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 7,1 Waiting for Mac Pro 7,1 A1991 (no more)
- Thread starter Mago
- Start date
-
- Tags
- macpro 2016
- Sort by reaction score
right, except when it comes to customers who would actually buy and use a Mac "Pro", I'd put money on there not being a single one whose purchasing intent would be altered by having to use an external loopback cable(s) to connect DP out on proper GPUS, to a DP-In port to get TB video.
who, exactly, is going to tell j.Ive 'no'?
and if you think s.Jobs used to tell him 'no' then i think you're mistaken..
[doublepost=1506476891][/doublepost]
i think it's also worth noting he did the design for cMP/G5.. and g4 towers (and yes, the cube).. G3.. the iMacs and PowerBooks..
meaning.. it's not like he's just being an arrogant new designer and bucking historical design for the sake of (whatever)..
he did more traditional towers.. early in his career.
when people around here are talking about the mac tower good ol days, they're usually talking about computers designed by j.Ive.. but apparently he also sux and needs to fired yesterday..
Last edited:
The only [released] device in that list that uses a desktop Intel CPU is the 2013 Mac Pro, which was acknowledged as being a design failure last Spring. The "2018 iMac Pro" (actually: late 2017) is yet to be released, and remains to be seen whether it succeeds, sales wise. Not to mention possible overheating & fan noise problems.
If a possible alternative "2018 Mac Pro" includes enough extra competitive features. Such as: several PCIe slots, for those wanting to later plug in a 2019 model nVidia video card (or two), or other 3rd party card. Such as: a high end audio recording card, a 10 Gb LAN card, a video conversion card, a TV tuner card, etc., etc. Then maybe the iMac Pro will not sell all that well.
For them to still treat Mr. Ive as an "All seeing, all knowing, infinitely trustworthy design guru" (even if he's best pals with Phil Schiller and the other Cupertino Amigos), would be a significant mistake.
Last edited:
as a side note...
remember j.Ive changed his job title a year or two ago.. he's no longer in a management position and is instead, is in a position to work on the real big projects (Apple Campus.. the car.. more grandiose things like this instead of gadgety/PC type stuff)
Ive has, working beneath him, two new head designers.. (basically, software and hardware industrial designer)..
(not actually sure if they are answering directly to Ive.. probably not but..),
the head ID is now Richard Howarth
https://www.cultofmac.com/323877/ev...-apples-new-badass-head-of-industrial-design/
...
the mMP is very likely going to be designed by him (well, the design team with him in the lead).. with Ive being the one that could say 'no' if it really came down to it.
if so, i'm not really sure what that may mean be it positive or negative.. still interesting though to realize the situation.
remember j.Ive changed his job title a year or two ago.. he's no longer in a management position and is instead, is in a position to work on the real big projects (Apple Campus.. the car.. more grandiose things like this instead of gadgety/PC type stuff)
Ive has, working beneath him, two new head designers.. (basically, software and hardware industrial designer)..
(not actually sure if they are answering directly to Ive.. probably not but..),
the head ID is now Richard Howarth
https://www.cultofmac.com/323877/ev...-apples-new-badass-head-of-industrial-design/
...
the mMP is very likely going to be designed by him (well, the design team with him in the lead).. with Ive being the one that could say 'no' if it really came down to it.
if so, i'm not really sure what that may mean be it positive or negative.. still interesting though to realize the situation.
whoever designed iPhone 6?
(ha!)
-----
i don't actually know.. these guys aren't exactly public with their info.. whoever did the 8 will be on the patents but those aren't public yet.
this guy Howarth though, he isn't new.. he's been working at Apple for 1 year less than Ive and has been Ive's right hand man the whole time.. in that article above, he apparently lead the group (within the group) on the original iPhone so it's likely he did the 8..
but what's different with mMP is it's essentially going to be a new product instead of built upon an existing form (such as iMac or iPhone etc.. those are evolutions of existing staples/designs).. so with mMP, it's a brand new design that Ive may not be part of or is going to take a back seat to..
it could be interesting and we might see some things that aren't necessarily 'apple like' in the design language..
(but i don't mean we're going to see a HPZ clone.. dude would get fired on his first project as manager if that happens
)
My problem isn't going to be with Howarth. My main problem is going to be with Jeff Williams...aka wannabe COO. I hope the supplies of mNP would be widely available...unlike iphone x.whoever designed iPhone 6?
(ha!)
