Mac Pro Hands-On: Adding Additional SSD Storage Using a PCIe Slot

[citysnaps]

Geez, could you guys at “Macrumors” actually try and replace that 256GB drive or do I need to buy a Mac Pro myself and do this? Pull the damn 256GB drive and put in a new one and install MacOS. Put the pulled out 256GB drive in an external enclosure and reinitialize it. This is BS about the T2 chip and only relates to “adding” or upgrading to the existing SSD with regards to needing Apple to do the upgrade. Nobody here has actually tried To do this.

"Pull the damn 256GB drive and put in a new one and install MacOS."

You can't do that because any after-market SSD NVMe card will have a built-in controller not compatible with the slot the stock 256 GB SSD occupied. Use a PCIe card in one of the eight slots instead.


"Put the pulled out 256GB drive in an external enclosure and reinitialize it. "

You can't do that either, since the Apple factory SSD module doesn't have a PCIe/SATA controller.

Best to just forget about the stock 256 GB card and install your own SSDs on PCIe cards in the Mac Pro's PCIe slots.

 

[thevault]

You're not making any sense.

The MacPro comes stock with 256GB storage. How much would you like? Let's say 1 TB.

Option 1: Get it from Apple and it's an extra $400. And under T2 control. And you'll need to send your computer to Apple if you ever want to upgrade it.

Or...

Option 2: You can get your own superior Samsung 1 TB 970 NVMe M.2 SSD and a PCIe SSD carrier card for less than $200. And then put Catalina on it. And not be under T2 control, have better performance to boot. And not have to send your MP to Apple. Just pretend the Apple 256 GB SSD doesn't exist.

Which way would you rather go? Spend $400 and be under T2 control. Or spend $200, not be under T2 control, have better performance, and not have to send your computer to Apple.

It's up to you. Of course if you want even more storage, say 2 TB or 4 TB, you can roll your own as well for less money, have better performance and not be under T2 control. And not have to send your MP to Apple.
[automerge]1578272115[/automerge]


No, relax. See above.

Complete sense you're not comprehending. Have MP with 256GB if an issue occurs with SSD only Apple can service. In regards to the PCIe SSD I'm buying a card for 4 SSD's onboard not worth purchasing a card to have one. The point is Apple should allow product purchaser to have full control of computer.
Simple

 

[citysnaps]

Complete sense you're not comprehending. Have MP with 256GB if an issue occurs with SSD only Apple can service. In regards to the PCIe SSD I'm buying a card for 4 SSD's onboard not worth purchasing a card to have one. The point is Apple should allow product purchaser to have full control of computer.
Simple

And my point is since you're installing your own SSDs, forget about the 256 GB stock SSD. Put Catalina and boot from your SSDs. You'll never have to worry about the 256 GB unit or need to visit Apple.

Also... from my earlier post, I used a 1 TB drive just as an example. And said you can get PCIe interface boards that will take two or four drives.

 

[PickUrPoison]

Yeah but at the moment it runs only Catalina and who in the world wants to use this biggest OS fail ever (head to head with iOS13).
I fully understand that some people are happy cause Apple gave them at least something after years of waiting. Other people look at it, look at the price and understand that Apple gave em the finger - and those people are not pleased.
I guess happy people need a thing that runs Final Cut - story told. But remember when Apple just dropped Final Cut and the MacPro replacing it with something not ready yet telling you that the PC area is over.

And yes - the MacPro. The trashcan MacPro had the same specs and the original MacPro 5,1 had the same specs, CPU trays, hdd trays and ports. Comparing the 8 PCIe slots to something with only 4 doesn’t impress me since I need at least one for M.2 SSDs and another one for Apple ports and maybe a third one for a some more ports.
But so you are saying this is a special computer for the video artists? Then please have a look at the presentation when Tim proudly tells the crowd how great this thing is for the developers.

But maybe Tim has never met a developer. But I guess the story behind this PC is that Tim fired all the people familiar with PCs and workstations and now some iPhone people are trying to build a workstation.

