That isn't a stupid question. A lot (maybe most) server motherboards have on-board graphics. On-board graphics is generally CPU dependent. I don't think the Xeon W supports it. Might be wrong, as I haven't used them personally, but a quick review of intel's spec page suggests I am correct.
Read this article on Semi-Accurate - https://www.semiaccurate.com/2019/12/13/amd-releases-the-radeon-5500xt/ - AMD I have to say, I’m pretty appalled that as sloooooow as AMD’s rollout has been of NAVI, that the drivers are I. Such an abysmal state in January of 2020zThey really need to fix issues with the AMD 5000 series drivers before W5700X is available.
Yeah that's the joke he's making, good job you got itWhat some people fail to remember (or acknowledge) is that this machine is absolutely not designed for the average consumer. Unless of course your name is John Siracusa lol.
No reason for the rack mounted version to have a GPU in it by default.
Who's going to use this as a server, though? Aside from hardcore Mac partisans, I can't think of anyone using it for that purpose. This is ideal for rack-mounted workflows, like video production.That isn't a stupid question. A lot (maybe most) server motherboards have on-board graphics. On-board graphics is generally CPU dependent. I don't think the Xeon W supports it. Might be wrong, as I haven't used them personally, but a quick review of intel's spec page suggests I am correct.
hey! Don't forget your YouTube watching!I need this to make my web browsing and email a smoother experience.
Or putting it in a road case with all the peripherals and monitor.It is still a workstation, not a server. I think this is more about mounting it alongside video/audio studio equipment than turning it into a server/high-density computing device.
The MP only remotely makes sense if you want/need to run MacOS based applications (which, as well as being GUI driven, often rely on a meaty GPU for acceleration). If you want a headless server or compute farm, more bangs per buck are available with generic PC hardware (which is why the XServe is no more, too).
Forgive me please, but I’m struggling to see why Apple are charging a thousand dollars extra for a different case? Can anyone enlighten me as to the reason?
What some people fail to remember (or acknowledge) is that this machine is absolutely not designed for the average consumer. Unless of course your name is John Siracusa lol.
What the?!? Does Apple really expect me to install a 19" equipment rack in my house just in order to use this computer? Who do they think they are?!?
(Sorry, that's about as much fake outrage as I can muster this early in the morning.)
No... that's what I bought the maxed out iPad Pro for...hey! Don't forget your YouTube watching!
Xeon chips have no iGPU - last i knew. So it would to have some graphics card.
Configure on one machine, and use cabling to just flash that configuration to all the slaves.
Since the tower version has a few TB3 ports on top (which would be inaccessible on the rack version), maybe Apple moved them to the front?View attachment 888571
Is that some kind of filter in front of the fans? The tower version does not have anything in front of the fans?
Does Mac OS have some network based setup out of the box?
Does the Mac Pro have an IPMI Interface they are hiding from the rest of us?
Does Apple even support PXE with Mac OS?
WooHoo! XServe lives!![]()
Doesn’t look like it.I'm assuming the extra cost is redundant hardware for hot swapping.