Even in the Windows world, these are niche applications for a small number of customers. PCs are mainly built for gaming. Intel and AMD have a sales decline of 30% y/y. Apple sees what's going on and has changed plans.
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 Silicon Mac Pro Said to Feature Same Design as 2019 Model, No User-Upgradable RAM
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I have an honest question:
Is there a scenario where Apple could just allow multiple M2 Ultra chips? I mean...when I buy ungodly expensive IBM iSeries machines (or even Windows servers, for that matter), they just charge me another $10k for a second processor (I'm dating myself a little here, it might be much more today).
And I know that the second processor doesn't make the server twice as fast as a single...but it helps a lot in various types of loads.
Why can't Apple just create multiple connections...I think they might call them sockets....again, this isn't my area.
They wouldn't be 'integrated', but they would be faster and cheaper than running multiple Mac Pros for heavy loads. And it would be very scalable (the only extra development would be the sockets).
Is there a scenario where Apple could just allow multiple M2 Ultra chips? I mean...when I buy ungodly expensive IBM iSeries machines (or even Windows servers, for that matter), they just charge me another $10k for a second processor (I'm dating myself a little here, it might be much more today).
And I know that the second processor doesn't make the server twice as fast as a single...but it helps a lot in various types of loads.
Why can't Apple just create multiple connections...I think they might call them sockets....again, this isn't my area.
They wouldn't be 'integrated', but they would be faster and cheaper than running multiple Mac Pros for heavy loads. And it would be very scalable (the only extra development would be the sockets).
I think the vast volume of enterprise computers will disagree with that sentiment. Gaming PCs are imo, a small percentage of overall PC sales.
Sounds like you didn't buy the high end Mac Studio.
Can I have some mayo on that word salad, please? Presumably means PCIe slots.
...but the 2019 MP has 8 slots, which take up 3/4 of the internal space. If the new MP only has 2 but stays the same size then it's going to be the most expensive box of fresh air, ever.
My big note of caution here is this: imagine Apple is testing out prototypes new Apple Silicon SoCs (M2 Pro, Max Ultra, Extreme, Ludicrous, M3, whatever) and wants to get them in the hands of software developers then the obvious thing to do is to make a large, spread-out development board with plenty of space for patches and connection points for test gear, with a PCIe slot or two for networking cards etc. (even the M1 seems to have some PCIe lanes for ethernet etc.) ...and if it even needs a case, stick it in a surplus Mac Pro case with more power and cooling than you need to worry about. It would be no big surprise if systems like this are floating around, and if some leaker sees them they'll think "scoop! new Mac Pro!" but in reality it's just a breadboard job that is never going to see the light of day.
As for these bombshells:
Non-upgradeable RAM:
That's inevitable if it's going to use anything resembling the current Apple Silicon SoCs. M2 Max/Ultra might increase the maximum by supporting larger LPDDR5 modules (or larger modules may have become available) although the major RAM bandwidth upgrade already happened with M1 => M1 Pro/Max. Nothing to see here.
Non-upgradeable storage:
If there are PCIe slots, you can add internal storage (dedicated SSDs for PCIe slots, or PCIe-to M.2 cards). The 2019 Mac Pro even has mounting points & connectors for a 3rd-party spinning rust module.
As for the primary, proprietary Apple fast SSD storage - the 2019 Mac Pro launched with these as "non-user-upgradeable" with the same justification as for the Studio*: they're raw flash storage and just changing them won't work because the controller on the T2 (for the 2019MP) or M1 (for the Studio) would need to be re-configured. It's possible - but seems pretty unlikely - that there are actually physical differences between the controllers in different storage configs, but more likely it is is just down to whether Apple chooses to make the necessary function available in their configurator tool. In the case of the 2019 MP, Apple later offered user upgrade kits - no movement so far on the Studio.
* Some are claiming success upgrading the Studio if you install modules in the correct permutations but Apple won't sell you the modules and I don't fancy buying and dismantling two Mac Studios to test it out!
GPU support:
Whether or not you can plug in 3rd party (well, AMD, at least) GPUs is really the big story here - so far, Apple have only been supporting their own GPUs on Apple Silicon. If it definitely supports PCIe GPUs that would be a scoop, rather than something to mention in an aside. They'd also need a lot of PCIe lanes (GPUs are one of the few things that actually make use of x16 slots).
PCIe support:
Plenty of uses for a couple of PCIe slots other than GPUs (esp. if you don't want a rats nest of USB-C cables and dongles hanging off the back) and some users could fill a lot more than 2 slots with audio/video interface cards. However, many of those cards - unlike high-end GPUs - would be fine in external 4-lane TB-to-PCIe enclosures which could be rack mounted along with a Studio-like computer to reduce the clutter. (One of the faults of the Trashcan was that it was exactly the wrong shape for rack mounting - there are already units available that can mount a Studio alongside 3xPCIe slots). Of course, rackmount kit tends to be "serious callers only" prices - but no more so than the 2019 Mac Pro itself.
