Apple Reveals All-New Mac Pro With Up to 28-Core Processor and 1.5TB of RAM, Starting at $5,999

[Porco]

I think the root of your argument is valid (there’s not a form factor that I’m used to that is affordable), but you’re missing the bigger picture. You can upgrade a Mac mini (or any other modern Mac). It’s just not going to be *inside* of the Mac mini enclosure... you’re going to need an external Sata interface. What did you upgrade in your previous builds? Storage? GPUs? Alternative IO? All can be added via thunderbolt. If you must have it all in the same box, the yeah, Mac Pro is your only option, but it’s a very narrow view to say these computers aren’t expandable. In fact, we live in an age where almost all Macs have robust support for expansion, from the MacBook Air all the way to the Mac Pro.

That’s my issue with the complainers. They want things that are tailored to exactly their specifications, but can’t see the options right in front of them. As so many others have said, if the Mac platform doesn’t suit your needs, then move on to Linux! You can customize everything!!

Of course I am well aware of Thunderbolt. That adds clutter and cost and doesn’t give the same expansion/upgrade options as the past, it only offers a subset of expansion possibilities.

You can’t add RAM with Thunderbolt. You can’t change the CPU with Thunderbolt. Why should I have to buy an expensive enclosure for times where all I want is a cheap PCI card that costs less than a Thunderbolt cable does?!?

The ‘if you don’t like it don’t buy it/move to Windows/Linux’ argument is as old as the hills and still just as invalid.

As I’ve said before, I don’t think it’s unreasonable to have wanted a Mac Pro that catered to and cost in the same ballpark as previous Mac Pros. Your issue with the complainers is they would like what they would like and didn’t get. Well sure, ok then! Have you never been disappointed by a product you were hoping would be suitable then isn’t?

Apple have priced out a certain section of loyal customers who have been (beyond)patiently waiting for this machine for (literally) years. Please allow us at least a few days to come to terms with the disappointment eh?!

 

[nate13]

Of course I am well aware of Thunderbolt. That adds clutter and cost and doesn’t give the same expansion/upgrade options as the past, it only offers a subset of expansion possibilities.

You can’t add RAM with Thunderbolt. You can’t change the CPU with Thunderbolt. Why should I have to buy an expensive enclosure for times where all I want is a cheap PCI card that costs less than a Thunderbolt cable does?!?

The ‘if you don’t like it don’t buy it/move to Windows/Linux’ argument is as old as the hills and still just as invalid.

As I’ve said before, I don’t think it’s unreasonable to have wanted a Mac Pro that catered to and cost in the same ballpark as previous Mac Pros. Your issue with the complainers is they would like what they would like and didn’t get. Well sure, ok then! Have you never been disappointed by a product you were hoping would be suitable then isn’t?

Apple have priced out a certain section of loyal customers who have been (beyond)patiently waiting for this machine for (literally) years. Please allow us at least a few days to come to terms with the disappointment eh?!

Not here to step on old school Mac fans (being one myself). I appreciate the well formed reply. I think the tough reality is that the industry has changed substantially since the good old G5 days, when an entry level model was $2k ($2600 in today’s dollars). The entry 2012 Mac Pro was $2500, or $2700 today. Yes, it would’ve been great to get that price point for an over engineered base workstation, but people are holding onto computers for longer and longer, and upgrading their personal devices instead, which has shifted the economies for workstation class devices.

My point with the Mac Mini was that for the same price ~2500, you can have a (very fast) 6 core CPU, plenty of ram, and a top tier GPU of your choice (so long as it’s AMD, unfortunately). For the vast majority of users, the storage and video card will be the things that get upgraded, and can be done more effectively with TB3 sleds. And there is a solution that Apple offers at that price point, that delivers great performance, but in a different form factor. I get it’s not a beautiful all in one system, but I think it’s pretty awesome to be able to extend a computers capacity with a single cable. And of course, just max out the Ram and CPU out of the gates!

 

[imageWIS]

Well, that is the only thing that sort of stuck out as a sore thumb when I read the spec's. But here's the deal on this machine. If it is, as billed, really easy to upgrade, swap, and repair various components - including storage - you should buy the low end model for 6 grand, then work on configuring it to your desire for the next several years. Your (and my) first upgrade would be SSD storage. I think they should spec even the low end config of a machine like this to at least a TB SSD - kind of reminds me of what they do with the low end iPhones - spec them to 16 or 32 GB storage, totally inadequate for high end photography and sound storage on a high dollar smart phone.