Are you running 10.15.2 or the 10.15.3 beta 1? Not sure what issues you’re having with Xcode—I haven’t been following your thread—but if you’re on the beta, there will probably be a release not this week but next week.

But regardless, I’d probably go ahead and return your Mac Pro and wait for 10.15.3 or even 10.15.4. The machine was just released, and unless you’re comfortable working through early adopter issues, it doesn’t make much sense to buy this soon.

As a developer, this machine could very well last you 7-10 years. No need to rush it, give it a couple months to stabilize. I think you’ll have much less frustration that way, and you’re clearly frustrated 😡

I understand it’s hard to wait when there’s something this awesome available today! But if you let the early adopters do the hard work of getting a bleeding edge machine up to speed, you’ll likely have a much smoother experience

 

[thevault]

And my point is since you're installing your own SSDs, forget about the 256 GB stock SSD. Put Catalina and boot from your SSDs. You'll never have to worry about the 256 GB unit or need to visit Apple.

Also... from my earlier post, I used a 1 TB drive just as an example. And said you can get PCIe interface boards that will take two or four drives.

My point is when an individual purchases an $8k+ computer he shouldn't have to purchase more components to operate and be in control his computer. Choice. Apple can release the procedure on how one can change internal SSD and everything will be great. Simple.

 

[citysnaps]

My point is when an individual purchases an $8k+ computer he shouldn't have to purchase more components to operate and be in control his computer. Choice. Apple can release the procedure on how one can change internal SSD and everything will be great. Simple.

Not simple. I suspect the need to go through Apple has to do with their security protocols, and publishing a master code in order to upgrade would severely compromise that protocol. Think about it.

You really want to buy a larger SSD from Apple at some point in the future? When you can purchase an aftermarket SSD that will perform better in a PCIe slot?

Also...Since you need to purchase that future larger upgraded SSD from Apple, you're still dealing with Apple.

 

[warnergt]

I installed an NVME M.2 SSD card on a PCIe adapter card in my new 2019 Mac Pro. Very easy and quick.

However, what I would like to do (but am finding impossible) is to make it a bootable Windows drive.
I tried dozens of different approaches but can't make this work. I can't even make it a bootable drive in an external Thunderbolt 3 enclosure. There are many web sites and videos on how to make an external Windows 10 bootable USB drive but these directions don't work with my external Thunderbolt 3/NVME M.2 SSD. When I try to boot from the drive, my Mac Pro 2019 hangs.

Any ideas on how to resolve this?

 

[PickUrPoison]

I installed an NVME M.2 SSD card on a PCIe adapter card in my new 2019 Mac Pro. Very easy and quick.

However, what I would like to do (but am finding impossible) is to make it a bootable Windows drive.
I tried dozens of different approaches but can't make this work. I can't even make it a bootable drive in an external Thunderbolt 3 enclosure. There are many web sites and videos on how to make an external Windows 10 bootable USB drive but these directions don't work with my external Thunderbolt 3/NVME M.2 SSD. When I try to boot from the drive, my Mac Pro 2019 hangs.

Any ideas on how to resolve this?

It hangs on the first re-boot after you install Windows 10? Assuming you’ve allowed booting from external drives, it might be a bug. How did you create the installer, did you use the Media Creation Tool? Are you using Boot Camp? Did you format the partition you’re using as NTFS?

 

[Detnator]

They did not notice the difference in startup times, web browsing, etc from going from a SATA to an NVMe SSD. You know that and I know that. What they may have noticed was going from a full SSD to a less full SSD. As you know, smaller SSD's of all types are generally slower and when SSDs fill up their speed declines a bit too.

Here's an in-depth test comparing NVMe vs SATA:

SATA vs. NVMe: Should You Upgrade Your SSD System Drive? - ExtremeTech

Is your once roomy boot SSD getting full? Now that there are lots of options for NVMe models, it's worth considering whether you should snag one for your upgrade.

www.extremetech.com

You are talking fractions of a second in tasks. You won't notice.



