstation that can support it. Hmmmm.

 

[saulinpa]

Naming conventions used in the MP forums on this site:

cMP = classic Mac Pro (2006-2012)
nMP = new Mac Pro (2013)
mMP = modular Mac Pro (2018?)

 

[Larry-K]

I'm assuming "nMP" means "new Mac Pro"

But I've also seen "cMP" which I'm guessing means "cylinder Mac Pro" (or is it "current Mac Pro" ?)

And I've seen "tcMP" which I can only assume means "trash can Mac Pro"

Can everyone get on the same page here?

I vote for the model identifiers (Mac Pro 6,1) or the year/model (2013 Mac Pro)

It's funny that the term "new" is still used anywhere in conjunction with this particular model... but that's a different story.

So what happens when there actually is a new Mac Pro? Will it be "nnMP" for "new new Mac Pro" ?

nMP is new Mac Pro, some people say cMP for "Classic Mac Pro", which reminds me of "Classic Coke" (look it up), so I say oMP for old Mac Pro.

5,1. 6,1 and 7,1 (if it comes)are just fine. Model year is just stupid, "late" anything rarely ships in that year, and when you're selling a 2013 machine in 2017(8), it just reminds you how sad the state of MacPros is.

"Cheese Grater", "Trashcan", it's all good.
[doublepost=1513629135][/doublepost]

Updating Logic Pro to support 36 cores is indeed interesting. That does imply dual processor availability in the upcoming Mac Pro. Which also means Skylake-SP Xeons, not the W series of iMac Pro.

Those processors are so expensive (unless you need dual processors). It would add a couple thousand to lower end configurations with single processors, compared to using Xeon W.

I just don’t see that big a market for dual processor workstations. Anybody that needs them hasn’t been buying Apple, would they really try to enter the $20k-70k workstation market?

But it doesn’t make sense to support 36 cores in Logic Pro without a dual processor workstation that can support it. Hmmmm.

Probably 36 Virtual cores.

 

[cmaier]

nVidia has not given up the idea of a "bridge" between GPUs.

NVIDIA NVLINK HIGH-SPEED INTERCONNECT
MAXIMUM THROUGHPUT FOR SUPERIOR APPLICATION PERFORMANCE

NVIDIA® NVLink™ is a high-bandwidth, energy-efficient interconnect that enables ultra-fast communication between the CPU and GPU, and between GPUs. The technology allows data sharing at rates 5 to 10 times faster than the traditional PCIe Gen3 interconnect, resulting in dramatic speed-ups in application performance and creating a new breed of high-density, flexible servers for accelerated computing Download the whitepaper for more details on NVLink.

http://www.nvidia.com/object/nvlink.html#utm_source=shorturl&utm_medium=referrer&utm_campaign=nvlink

But the market has.

 

[Bacillus]

Naming conventions used in the MP forums on this site:
cMP = classic Mac Pro (2006-2012)
nMP = new Mac Pro (2013)
mMP = modular Mac Pro (2018?)

What a Christmas season, now these clowns from Cupertino have spoilt their chances with Airpod, AirPower, HomePod, etc...availability.
So I would plea for a wMPg (=whatever MacPro giveaway) for the way they've insulted customers.
Yes, giveaway's. For a model that hardly anybody would buy anyway now that a forthcoming, better modular design was forecasted. Why that ?
It might both save their crazy image and might dress up their Q4 volume sold figures and market penetration (after so many real Pro's felt betrayed and left the platform over the years).
Loss on turnover will be minimal - and image is more important than sales anyway, currently.

 

[cmaier]

Apple is the only "workstation" manufacturer that has eliminated multiple CPUs as an option (cutting in half the available PCIe lanes, and limiting the CPU). Yes more people can be served with a single CPU than before - especially if you never did push the machine (and most people have idle processors at 80% to 90% of resources). But then the tcMP was no longer really a workstation, more a consumer PC with some workstation components. The high end niche will continue to push at the top end of the performance requirements. Going from two 6 core Xeon processors to one 12 core processor was basically standing still for a generation in CPU performance, and halving the amount of bus bandwidth available. Also as you put more cores on one CPU - the per core speed goes down once you reach a certain point... so you could end up doubling the cores, but dropping the per core performance by half.... where as just doubling the CPUs would have kept the CPU cores at a higher per core performance. I think we might see the 2 core Xeon system come back in the latest version - Logic Pro has been updated to handle 36 cores... maybe the Apple Logic Pro people know something we don't?

