Possible Upcoming Mac Pro Reference Discovered in OS X El Capitan

[LordVic]

What GPU options? Will regular sized GPU's fit in current enclosure?

I would think the Fury Nano would be a good option (maybe the Fury Nano was designed for use in Mac Pros to begin with?). But early reports say the Fury Nano has a terrible coil whine.

no. The new Mac Pro "tube" will only use GPU's provided by Apple in a proprietary daughter board with special cooling and connections, that currently only Apple uses exclusively in the Mac Pro.

And as far as I have seen (haven't checked that recently) there are NO upgrade options after purchase. So you can't opt to purchase the more powerful one at a later date and swap them in yourself (unless maybe you can find them used on ebay or something)

 

[dwarg]

yup! as a database guy and sometimes coder, What the hell do i care about 2x Professional grade GPUs? why the hell would I pay the premium for the new Mac Pro when likely, most of the cost is going to a 'feature' that 90% of the 'professional' world will never benefit from.

Pain and simple: the new Mac Pro, while extremely powerful, is a very niche product. It's aimed at Video and Image producers who also want a device that can "show off" by sitting on their desktops in viewable site. the "look" of the device is more a feature to many than the performance capabilities.

Let me direct you this way sir, to the Mac Mini. I think you'll really enjoy them.

 

[LordVic]

Let me direct you this way sir, to the Mac Mini's. I think you'll really enjoy them.

the OLD mac Mini, yes.

But the new one is too power limiting. I had actually saved some budget to buy one last year, and was waiting patiently for the refresh, assuming that they would keep the same basic power envelope and CPU options (the QuadCores). Instead, they butchered it, and opted to put laptop ULV CPU's inside.

Essentially, the new Mac Mini's would cost more, to get less power than what I was currently using at the time.

Instead, I took the $500ish I had set aside, and was able to purchase a desktop system running a quad core i5-4670 with 16gb RAM and 4tb hard drive. OSx isn't a concern to me because the platform that I use doesn't have OSx compatibility anyways as my overall need is linux/unix.

A Mac Mini would have just been a nice option to alleviate clutter. I have a very Tiny home office and having multiple full tower solutions does add up fast!

 

[dai613-2]

no. The new Mac Pro "tube" will only use GPU's provided by Apple in a proprietary daughter board with special cooling and connections, that currently only Apple uses exclusively in the Mac Pro.

And as far as I have seen (haven't checked that recently) there are NO upgrade options after purchase. So you can't opt to purchase the more powerful one at a later date and swap them in yourself (unless maybe you can find them used on ebay or something)

Thoughts on what GPU choices there might be on the 2016 Mac Pro?

 

[dwarg]

the OLD mac Mini, yes.
...
Essentially, the new Mac Mini's would cost more, to get less power than what I was currently using at the time.
...
OSx isn't a concern to me because the platform that I use doesn't have OSx compatibility anyways as my overall need is linux/unix.

I envy you. I fell in love with OS X the minute I laid eyes on her. With Apple's trend of reducing performance and upgradability while increasing prices, I start to wonder if I'm suffering some kind of Stockholm Syndrome. Why am I still here? I know they've moved on to the younger, sexier, hipper consumer electronics segment. But I keep thinking maybe they'll come back to their roots. Remember the good old days. Or maybe it would occur to them they could have one machine that emphasized function over form, you know just to see how it goes. But no, I leave the light on, night after night, while Johnny Ives "Live Photos" his flaccid junk to adoring fans on another iOS bender. While I cry in my server room clutching our cheese grater Mac Pros that we used to cherish together.

 

[LordVic]

Thoughts on what GPU choices there might be on the 2016 Mac Pro?

Going to go on a limb and estimate a revised version of the R9, but in the similar form factor. The Software tweaks in Apple's software currently lends itself very well for AMD based GPU's. Final Cut I believe sees tremendous benefit from the Dual AMD cards.