Plenty of companies sell them and I'm sure they are significantly cheaper than this. You can spare the drivel about professionals. I know all too well the target audience and how that time is money. The point is that for edge cases this machine is perfect. For most it's way overpriced. Just like the trashcan was.

Spec a comparable Xeon on Puget Systems' website and tell me this isn't overpriced. Unfortunately they don't do AMD now but they have a reputation as an excellent HEDT OEM.



Having run both OS's - OS X since 2001 and Win 10 since 2017 both are fine OSs. In default configuations both are stable. Your ignorance about Win 10 is immense. The provided MS AV and firewall solutions are quite good and so much so that you don't need 3rd party AV any more. I've not needed any. As for other stuff, what are you referring to? half baked photo management? lacking "office suite"? broken video editor? buggy OS releases? Cause that's all present on the Mac side of things just like Windows. Hell, Windows 10 will let you run Ubuntu and have a near full POSIX command line so that plus for OS X is going out the wayside.

I still like OS X a little more but it's pretty much a draw. There are some things that OS X could learn from Windows and some things Windows can learn from OS X. Both will run for months at a time (not advised) without rebooting and are reliable.

People are feeling the pinch with Tim's de-contenting and price increases. Recent quarter has Apple losing market share https://www.macrumors.com/2019/10/10/mac-shipments-q3-2019-gartner/

Used to be easy to recommend a Mac. A top of the line machine with decent specs for a little more than a comprable Windows machine. Like $200 more. Now you have Macs that are $1k more than premium Windows laptops with less features, and in the case of those with Butterfly keyboards, poor designs. It's a hard sell. Last laptop I wanted to go Mac. But instead of a touchscreen (insanely useful), we got the ****** touchbar, port removals, and a $2k price. I picked up a top of the line HP Spectre for $1500 and it's been rock solid for 3 years now. So tell me again why OS X is so great?

I'm an Apple shareholder so I hope they do well. But under Tim, while they have grown we've seen them gouging the user base, removing features, fragmenting the markets, and releasing flawed designs. Seems they went through this stuff about 3 decades ago and they almost lost the company. This time Steve is not around to fix it.
[automerge]1578266374[/automerge]


That article is a year old. New Threadrippers were released a few months ago that dominate the Xeon chips.

The number of holes in your arguments is immense. I almost don't know where to start.

"They did not notice the difference in startup times, web browsing, etc from going from a SATA to an NVMe SSD."

They did notice. I was there. I saw them notice it. I noticed it also. I'm sorry. You're just wrong. And here's part of why:

"Here's an in-depth test comparing NVMe vs SATA:"

The top speed of the NVMe they're using is 1725MB/s. The speed of the NVMe drive in my MacBook Pro is 2600+ MBps. If you seriously think there's no noticeable difference between 500 MB/s and 2600 MB/s (over FIVE times faster) to anyone who cares, then something is wrong with your perception.

My MacBook Pro starts up in about 20 seconds off the internal drive. I've tried from an external SATA drive in both a Thunderbolt 3 enclosure and a USB-C enclosure. Both take more than a minute. Off an external NVMe drive (970 EVO) in a Thunderbolt 3 enclosure, it's back to the 20 seconds. SATA vs NVMe, significantly noticeable difference.

So why does my experience differ from the guy in the article? Who knows? Something else in his set up is a bottleneck (or multiple bottlenecks). And that's part of the point in macs vs PCs. Bottlenecks. A chain is only as strong as its weakest link. A computer is only as fast as its slowest piece. And any computer is an extremely complex piece of equipment, or more accurately it's countless pieces of equipment all put together. Any one of those pieces (links in the chain) could be bottleneck. He even admits "we picked a slightly older board since that is the kind people are likely to be working around to upgrading."

Apple spends billions on R&D to (usually) make sure ALL the pieces in their computers (including the software) are all the right pieces for each other and there are no bottlenecks. People who build their own computers, and even other manufacturers that build "normal" PCs don't pay nearly as much attention to putting all the right pieces together, and then you get articles like your one above, that can't see the difference between SATA and NVMe/PCIe. Ok, just because he didn't see it doesn't mean no one sees it.

