The truth is that in the end, you simply find other ways to accomplish your tasks. It can be done, and you move on..
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 Planning 'Something Really Different' for New Mac Pro
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The truth is that in the end, you simply find other ways to accomplish your tasks. It can be done, and you move on..
Where are you getting those numbers from? Just taking a quick look at crucial you have 2x 4gb of ECC RAM vs 2x 4gb of Non-ECC RAM, both of the same specs. The result is that the ECC version is double the cost; even if you go for unbuffered ECC the cost difference is pretty high.
I didn't know that Mac Pros will take non ECC memory though, so thanks for pointing that out. Seems my 2008 Mac Pro still suffers from insane prices regardless though.
Anyway, that said there are other options as well; if they could offer a different memory interface as a build to order option then I wouldn't mind a Mac Pro that could take GDDR5 memory for example, to give the same speed memory interface that your GPU has.
Also, thinking about the concept of a modular Mac Pro built from Mac Mini-like units; depending on their size (i.e - they'd need to be long enough to accommodate a proper GPU) it could be a pretty interesting concept. Several people have pointed to Thunderbolt as the interface of choice, but if you're looking at dockable units then why? It doesn't seem like something where hot-plugging is a high priority, so just exposing a PCIe slot type structure could suffice, just add some shaped gap for lining up the units, and a latching mechanism to secure them and you could be golden.
I'm just not sure it's all that viable as the majority of customers won't benefit from having fewer units, so you basically have a minimum machine size anyway at which point you might as well just build a tower with enough room for the most common use-case.
I'm hoping "something really different" refers just to a new case design (though I am fond of the current one), maybe with a tweaked form-factor. I'd love to see a tower that more closely fits a rack-mountable size, maybe even designed to go on its side with rails if that's what you want to do with it. Not the most efficient use of rack space of course, but then if you do have a work-place with more than a handful of Mac Pros then it would be a better way to manage them, especially if you are actually using a "server" version. Redundant power supplies as an option would help there as well. I mean I loved the XServe as an unusually stylish rack-mount server, but Apple never really competed in that space, but even so it would make some sense for rack-mounting to be considered in the design since racking computers is more common in high-end areas anyway.
Intergrated GPUs :-(
I would NOT be interested in integrated GPUs
... Apple never has been good at allowing the user to upgrade the GPU power to something that meets their specific needs. Also, the base level system GPU options are always under-powered and overpriced.
Guess I'll be forced to switch to a different platform...
Thunderbolt simply isn't fast enough even for Thunderbolt 2 (2GBs). A 16 lane PCIe 2 slot gives us about 15GBs...
I would NOT be interested in integrated GPUs
... Apple never has been good at allowing the user to upgrade the GPU power to something that meets their specific needs. Also, the base level system GPU options are always under-powered and overpriced.Guess I'll be forced to switch to a different platform...
Thunderbolt simply isn't fast enough even for Thunderbolt 2 (2GBs). A 16 lane PCIe 2 slot gives us about 15GBs...
Thanks but I have a Mac Pro, I don't need to 'move on'.
There are many ways of achieving many things, I'm highlighting a way Apple could achieve greater sales of its Mac Pro tower and keep its user base happy - no work arounds required!
That's exactly what I'll be doing if this Mac Pro update is a dud / disgrace / modular disaster
We've built hackintoshes for our render farm... but they aren't optimal for workstations. We need a workstation class machine from Apple. Unfortunately, we know several studios that tired of waiting for Mac Pros and moved over to Windows. This has been a horrible misstep by Apple.
I love a good science project as much as the next guy, but I just don't have time for this stuff anymore.
Don't forget Central Dispatch, OpenCL and xGrid Apple has already developed in order to have applications take advantage of every CPU core, every CPU on the system, and beyond the system itself.
If Apple were to find the magic recipe to make multiple desktop i7s work together (they can't on normal motherboards) or multiple GPUs to really work together on general computing workloads, that could potentially multiply the processing horsepower of such systems by orders of magnitude, at the same price points.
If Apple can use a multi-processor design with desktop i7s, a system with 10+ of those could still cost as much as the high-end Mac Pro does today, but obliterate it in terms of processing power.
Don't forget that even today, for specific tasks like video encoding and applying filters using Compressor & Qmaster, you get much, much more bang for your buck from 7 Mac minis (2.6GHz Quad-Core i7, $6.300) than one Mac Pro (2x3GHz 6-core Xeons, $6.200).
