As offered in other threads, Mac Pro is a computer for the few (with plenty of cash) who want/need a very flexible, easily expandable & upgradable Mac. Those who do not need that have plenty of Mac options from which to choose. If
this Mac Pro doesn't deliver on that, it faces the same issues that make the Trashcan and Mac Studio NOT be the new Mac Pro.
So I'm 'thinking different' about Mac Pro potential...
Just because Silicon locks down RAM & GRAPHICS & SSD doesn't mean a Mac Pro must too.
For RAM:
- Slot the Ultras, so that someone needing more than the MAX associated with one Ultra can simply add another Ultra: 192GB RAM becomes 384GB. Create a "grand central"-like way to make them work together, like that technology on the old PowerPC Macs (what was that called???) that allowed tasks to be spread over several Macs linked together. Someone needs more than 384GB RAM? Slot in another ULTRA for 576GB. Make all 3 work together. Yes, this wouldn't be as fast as the EXTREME concept or jamming all of that extra RAM on one piece of silicon but it seems it could be as FAST as current Mac Pro slotted RAM modules.
- AND/OR support third party RAM anyway. It will simply be a little slower than the Silicon RAM. Again, in software, use a "Grand Central"-like approach to put most RAM demanding processing in FASTEST silicon RAM and put slower RAM processing needs in expansion RAM. Think of this like various caches in CPUs. This would introduce a concept of having FASTEST (Silicon) + FAST (regular RAM) + SLOW (SSD Swap "ram") in this setup. Those interested in buying Mac Pros now could still get their 1.5TB of "high performance" RAM made up of 192GB of fastest Silicon RAM and then traditional RAM that should be as fast as what it can be in the existing (aging) Mac Pro (if not faster).
- BOTH: slotted ULTRAS for those who need more FASTEST RAM AND traditional RAM to the moon for those who need more than however many slotted ULTRAS could be put in the case.
This idea of slower RAM gets attacked but anyone who hops on an Intel Mac is unlikely to notice a RAM-based difference in speed of computing. Slotted RAM is no big speed bottleneck in typical uses of Macs. Yes, Silicon RAM is benchmark FASTER than slotted but real work experience probably can't notice except in very specific tasks. Every current Mac Pro user in the world only knows the speed of slotted RAM. So slotted RAM in this new one can't possibly feel any slower than what they know.
In many other threads, "we" are making justification arguments for half speed SSD chips in new M2 Macs because they are "good enough" and "no one can notice in real world use." That same logic(?) can apply here. Slotted RAM as an augment to Silicon RAM should not be slower or noticeably slower.
For GRAPHICS:
Anyone with an objective mind can find hard evidence that third party graphics are faster-to-much-faster than Silicon graphics (albeit at the expense of power vs. power per watt). I own a M1 Ultra myself and freely accept that to be true. Nevertheless, some people would like to use more power to get processing done faster than save a couple of dollars on a monthly electric bill so they can get things done slower but spin PPW as a huge benefit.
For those who need FASTEST graphics, Mac Pro should deliver the option of third-party graphics cards. Else that business that cares about power more than tiny PPW dollar savings goes to PC options. Mac Pro has no concern for battery life so Power should trump PPW anyway.
I see no way around this. If the existing market for existing Mac Pro is X and a chunk of X pays up for Mac Pro for the easy ability to keep up with graphics processing advancements, I doubt that chunk can be sold on "good enough" for life of device for ANY generation of Silicon graphics processing. Deliver the flexibility to use third party graphics card or just about force those people to buy their next Pro from PC makers. Those who feel it is Mac or bust will simply buy an Ultra in Studio, accept the full lockdown, and pay much less a Mac Pro... then "throw baby out with the bathwater" over and over to "keep up with" the latest Silicon graphics power.
Exception: revive the
external graphics card option via thunderbolt connection? But do that and it seems it would have to be spread to all other Macs. So make this an exception
INSIDE of Mac Pro and all other Macs are logically excluded from the option, while delivering a very clear differentiator in support of paying wayyyyyyy up for a Mac Pro.
For SSD:
Up to 8TB is great (and insanely expensive when there's only one source of that storage). And Silicon SSD is VERY FAST. But even 8TB is not enough for everyone. Mac Pro owners enjoy the capability of using some of that internal space to fatten up their storage options, very cleanly,
INSIDE the case.
This one seems easiest to address. The weakest way to support this need would be having some Thunderbolt ports INSIDE the case and basically shelves on which drives can be mounted. Plug into internal thunderbolt jacks just like one can plug an external enclosure into Thunderbolt jacks on the outside.
The
best way to support this is to simply use the PCI-E lanes that will be necessary to support any cards and allow some of them to connect with storage on cards. Conceptually, this could lead to cards with many m.2 sticks mounted on them for gigantic and very fast RAID storage in a relatively small amount of space. Yes, this storage would probably not be as fast as Silicon storage but see the 3 tiers of RAM concept: Fastest SSD (Silicon) + Not Quite as Fast SSD (expansion cards/storage/internal Thunderbolt option) + External storage options like all Macs have now.
Just my "think different" 2 cents. Mac Pro has historically been positioned as "our more powerful Mac" not our most PPW-efficient Mac. I think new Mac Pro must be the most
powerful Mac... not the same powerful (as Studio)... and not just as locked down as Studio.