Of course Apple's not perfect and they get it wrong sometimes. Compare the 2019 15" and the 2019 16" MacBook Pros together, spec for spec. The same specced 16"-ers are 10-20% faster in a number of different metrics despite having the same "specs" in them. Some of it is better cooling, but there are a number of other pieces have improved, outside of the "specs". The point being, even the same manufacturer with almost exactly the same hardware, can produce different results. There's a lot more to how well any given computer performs than just GHz and cores. And that's where this Mac Pro is different to the competition.

On bottlenecks again, here's one: Windows. MacOS is much more efficient in a number of ways. The Unix kernel and other things at the core of macOS make a significant difference to real world performance by a number of metrics, including storage.

I work a lot with FileMaker databases. A company I worked for had a rack of six Dell PowerEdge servers running VMWare ESXi and various versions of Windows and Windows Server. We had about 140 FileMaker 11 files to convert to FileMaker 18. After trying various different configurations of the various resources in those Dells the best time we could get out of them for those conversions was about 9 hours. We used up to 8 cores. Any more than that was wasted because a couple of the files were large enough that each given their own cores (with the other files spread over the rest), those two files (a core for each of them) took longer than the rest spread over another 6 cores. So that's 9 hours for 8 cores in Dell PowerEdge servers.

I got it down to under 4 hours on a base model Quad Core 2013 Mac Pro. That machine's four cores did better than 8 cores in Dell PowerEdges (similar generation and GHz Xeons in the Dells as that Mac Pro). Then... on the new 2019 2.4GHz 8-core i9 MacBook Pro (not even a Xeon) I got it down to under 2.5 hours.

So how did I do that? The software (FileMaker Pro) is basically the same. One's running Windows the other macOS. One has a SAN with an array of expensive SAS drives, the other two have a single NVMe drive. Bottom line: my mac laptop performs significantly better than $20K worth of Dell PowerEdges, for this particular task. How?

So I have anecdotal evidence that NVMe vs SATA is, or at least can be, significantly different in real world performance. I have various examples of anecdotal evidence that Macs perform better than Windows machines in at least some tasks. Generally speaking, with any given specs put together by Apple vs the same specs put together by pretty much anyone else, the Mac performs significantly better. How?

But it's not just me: If macOS vs Windows is "pretty much a draw" for you, well, great. But it's not for a lot of other people/companies. So you asked me to tell you again why macOS is so great? I've given some examples above. But hey, how about we let IBM tell you, from their experiences with their 90,000 installed Macs: https://www.appleworld.today/blog/2...ter-productivity-employee-satisfaction-at-ibm

Perhaps you can't see the significant differences between how macOS is outstandingly better than Windows in real world usage for, not everyone, but certainly a large segment of computer users. But just because you can't see it doesn't mean it's not there.

To your rantings about price... you brought up this "A threadripper is better for less $" thing. Please prove it.

And to your: "You can spare the drivel about professionals. I know all too well the target audience and how that time is money. The point is that for edge cases this machine is perfect. For most it's way overpriced..."

Really? You know all too well...? Yes, for the people this machine is for, it's perfect. We're in agreement on that. Seems where we differ is what we think each of the "edge cases" for whom it's perfect and the "most" you're referring to, for whom it's overpriced are. Those "most" for whom it's overpriced... who are they? This machine isn't for them. But it is for more than just "edge cases". Your rant is ridiculous. It's like you're saying a Ford F-150 is overpriced for someone who needs a Focus or any other sedan. Well Duh.

Finally: "Spec a comparable Xeon on Puget Systems' website and tell me this isn't overpriced."

Ok. I tried. I must be missing something because I can't find any options that really compare to the what's in the Mac Pro. The closest specs I can find that compare to the base model Mac Pro are $5K+, and what's in there is still inferior. If I start putting stuff in that's superior to what's in the Mac Pro it starts getting significantly more expensive than the Mac Pro. So what's your point? I challenge you to show me some example of ANY decent brand PC that can compete with this Mac Pro in performance, at a significantly lower price.

Otherwise you're blowing smoke.

