Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
MP All Models The Mac Pro is Dead, This is the End?
- Thread starter MoonCakeTropics
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This is the first time that the new Mac Pro is far behind PC workstations.
Nvidia and other graphics cards are three times more powerful than Apple's best chip. Intel's processors are about 50% faster. Apple's big mistake was abandoning Intel, not working with Nvidia . This is why the Mac Pro is in no way a competitive product today. It may not be dead but $10000 for such a product is a cosmic price.
There were also a lot of promises about PCIe slots and it ended as usual. Mac Pro was never cheap but at least you could have top performance. Today it's just an expensive interface so people can install old hardware on PCIe.
Apple is leaving the desktop market at a time when just such computers are making a comeback . Because portable I can have a laptop or iPad but business needs solid desktop computers. Well, unfortunately, Apple has nothing to offer in this topic and probably Mac Pro 2023 is the last such product.
Nvidia and other graphics cards are three times more powerful than Apple's best chip. Intel's processors are about 50% faster. Apple's big mistake was abandoning Intel, not working with Nvidia . This is why the Mac Pro is in no way a competitive product today. It may not be dead but $10000 for such a product is a cosmic price.
There were also a lot of promises about PCIe slots and it ended as usual. Mac Pro was never cheap but at least you could have top performance. Today it's just an expensive interface so people can install old hardware on PCIe.
Apple is leaving the desktop market at a time when just such computers are making a comeback . Because portable I can have a laptop or iPad but business needs solid desktop computers. Well, unfortunately, Apple has nothing to offer in this topic and probably Mac Pro 2023 is the last such product.
Last edited:
I'm not so sure if the Mac Pro is quite dead yet as it really depends on what we see at WWDC. It might be Apple's position that the M3 Ultra and TB5 will be enough for Pros (unfortunate if true). Since it does not look like the M4 generation will have an ultra chip, it could mean that the next iteration of the Ultra would be M5. If rumors/speculation of the next Ultra being a monolithic design are true, it could mean that an M5 Extreme could be introduced. This could serve to further differentiate the Mac Pro from the Mac Studio especially if the studio remains in its M4 Max/M3 Ultra configuration. At the very least I expect to see a Mac Pro with M3 Ultra with the same specs as the Studio. I think there is the remote possibility of added compute cards and/or some clever way of expanding memory beyond the 512 GB.
I'm just spitballing here, but I think the easiest way to do the memory expansion would be to have a separate bank of up-gradable ram that initializes as a RAM Disk upon start-up if the system detects memory modules. The OS and applications load into unified memory as they currently do now, and only that which the user places into the RAM disk resides there. While not as fast as unified memory, I would think that this could still be way faster than accessing the SSD and could have much larger capacity than unified memory existing as a middle ground between the two. Two use cases I can think of this right off the bat would be loading large sample libraries in Logic and certain AI tasks that require large amounts of VRAM. If the user doesn't need this capacity and say just needs the PCIe expansion, then the system works like it currently does.
I'm just spitballing here, but I think the easiest way to do the memory expansion would be to have a separate bank of up-gradable ram that initializes as a RAM Disk upon start-up if the system detects memory modules. The OS and applications load into unified memory as they currently do now, and only that which the user places into the RAM disk resides there. While not as fast as unified memory, I would think that this could still be way faster than accessing the SSD and could have much larger capacity than unified memory existing as a middle ground between the two. Two use cases I can think of this right off the bat would be loading large sample libraries in Logic and certain AI tasks that require large amounts of VRAM. If the user doesn't need this capacity and say just needs the PCIe expansion, then the system works like it currently does.
Each of us has our own guesstimates. Personally I expect Apple to do something good with the MP, but I do not even have a good guess as to what. In any event I look forward to the announcement.
There is the "Hidra" chip that Gurman said Apple was working on for possible use in the next Mac Pro.
Note: "Hidra" is the name of an island in Norway and Apple often uses island code names for A and M series SoCs.
Yeah and if macOS stops working due to a required security update on your unsupported hardware, what then?
If it starts randomly crashing due to (at this point, well-known) CPU degradation on the 14900K, what then? How do you even know it is necessarily caused by CPU degradation and not your hackintosh build?
Anybody doing anything serious with a computer, (for money, as a job) whether it is a mac or a PC is buying something with warranty/support, writing it off on tax as a business expense and depreciating/replacing over 3-5 years.
If you want to build a hackintosh toy to play with, go nuts. People with real work to do and a need for the thing to be reliable aren't going to go there if they have even a modicum of sanity.
PC hardware may be more repairable, but they typically need more repairs!
As someone who has been and continues to build his PCs from components since 1992 - i have had far more issues with PC hardware than i have with mac hardware. Both in terms of failures and wierd/random problems due to bugs with the components/drivers and how they play together.
Last edited:
Or as folks who work with gear that isn't computers would put it...
If it costs as much as a lathe, fume extractor or tractor, it should last as long, and be as repairable as a lathe, fume extractor, or tractor.
If it lasts for as little as an iPad, it should cost as little as an iPad. That includes operating system, security and application support.