THough I don't keep on top of current Workstation chipsets, I couldn't begin to guess what is on the roadmap

 

[navaira]

I envy you. I fell in love with OS X the minute I laid eyes on her. With Apple's trend of reducing performance and upgradability while increasing prices, I start to wonder if I'm suffering some kind of Stockholm Syndrome. Why am I still here? I know they've moved on to the younger, sexier, hipper consumer electronics segment. But I keep thinking maybe they'll come back to their roots. Remember the good old days. Or maybe it would occur to them they could have one machine that emphasized function over form, you know just to see how it goes. But no, I leave the light on, night after night, while Johnny Ives "Live Photos" his flaccid junk to adoring fans on another iOS bender. While I cry in my server room clutching our cheese grater Mac Pros that we used to cherish together.

My uncontrollable imagination would like to thank you for those visuals...

 

[LordVic]

I envy you. I fell in love with OS X the minute I laid eyes on her. With Apple's trend of reducing performance and upgradability while increasing prices, I start to wonder if I'm suffering some kind of Stockholm Syndrome. Why am I still here? I know they've moved on to the younger, sexier, hipper consumer electronics segment. But I keep thinking maybe they'll come back to their roots. Remember the good old days. Or maybe it would occur to them they could have one machine that emphasized function over form, you know just to see how it goes. But no, I leave the light on, night after night, while Johnny Ives "Live Photos" his flaccid junk to adoring fans on another iOS bender. While I cry in my server room clutching our cheese grater Mac Pros that we used to cherish together.

I think with the current crop of hardware Apple has released, they're making a purposeful shift towards the high cost, high margin, disposable hardware for the consumer space.

Is there anything fundamentally wrong with their hardware choices? No, I would agree that MOST users of computers will be served fine by their options. And this is what they're caterign too. "Parents and grandparents". Not the geeks and techies.

I don't see anything fundamentally shifting in this unless there's a sudden shift in their finances. And Tim Cook has done a stellar job at selling the Apple Brand.

 

[kwikdeth]

And that is precisely why Apple isn't bothering upgrading the Mac Pro every month. What exactly are people absolutely needing in a Mac Pro refresh? Are the new processors 200% more powerful or something? All we keep hearing is "2 years old OMG IT IS NOT WORTH IT AHHHHHH!!!", but what can they do? We are at a point now where processors are not really a major improvement over the other. Power usage and integrated graphics are the primary focus these days.

back in the days of the G5s and previous machines, it was normal for Apple to continue to refresh the line with small speed bumps and shift prices downward between major refreshes. the problem with Apple's approach today is that by the time the machine is ready to be deprecated, you're still paying the same fixed price for components that have long since been replaced by newer, cooler running and less power hungry variants. Buying the current Mac Pro in 2015, you are being ripped off, end of story. D series GPUs are two generations old, the E5-V2s were replaced a while ago with V3s and V4s are on the horizon...
its weird that a company that seems to pride itself on making its products obsolete prematurely that they *wouldnt* be pushing out Mac Pro updates every six months. I have no problem with the premium price the Mac Pro commands but at least update the thing periodically to keep it spec competitive. the guys who are buying these things *will* still purchase them, and will likely complain a lot less in the meantime.

 

[kwikdeth]

Plus, TB ports for external drives are sharing the same busses as monitors not to mention that total TB bandwidth is still much lower than total PCIe bandwidth was in the old machines.

this. i cannot tell you the number of people I have had to have this discussion with. very few people seem to understand that TB is, despite its very convenient feature set, a lower performance tech than direct PCIe. Thunderbolt was meant to complement internal PCIe, not replace it.

 

[kwikdeth]

Why? the controllers have been launched in september. The spec has been set since January.

because support for it has to be baked into the CPU. Xeons with support for it will not ship until 2016

 

[AirdanMR]

Likewise, I'm more than happy with the design and thinking behind the cooling.
My only reasons for not buying onw is Apple's choice of components.