[automerge]1578292648[/automerge]

Brillant....Im referring to four cards and purchased with just 256gb.

I want full control over the computer I've purchased and don't want to send my MP to Apple service at anytime. Simple.

I suppose you want full control of your BMW, and don't want to send it to BMW for service either...?j

If you want full control over the computer you've purchased, then Macs aren't for you, and they NEVER have been. This isn't some new Tim thing. Sure, in the past you could upgrade your RAM, HD, and a few other things yourself. Well guess what, you can do that with this Mac Pro too.

Get over the "I can't change the stock SSD." That stock SSD has some very special functionality in how it's tied to the T2 and a few other things. If you don't like that, don't use it. You have FULL control over what you put in all the enormous expansion options in this machine.

I'm sorry, you're just not making the slightest bit of sense. If English isn't your first language then perhaps that's the problem here, and that's forgivable. Either way, I honestly have no idea what you're talking about.

 

[Detnator]

My point is when an individual purchases an $8k+ computer he shouldn't have to purchase more components to operate and be in control his computer. Choice. Apple can release the procedure on how one can change internal SSD and everything will be great. Simple.

I see others have responded to you as well. Bottom line: Dude, get over the internal 256. Ignore it.

You're completely contradicting yourself. On the one hand you want full control to put in your own SSD. On the other hand you're saying you shouldn't have to purchase more components. Make up your mind.

Multiple other people have responded to you, as have I. Get over the internal non-replaceable SSD. Ignore it. Use the enormous expansion options in this machine to put whatever the hell you want in it completely under YOUR control, for less $ than Apple wants for their SSDs. THAT's "Simple". Your arrogance with your use of "Simple" is offensive.

You're talking about the internal SSD as if it's just another SSD. It's not. That SSD performs a number of special functions (many relating to the security and other features provided by the T2) that have value to some people even if not you. Apple is not going to remove it (and all that extra functionality) just for you. And there is absolutely no reason to. If what that SSD provides has no value to you then ignore it. Apple has provided you with the means to put whatever SSD you want in this machine. There's your "Choices". If you're spending $8K+ on it and you can't handle another $200 for your own SSD, then you're another person here just blowing smoke to diss Apple, with absolutely no substance.

 

[Superhai]

On the new Mac Pro, is TRIM support enabled by default for third-party SSDs? If not, can a user enable TRIM support without having to use the command line?

Trim command is part of the (S)ATA specification, so it is not applicable for NVMe which has its own command set where the functionality (deallocate) is included. As NVMe standard is new and "drives" are implemented properly to it, there are no issues with it as it was with SATA where implementation varied from manufacturers and also the spec change from SATA version 3.1. Thus there is no need to enable it as it is already enabled.

 

[Faizan Ahmed]

I am a type of guy who would always prefer Apple official upgrades, rather than third parties' upgrades. That is just how I am.

 

[Onelifenofear]

Not simple. I suspect the need to go through Apple has to do with their security protocols, and publishing a master code in order to upgrade would severely compromise that protocol. Think about it.

You really want to buy a larger SSD from Apple at some point in the future? When you can purchase an aftermarket SSD that will perform better in a PCIe slot?

Also...Since you need to purchase that future larger upgraded SSD from Apple, you're still dealing with Apple.

Actually we don't know that yet... so you can turn of the SIP by booting into recovery and then you can install MacOS onto any drive. Despite the fact the SSD has a Different connector doesn't mean that someone like OWC or Crucial or whoever just won't reverse engineer the connector.

So some things need to happen but it may well work fine. Apple have put a spanner in the works is all. Doesn't mean you can't move the spanner.

 

[PickUrPoison]

I am a type of guy who would always prefer Apple official upgrades, rather than third parties' upgrades. That is just how I am.

Agree. In this case, there are a couple of third party options for hard disk storage, which Apple and Promise co-designed.