I have had many i9-14900K processors and no problems. Since this affects maybe 0.001% . Well, and Intel gives you five years warranty for free and not paid like apple care ) In fact, in 20 years I have not seen a broken proceosor - unless people do it at their own request like manual OC. In fact, the hackintosh can run more stably than the original mac because it has better cooling and more reliable high class motherboard/components.
I do not know how you do these deductions that you come out better than buying hackintosh three or four times cheaper .
Because time is money. If I spend 1-2 days building the machine and getting macOS to work on it properly, that’s two days not doing my day job. My day rate (salary) is ~ $700 not including opportunity cost of lost productivity for my employer.
For people using these machines for work, screwing around with hackintosh hardware which won’t work when Apple drop Intel support makes zero sense. Unless you do not value your time.
A handful of lost days over the expected life of the machine and any hardware savings are done.
A real Mac? Any issue, with AppleCare plus I get Apple out to fix it. Instead of diagnosing stuff myself to determine which vendor to claim warranty for.
It’s not that I can’t diagnose it. I’ve worked in that field. It just makes no sense. I have other work to do.
Last edited:
Well, these days all of those are likely to contain computers that rely on updates from the manufacturer to stay current and lock customers in to spares and service, and force obsolescence… There have been huge “right to repair” campaigns regarding tractors, for instance:
US farmers win right to repair John Deere equipment
The grassroots movement has grown among consumers around the world as repair costs soar.
www.bbc.co.uk
However, assuming that you mean old-dangled, dumb, non-internet connected equipment… users of those don’t expect to upgrade or update them over time. A “general purpose” computer is, for most people, a different kettle of fish.
I’m about to chuck out an old Mac Pro 1,1 - it won’t run modern software (without a lot of faffing around) and even if I did find a hack to run a newer OS (or stick Linux on it) it’s basically a space heater that sucks 10x the power of a modern system for a fraction of th3 performance. However - if I still needed to run Adobe CS 4 or Macromedia Flash, it will still do so every bit as well as it did in the late 00s. The web browser would happily display any 20 year old websites still out there - and if I were really lucky wouldn’t be compatible with modern malware
- yeah, online security would be the deal-breaker but even if you could patch the vulnerabilities the hardware would struggle to render a modern video-ridden website. Thing is, you don’t need to upgrade your tractor to harvest Potato XL 2025 (although I probably shouldn’t give Monsanto ideas…) - but for a general-purpose personal computer “progress” is usually unavoidable…
There’s no reason that a modern Mac Pro/Studio shouldn’t keep going for 10 years+ if you don’t mind spending part of that time running 5 year old software - the only “perishable” is the SSD and that is at least user-replaceable (and Apple will be obligated to offer repairs for 5-6 years). (True, that’s where using standard m.2 and/or removing some of the artificial upgrade hurdles would be better),
(Now, thinking of the planet, I could gut the Mac Pro and fit modern hardware (unfortunately fitting an ATX motherboard would require a bit more metal smithing than I fancy) - but the reality is that the aluminium case and the PSU full of copper are highly likely to get recycled - it’s the electronics that are the nasty toxic waste.)
For one thing, building a Hackintosh involves breaching Apple’s Mac OS licensing agreement. Now, the odds of Apple going all Streisand and suing individuals for building hackintoshes may be a risk you’re personally willing to take as a hobbyist - but in a business/professional environment (where you might, e.g. face a software audit) that’s really not acceptable.
Well yeah that too. If your country had a copyright or digital rights agreement with the USA piracy is up to 250k per offence or more for a company if prosecuted.
Unlikely? Sure. But any business is crazy to deliberately take on that risk to not even really save anything when assembly time and troubleshooting is taken into account.
In the EU you can install macOS even on a microwave oven this is the law . But I do not think it makes any difference in other parts of the world . Hackintosh has been successfully used for almost 14 years all over the world .
While the real problem is the real shortening of the average lifetime of desktop mac silicon some two to maybe three times . This is due to the lack of modularity of these computers - all the most important components are on one board. Which in practice makes the repair uneconomical . But also due to the lack of possibility of upgrading the memory, drives, graphics or processor.
Intentional obsolescence and lack of upgradeability was the main purpose of the transition to silicon technology. Replacing a computer as often as a smartphone is a priority for Apple. This confirms the lack of a significant advantage over Intel , AMD or Nvidia processors. But if you can't be the best then you can always make the most money on your products
While the real problem is the real shortening of the average lifetime of desktop mac silicon some two to maybe three times . This is due to the lack of modularity of these computers - all the most important components are on one board. Which in practice makes the repair uneconomical . But also due to the lack of possibility of upgrading the memory, drives, graphics or processor.
Intentional obsolescence and lack of upgradeability was the main purpose of the transition to silicon technology. Replacing a computer as often as a smartphone is a priority for Apple. This confirms the lack of a significant advantage over Intel , AMD or Nvidia processors. But if you can't be the best then you can always make the most money on your products
Having so much on the system-on-a-chip, and a small & relatively simple main logic board should make things more reliable.
