New Mac Pro Confirmed to Have Removable CPU

[calaverasgrande]

Check out the 2.9 GHz 10-core! If you don't need those extra two cores, it's a steal, at about the same price as a 3.0 GHz 8 core.

that is the one I have my eye on.
One good thing about Xeons vs i5 or i7 chips is that server parts tend to have legs. I can still find bits and pieces for our HP DL380 servers 7 years after they were bought. Well except one fiddly raid battery.
But as far as Ivy Bridge Xeons, we can probably count on those being in channel for a couple years. Though from what I understand the next version of LGA 2011 will be incompatible. So read those descriptions carefully when buying ebayed chips!

 

[GJN]

In my eyes the only reason Apple did this was to save BIG bucks. Seeing how these are built and assembled in the US, much higher wages than anywhere else they would be assembled, they want to do everything to cut costs. But allowing the internal mold/construction to remain the same across all the models, with no soldered or difficult to remove parts, it allows ONE single MacPro to become any configuration. Doing so will allow MacPro's to be easily constructed and customized, repaired and replacement parts to be installed. All of that will in turn reduce the amount of time i.e. money Apple technicians need to build and repair these machines. I'd like to believe Apple did to for the consumer but I HIGHLY doubt that. It just makes financial sense for them to allow one chassis for any new MacPro.

Excellent point. It should also make the units readily serviceable at local Apple stores.

 

[rGiskard]

It's an upgrade. We're not going to get into the semantics of what the word means.

Now we come to you and the GPUs. Are you certain that, when Apple does update the Mac Pro to 7,1, that the GPUs will NOT be pin-compatible with the current 6,1? Here are some things to think about before answering and/or taking the bet: Costs. Why would Apple invest $N into developing a proprietary GPU card form factor that will only work on one generation of Mac Pro? The ROI there sucks. What's more likely is that this is the new GPU form factor for Apple's Mac Pros for the foreseeable future, and that any new ones they come out with will work just fine in today's 6,1. There may need to be an EFI or firmware flash, but, oh no! We haven't done that before, have we? (See: 4,1 Mac Pros becoming 5,1 Mac Pros...)

Personally, I think you're making some massive assumptions based on very little first hand knowledge.

I certainly admit the possibility that new GPU boards will fit in old MPs. But I don't consider buying repair parts from Apple to be an "upgrade". I notice you preemptively brought up "semantics" because you know you're pushing the definition of what an "upgrade" is.

Under the scenario you pose, nMP users are restricted to OEM GPU part replacements direct from Apple. No GPUs that weren't CTO options. To prevent the parts from being used as "upgrades", all Apple needs to do is price them absurdly high and/or restrict sales to Apple authorized service centers.

Furthermore, even IF Apple were to freely sell those GPU boards at reasonable prices, their use will be limited to MP users with the technical skills to install them. It's not going to be like a typical CPU upgrade with four idiot-proof heatsink screws.

Ultimately for something to be an "upgrade", I think it must be freely available and economically viable. So while I could swap out the internal components of my 2009 Mac Pro to make it identical to a 2012 Mac Pro, I would not call that an "upgrade" since it would be cheaper to simply buy a 2012 MP. I suspect that it's not going to make economic sense to buy a used macpro6,1 and upgrade it with macpro8,1 GPUs.

I hope I'm wrong, but based on the GPU board design and Apple's history regarding upgrades, I'm not optimistic.

 

[calaverasgrande]

Impossible? No. But it is different, more like:

CPU: yes

RAM: yes

GPU: probably not, at least not with standard cards. This is still a big question for me...

USB ports? Yes, via hubs. May not be the most optimal solution depending on your use case, but it can be done.

SATA ports? Replaced with Thunderbolt for eSATA and a PCIe connection for internal drives. This is a good upgrade overall. The only downside is, for now anyway, it's a good deal more expensive.

Ethernet/Fiber Channel - MAY be mooted with IP over Thunderbolt, depending on how well it works in practice.

TB has a much shorter maximum distance than ethernet or fiber, which both can push dozens or even hundreds of meters.
Try even finding a TB cable that is longer than 10 yards.

 

[rGiskard]

Impossible? No. But it is different, more like:

CPU: yes

RAM: yes

GPU: probably not, at least not with standard cards. This is still a big question for me...