PROMISE Technology - Storage Solutions for IT, Cloud, Surveillance and Rich Media

Promise Pegasus R4i 32TB RAID MPX Module for Mac Pro - Apple

Apple Store Search Results

www.apple.com

Promise Pegasus J2i 8TB Internal Storage Enclosure for Mac Pro

Promise Pegasus J2i two-drive internal storage enclosure delivers 8TB of SATA storage for your Mac Pro. This module can be installed in your Mac Pro and connects to the main logic board with included cables. You also have space to add a second 3.5-inch SATA drive to your system.

www.apple.com

It would be nice to see a PCIe 8x high speed controller with 2/4 NVMe slots similarly blessed by Apple.

 

[Onelifenofear]

I am sure that Promise type racks for MNVE and SSD versions will come soon enough.

 

[Peruna]

Many years ago when I got my first job I told myself eventually I’ll get a Mac Pro (that was when the starting at $3000) I think. Fast forward to 2020, starting is at $6000, basically priced out most of the Mac lover. So at this point as much as I love the new line I’m looking at continue to use my 2009 bought used Mac Pro or an iMac if I want a desktop. Sigh, maybe a few more years.....

To be fair, though, the new Mac Pro really isn't intended or marketed to the home user, it is intended for, well PROfessionals. Video professionals specifically who can justify a $10K, $20K...$50K system because it will increase their work flow and pay for itself with increased income. I'm still using my mid 2011 27" iMac (quad 3.4GHz i7) but user upgraded to a now 3.26 TB fusion drive and 20Gb Ram and doin' fine.

 

[FlyingDutch]

Yeah but at the moment it runs only Catalina and who in the world wants to use this biggest OS fail ever (head to head with iOS13).
I fully understand that some people are happy cause Apple gave them at least something after years of waiting. Other people look at it, look at the price and understand that Apple gave em the finger - and those people are not pleased.
I guess happy people need a thing that runs Final Cut - story told. But remember when Apple just dropped Final Cut and the MacPro replacing it with something not ready yet telling you that the PC area is over.

And yes - the MacPro. The trashcan MacPro had the same specs and the original MacPro 5,1 had the same specs, CPU trays, hdd trays and ports. Comparing the 8 PCIe slots to something with only 4 doesn’t impress me since I need at least one for M.2 SSDs and another one for Apple ports and maybe a third one for a some more ports.
But so you are saying this is a special computer for the video artists? Then please have a look at the presentation when Tim proudly tells the crowd how great this thing is for the developers.

But maybe Tim has never met a developer. But I guess the story behind this PC is that Tim fired all the people familiar with PCs and workstations and now some iPhone people are trying to build a workstation.

Cool story.
except nothing in this is even remotely true.

 

[kemal]

Tom says otherwise. Well they Both have advantages and disadvantages.

Core Combat: Intel Xeon W-3175X vs. AMD Threadripper 2990WX

AMD's Threadripper 2990WX challenges Intel's pricey Xeon W-3175X in this battle of the behemoths of the processor market.

www.tomshardware.com

Look a threadripper is fantastic but it's not all about the core counts. There are other things to take in to account like the Memory channels - 4 on the AMD vs 6 on the Xeon. It wouldn't be able to have 8 PCIE slots for example.

The AMD EYPC chips are actually workstation chips but they are as expensive as the Xeon.

The new 64 Core Threadripper and EYPCs will be even better - but well they don't exist yet!

Threadripper 39*0X is a workstation chip that crosses down to high end desktop as it is unlocked for OC. EPYC Roam is a server chip, not workstation. It would be a fairly poor choice for a workstation due to speed, price, NUMA domains. Both are available to reviewers, at least.

General rules:
Dasktop: fast single core, fast multi core, few memory channels, limited expansion (PCIe), OC option

High end desktop: Fast single core, faster multi core, more cores, more memory channels, big expansion, OC included, runs hot.

Workstation: just HEDT with ECC memory and OC disabled with cooler running. The fine points include:
- intel has one workstation chip that can OC. Save your money.
- AMD Threadripper (and even RYZEN!) chips can run ECC memory and OC.

Server: Slowest single core, slowest multi cores, largest number of cores. lowest power draw per core, most memory channels, 128 PCIe 4.0 lanes in EPYC Roam ..... because you want to plug in a metric crqap ton of storage.

