Well, you ALSO need a processor that’s sending a graphic signal out, via PCIe, to be picked up and rendered by an external GPU. That, more than anything else, is the blocker. So, if “whatever it is” is targeted for before June, there won’t be an external GPU. If it’s targeted for AFTER June, then listen close to the WWDC presentations and see if they provide any information related to their GPU code definitions. If they’re still indicating that, when a developer calls AppleGPU, that it’s meaning the internal GPU, then no external GPU then either.
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.
Mac Pro Enthusiasts Raise Concerns Over Upgrade Limitations of Apple Silicon
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Same Mac Pro design but in a dark black, I don’t need it but would want it.
I’d love it, simplifies the hardware support vendor contract as they just have to make sure I have enough replacements of just ONE part. But, that’s mainly because I’m all about the ease of support because the quicker I can make basic support an afterthought, the quicker I can focus on, at least for me, the other more rewarding parts of IT.
Just out of curiosity, did you buy a 2019 Mac Pro? What was the original configuration? How did you upgrade it?
My BF did. He has upgraded the storage with an OWC Accelsior 8M2 and added 8 NVMe 2TB drives. He has not upgraded the 96GB of RAM he bought, nor has he upgraded the Duo MPX card he bought. Having PCIe card slots for high-speed storage and other specialized functions like Hyperdeck cards would be why someone who actually bought one of these machine would want one over a Studio.
The ability to support PCIe cards.
The 2013 Mac had more expansion than the Studio (RAM, SSD, Processors and GPUs), but neither support x16 PCIe cards. Thunderbolt 4 is great, but for speed, it still is slower than PCIe x16.
Anyone who read the Steve Jobs biography would know that has long been Apple’s vision. Jobs didn’t think that users should be able to open their devices. Think about every “iDevice” all the way back to the original iMac.
I’m guessing Apple has concluded that it isn’t worth the effort to go after the extreme high end that the current Mac Pro caters to. Hence cancelling the M2 Extreme.
Such a company would not have the resources to build anything competitive. The iPhone subsidizes the development of all the other lower volume products.
If this is really true there’s not much of a reason for the Mac Pro to exist now that there is the Mac Studio. Apple must have some kind of differentiating feature for the Mac Pro.
I want one of those! Curious, what are you getting on the Blackmagic Speed test with that?
I'm still expecting that Apple has been actively working towards the "M* Quadra" since the M1s, and it is just a really hard technical problem to solve. I imagine Apple will try to ship the M3 Quadra, and I hope they succeed.
Really, aren't PCIe slot enough to warrant a Mac Pro chassis...
... and in the future we might still get a (4 * Max) chip, which would be even better.
Big question is how long will they support their Intel based Mac Pro? 5 years? Not such a big deal if it’s not connected to the Internet. Lots of money for a system on life support. I think this transition is going to bite people in the proverbial arse.
So isn’t it obvious that Apple has nowhere to go but to crank up the voltage on an M2 Ultra setup?
I mean if the Max Pro can reach 5Ghz or overclock the GPU then we have something interesting in this machine.
I mean if the Max Pro can reach 5Ghz or overclock the GPU then we have something interesting in this machine.
Hmmm... Gurman's statements are a little weird...
Keep the current Intel Mac Pro case, but don't support anything that necessitates that type of case!? No memory slots, no PCIe slots, no 3rd party GPU support. Huh? So that entire case is for "expandable storage" and a "better cooling system".
1. The cooling system in the Studio is more than enough to keep it cool even under a continuously heavy load. so there's no reason you'd need the Mac Pro case just to keep the M2 Ultra cool enough to get full performance.
2. While I can believe the M2 Extreme may have been scrapped, it would be a huge misstep to release a freaken Mac Pro with just an M2 Ultra. They can afford to wait until the end of the year for the M3 Ultra/Extreme.
3. Apple was well into development of their M-series SoCs when the Mac Pro debuted. They would've known that eventually those SoCs would end up in the Mac Pro and planned accordingly; expandable memory, PCI slots, 3rd party GPU support, etc. They designed that case for all of those reasons.
Keep the current Intel Mac Pro case, but don't support anything that necessitates that type of case!? No memory slots, no PCIe slots, no 3rd party GPU support. Huh? So that entire case is for "expandable storage" and a "better cooling system".
1. The cooling system in the Studio is more than enough to keep it cool even under a continuously heavy load. so there's no reason you'd need the Mac Pro case just to keep the M2 Ultra cool enough to get full performance.
2. While I can believe the M2 Extreme may have been scrapped, it would be a huge misstep to release a freaken Mac Pro with just an M2 Ultra. They can afford to wait until the end of the year for the M3 Ultra/Extreme.
3. Apple was well into development of their M-series SoCs when the Mac Pro debuted. They would've known that eventually those SoCs would end up in the Mac Pro and planned accordingly; expandable memory, PCI slots, 3rd party GPU support, etc. They designed that case for all of those reasons.
I will go over and run it when I have some time. I know it was better than the OWC 4m2 he had before which maxed out because of the Thunderbolt port speed.
Apple has showed zero evidence that they are interested in this.
The difference of GeekBench single-threaded performance from the M2 MacBookAir to M2 Pro Mac mini is only 2.9%.
The difference of GeekBench single-threaded performance from the M1 MacBookAir to M1 Ultra Mac Studio is only 2.7%.
Clearly Apple believes that "a core is a core is a core".
I see no reason to think this will change in the Mac Pro.
Yes.
I hope so. It is also quite possible that the SoC is on a card that would allow a generation or two of upgrades, but probably not more than that (eventually, PCIe 5 or 6 or .... would be needed).
Sounds about right.
Anyone who purchased one without the ability to pay it off in two (or at most three) years probably made a mistake. My BF paid off his iMac Pro in under a year and his Mac Pro in about 15 months.
Will be a very bad move if both RAM and GPU are not user upgradeable.
People who use these machines for work, do not tinker with piecemeal upgrades like that. They amortize the machines in 2-3 years a most (sometimes faster) and replace them as needed. Hobbyists and tinkerers are unlikely to buy $20,000 systems in any case.
That's a really interesting idea.
Given that the majority of the I/O coming off the Package is PCIe, it is absolutely possible that Apple could make a proprietary slot for the SoC package. I don't think they will. but it is plausible.
The only problem I see is that the slot connector and longer PCIe traces would make PCIe gen4 or gen5 more difficult. The physical reality of the PCIe lane traces can make a huge difference with these super faster motherboard communication protocols.
This will be a huge mistake and it will flop.
It’s basically defeating the whole purpose of Mac Pro.
It’s basically defeating the whole purpose of Mac Pro.
Agree, hoping for some sort of just one more thing type of feature, especially if it would be in the same chassis
Why don't they have both Intel and Apple Silicon options?
1) It would have a large R&D cost for Apple, it would be a PR/marketing nightmare (Apple couldn't only comparing Apple ARM chips to old Intel chips); and worse, Apple needs to recoup the upfront cost of their ARM chip initiative, and the more ARM chips they ship, the better it economically works.
2) It would also be extra R&D work for lots of developers, which is the last thing Apple needs right now.