USB ports? Yes, via hubs. May not be the most optimal solution depending on your use case, but it can be done.

SATA ports? Replaced with Thunderbolt for eSATA and a PCIe connection for internal drives. This is a good upgrade overall. The only downside is, for now anyway, it's a good deal more expensive.

Ethernet/Fiber Channel - MAY be mooted with IP over Thunderbolt, depending on how well it works in practice.

My Nehalem MP has USB 3.0 ports via PCIe card. Such an upgrade is not possible on a new MP.

 

[MattInOz]

I
To get on topic, the breakdowns do show that the whole machine is surprisingly, almost elegantly easy to disassemble, but the GPUs remain the biggest question for me. They look like bog standard graphics cards with the fan housing stripped off, but I haven't seen a single connector in any of the shots. What they are (I'm guessing they're PCIe 16x), or where they're positioned on the card itself.

The two GPU's seem to be using the same pin grid that is used on the back panel. That one looks like a 10 x 32 grid (photo to low res to be sure). 320 pins is almost enough to do 2 completely separate PCIe 16x connections.

 

[Renzatic]

TB has a much shorter maximum distance than ethernet or fiber, which both can push dozens or even hundreds of meters.
Try even finding a TB cable that is longer than 10 yards.

That depends. If IP over Thunderbolt requires a TB cable, then you have a good point. But if it uses an external fiber network card that interfaces with your computer via TB, but uses fiber cable otherwise, then it's not that big of a deal.

Though out of curiosity, what's the average bandwidth of a fiber network setup? 10Gb?

 

[Cisco_Kid]

TB has a much shorter maximum distance than ethernet or fiber, which both can push dozens or even hundreds of meters.
Try even finding a TB cable that is longer than 10 yards.

11 Yards

http://store.apple.com/us/product/HE125VC/A/thunderbolt-33-ft10-m-optical-cable-by-corning?fnode=51&fs=s%3DpriceHL

 

[LordVic]

11 Yards

http://store.apple.com/us/product/HE125VC/A/thunderbolt-33-ft10-m-optical-cable-by-corning?fnode=51&fs=s%3DpriceHL

10 Metres = 9.77 yards

edit:

HOLY MOTHER OF>...... $330 for 10meter cable...

 

[TMay]

not only that, is GPU upgrades, if this is a proprietary board design, would be exclusively sold / controlled / maintained by Apple.

I dont imagine AMD sold the reference designs of these boards to their regular licensees.

And expansion GPU's via thunderbolt will not be done unless Intel gets off their might high horse and allows thunderbolt development for GPU's

So, you're saying Intel is blocking TB for use with GPU's? Not seeing any reason for this action. Do you have a link?

 

[LordVic]

So, you're saying Intel is blocking TB for use with GPU's? Not seeing any reason for this action. Do you have a link?

i'll see if i can dig it up again:

back in 2011/12, when Thunderbolt came out in the Macbook airs, I was extremely hopeful that i'd get an external GPU box on thunderbolt to give me some form of desktop expandability.

never happened. started to look into what sort of costs and development was available.

found the developers sign up package and in it, they explicitly say that no external GPU projects will be licensed, and do not provide further information.

i have my speculative reasons why. and it's mostly due to Intel not wanting competition to their HD series graphics parts.

 

[N64]

not only that, is GPU upgrades, if this is a proprietary board design, would be exclusively sold / controlled / maintained by Apple.

I dont imagine AMD sold the reference designs of these boards to their regular licensees.

And expansion GPU's via thunderbolt will not be done unless Intel gets off their might high horse and allows thunderbolt development for GPU's

To be fair, some GPUs can connect over Thunderbolt (and it has been done), but pro GPUs will require too much bandwidth for that. I've heard that it'll work with 2 Thunderbolt cables.

If Apple controls all of the GPUs for this, they have a monopoly on it. They'll charge something really high.

----------

TB has a much shorter maximum distance than ethernet or fiber, which both can push dozens or even hundreds of meters.
Try even finding a TB cable that is longer than 10 yards.

Yeah, but there could be adaptors. There's already TB to ethernet.

 

[calaverasgrande]

That depends. If IP over Thunderbolt requires a TB cable, then you have a good point. But if it uses an external fiber network card that interfaces with your computer via TB, but uses fiber cable otherwise, then it's not that big of a deal.

