Apple to Release Mac Pro and Pro Display XDR on December 10

[bluecoast]

Why is there the Mac Pro?

For professional audio and video production, certainly.

And you can bet that everything made for Apple TV+ is going to use this.

Also, we are entering the age of AVR and VR.

I’m betting that we’ll see some AVR enabled Apple TV+ shows that you’ll watch on your phone, iPad or actual real Apple TV (ie an Apple made screen).

A reasonable assumption is that you’ll need some pretty good hardware to develop applications for these things. Enter the new Mac Pro.

 

[chatin]

The Mac Pro is already obsolete as it uses the Q2,2019 Xeon W-3275 not the refreshed Q4,2019 9th gen parts.

All of the features the new Mac Pro is now missing at launch.



https://www.extremetech.com/computi...veils-cascade-lake-hedt-specs-cuts-cpu-prices

 

[bluecoast]

But not a fast one for the money

I guess that Apple have always sold their hardware and software integration over a pure speed numbers game.

Also see my other comment - I suspect that with Apple TV+ shows there’s going to be a unique hardware and software element (AVR) which we haven’t seen yet. And you’ll need a machine to create this content on.

 

[MarkC426]

In Benchmarks the Xeon Apple uses in the base model is slower compared to a i9 9900K.
So together with a 5700XT, 64GB Ram and 2TB Samsung Evo Pro - I‘d like to say that a little PC (<3k) whipes the floor with the 6K base model Mac Pro. I‘m using exactly this system (vega64 actually) and on the top Linux feels so damn fast compared to macOS and I have CUDA, OpenGL, Vulkan ...

My next one will get an AMD threadripper. The only thing left is the piece of hardware Apple builds to decode and encode 4K streams - but for gods sake I don‘t need it.

That’s nice, but people here are interested in the MacPro and MacOS.......🤪

 

[Quu]

Threadrippers doesn't support Registered ECC, which limits the memory to 256GB at maximum.

You're of course correct, I hadn't considered that, the XEON processors that Apple are offering can address a lot more memory. Of course you could upgrade from Threadripper to EPYC and get 4TB of memory address space for more cost than Threadripper (though the two platforms are very similar and use the same micro architecture).

If you need more than 256GB of RAM I would say go EPYC but if you need less, Threadripper is incredible value.

 

[OkiRun]

Haters are really odd. Why do people care whether sales are high or low, or why would people want sales to be low? It's not a competition, and it's weird that people try to make it one.

Who really cares how many 28-core chips Intel sells, unless you're a shareholder. Go Intel! Go Xeon! Boo Mac! It's ridiculous. Computing isn't sports.

The PC vs MAC hate goes wayyyyyyy back!

 

[NBAasDOGG]

Really? Wow!

Well, he not lying, but restricted to Windows 10.

 

[aaadktda]

Its worth pointing out, 999$ isn’t crazy for what it is. It’s just ... maybe not marketing’s finest hour over there

Or maybe one of it's finest. Apple probably got millions of $ worth of publicity from that stand. It went viral, people made memes about it and to some extent it's still a hot topic.

 

[Stephen.R]

The Mac Pro is already obsolete as it uses the Q2,2019 Xeon W-3275 not the refreshed Q4,2019 9th gen parts.

You realise the "Q4,2019" parts referenced in that article are 2200 series, not 3200 series that the Mac Pro will use? They top out at 18 cores and have only quad channel memory. They're what the iMac Pro uses, IIRC.
[automerge]1575803730[/automerge]

If you need more than 256GB of RAM I would say go EPYC

That works, so long as your workload is 'steady' - they have a much lower burstable frequency compared to base, than the "workstation" chips (aka the Threadrippers and Xeon's).

 

[Abazigal]

Have you considered that maybe they don't want to sell a stand with every monitor? The components used may not be available in huge quantities. Like how Apple has bought up the entire world supply of certain products/components in the past. Or in a wider sense, like how it took China until 2017 to be able to make a ballpoint pen without having to import ball bearings. Yes - 2017.

And for those with VESA mounts already, it would take the cost from $5200 to $6200.

Should've. Yep. Or maybe not.

My guess is that Apple knows their target market a lot better than the people laughing at the idea of a $1000 stand.

I am willing to bet that the target market for such a display are those working in a studio where they already have custom vesa mounts installed for the very reference monitors that this XDR display is aimed at replacing.