Heh, yeah, had to reread that a few times and think “I think that’s the wrong acronym” lol.
Don’t think that way. Your gonna live to 95!
The vast volume of enterprise computers aren't being used for graphic intensive programs.
Some other people have already mentioned this, but the one advantage to the fact that the ram and graphics are integrated to the SoC in the same form factor as the 2019 Mac Pro, is that there could be additional space for more expansion. Though, I have a feeling Apple will include I/O in one of those slots like they do with the 2019, it may include some thing bigger to take up more space/lines, and the space where the graphics card is in the 2019, maybe used up by a change the internal layout of the system. It’s hard to know until we see the real thing.
A lack of user upgradable ram is not very Pro for this machine form factor.
Neither is it very sustainable.
Neither is it very sustainable.
TheYayAreaLiving 🎗️
Suspended
I’m assuming the Mac Pro Wheels are going to cost about the same as well?
Thank goodness. My wallet needs a break.
Nope. You're completely right. This is what Gurman does.
How long are you planning to keep your next computer?
I believe 5-6 before you have to change sth.
In 6 years you will be 74. Are you really want to tell me that with 74 you would still be willing to fuss around with upgrading your computer?
Technology is developing rapidly. Especially with all these embedded systems more performant can-do-it-all-computers become more and more available on the market and get even smaller.
In 6 years you will get the same performance as to day probably in a Raspberry-Pi package.
So why would you like upgrading your system in 6 years?
Or let's assume you would be really like doing it.
In that case you would probably go with a WIN-Solution as PCs are more modular than Macs.
But even in that case you would need to replace all the internals = mainboard + CPU + cooling + PSU. And of course you need neew and more storage in RAM and SSD.
And that will make a new computer.
I am not against upgrading. Absolutely not.
I just think that this route will become narrower more and more - and result in a dead end eventually.
You're correct, but I was responding to the member who made a blanket statement that " PCs are mainly built for gaming."
If this is true then I think Apple really needs to change the paradigm for upgradability. That is to start offering logic board or CPU upgrades/swaps again.
I did see them on Amazon for a while for £175.....75% off.
I wonder if Apple is going to surprise us with memory slots. Computers have always had a trade off of storage space versus performance. CPU registers > CPU caches > RAM > Disk > Archive Storage.
Apple’s SoC could have on chip RAM and then offer traditional memory slots. It is a win-win. You get a nice chunk of high performance RAM and you can also add more standard performance RAM.
Apple’s SoC could have on chip RAM and then offer traditional memory slots. It is a win-win. You get a nice chunk of high performance RAM and you can also add more standard performance RAM.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
WHAT IF a Grand Central station-like approach was applied so that apps needing fastest RAM automatically gain access to Apple RAM and apps needing abundant RAM beyond Apple RAM capacity can use the slightly slower RAM they've added in traditional ways?
In other words, does it have to be ALL (Apple RAM) or nothing? Couldn't there be room for Apple RAM + add-on (slightly) Slower (traditional) RAM as a kind of second tier of RAM?
As is, if more RAM is needed than available, the SSD becomes relatively very slow spare "RAM" to swap in and out to main RAM. So how about a THIRD tier: Fastest RAM + (not quite as) Fast RAM + (slow faux RAM) SSD (as last resort)?
This idea seems plausible to me in a hypothetical Mac Pro still built on Silicon. Those wanting maximum Silicon RAM speed would still pay up to MAX out Apple RAM. Those who need more RAM than the MAX available from Apple would have an option. Those willing to have slower processing could pair some amount of Apple RAM with slightly slower add-on RAM.
Last edited:
Am I willing to fuss around upgrading my computer at 74?
Certainly.
I built my first few windows machines. It isn't rocket science nor is it difficult to upgrade.
This is something I’ve been wondering about. Theoretically it’s possible for a hybrid RAM system, but I’ve always assumed the combination would be unstable and that the traditional RAM would be a bottleneck. Would there truly be a benefit in having a system with both?
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
The sure thing will be to embrace the PC. Apple seems to have fully left the station with this rumored Mac Pro being "last hope" for any user hardware flexibility at all.
PCs are quite good. Yes, they are not Mac and macOS and the Apple ecosystem, etc. but if anyone wants an upgradable computer, PCs are certainly that while this Mac Pro only MIGHT be one option for that within the walled garden (and at a relatively shocking price).