Though out of curiosity, what's the average bandwidth of a fiber network setup? 10Gb?

actually more like 8gb or 4gb. There are 10gb HBAs too though, I've seen some faster ones but we arent using any here.
The main advantage of fiber isn't speed. It's speed combined with distance. We have a fiber run about a mile long to the stadium down the street. Cost us a mint to put it in, but we don't have to pay thousands for every single time we connect via AT&T, Level 3 or some other provider. And better, we can maintain both ends in house, and barring cut fiber, we can recover any problems in house.
I'll be interested to see how TB evolves. The optical side of TB has yet to show up for the party, so perhaps that will provide the "long distance version" for NAS arrangements where the array resides on another floor.

 

[rGiskard]

SATA ports? Replaced with Thunderbolt for eSATA and a PCIe connection for internal drives. This is a good upgrade overall. The only downside is, for now anyway, it's a good deal more expensive.

The PCIe connection for internal drives would be great if there were more than one, and if it used a standard type of connector that enabled the use of common aftermarket drives.

----------

So, you're saying Intel is blocking TB for use with GPU's? Not seeing any reason for this action. Do you have a link?

So far, TB doesn't offer enough bandwidth to make it practical for GPU use.

PCI Express, 16 lane:
v3.0: 15.75 GB/s
v4.0: 31.51 GB/s

Thunderbolt 2: 2.5 GB/s

 

[mrxak]

This news should not surprise anybody. Now we just need to find out if Apple is going to sell video updates.

 

[N64]

So far, TB doesn't offer enough bandwidth to make it practical for GPU use.

PCI Express, 16 lane:
v3.0: 15.75 GB/s
v4.0: 31.51 GB/s

Thunderbolt 2: 2.5 GB/s

Those are the maximum bandwidths of PCIe, not the maximum bandwidth that every GPU uses. Some will work according to some people here (http://forums.creativecow.net/thread/378/2912), but I read that it's not practical for high-end GPUs.

 

[Cisco_Kid]

10 Metres = 9.77 yards

edit:

HOLY MOTHER OF>...... $330 for 10meter cable...

http://www.checkyourmath.com/convert/length/feet_yards.php

Thunderbolt 33 ft./10 m Optical Cable by Corning
http://store.apple.com/us/product/HE125VC/A/thunderbolt-33-ft10-m-optical-cable-by-corning?fnode=51&fs=s%3DpriceHL

33 ft = 10.999 yards.

Last time I was in school 1 Yard - 3 Feet

 

[LordVic]

The PCIe connection for internal drives would be great if there were more than one, and if it used a standard type of connector that enabled the use of common aftermarket drives.

----------



So far, TB doesn't offer enough bandwidth to make it practical for GPU use.

PCI Express, 16 lane:
v3.0: 15.75 GB/s
v4.0: 31.51 GB/s

Thunderbolt 2: 2.5 GB/s

To be fair, some GPUs can connect over Thunderbolt (and it has been done), but pro GPUs will require too much bandwidth for that. I've heard that it'll work with 2 Thunderbolt cables.

If Apple controls all of the GPUs for this, they have a monopoly on it. They'll charge something really high.

----------



Yeah, but there could be adaptors. There's already TB to ethernet.

i'll see if i can dig it up again:

back in 2011/12, when Thunderbolt came out in the Macbook airs, I was extremely hopeful that i'd get an external GPU box on thunderbolt to give me some form of desktop expandability.

never happened. started to look into what sort of costs and development was available.

found the developers sign up package and in it, they explicitly say that no external GPU projects will be licensed, and do not provide further information.

i have my speculative reasons why. and it's mostly due to Intel not wanting competition to their HD series graphics parts.

took me a bit of link delving but I found it again!

http://f.cl.ly/items/1Q1X3F210F0L0E0l0n0T/Thunderbolt Developers Application - V1.2.pdf

that was Intel's developer sign up form.

and some people who did it succesfully but unnoficially http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/...harges-macbook-air-graphics-performance-by-7x
http://forum.techinferno.com/diy-e-...o-expresscard-pe4l-internal-lcd-[us$250].html


doing so does see performance overhead losses due to bandwith restrictions to the cards. high end cards took a performance hit, but were still able to outperform intels integrated options.