Then they shouldn't even offer such a machine. It leaves a bad taste in one's mouth... also if you price out the specs of the base model, it's around $3300... WHERE is the other $2700 going, other than straight to Apple? This must be the most overpriced machine they have ever made. THis machine should be priced at $4500 WITH the Apple premium, not $6k.

To say nothing that the top model with monitor will prob max out at $45k...! For what is still essentially a advanced prosumer computer... and when I get challenged on that, here is an actual pro desktop: https://www8.hp.com/us/en/campaigns..._us/en/psg/ws_desktops/products/z8-learn-more which can max out at: 56 cores, 3 TB RAM, 48 TB internal storage, and 3 (THREE!) NVIDIA Quadro P6000 GPUs. Oh, and the cooling design is better than Apple's, with air being directed in different directions on different levels.

Honestly, the new Mac Pro is a big monetary joke by Tim Apple and Co.

 

[09872738]

That’s my issue with the complainers. They want things that are tailored to exactly their specifications, but can’t see the options right in front of them.

Don't be preposterous. Nothing is to specification... the cMP was. G5, yes, G4, too.
The Mac mini's selling point is its small footprint and that's ok.
Don't get me wrong, I had several (including the fabled 2012 i7) until they soldered everything on. Its a decent little computer.

But it will never be a true powerhouse, and attempting to create one requires all the cabling, powerbricks etc Apple usually likes to get rid of.

Not to mention issues with eGPUs (plug and play? Not exactly), it throttles, its SSD is soldered on and last but not least, even if one could ignore those issues: The mini itself is vastly overpriced and eGPUs are not cheap either. 2500 is waaay to much for what it is.

Also your "Linux" argument is invalid. Its not that hard to build a Tower/Midi tower with reasonable specs. Each and every PC manufacturer does it. Every gamer does it. Apple did it in the past.

I wonder why Apple so reluctantly refuses to build such a machine, it could be the no 1 selling Mac.

 

[nebojsak]

Why would I compare a Mac Pro to an iPad? Fact: the new Mac Pro has many advanced features and innovations not found in any existing machine, by any manufacturer.

Well yes, putting together 8-core cpu, low end gpu and an iphone storage size, on the $2k+ motherboard, in the $6k machine - it could be considered a hell of an innovation for sure.
[doublepost=1559793735][/doublepost]

If you buy one of these machines it'll last you a solid 5-8 years at least. Look at the price per year, it's not that bad. Investing in yourself is always a good idea.

If I were Mr Cook, with customer base like that, I would cut down specs a little bit (maybe some $1k+ mb instead of $2k+), raise the base model price to the cca $7k, and it still will be a solid investment.

 

[LasseM]

Hmmm.. It got wheels.... Okay.... so now we know what the Apple Car project was all about....

 

[torana355]

I wonder why Apple so reluctantly refuses to build such a machine, it could be the no 1 selling Mac.

You really don't know the answer to that question?

 

[09872738]

You really don't know the answer to that question?

Weeell, only explanation I could come up with: they are not interested in money. But we know how greedy they are.
So... maybe just lost interest in the Mac coz they make b***loads of money otherwise and they'd rather not deal with the annoyance the Mac has become?

 

[torana355]

Weeell, only explanation I could come up with: they are not interested in money. But we know how greedy they are.
So... maybe just lost interest in the Mac coz they make b***loads of money otherwise and they'd rather not deal with the annoyance the Mac has become?

It would cannibalize their iMac and iMac Pro sales, Apple don't want you to own a machine that you can repair and upgrade yourself, they want you to buy their all in one machines that you need to replace with the latest model in a few years time.

 

[Rockadile]

Unfortunately, Apple has kicked the lower half of current Mac Pro users to the curb and now hope many will be satisfied with the iMac Pro instead.

I'm wondering why it's not in space gray and does it have a dust filter?

 

[PickUrPoison]

The case design is very ugly, the cheese grater holes are too large, the handles and feet are silly looking, and the curves on the box are unnecessary.

This was the wrong direction for Apple to take. An entry level Mac under $1,000 with upgradable modular parts is the right direction.

This box is unobtainable for even pro users. I’ll be hanging on to my 2010 Mac Pro for many years to come. This is getting ridiculous.

If a 10-20 year old Mac Pro is sufficient for your needs, you’re not the target market for this expandable powerhouse.