 

[guzhogi]

Actually we don't know that yet... so you can turn of the SIP by booting into recovery and then you can install MacOS onto any drive. Despite the fact the SSD has a Different connector doesn't mean that someone like OWC or Crucial or whoever just won't reverse engineer the connector.

I wonder if/when OWC will reverse engineer the connector? However, I've had a number of bad experiences with OWC drives. Either them failing, or not being 100% compatible. I put an Aura Pro into a MacBook Air, then found out it didn't work with 10.13 without having to update the firmware on it. Not a big deal for a techie person like me, but most people aren't techies like me.

 

[citysnaps]

Actually we don't know that yet... so you can turn of the SIP by booting into recovery and then you can install MacOS onto any drive. Despite the fact the SSD has a Different connector doesn't mean that someone like OWC or Crucial or whoever just won't reverse engineer the connector.

So some things need to happen but it may well work fine. Apple have put a spanner in the works is all. Doesn't mean you can't move the spanner.

And then you will still need to engage Apple as that SSD will be controlled directly by the T2.

 

[FlyingDutch]

Having a T2 chip is not actually much more secure compared to let say Linux LUKS disk encryption. This is because T2 chip partly relies on obscurity for its security. Meaning we really do not know how things are being done inside the T2 chip. Who knows there is a backdoor or since it can't be audited by 3rd party then we can't really say that the system is to be trusted because in terms of security the first thing to take into consideration is TRUST and trust means transparency.

One argument of having a T2 chip is so that key management is not done by the OS or CPU which might be compromised already. But my take on that argument is that, if the OS or CPU is already compromise then the T2 chip can not protect your data because it will happily decrypt the data and serve it to the OS. I don't think it has the facility to detect if the OS is compromised. I don't think disk encryption was design to protect your data while the machine is on, i think its core design is protecting data at rest.

Another feature of T2 is it always encrypt your data in the SSD whether FileVault is On or Off. FileVault turing ON means merely requiring you to provide password before T2 chip starts decrypting the drive. This means that the master key for decrypting the drive is stored inside the T2 chip and is not protected by your own password. This means anyone who can gain access to the T2 chip will be able to decrypt the drive. I think thats where the obscurity part is involve. Since no one knows except Apple on how T2 chip is managing the keys inside then we are just hoping no one will be able to hack or defeat the whole system. But of course Apple technicians can always access the T2 chip and probably can decrypt your drive for you. And thats a problem since you really don't have total control on the security of your data. It is different from let say Linux LUKS disk encryption in which it will create a master key for encryption/decryption and encrypt this master key using your password or passphrase. This way no one will be able to decrypt your data without your password. Of course they can always torture or intimidate you so that you will give them your password

So to the question, do you really need to lock the drive to the T2 chip to provide better security. I don't think so.

I wish they could have just implemented it in a way that every time you plug-in a different SSD the T2 chip will format the drive and generate a key for that drive and start encryption/decryption on the fly. This way you can swap your drive without the need to visit Apple which hold the key to your SSD. Sadly you do not hod the key to your data

And also, if the T2 chip dies then there is no way to recover your data without recovering first the key. But fortunately T2 chip is robust enough that they don't just die on their own.

So you basically admitted not to know what T2 is doing but nonetheless you stated LUKS is better.
interesting...

 

[Adoniram]

In theory, could you add a second M.2 drive without a fleecing assistance from Apple? In this picture, you can see there are two M.2 slots, so perhaps the second drive could be added without dealing with any T2 chip issues? Or has anyone confirmed that there is really no communication to the mainboard without going through the T2 chip in either slot?
(source: iFixIt)

 

[aajeevlin]

To be fair, though, the new Mac Pro really isn't intended or marketed to the home user, it is intended for, well PROfessionals. Video professionals specifically who can justify a $10K, $20K...$50K system because it will increase their work flow and pay for itself with increased income. I'm still using my mid 2011 27" iMac (quad 3.4GHz i7) but user upgraded to a now 3.26 TB fusion drive and 20Gb Ram and doin' fine.

