Yeah… that’s me. I needed a Q840v to record video in the 90s… I don’t now… still absurdly priced but… I’ll go find a new work flow and ideology.
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 Unveils New Mac Pro With M2 Ultra Chip and More
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
They did that LONG ago. Today was just more of the same.
It sounds to me like you have a VERY good idea who this machine is for, to me! Good Job!
The bandwidth of M2 Ultra is WAY slower than workstation GPU which is totally meaningless. Having more VRAM doesn't really mean it's faster and there are so many factors to consider. Beside, Apple GPU itself is way slower than RTX 30 series so VRAM doesn't mean better or faster.
It doesn't make sense to me either. It wouldn't be cannibalizing their existing hardware sales, so what's the downside?
You are probably right. Call your broker, it is time to sell. This is a gigantic misstep.
Forums full of people whining becuse they are trying to squeeze the last two cents out of a machine by throwing a 100 more dollars at it. Sure, you can fiddle around and add some cards, slip in a faster CPU from the same vintage as the machine, maybe add a little more ram, heck maybe even max it out beyond what Apple said it would support new, but in the end you aren't really taking it any further than what you could have just speced it out when it was new and certainly not anywhere near what a modern machine supports. Really a bad investment as a personal machine and a lagging relic if you are doing paid work on it.
I have 4 cheese-graters in my garage, a 2006, 2008, 2010 and a 2012. (that's not even counting the 2 G5s that have long since been recycled) I moved to a 2013 trashcan and then opted for the iMac Pro which I replaced with an M1 MacBook Pro and then eventually with a Mac Studio Ultra. Each upgrade was justified by revenue and workload. The old hardware was depreciated and written off. I didn't have to crack open cases and fiddle with upgrades and scour forums looking for driver hacks or patch the OS. I kept my hardware current and supported and I didn't miss a beat.
I was really hoping Apple would stick with ECC RAM in at least the Mac Pro, and in my wildest dreams, add it to the updated Studio as well. In reality what Apple dis is save me a **** ton of time and effort that I was going to expend developing ZFS to work flawlessly with Apple Silicon Macs. Without ECC RAM, there really is no point.
Mac Pro without third party GPU support isn't a Mac Pro. #NotMyMacPro
The MBP is a nice computer but not a halo product. You are likely correct, they no longer have a halo product.
Welcome to a repeat of the waxing days of John Sculley.
Quadra 840 AV was a sweet machine. It let me move off a IIfx and dump half my cards.
I recall one of the first Mac Pro rumors was a double rumor, that 2 were in development. One would be a similar form factor, and the second would be a much more compact design. The second turned out to be the Studio, of course. Do you guys recall that early rumor, and who made it? I think it was in 2021.
I was referring to external expandability via the 4/6 Thunderbolt ports (and have edited my original post to make that clearer).
But as I noted, the 2013 Mac Pro also had 6 Thunderbolt ports, but for people whose work flows were designed around components that connected via PCIe expansion cards, that meant either having to move to an external solution or purchasing external Thunderbolt enclosures to place those PCIe cards into which meant that "elegant small PC" was surrounded by boxes/enclosures.
That was Mark Gurman at Bloomberg:
Bloomberg: Apple Silicon Mac Pro May Feature Up to 32 High Performance Cores, 128 Core Option for Graphics
Apple is working on an updated model of its Mac Pro that may feature an Apple silicon chip with as many as 32 high performance cores, and a 128 core...
www.macrumors.com
There’s nothing special about it. It’s just another computer doing computery type things that a small (compared to all the non-Mac platforms) number of folks will choose to work and make money on or just use. And, Apple stands to profit in some way from a percentage of those users/developers efforts.
That’s what I thought I heard, too. Just finished the Platforms State of the Union (will likely fire up the ‘mac for gaming’ threads with the stuff starting at 27:30
) Haven’t watched the Keynote again yet.Agree, or disagree, Vision Pro is now Apple's halo product. That's their vision of the future.
Absolutely right. This Mac Pro is made ONLY for those cases where it’s a ridiculously overpriced solution that CAN’T be solved other ways.
For MOST people buying their first computing systems this year? An iPhone would be enough
The comparisons I’ve seen are using code that’s been highly optimized for Intel/Nvidia systems for years. So, while comparisons are out there, they’re likely using code that’s not tuned for a TBDR display path. It’s a useful comparison, but not for raw performance, more for answering “which one does best running the code that’s been tuned for Intel and Nvidia solutions?” The answer is never surprising!
You could have told them back with the FIRST Apple Silicon was released.
Apple made SUCH a big deal about it during their initial developer videos about how Apple Silicon systems are different from Intel Macs, it was clear that there were going to be the same number of third party GPU’s for Apple Silicon as there were third party GPU’s for the SoC’s they created for the iPhone. No? Because the reasons for why they didn’t, haven’t changed, really.
LOL I was JUST saying earlier today that, even though it’s been made clear, once again, what Apple’s direction with GPU’s is, there’s still going to be folks saying otherwise because it gets clicks!