Or are you? If your last Mac Pro gave you 10 years of use, I’m sure this one would be good for at least that long. So $50 a month. If you’re in the US and it’s for business use, it’s closer to $35 after tax.

 

[lambertjohn]

I'm reaching for my credit card...and my ankles.

 

[orthorim]

Design epic. Pro prices with features actual Pros actually need. This will be a decent seller for Apple, also maybe more importantly will keep Apple relevant in those markets.

1.5TB of RAM? Oh yeah!

The Apple Accelerator (afterburner? some name like that) sounds interesting but I am not a video pro so can't really tell if that is useful. But... given it sounds totally alien to me, I can only guess they did a bunch of market research and found that to be a need.
[doublepost=1559823339][/doublepost]

I think the design is very unique. The grill vent openings are specifically designed to dissipate as much heat as possible by having as much surface space as possible. It's not form over function, but they ensured that it looks good, too. I take it that you don't like the appearance?

Seriously!!

"3D machined on both sides..."

Who else has that?

That's right, nobody. Because everyone else will just slap a big fan or three on every chip and card, meaning the thing sounds like an airplane about to take off. For reasons I will never understand only Apple seems to care about making the damn computers silent. Caring enough about it to go through some near-unreasonable effort to design new vents!

 

[Stephen.R]

Apple seems to care about making the damn computers silent.

I’d wager it’s because someone in apple HQ once turned on a g5 powermac in Steve’s presence and he said “holy **** where is that noise coming from”.

I’m glad the new machine will be (hopefully) silent or low volume (I believe the 2013 is fairly quiet?) but it hasn’t always been that way.

 

[nate13]

Then they shouldn't even offer such a machine. It leaves a bad taste in one's mouth... also if you price out the specs of the base model, it's around $3300... WHERE is the other $2700 going, other than straight to Apple? This must be the most overpriced machine they have ever made. THis machine should be priced at $4500 WITH the Apple premium, not $6k.

To say nothing that the top model with monitor will prob max out at $45k...! For what is still essentially a advanced prosumer computer... and when I get challenged on that, here is an actual pro desktop: https://www8.hp.com/us/en/campaigns..._us/en/psg/ws_desktops/products/z8-learn-more which can max out at: 56 cores, 3 TB RAM, 48 TB internal storage, and 3 (THREE!) NVIDIA Quadro P6000 GPUs. Oh, and the cooling design is better than Apple's, with air being directed in different directions on different levels.

Honestly, the new Mac Pro is a big monetary joke by Tim Apple and Co.

Did you configure the HP that you linked?

Just to get the base Z8 G4 to the entry specs of the mac pro (remember, need to select the Xeon Gold with the 24MB cache!) puts it over 6k, before storage and video cards.

I'm halfway through configuring one that is comparable to the top of the line Mac Pro (56 Cores, 1.5 TB of RAM) and I'm at $81K.

 

[jwdsail]

It would cannibalize their iMac and iMac Pro sales, Apple don't want you to own a machine that you can repair and upgrade yourself, they want you to buy their all in one machines that you need to replace with the latest model in a few years time.

Some over-paid MBA, who's probably never used a Mac for anything besides Excel and Powerpoint, somewhere inside Apple sure seems convinced a headless iMac would cannibalize iMac sales, but it really isn't true.

The people that want a headless iMac with i5/i7/i9 chips, 3 or 4 PCI-E slots and non-soldered ram and storage, are never going to buy an iMac that's glued together and essentially a great 5K 27" LCD with a 15" MacBook Pro glued inside.

They're going to keep upgrading their OG cheese graters and build hackintoshes.

Or, move to Windows.

The over-paid MBAs across corporate America that keep pushing the theory that selling people what we actually want will hurt sales, need to be fired. From a cannon. Into the fraking sun. All of them. And nothing of value would be lost.


www.apple.com/feedback

 

[curmudgeonette]

Just to get the base Z8 G4 to the entry specs of the mac pro (remember, need to select the Xeon Gold with the 24MB cache!) puts it over 6k, before storage and video cards.

Leaked Intel pricing of the new Mac Pro CPUs:

W-3223: $749, 8 core, 8MB L2 + 16.5MB L3
W-3235: $1398, 12 core, 12MB L2 + 19.25MB L3
W-3245: $1999, 16 core, 16MB L2 + 22MB L3
W-3265: $3349, 24 core, 24MB L2 + 33MB L3
W-3275: $4449, 28 core, 28MB L2 + 38.5MB L3

 

[09872738]

Some over-paid MBA, who's probably never used a Mac for anything besides Excel and Powerpoint, somewhere inside Apple sure seems convinced a headless iMac would cannibalize iMac sales, but it really isn't true.