In this context, giving users the choice to pick either a VESA mount or the official Apple stand (or perhaps even none of them, assuming said monitor is backwards compatible with their existing VESA mounts) actually makes a lot more financial sense compared to inflating the price with mutually exclusive optional items.

When you consider that the alternative is to raise the price unnecessarily just to coddle the people who aren't remotely likely to buy it, it's actually a very reasonable move for Apple to take.

Now that's courage.

 

[OkiRun]

So your complaint is, Apple's top of the line Pro Workstation, is unaffordable for ****ing college students?


NO ****ING **** GENIUS. An 18 wheeler is also unaffordable for ****ing college students. So is a bulldozer or a god damn fishing trawler.

There's always the student discount?
[automerge]1575804501[/automerge]

I'm sure it's been confirmed, but something about the layout / type on that email doesn't look very polished could make me think it's a fake.

I have not received a message in Japan as of this moment...

 

[RammyXX]

Still disappointed they made this a workstation for the highest-end professionals only. I would have rather seen something like the previous two Pros, that were still affordable for small studios or individuals and cost only half for the base configuration of the new Pros.

 

[dantroline]

Still disappointed they made this a workstation for the highest-end professionals only. I would have rather seen something like the previous two Pros, that were still affordable for small studios or individuals and cost only half for the base configuration of the new Pros.

You're right. Apple has left a hole in the market and it is going to be a boon for cloners.

 

[Kpjoslee]

You're right. Apple has left a hole in the market and it is going to be a boon for cloners.

Power Computing is coming back? 😄

 

[OkiRun]

I can’t think of any working pro who wouldn’t be able to cover the delta between $6k and what you think the base Mac Pro should cost. You’re talking about maybe $50-60 a month over a five year life cycle. That’s a fraction of one billable hour for most.

Finally... some sanity as it pertains to the real business world. I'm retiring a late 2015 iMac and replacing with the Mac Pro 7.1 and display. It's the normal process for machines out of warranty and that are worn out and of old technology. I use PCs in my company too.
[automerge]1575805560[/automerge]

Mythical displayless xMac that Apple is no longer interested in making.

It might help some to stop referring to this iteration (at least in their mind) as a Mac Pro. Best to begin referring to it as the ProXDR. See, Apple didn't abandon the Mac Pro user. It just came out with a high-end ProXDR for professionals. It's like counseling for the disappointed.

 

[linuxcooldude]

Totally agree. As a developer I am not at all a fan of AMD GPUs. I do not have the budget or time to develop specialized code for a GPU that has maybe 20% market share. So until Apple eventually incorporates an NVIDIA GPU, there is no business case for me to purchase one of their high end machines. I don't care how fast the Radeon might be or what the specs claim because at the end of the day the AMD device is incompatible with the vast majority of GPU code being written. Frankly, any old $250 NVIDIA card from 3 years ago is better because at least my software can compile and run on it.

It's not about whether Apple supports Nvidia, it's that Nvidia is planning on stopping support for CUDA on MacOS in the next version. Nvidia has the ability to support Drivers and CUDA on MacOS if it wants too.

 

[skippermonkey]

At last! My trusty old 2010 Mac Pro can go on admin/rendering/storage/backup duties. So excited to get a new Mac Pro after all these years – irrespective of cost, lack of CUDA, AMD Threadrippers, DIY PC builds… et-bleeding-cetera. Bring on Tuesday and the BTO.

 

[0134168]

Apple Tags would have been a very good Christmas present. Looks like it's not going to happen and this is the last product release this year.

Apple Tags is going to destroy all other tags business. Whenever they realease it. They know.
[automerge]1575806031[/automerge]

At last! My trusty old 2010 Mac Pro can go on admin/rendering/storage/backup duties. So excited to get a new Mac Pro after all these years – irrespective of cost, lack of CUDA, AMD Threadrippers, DIY PC builds… et-bleeding-cetera. Bring on Tuesday and the BTO.

Wise guy!

 

[basehead617]

In Benchmarks the Xeon Apple uses in the base model is slower compared to a i9 9900K.
So together with a 5700XT, 64GB Ram and 2TB Samsung Evo Pro - I‘d like to say that a little PC (<3k) whipes the floor with the 6K base model Mac Pro. I‘m using exactly this system (vega64 actually) and on the top Linux feels so damn fast compared to macOS and I have CUDA, OpenGL, Vulkan ...