Silicon has more or less flat lined in the way of advances. The more cores you put on one silicon the larger the silicon wafer is, and as you increase the size of the wafer the cost of manufacturing goes up exponentially (since the percentage of silicon you have to through in the trash can goes way up). It is the reason why the price of Xeons goes up dramatically the more cores you have on one chip. My Mac Pro from 2008 with two processors -- 8 cores was $2,500 (general inflation has been flat).

SSDs might be great for some things but it is not cost effective for large storage (and won't be in the near or mid-term) where you don't need very low latency or super fast bandwidth. I have more than 60TB in storage, I have an SSD for the stuff I need fast access, but the rest -- archived on the RAID. Replacing 60TB of hard drives with SSDs is just not economical. Now just imagine the cost to equip a van with SSDs to store 4K footage while it is being filmed?

As far as video cards, or tensor processing cards -- just because you have high performance cards - does not mean that having one is enough for everyone (especially TPUs).

The issue is the tcMP was turned into a high end consumer PC. Workstations tend to be a class above (but not the top class) your standard consumer PC and just because more people can use PCs instead of workstations - does not mean there is not a need for the leading edge of workstations. In 2013, Apple basically said -- take a hike if you are in that class -- and many have, and more were on their way out as they gave up hope.... it is why they announced vaporware last year with regards to it -- trying to freeze that movement. When you spend the day working in one or two apps -- the operating system is in the background and not much of an issue (and many of the creative tools by vendors other than Apple are cross-platform).

More cores don’t mean more silicon unless you are in the same process generation. With each lateral shrink, more cores can fit in the same space. Silicon hasn’t flatlined, btw. Intel has. And per core performance goes down only once you reach the thermal envelope. With each generation, driven capacitance decreases so dynamic current also decreases. Given the same number of transistors, power dissipation would decrease. So physics tells us that with time more transistors will fit in the same physical and thermal space.

 

[ackmondual]

I'm not sure why people are complaining about the price tag for Pro computer models. These aren't intended for the average consumer. These are for volume enterprise purchases.

... That's a bit depressing to hear. I was hoping there would be something that's a bit more within reach of individuals or freelancers. $13K is the max spec configuration, but I suppose something around the ballpark of $5K to $8K could still suffice.

 

[Michael Scrip]

nMP is new Mac Pro, some people say cMP for "Classic Mac Pro", which reminds me of "Classic Coke" (look it up), so I say oMP for old Mac Pro.

I remember Classic Coke.

But it never occurred to me that cMP would mean "classic Mac Pro"

Thanks for that! I was waaay off with "cylinder"

Model year is just stupid, "late" anything rarely ships in that year, and when you're selling a 2013 machine in 2017(8), it just reminds you how sad the state of MacPros is.

Why is model year stupid? Most other Macs are referenced that way.

For instance... the 2016 Macbook Pro 15" or 2017 Macbook Pro 15"

And let's not forget everyone's favorite 2015 Macbook Pro 15"... with ports and MagSafe!

Those are all year-based names. I hear those year/models mentioned all the time on podcasts and in articles.

I agree that it's a sad state of affairs for the Mac Pro at the moment. But if someone said "2013 Mac Pro"... you'd still know exactly what they mean.

And when the next Mac Pro is released in 2018 or 2019... I see nothing wrong with applying those years to the name.

But one thing's for sure... we can't keep calling the 2013 model the "nMP" after the next model comes out.

It won't be "new" anymore!

"Cheese Grater", "Trashcan", it's all good.

Yeah... those names make sense... since they are names and not just letters that can mean different things.

I still get confused when I see TB in conjunction with MBP.

For some reason I keep wanting to think "ThunderBolt" instead of "Touch Bar"

 

[Count Blah]

You're REALLY going to compare the 2013 Mac Pro with a current ANYTHING?.

Why not, Apple still sells it. And until recently, at original prices.

Embarrassing, right?

Apple still sells the neutered 2014 Mac Mini at full price as well.

Embarrassing, right?

 

[bkkcanuck8]

Updating Logic Pro to support 36 cores is indeed interesting. That does imply dual processor availability in the upcoming Mac Pro. Which also means Skylake-SP Xeons, not the W series of iMac Pro.

Those processors are so expensive (unless you need dual processors). It would add a couple thousand to lower end configurations with single processors, compared to using Xeon W.

I just don’t see that big a market for dual processor workstations. Anybody that needs them hasn’t been buying Apple, would they really try to enter the $20k-70k workstation market?