The people that want a headless iMac with i5/i7/i9 chips, 3 or 4 PCI-E slots and non-soldered ram and storage, are never going to buy an iMac that's glued together and essentially a great 5K 27" LCD with a 15" MacBook Pro glued inside.

They're going to keep upgrading their OG cheese graters and build hackintoshes.

Or, move to Windows.

The over-paid MBAs across corporate America that keep pushing the theory that selling people what we actually want will hurt sales, need to be fired. From a cannon. Into the fraking sun. All of them. And nothing of value would be lost.


www.apple.com/feedback

You made my day! Sooo true....

I also fail to see the problem; I'd happily cannibalise the iMac's sales if that means selling two to three times the volume.
Or, in mentioned MBAs mangled line of thought: they take issue in cannibalising iMac sales by a projected "Mac Semi-Pro", but by the same token are fine with cannibalising this "Mac Semi-Pro's" sales by the iMac (by not even creating it).

My theory: the overpaid MBA in corporate America (Europe as well) is the actual reason for so many issues in our society.
People like these MBA believe its actually an accomplishment to reduce corporate costs by paying people badly. I know a company that went bust because they couldn't hire enough engineers. The unrevealed, actual reason: They paid engineers rather badly - the MBAs couldn't stomach the fact that a decent engineer is paid (much) more than themselves. In mentioned company the ceiling for an engineers pay was the MBA's (in german terms, roughly: BWL). So no halfway skilled computer scientist would join them...
Sorry for O/T

 

[nate13]

Leaked Intel pricing of the new Mac Pro CPUs:

W-3223: $749, 8 core, 8MB L2 + 16.5MB L3
W-3235: $1398, 12 core, 12MB L2 + 19.25MB L3
W-3245: $1999, 16 core, 16MB L2 + 22MB L3
W-3265: $3349, 24 core, 24MB L2 + 33MB L3
W-3275: $4449, 28 core, 28MB L2 + 38.5MB L3

Great, when Intel releases this pricing to the public, you should build a computer with these component prices and sell it at cost. Or just build your own, and enjoy it.

Back to my original point (not trying to dispute component prices here!) is that HP is selling a similarly spec'd unit to the Mac Pro for more than the Mac Pro lists for.

 

[-hh]

Thank you.
I have been saying this on this forum and people just don't get it. I work on motion graphics in LA/NY for the past 20 years. I freelance on several high end studios and I doubt they will buy many of these MP's and displays for their staff. It's too much $$$ and companies are budget conscious and they want to see performance for a good price.
Sure, I can see folks buying these but, starting at $11/12k for a MP/Display combo it's too much for a pro unless you are on the super high end bracket that brings Thousands of dollars per day of work.
I am just worried that lack of sales might constrain the further development in the future. Apple should have a option of MP/display starting at $5/6k and not on an iMac form factor.

And another key point is that for many enterprises, there’s “magic numbers” in their purchasing system which makes exceeding it a royal pain. Ours is $10K for the system...can’t dodge it by splitting off the monitor(s), etc.

 

[torana355]

Some over-paid MBA, who's probably never used a Mac for anything besides Excel and Powerpoint, somewhere inside Apple sure seems convinced a headless iMac would cannibalize iMac sales, but it really isn't true.

The people that want a headless iMac with i5/i7/i9 chips, 3 or 4 PCI-E slots and non-soldered ram and storage, are never going to buy an iMac that's glued together and essentially a great 5K 27" LCD with a 15" MacBook Pro glued inside.

They're going to keep upgrading their OG cheese graters and build hackintoshes.

Or, move to Windows.

The over-paid MBAs across corporate America that keep pushing the theory that selling people what we actually want will hurt sales, need to be fired. From a cannon. Into the fraking sun. All of them. And nothing of value would be lost.


www.apple.com/feedback

Except that is not entirely the case, there are plenty of professionals using iMacs to get real work done. I would say the people who won't buy an iMac and build a hackintosh instead are an extremely small minority.

 

[toke lahti]

Amazing, incredible. Apple making the fastest computer in the world again with an accelerator card. Feels like Apple is back with a new Quadra for us all.

For all the Apple noobs out there, here are the 1993 Quadra prices - $6k for this new Mac Pro is totally reasonable in the corporate or scientific research space.