The most likely parts to fail - the ones that actually “wear out” and/or might get irretrievably bricked - are the SSDs which are Modular on the Pro, Studio and now the Mini. Apple have artificial restrictions on “upgrading” them but they can be replaced if they fail. Same for the power supplies in the Studio and Pro. The Studio and Pro also have replaceable daughter boards for the connectors etc. that are likely to wear out.
Having the RAM soldered in is standard with all systems that use LPDDR RAM - having the shortest, simplest link between the CPU and the RAM brings speed/power savings. There’s now - only recently - a plug-in version of LPDDR but apparently even that comes with a performance hit. Even Framework, who are all about upgradeability, have gone for soldered RAM in their latest desktop..
I’ve assembled my own PCs in the past and found the main advantage of “modularity” is being able to customise the system on day one. When upgrade time comes around, typically, everything is outdated and the latest CPU and RAM technology need a new motherboard. Even GPUs have gone from ISA to PCI to AGP to PCIe… not to mention the various versions of PCIe since… I’ve usually found that it’s more useful to repurpose the old kit as a server, or fallback system, than end up with a box of outdated PCI cards, memory modules and hard drives.
So, with a Mac Mini/Studio, you have to replace the whole machine to upgrade the GPU. Except the whole machine (esp. the main board) is smaller and less complex than the typical equivalent PCIe GPU card - and Macs probably hold their value better than old-model GPUs. You can replace the Mac and resell/repurpose the old one.
The Mac Pro currently exists for the benefit of those with specialist PCIe interface cards or loads of SSDs - a small but possibly important niche. Discrete GPUs on Macs are over - and, frankly, if you need that sort of platform, x86 from Intel or, particularly, AMD is the better tool for the job. It’s a difficult decision but I think Apple are right to focus on the things that Apple Silicon does well rather than putting a lot of effort into a “me too” big box ‘o’ slots with 3rd party GPUs (which will be dependent on keeping drivers up to date).
I'm not convinced by this argument. I think Apple, when given an opportunity to make a single design of hardware, and to control every part of that hardware chain of trust, will use that opportunity to limit reliability and edge-case testing, and Apple's systems will become increasingly black-swan-fragile in a world in which black-swan events become increasingly commonplace.
Apple's entire reliability chain is based on assuming failure modes won't occur, rather than building systems with inherent survivability when failure DOES occur.
We've already seen that the entire M series suffers from endemic hard-wired security flaws in the silicon itself, and we regularly see show-stopper bricking flaws on M-series Macs that were largely unheard of before T2 era Macs started happening.
The more of the widget Apple makes, the less reliable it becomes, because Apple lacks a culture of building for reliability.
That's what's going to happen.
The expansion capabilities of desktop PCs are plentiful. Depending on their needs, many users buy a given model in the basic version, which is sufficient for them. But apps requirements and user preferences change over time. Below I give you an example of an upgrade of a Dell computer that is 8 years old and at one time quite expensive as it is Dell . That is, here we have enlarged the disk ten times , enlarged the memory four times and replaced the processor from i3 6th generation to i5 7th generation ...Of course all these added components are very cheap now. PCIex4 NVME 1 TB drive eight years ago certainly cost a fortune (or it was not there ) Finally, the installation of the latest version of macOS Sequoia. If it were not for the possibility of upgrading this equipment would already be suitable for ...recycle....The question now is where will the mac mini be in eight years ?
Tractors aren't very repairable at all. You can thank John Deere for that! The crap they pull off puts Oracle to shame. Heck, they've even told a judge that someone who buys one of their tractors doesn't actually own it.
I think that's more John Deere that tractors in general, and no one outside of America is going to be buying them going forward. Also a reason why old tractors are so beloved.
In Poland, we produced Ursus tractors that were simple and easily repairable. But the company went bankrupt. Every farmer would probably like to have a John Deere but few can afford it )
Apple should announce the discontinuation of Mac Pro line.
Mac Studio is what Mac Pro wanted to be in 2013. And now it can. Apple Silicon provides decent CPU/GPU performance under a similar power consumption as Mac Pro 2013, and much less thermal issue. Without the replaceable GPU, other PCIe cards can be replaced with Thunderbolt accessories.
Mac Studio is what Mac Pro wanted to be in 2013. And now it can. Apple Silicon provides decent CPU/GPU performance under a similar power consumption as Mac Pro 2013, and much less thermal issue. Without the replaceable GPU, other PCIe cards can be replaced with Thunderbolt accessories.
I’m sure that isn’t far off, and the MP as it is isn’t going anywhere new - the Studio is the future, but why rush its demise? It is serving a niche who need high bandwidth PCIe slots and isn’t harming anyone else.
A Thunderbolt device gets the equivalent of 4 lanes of PCIe (and only PCIe 3 until everything is updated to TB5). The Mac Pro can accept cards that use 8 or 16 lanes of PCIe 4, or multiple 4-lane cards. Thunderbolt is still playing catch-up on that - TB5 may help close the gap a bit when a good range of TB5 devices are available.
Those of us who don’t need it can safely ignore the Mac Pro - but it does serve a purpose for people who have a lot invested in specialist AV cards or storage.