But it doesn’t make sense to support 36 cores in Logic Pro without a dual processor workstation that can support it. Hmmmm.

Many of the customers that had given up waiting for a new Mac Pro for video production purposes have gone with HP workstation. I am not an expert on HP workstations, but the HP Z8 starts at around $2,500 at the low end (probably single processor installed) and goes up to sky's the limit sort of configurations.

The Z8 can climb as high dual 28-core Xeon Platinum processors, 3TB of RAM, dual Quadro GP100 with 16GB of HBM2 memory.

All of this available in a desktop chassis (sort of like a really really ugly replacement for the cheesegrater).

I have every confidence that Apple if they wanted to compete -- could .... and not be so mug ugly.

I am sure you could design a chassis to support single or dual Xeon processors of varying grades -- with thermals allowing for an ultimate tricked out one at the top end.

If they come up with another dud - all those that they held in a waiting state when they announced vaporware mid-last year.... will be gone. No time to goof around.

 

[Count Blah]

Naming conventions used in the MP forums on this site:

cMP = classic Mac Pro (2006-2012)
nMP = new Mac Pro (2013)
mMP = modular Mac Pro (2018?)

cMP - classic
tcMP - trash can
vwMP - vapor ware, which MAY turn into mMP - modular

 

[tillsbury]

c Pro"

Thanks for that! I was waaay off with "cylinder"

But one thing's for sure... we can't keep calling the 2013 model the "nMP" after the next model comes out.

It won't be "new" anymore!

yes, cMP has always been "classic" or cheese grater.

You're right in that the nMP is about to become non-new. Hence why people have started to call it tcMP...

 

[bkkcanuck8]

I just don’t see that big a market for dual processor workstations. Anybody that needs them hasn’t been buying Apple, would they really try to enter the $20k-70k workstation market?

We are talking about the same company that made an aspirational watch costing $16,000 -- and all it did was go tic-toc-tic-toc -- actually it did not even do that

 

[PickUrPoison]

We are talking about the same company that made an aspirational watch costing $16,000 -- and all it did was go tic-toc-tic-toc -- actually it did not even do that

Well I definitely get how making some expensive gold watches to give away to celebrities can help create buzz. And of course, there’s no denying the gold Watch is beautiful, and brilliantly positioned AW as an iconic fashion item, not some geeky calculator watch.

But I still wonder if Apple sees space for themselves in a big-iron HPC market that’s currently using 0% Mac and 0% MacOS. Sure they could make a $100,000 workstation that had 56 cores and 3 TB of RAM, I don’t doubt they have the technical capability. But it would be a major pivot, given the Mac Pro was all but dead a year ago.

Personally, I’d love to see it, and these are the processors I’d like to see available in a dual socket Mac Pro. (None of which support 1.5 TB per processor btw; those parts are more expensive. These support only 768GB per processor.)

(Part#,cores, all core/single core, tray price)

8180 28 core 2.5/3.8 $10,009
8168 24 core 2.7/3.7 $5,890
6154 18 core 3.0/3.7 $3,543
6146 12 core 3.2/4.2 $3,286
6144 8 core 3.5/4.2 $2,925

A base model single processor, 8-core, 48GB, 1TB system I’d guess would be around $7,500, with a similarly configured 28-core box at least $15k.

 

[bkkcanuck8]

Well I definitely get how making some expensive gold watches to give away to celebrities can help create buzz. And of course, there’s no denying the gold Watch is beautiful, and brilliantly positioned AW as an iconic fashion item, not some geeky calculator watch.

But I still wonder if Apple sees space for themselves in a big-iron HPC market that’s currently using 0% Mac and 0% MacOS. Sure they could make a $100,000 workstation that had 56 cores and 3 TB of RAM, I don’t doubt they have the technical capability. But it would be a major pivot, given the Mac Pro was all but dead a year ago.

Personally, I’d love to see it, and these are the processors I’d like to see available in a dual socket Mac Pro. (None of which support 1.5 TB per processor btw; those parts are more expensive. These support only 768GB per processor.)

(Part#,cores, all core/single core, tray price)

8180 28 core 2.5/3.8 $10,009
8168 24 core 2.7/3.7 $5,890
6154 18 core 3.0/3.7 $3,543
6146 12 core 3.2/4.2 $3,286
6144 8 core 3.5/4.2 $2,925

An base model single processor, 8-core, 48GB, 1TB system I’d guess would be around $7,500, with a similarly configured 28-core box at least $15k.