They could spec very different components and sell a TON of these.
The ultimate gaming computer even. Two Titan X's perhaps and dump with silly CPU's 99.9% of people don't want/need.

DO that and they could take over the high end gaming world.

Or course they wont

If that decision were up to me the desktop family would be something like this:

Mac mini => Dual / Quad core mobile

Mac => Quad core desktop + GTX / AMD (this could be easily done in the mac mini body with x2 or x3 height)

Mac Pro => Xenon + Quadro / Firepro (mac mini with x5 height)

You can't rip the Pro GPUs from the MP they are meant to be workstations... no gaming machines. Also two titan would be a lot of power consumption heat and of course insanely overpriced, nobody would buy that.

 

[Roykor]

But not all, if not most software - don't use dual gpu. photoshop doesnt like two gpus. They even warm users that a dual gpu can create performance issues. So why not a option for a single superfast gpu?

 

[deconstruct60]

There are quite a few Macs with the bluetooth connected via USB...

OK. I thought the WiFI and Bluetooth used the same PCI-e linkage. But BT maps through USB for OS level linkage.

Since all Macs have bluetooth, this mapping in the XHCI doesn't say much then about any specific model.

 

[bkkcanuck8]

because support for it has to be baked into the CPU. Xeons with support for it will not ship until 2016

When in 2016? I doubt the new Mac Pros will ship until at least the beginning of next year.

Often major builders will get shipments of processors before the official launch date or the ship date.... Apple already probably has at least samples of them.

 

[JesterJJZ]

The biggest flaw with the new design is it limits to one processor, which limits PCI lanes, which is the base issue of all the things we bitch and moan about.

 

[bkkcanuck8]

My hope is that they will add more DIMM slots - some for memory and some for ultra-fast SSD modules.

 

[konqerror]

Bluetooth on USB would be odd. Typically Bluetooth is provisioned from the same internal module at Wifi. Broadcom often. In most Mac set-ups that is connected with a 1x PCI-e v2 link. Likely that would be the same for a new Mac Pro. [ revision Ed. Ah... bluetooth presents as a USB hub although not really provisioning or consuming any physical ports. ]

Yeah, the mini PCIe card supports USB 2.0 through the connector along with PCIe. It still is a port, just internal. I think the main reason is legacy input compatibility. The Bluetooth chip fakes a USB HID keyboard/mouse until it is properly initialized.

 

[rdav]

This thread is becoming kinna duplicative, discussing the likely features of the much-anticipated nMP(7). Humbly suggest switching to this (more mature) version instead - featuring some remarkably similar topics & content.

Will there be a new Mac Pro in 2016?
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/will-there-be-a-new-mac-pro-in-2016.1928328/page-17

 

[bkkcanuck8]

If that decision were up to me the desktop family would be something like this:

Mac mini => Dual / Quad core mobile

Mac => Quad core desktop + GTX / AMD (this could be easily done in the mac mini body with x2 or x3 height)

Mac Pro => Xenon + Quadro / Firepro (mac mini with x5 height)

You can't rip the Pro GPUs from the MP they are meant to be workstations... no gaming machines. Also two titan would be a lot of power consumption heat and of course insanely overpriced, nobody would buy that.

It would be nice if Apple produced either a Mac Mini quad core (maybe portable Xeon quad core) or even better a Mac quad-core (similar in design to the Mac Pro - just slightly smaller) with discrete graphics options (priced between Mac Mini and Mac Pro).... I have never liked all-in-one computers (since I never only use one monitor and the monitor is the most likely to break - shaving years of life off of the device). Other specs that would be nice would be up to at least 32GB of RAM, and ultra-fast SSD. There is probably a sizable enough market in that range to make the production run worthwhile.

 

[prowlmedia]

While you don't need it, an external TB drive (or even TB enclosure) is still vastly more expensive than an internal SSD. Plus, TB ports for external drives are sharing the same busses as monitors not to mention that total TB bandwidth is still much lower than total PCIe bandwidth was in the old machines.