The ultimate market-disrupting tech would be to find a way to use a bunch of relatively cheap desktop CPUs in unison, for every task you through at them.
If Apple were to find the magic recipe to make multiple desktop i7s work together (they can't on normal motherboards) or multiple GPUs to really work together on general computing workloads, that could potentially multiply the processing horsepower of such systems by orders of magnitude, at the same price points.
If Apple can use a multi-processor design with desktop i7s, a system with 10+ of those could still cost as much as the high-end Mac Pro does today, but obliterate it in terms of processing power.
Don't forget that even today, for specific tasks like video encoding and applying filters using Compressor & Qmaster, you get much, much more bang for your buck from 7 Mac minis (2.6GHz Quad-Core i7, $6.300) than one Mac Pro (2x3GHz 6-core Xeons, $6.200).
The ultimate market-disrupting tech would be to find a way to use a bunch of relatively cheap desktop CPUs in unison, for every task you through at them.
I just went to Newegg, Amazon and Superbiiz. Crucial's site is just a company store for the retail brand of a chip maker remember. Their server RAM has always been priced very high on there.
DDR3 models can, but those that used DDR2 need FB-DIMMs. FB-DIMMs aren't made anymore and the pricing stalled where it was years ago. Sadly the 2008 models were really the only computers to use 800MHz FB-DIMMs so all the ex-server/workstation memory is 667MHz. Which does work. You can pick up 16GB with heatsinks for under $100 and 32GB for $300.
They couldn't do that and GDDR5 is not suitable for a computer. It's going to be fine on the PS4 rather than DDR3 because it's going to be used for games and videos which the type of usage GDDR5 is great at. A longer explanation can be found here: http://www.techspot.com/community/topics/186408/
I'm with you on your other thoughts for what it's worth
----------
Which is all highly unlikely to come out of Apple. Maybe I'll eat my words one day if Apple spend their money differently, but the market for this is one Apple appear very far away from. I think they would be too closed off to be the pioneer of major parallelism advances.
Last edited:
I'm sure it's probably been said 1000 times in here, but I'd put money on it being something small and sealed.
PCIe 3.0 uses a more efficient encoding, so in practice each 8 Gbps lane is about four times faster than a 2.5 Gbps lane.
Mac Pro Leaks: (MicGadget)http://micgadget.com/26895/upcoming-new-features-and-specs-for-the-new-mac-pro/
CodeName K5B
Sandy Bridge Xeon E5v2 Upto 8cores/Cpu may offer Single CPU only this year.
USB3, Thubderbolt, 6 SATA3.
PCIE 3.0 with 40 lines .... mmm (PCIe3.0 uses to have 36lines, so it may indicate a propertary PCIe Slot as previously rumoured.
ATI Video (strange this claim)
External GPU Still A Possibility Thru Propertary Connectors and a Customized nVidia Quadro Plex or Similar
No Word on Case Desing, but unlikely to have CD/DVD Bays Niether Stackable Modules.
CodeName K5B
Sandy Bridge Xeon E5v2 Upto 8cores/Cpu may offer Single CPU only this year.
USB3, Thubderbolt, 6 SATA3.
PCIE 3.0 with 40 lines .... mmm (PCIe3.0 uses to have 36lines, so it may indicate a propertary PCIe Slot as previously rumoured.
ATI Video (strange this claim)
External GPU Still A Possibility Thru Propertary Connectors and a Customized nVidia Quadro Plex or Similar
No Word on Case Desing, but unlikely to have CD/DVD Bays Niether Stackable Modules.
Normal computers are already modular. This stupid modular talk is just a recipe for further Apple price gouging.
I used to be upset about the lack of current Mac Pros, but I got over it as soon as it got so easy to build Hackintoshes. There is no value in buying Apple hardware these days. You guys who think this stuff sounds great, do yourself a favor and build a computer. That simple act will forever turn you off to the crazy prices Apple charges for sub-standard workstations.
I used to be upset about the lack of current Mac Pros, but I got over it as soon as it got so easy to build Hackintoshes. There is no value in buying Apple hardware these days. You guys who think this stuff sounds great, do yourself a favor and build a computer. That simple act will forever turn you off to the crazy prices Apple charges for sub-standard workstations.
1. That article is from a year ago which says a lot really. A Mac Pro next week would still be using those parts that were available a year ago, apart from perhaps GeForce 700 series cards.