I get it. That’s why I wrote what I wrote in kind of a love/hate attitude. Regular joe like us who would love to have a expendable desktop is priced out. Only if Apple can release a 3k version...

 

[FlyingDutch]

They did not notice the difference in startup times, web browsing, etc from going from a SATA to an NVMe SSD. You know that and I know that. What they may have noticed was going from a full SSD to a less full SSD. As you know, smaller SSD's of all types are generally slower and when SSDs fill up their speed declines a bit too.

Here's an in-depth test comparing NVMe vs SATA:

SATA vs. NVMe: Should You Upgrade Your SSD System Drive? - ExtremeTech

Is your once roomy boot SSD getting full? Now that there are lots of options for NVMe models, it's worth considering whether you should snag one for your upgrade.

www.extremetech.com

You are talking fractions of a second in tasks. You won't notice.



Plenty of companies sell them and I'm sure they are significantly cheaper than this. You can spare the drivel about professionals. I know all too well the target audience and how that time is money. The point is that for edge cases this machine is perfect. For most it's way overpriced. Just like the trashcan was.

Spec a comparable Xeon on Puget Systems' website and tell me this isn't overpriced. Unfortunately they don't do AMD now but they have a reputation as an excellent HEDT OEM.



Having run both OS's - OS X since 2001 and Win 10 since 2017 both are fine OSs. In default configuations both are stable. Your ignorance about Win 10 is immense. The provided MS AV and firewall solutions are quite good and so much so that you don't need 3rd party AV any more. I've not needed any. As for other stuff, what are you referring to? half baked photo management? lacking "office suite"? broken video editor? buggy OS releases? Cause that's all present on the Mac side of things just like Windows. Hell, Windows 10 will let you run Ubuntu and have a near full POSIX command line so that plus for OS X is going out the wayside.

I still like OS X a little more but it's pretty much a draw. There are some things that OS X could learn from Windows and some things Windows can learn from OS X. Both will run for months at a time (not advised) without rebooting and are reliable.

People are feeling the pinch with Tim's de-contenting and price increases. Recent quarter has Apple losing market share https://www.macrumors.com/2019/10/10/mac-shipments-q3-2019-gartner/

Used to be easy to recommend a Mac. A top of the line machine with decent specs for a little more than a comprable Windows machine. Like $200 more. Now you have Macs that are $1k more than premium Windows laptops with less features, and in the case of those with Butterfly keyboards, poor designs. It's a hard sell. Last laptop I wanted to go Mac. But instead of a touchscreen (insanely useful), we got the ****** touchbar, port removals, and a $2k price. I picked up a top of the line HP Spectre for $1500 and it's been rock solid for 3 years now. So tell me again why OS X is so great?

I'm an Apple shareholder so I hope they do well. But under Tim, while they have grown we've seen them gouging the user base, removing features, fragmenting the markets, and releasing flawed designs. Seems they went through this stuff about 3 decades ago and they almost lost the company. This time Steve is not around to fix it.
[automerge]1578266374[/automerge]


That article is a year old. New Threadrippers were released a few months ago that dominate the Xeon chips.

Nope.
Windows 10 IS NOT “a fine OS”.
I have to use it daily, but I would avoid it with great pleasure, if possible.

And again NOPE, I don’t want to touch the screen of my laptop. I much prefer the touch bar.

 

[PickUrPoison]

In theory, could you add a second M.2 drive without a fleecing assistance from Apple? In this picture, you can see there are two M.2 slots, so perhaps the second drive could be added without dealing with any T2 chip issues? Or has anyone confirmed that there is really no communication to the mainboard without going through the T2 chip in either slot?
(source: iFixIt)

Those aren’t M.2 slots, and they’re incompatible with NVMe drives. They take Apple’s proprietary NAND memory modules and connect directly to the memory controller on the T2 chip, whereas NVMe drives have the SSD controller on the module itself. The second slot is for capacities greater than 512GB, which operate in an interleaved fashion for faster speeds.
[edit: second slot used for 1TB capacities and above]