Who knows how long it will be until TB bandwidth finally catches up to the PCIe bandwidth of a 2009 mac pro? Probably not this upcoming refresh and maybe another two years before the next one? You can put a USB3 or TB or SATA III card in if someone makes one. Hell, in theory you could use a PCIe card to add TB3 or USB4 to an old mac if there's a card for it. No way to add TB3 by connecting it to a TB2 port.

Four ram slots is shameful.
Putting in fast PCIe internal SSD is awesome but there's no excuse for not having two of them inside there. Yeah I know the dual GPU eats up lanes but I'd much rather use those for SSD than for that second GPU.
And let's not forget that these machines went from dual CPU to single. 12 core is great but if they kept a dual CPU option we'd be seeing 16 and 24 core machines.

You know that unless you are sticking the latest SSDs in your 2009 internally, The bottlenecks are there to not actually make much difference. The Raw speed may well be higher though PCIe but in reality you will not achieve that and certainly not with spinners. PCie Bandwidth across the system never achieve it's theoretical Max. The tests done with thunderbolt 2 > PCIe3 eGPUs in a external case actually show there is only about 10-15% loss of speed overall... and thunderbolt 3 will be even faster.

It really doesn't matter. We basically have super counter from only 14 years ago sitting on our desks and there are very few applications that actually take them to the Max... Heavy 4K compositing. 3D animation and CAD. VR and theoretical modelling.... but if you become so caught up in the fastest machine of the moment you'll never actually buy one. Technically you can get a PC or Linux machine to be faster... but why would you want to do that?

For my Applications - 3d Animation mostly the nMP is fantastic. Very powerful, and portable... and I actually render on a renderfarm with 3000 CPUs... so have all the power I could ever need.

 

[prowlmedia]

There's pros and cons to having thingw internal vs external. One shouldn't assume that one side is better than the other, but investigate what their usage cases are.

The problem is, with the new Mac Pro design, you have no choice. It has to be external.

So, say you're a user, maybe not the most advanced user, but you only have need for 2-3 hard drives of various sorts, What is going to be easier / cleaner to setup, maintain and keep clutter free? 2-3 drives inside your computer chassis? or one or two drive arrays sitting on your desk connected by cables to both the thunderbolt port and power on the wall.

Nobody is saying, Having the Thudnerbolt ports as an expansion option is bad. Its fantastic. I think more people just think that the "form over function" for something claiming to be "pro" and aimed at workstation use is not the place to impose artificial expansion limitations on by going for some ridiculously proprietary (Albeit cool) device..

Sure I understand that... but 95% of the freelance ones I've ever used in companies only ever had 1 hard drive installed and it was the stock 7200rpm spinner! Most were not remotely set up right at all.

The only people that really filled them are the enthusiasts or single workstation owners. But of course everyone will have their own opinions and needs... but external for me is a way more adaptable system... I do however agree they should have 2 internal slots for the super fast SSD internally...

There is always this of course..
https://eshop.macsales.com/shop/SSD/OWC/Aura-for-Mac-Pro/

But it looks like we are going to have a fundamental shift in storage soon. RAM speed long term storage is coming and it's look like it will be cheap and potentially with HUUUUGE sizes.

 

[prowlmedia]

Each to their own as you say but personally, I’d rather have both.

But then you have a big non-movable box again.

 

[Roykor]

For my Applications - 3d Animation mostly the nMP is fantastic. Very powerful, and portable... and I actually render on a renderfarm with 3000 CPUs... so have all the power I could ever need.

Are you not missing any CUDA gpu stuff? Those 3D applications use CUDA and OpenCL right? (if i am wrong, let me know)

 

[prowlmedia]

because support for it has to be baked into the CPU. Xeons with support for it will not ship until 2016

I know that Xeons and CPUs in general are a quagmire of code numbers and levels.. but there are already Xeons with thunder bolt 3 shipping - even mobile ones - ThinkPad P70 has a Xeon and TB3.