2. LGA 2011 CPUs have 40 PCI-E lanes each. http://ark.intel.com/products/64621/
3. ATI is being suggested there due to the compute power "crippling" NVIDIA did on the GeForce 600 series.
Last edited:
I don't blame you. The vast majority of professionals won't turn to hackintosh for many good reasons.
But like "Wild-Bill" says...if the next Mac Pro doesn't meet my expectations then I've got switch over to a PC.
I figure as long as I'm using a PC, I might as well make it a hackintosh.
But I'm optimistic that I won't be forced to make that choice...knock on wood.
.
That link is from 2012, so I'm pretty sure that's not it.
Everyone here should listen to the latest Accidental Tech Podcast, where they discuss the rumored Mac Pro at length (fast forward to 51:00), but listen to the whole thing for a great podcast.
Interesting bits:
- Siracusa means it needs to crush all other macs in speed and specs.
- Definitely not modular. No daisy-chaning of components/computers.
- There is most likely going to be a significant change, not just an upgrade to the current Mac Pro. This is based on them skipping last generation and Cook's comment.
- By slicing off some part of what makes the Mac Pro what it is today (fewer bays, no PCI-E, no dual socket CPU, mac 32 GB RAM), a significant portion of edge-case users are going to be displeased.
- High end GPU's won't work over Thunderbolt!
- What's in it for users/Apple in making drastic changes? For existing Mac Pro fans it's going to be worse in some way if the changes are drastic.
- "You're going to be really happy"-quote from Cook is unsettling.
- This will not be better for old customers, but it will be better for new costumers.
- A headless iMac is just a faster Mac Mini and won't be helping anybody.
- Retina Display alongside a Mac Pro? It's borderline. It could be done this year, but it would be a lot better next year (when all Macs can drive it).
- When the current iMac 27" came out, you basically got a free computer compared to competing displays of the same caliber.
However, the best idea came from Marco:
Could it be the "next thing for pros" is a Retina iMac?
My guess is yes.
They are going to let the Mac Pro as we know it, sunset. They'll maybe keep it around, like the iPod Classic, but it's not going to get updated. This will of course piss off the people who need X (multiple harddrive bays, 30 PCI-E lanes, dual socket CPU, >32GB RAM), but I'm guessing this is a small minority of buyers. It's obviously not selling well enough in its current state, since it's not getting updated.
Announcing a Retina iMac will be Apples answer to the pros for sunsetting the Mac Pro. It won't cater to all the pros who today buy a Mac Pro, but it will cater to a portion of them. At the same time it will expand the costumer base. Even though the high-end Mac Pros are competitvely priced, the entry-level Mac Pro's are overpriced and possibly out of reach for many customers. A Retina iMac starting at $3000 is a lot more accessible than a Mac Pro without display. (Yeah, I know, a 4K-display alone will cost more than that, but let's say Apple is getting an insane deal on those panels, like the original 27" iMac.)
Maybe they'll allow some crazy BTO-options? Buyers can opt for 6-core i7s, desktop-class discrete GPU, maybe dual SSDs or a Raided Fusion Drive. Could it be enough to satisfy pros?
It's definitely perfect for Apple: Catering to the 90%. Minimizing logistics. Removing a product from the line-up.
I'm not exactly in love with the Lion/Mountain Lion OS's of late (it's a little disheartening when the first thing an OS upgrade does it tell you that you don't know how to scroll), I'd only be adopting them for better video card support, in which case why not just go to Windows which has a zillion better, cheaper options?
I've never used CDs or DVDs for workflow. And the frequency of burning DVDs is slowing going away.
I think the number is higher than 1% for BluRay Authoring, maybe not.
-mark
I do prefer OS X to Windows. I've got quite a bit of money sunk into OS X applications.
I really do like PC cards. Right now I am running OS X on a PC GTX 680. My next gpu will be Nvidia's GTX Titan.
You're thinking of fully buffered dimms. Intel also moved the memory controller to the cpu. A secondary discrete controller wouldn't exactly bring the price down. If you look up the price of ram for anything newer than that 2008, you'll find it's the same price as you pay for other desktops or notebooks. The 2008 and prior models used fbdimms with the big heat sinks. They cost much more. You can find 8GB dimms for $50-70 both in ECC and non ECC variants, including sodimms. I understand the mistake if you're on a 3,1 or earlier, and ECC in general did used to cost significantly more in general many years ago.