I think your list, plus maybe one entry level Xeon Silver (usually have one under $500) would be more than sufficient for the near future -- and I think would give both an aspirational and solid foundation that would make most professionals happy -- especially if the case design were not too cute and thus problematic going forward (i.e. would be able to be updated easily on the release of new parts without the same level of investment). Even if they just had the Entry, 8 core, 18 core, and 28 core dual processors as options it would give both a "low entry" + security at the high end to professionals. It is like the gold watch -- not a huge money maker, nor a huge installed base -- but gives security in knowing that you have room to grow and just having an aspirational product.

 

[Apache1]

Personal opinion only. I don't think that is such a bad idea. Basically what I want is a headless Mac. While the iMac Pro is way overkill for what i need, the specs in it are pretty impressive but overshadowed by the no upgrade/repair possibilities. Yes I like to tweak things.

It certainly sounds like you will be able to upgrade SSD drive and upgrade RAM as necessary given that Apple is saying its factory upgradeable, but maybe just not if first years of warranty.

 

[homegrownhero]

I hope it looks one of those large shoebox-sized-MiniITX-yet-still-fits-a-fullsize-founders-edition-1080 small form factor PCs.

I REALLY do hope so.

 

[Larry-K]

Why is model year stupid? Most other Macs are referenced that way.

For instance... the 2016 Macbook Pro 15" or 2017 Macbook Pro 15"

And let's not forget everyone's favorite 2015 Macbook Pro 15"... with ports and MagSafe!
Those are all year-based names. I hear those year/models mentioned all the time on podcasts and in articles.

I agree that it's a sad state of affairs for the Mac Pro at the moment. But if someone said "2013 Mac Pro"... you'd still know exactly what they mean.
And when the next Mac Pro is released in 2018 or 2019... I see nothing wrong with applying those years to the name.
But one thing's for sure... we can't keep calling the 2013 model the "nMP" after the next model comes out.
It won't be "new" anymore!

I'm not a big fan of the year naming because of the "Early/Late" versions of some years (although Apple has slowed down a bit on such silliness), Since I occasionally have to deal with iMacs and MacBooks, the number designation helps keep things clear.

We can just consider the nMP the "Nano" MacPro, the "Non" MacPro, the "Neutered" MacPro, the "Nonsensical" MacPro, the "Needless" MacPro, etc.

The "Modular MacPro" have lots of opportunity to earn a moniker, but it'll always be the good old 7,1 to me.

Ahhh, "New Coke". I think you can pretty much see the beginning of Western Civilization's decline with its introduction, turned me against Bill Cosby long before his other transgresssions. Fortunately "Mexican Cokes" are widely available for those of us who know what a real coke is supposed to taste like.

 

[itsamacthing]

Apple will see if the iMac Pro can take enough market share from Mac Pro buyers first... they are in no rush to please the Mac Pro now that the iMac Pro is in the wild. Focus on marketing, not about customer happiness.

 

[barmann]

Apple figured that the Cylindrical Mac Pro could provide BOTH form AND function.

They unfortunately gambled on two things that didn't pan-out.

1. The wide and quick adoption of Thunderbolt.

2. The wide adoption of software actually DESIGNED for multiple-GPU architectures, rather than one, honkin' GPU.

But you cannot say that the 2013 Mac Pro was SIMPLY form over function, or there wouldn't have been SIX Thunderbolt 2 Ports on it.

You can clearly see where Apple was trying to lead the industry; but Intel screwed-up the adoption of TB, and coders simply decided to not bother trying to create more parallel GPU code.

Well, I will agree with you on Apple getting it completely and utterly wrong .
But is was their fault and poor strategy, noone else's .
Apart from the adaption of tech like TB being an industry wide decission, Apple left it mainly to 3rd party manufacturers to eventually provide the external hardware required to make the nMP a viable option re. expansion .
And the costs were left to the consumer to pay , whatever they might be .
We all know how that went ...

They could easily have avoided all the issues with an update or an evolution of the cMP design .

To this day, the single box design with a bunch of expansion slots for RAM and PCIe cards, multiple connectors and standard processor bays is still the best , maybe even the only workable solution for a modular workstation .
Even room for some internal drives won't add much extra space .

Fairly easy and cheap to design, maintain, produce and upgrade - the most affordable , most flexible solution for everyone .

But Apple DID choose form over function ; then, and certainly in hindsight .