Introduced March 22, 1993:

• Macintosh Quadra 950: 33 MHz 68040 CPU.[6] $7,200 for a floppy drive only model, $8,499 with a 230 MB HDD, and $9,199 with a 400 MB HDD.[2] 8 MB of memory was standard everywhere except for some European countries, where the standard included memory was 4 MB.

• Workgroup Server 95: Sold in several configurations, all of which include a 33 MHz 68040 CPU and a PDS card containing a fast SCSI connection.[7] In the United States, the configurations were split into "File and Print", and "Database" configurations:
  • File/Print: 16 MB RAM, 230 MB HDD, 128 KB L2 cache. $7,589.[8]
  • File/Print: 16 MB RAM, 500 MB HDD, DDS-DC digital tape drive, 256 KB L2 cache. $10,039.[8]
  • File/Print: 32 MB RAM, 1000 MB HDD, DDS-DC digital tape drive, AppleShare Pro, 512 KB L2 cache. $12,839.[8]
  • Database: 32 MB RAM, 230 MB and 500 MB HDDs, DDS-DC digital tape drive, 256 KB L2 cache. $11,319.[8]
  • Database: 48 MB RAM, 230 MB and 1000 MB HDDs, DDS-DC digital tape drive, 512 KB L2 cache. $12,929.[8]

You mean that they still, after almost 3 decades, haven’t learned their mistakes?
Or they still think that getting bigger share from desktop market, they’d face the problems of having too dominant position in market, better to stay somewhere below 10% of the market?
[doublepost=1559862514][/doublepost]

Except that is not entirely the case, there are plenty of professionals using iMacs to get real work done. I would say the people who won't buy an iMac and build a hackintosh instead are an extremely small minority.

The right question should be, if there would be just ”a regular headless desktop mac”, who would choose imac over it?
For service point of view, I’d guess very few corporations.
For visual work, have you ever find a pro that prefers a double glassy glossy screen of an imac, over a nice high quality matte screen?
[doublepost=1559862795][/doublepost]

Video professionals, like myself, have NAS setups which more adequately support the 100TB+ storage needs we have.

Still, many of cMP users used the internal storage bays.
You don’t need wheels to carry MP arounf when storage is inside.
Fortunatey now we do have wheels, when we need to stack the storage on top of MP...
[doublepost=1559862908][/doublepost]

define 'slower'

Basic benchmarks for cpu.
And maybe also gpu?

 

[orthorim]

I’d wager it’s because someone in apple HQ once turned on a g5 powermac in Steve’s presence and he said “holy **** where is that noise coming from”.

Powermac g5 is exactly when Steve came back. I even remember reading something about it. Quiet machines is def one of Jobs’ legacies. Bless him.

 

[PickUrPoison]

Leaked Intel pricing of the new Mac Pro CPUs:

W-3223: $749, 8 core, 8MB L2 + 16.5MB L3
W-3235: $1398, 12 core, 12MB L2 + 19.25MB L3
W-3245: $1999, 16 core, 16MB L2 + 22MB L3
W-3265: $3349, 24 core, 24MB L2 + 33MB L3
W-3275: $4449, 28 core, 28MB L2 + 38.5MB L3

Those prices actually aren’t leaks, the CPUs have been posted on Intel’s ARK for a couple days:

https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/series/125035/intel-xeon-w-processor.html

Note that only the “M” suffix parts are capable of the Mac Pro’s max spec of 1.5TB RAM, and Apple only uses those in the 24 and 28 core models. The 24/28 core “M” parts are $3,000 higher, so the prices for the CPUs Apple is using are:

W-3223: $749, 8 core, 8MB L2 + 16.5MB L3
W-3235: $1398, 12 core, 12MB L2 + 19.25MB L3
W-3245: $1999, 16 core, 16MB L2 + 22MB L3
W-3265M: $6353, 24 core, 24MB L2 + 33MB L3
W-3275M: $7453, 28 core, 28MB L2 + 38.5MB L3

 

[Stephen.R]

Note that only the “M” suffix parts are capable of the maximum 1.5TB RAM, which is the max for the 24 and 28 core Mac Pros.

The interesting (but completely academic for most of us, even those who plan to buy) is whether the 1.5TB max is just about availability of RDIMMs - The higher end xeons in w- series list 2tb as max memory I believe, so possibly it’s the availability of > 128GB modules that sets the 1.5TB ceiling. Would be interesting (again, purely academic for the vast majority of us) if after market upgrades allow for greater capacity using larger modules.