My next one will get an AMD threadripper. The only thing left is the piece of hardware Apple builds to decode and encode 4K streams - but for gods sake I don‘t need it.

Serious question - what professional audio/video work are you doing on a Linux machine? What applications?

I didn't know it was in use in the industry at all.

If you're not, why are you interested in macs?

 

[Sakurambo-kun]

I wonder how many pros are left on Mac OS. Surely pretty much all of them will have moved to Windows years ago?

As for this machine, the specs are nice enough but they're crippled by Mac OS' useless 3D graphics support. A version of OpenGL which is a decade out of date and laughably slow, no Vulkan, and of course no DirectX. I'm not aware of a single pro 3D app which supports Metal.

 

[Onelifenofear]

Every medium studio I’ve work for still does. Some have PCs as render stations and for huge 3D scenes. Lots have iMac Pro’s

I wonder how many pros are left on Mac OS. Surely pretty much all of them will have moved to Windows years ago?

As for this machine, the specs are nice enough but they're crippled by Mac OS' useless 3D graphics support. A version of OpenGL which is a decade out of date and laughably slow, no Vulkan, and of course no DirectX. I'm not aware of a single pro 3D app which supports Metal.

Autodesk
Foundry
Adobe
Maxon
Redshift
Octane
And loads of others are supporting metal starting with this Mac Pro.

openGL is slow everywhere.

 

[OkiRun]

I wonder how many pros are left on Mac OS. Surely pretty much all of them will have moved to Windows years ago?

As for this machine, the specs are nice enough but they're crippled by Mac OS' useless 3D graphics support. A version of OpenGL which is a decade out of date and laughably slow, no Vulkan, and of course no DirectX. I'm not aware of a single pro 3D app which supports Metal.

You have a limited idea of the word 'pro'...

https://machow2.com/best-cad-mac/

 

[Onelifenofear]

But not a fast one for the money

oh do you have one on test?

 

[Sakurambo-kun]

Autodesk
Foundry
Adobe
Maxon
Redshift
Octane
And loads of others are supporting metal starting with this Mac Pro.

openGL is slow everywhere.

OpenGL is plenty quick on Windows, not that it's needed, as Windows has Vulkan and DX.

I wasn't aware Autodesk had added Metal support. This is in Maya?

What about Allegorithmic? Capture Reality? Agisoft? Epic? Unity? Marmoset?

 

[mdriftmeyer]

Cuda is dead! Long live AMD's RDNA GPUOpen!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPUOpen

You mean Metal 2/3 long live. The RDNA Architecture has nothing to do with the new Mac Pro, presently. The base model has the GCN Polaris 580 and then it's Vega Pro. It's HBM2 behemoths are GCN Vega VII Pros. The upcoming RDNA II is meant to be the first big Compute capable designs to compete with Nvidia 2080Ti and Lisa Su has said both HBM and GDDR6 based versions will appear.

In 2020 both Samsung's HBM2e or SK-Hynix based memory and range from 16GB, 32GB, 64GB [depending upon the stack sizes between 4-16 GB per stack] options will be available. The world of ``8GB of GDDR6'' is all you'll ever need is wearing thin.

SK-Hynix: https://www.skhynix.com/eng/pr/pressReleaseView.do?seq=2809&offset=1

Samsung: https://www.samsung.com/semiconductor/dram/hbm-aquabolt/

There is a reason Radeon HBM2 based cards were limited run on the Radeon VII--both Samsung and SK-Hynix have focused on the successor--HBM2e.

Apple needs as much Metal capable resources it can get its hands on, from Macbooks to Mac Pros. CUDA is a competitor to Apple Metal APIs--something nearly everyone on this site overlooks. Apple has zero interest nor need to add Nvidia to its mix of AMD discrete and Intel integrated GPU capable solutions for Metal. Apple took the best of OpenCL--their invention, and released Metal long before Vulkan/DX12 were a reality.

Metal 3 was announced at WWDC 2019, but the final product isn't out yet. I suspect that happens the day the Mac Pro goes on sale.

http://metalkit.org/2019/06/10/introducing-metal-3.html

Both Apple and AMD have been moving targets on when RDNA II and Metal 3 to take advantage of the RDNA based architecture will be generally available for the Mac platform.