 

[N64]

took me a bit of link delving but I found it again!

http://f.cl.ly/items/1Q1X3F210F0L0E0l0n0T/Thunderbolt Developers Application - V1.2.pdf

that was Intel's developer sign up form.

and some people who did it succesfully but unnoficially http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/...harges-macbook-air-graphics-performance-by-7x
http://forum.techinferno.com/diy-e-...o-expresscard-pe4l-internal-lcd-[us$250].html


doing so does see performance overhead losses due to bandwith restrictions to the cards. high end cards took a performance hit, but were still able to outperform intels integrated options.

Thanks. The one about the MacBook Air was on MR a while ago.

 

[wwinter86]

But what about removable graphic cards?

 

[LordVic]

But what about removable graphic cards?

what do you mean? like internally?

what would be the point? Thunderbolt is inferior in speed to directly connecting to the PCI-e bus. it makes little sense to go from PCI-e -> thunderbolt -> GPU if you're all within the same chassis.

the same rules of Simplicity should be applying even here. K.I.S.S. Keep it simple stupid. (not calling you stupid, it's just a common saying)

 

[fullstop102]

excellent!

Does this mean that I can put this one there and save $800?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116925

Not only that, but you have a CPU to package up and sell. Even more savings

 

[Illusion986]

Ok OWC, iPhone photos, really? Office cant afford a DSLR?

I want to see what the power supply looks like to run all that beefy hardware and yet still fit in that tiny area.

Ok DonutHands, bitching about photo quality, really? Telling others how to spend their money?

But i would like to see that power supply as well

 

[Gudi]

What's so obsolete about SATA?

What is not? It is a connector that was designed with HDDs in mind and every new version was made to keep backward compatibility. So much that SSDs have adopted the size of 2.5-inch notebook HDD drive bays. The current SATA standard SerialATA 6.0 Gbit/s is already maxed out by todays SSDs. Why wait till it catches up? Apple knows that they never again want to use spinning disks and older SSDs. Fusion Drive exists only as a transition technology to keep storage prices down in stationary Mac minis and iMacs. Customers of the Mac Pro need fast storage, not cheap storage. All these computing cores need to be fed fast with new data. Even a SATA III SSD does not fit in this setup. It is already obsolete for Pro computing.

And especially PCIe, which they have also removed but which every GPU except for their snotty little proprietary cards use. Not to mention all those sound cards and stuff.

All those old sound cards made for the expansion of pre-thunderbolt computers. Who knows if all those stuff isn't better emulated in software? Or build right in that external sound station you want to connect to your computer? Does it belong inside the machine? I don't know. Maybe not.

​

Look how stupid these standard PCIe cards look. Instead of changing the physical dimensions of a standard card slot, they take up two of the old slots. Because there is no sufficient thermal design, this one card alone has three times the number of fans as the whole Mac Pro with dual GPUs in it. Ridiculous! Totally outdated DVI and HDMI ports, though they had the courage to leave out VGA. But where do I connect the six 27-inch thunderbolt displays in the photo above?

Anyone saying that this new Mac Pro is very user-upgradeable is kidding himself. It's meant to be sleek and use external components.

Everyone saying that the compliance with ancient standards is a way to enable upgradeability is kidding himself. What those IBM-compatible PCs do, is to enable user-downgradebility. And yes, being smaller, lighter and looking sleeker as previous computers is a form of progress. You want to go further that route until the power of a Mac Pro fits on your ring finger.

 

[CausticPuppy]

It isn't perception, it's reality

Many of the upgrades to my MP tower would be impossible on a nMP:

CPU: yes
RAM: yes
Video card: no
USB ports: no
SATA ports: no, not even available on nMP
Ethernet: no
Fiber channel: no way
ODD: no, but not so relevant

Some of those upgrades aren't so important, but there's no question that the nMP is much less upgradable than the MP Tower.

Every single one of those upgrades is still possible on a nMP, just via external connections.

For example, fiber channel:

http://www.promise.com/storage/raid...n-global&m=1060&sub_m=sub_m_7&rsn1=40&rsn3=49

You can also get esata hubs, and the others via regular thunderbolt expansion bays.