-----
i don't actually know.. these guys aren't exactly public with their info.. whoever did the 8 will be on the patents but those aren't public yet.
this guy Howarth though, he isn't new.. he's been working at Apple for 1 year less than Ive and has been Ive's right hand man the whole time.. in that article above, he apparently lead the group (within the group) on the original iPhone so it's likely he did the 8..
but what's different with mMP is it's essentially going to be a new product instead of built upon an existing form (such as iMac or iPhone etc.. those are evolutions of existing staples/designs).. so with mMP, it's a brand new design that Ive may not be part of or is going to take a back seat to..
it could be interesting and we might see some things that aren't necessarily 'apple like' in the design language..
(but i don't mean we're going to see a HPZ clone.. dude would get fired on his first project as manager if that happens
Last edited:
"Howarth has been the lead designer on many of Apple’s most important products, including the first iPod; the titanium PowerBook G4; the first plastic MacBooks; and the first iPhone."
Didn't the titanium PowerBook come out about the same time as the Power Mac ?
PowerBook G4 : 2001
PowerMac G4 : 2003
I'd bet this new Head of design had his hands in those designs.
Didn't the titanium PowerBook come out about the same time as the Power Mac ?
PowerBook G4 : 2001
PowerMac G4 : 2003
I'd bet this new Head of design had his hands in those designs.
If Apple goes that way, I hope they work on getting it standardized. PC Xeon workstations will have the same issue (that they're currently working around with that passthrough cable.) Could be interest in a new standard especially if Intel pushes.
But I could see Apple also go the other way like they did with their not quote NVMe drives.
Just conjecture. I don't know anything so it's just based on PhD's suggestion. I did hear that Apple has heard the feedback on PCIe slots, no idea if they'll follow it. Wasn't like they didn't know that was going to cause problems with the 2013 Mac Pro.
Apple must change the compact form WS to something else than the 2013 MP. Apple cannot appreciate the nickname "trashcan". Trashcan II would be a marketing nightmare. Another compact MP with the iMac Pro looming? Fine by me but what is the angle? Perhaps to to give freedom to chose screens?
If I understood the discussion above. I think the idea with a sledge for hosting PCIe cards make sense as it provides better packaging than a "naked" PCIe card. It was some time since I made card replacements but I recall it as not so easy to do with motherboard bending due to hard to insert cards, poor alignment of slots, cables that sometimes where to short and concern about static electricity. Have this improved significantly over the years?
I think if graphics cards could be as easily mounted as hard drives in RAID systems, I think modularity from users perspective have moved up a notch or two. Inserting PCIe cards in empty sledges would be for the specialists.
If I understood the discussion above. I think the idea with a sledge for hosting PCIe cards make sense as it provides better packaging than a "naked" PCIe card. It was some time since I made card replacements but I recall it as not so easy to do with motherboard bending due to hard to insert cards, poor alignment of slots, cables that sometimes where to short and concern about static electricity. Have this improved significantly over the years?
I think if graphics cards could be as easily mounted as hard drives in RAID systems, I think modularity from users perspective have moved up a notch or two. Inserting PCIe cards in empty sledges would be for the specialists.
A crazy idea, now AMD sounds, what about an full AMD Trashcan MacPro-lite?
[updated with Ryzen PCIe lines]
AMD Ryzen 24+8 PCIe
It Fits the tcMP TDP limits, while maynot Appeal those waiting 18cores and dual Vega, but it will be cheap and capable (BOM < 1000 not inc ram/ssd) and sell like hotcakes at less than 2000$ full loaded.
Good for those that needs a compact quiet WS and dont need monster GPU/CPU but a mac mini is not enough neither an iMac Pro.
cMon Apple ...
[updated with Ryzen PCIe lines]
AMD Ryzen 24+8 PCIe
- 8 cores AMD Ryzen 1700X: <90W
- 2x AMD RX570 8GB: <300W (combined) each using 8 Pcie Lines
- 4 DIMM uptp 64 gb RAM ecc/non-ecc.
- 4 Tb3 on chipset's PCIe (2x TB3 headers)
- 1 or 2 NVMe on CPU PCIe
- a 10 GBe instead 2nd NVMe
- WiiFi/Bt on internal USB lines.
- 6 USB3
It Fits the tcMP TDP limits, while maynot Appeal those waiting 18cores and dual Vega, but it will be cheap and capable (BOM < 1000 not inc ram/ssd) and sell like hotcakes at less than 2000$ full loaded.
Good for those that needs a compact quiet WS and dont need monster GPU/CPU but a mac mini is not enough neither an iMac Pro.
cMon Apple ...
Last edited:
I still think Apple is going to stick with third-party external solutions for PCIe. TB3 offers the bandwidth to make eGPUs useful and should be more than fine for any other type of PCIe card. And companies like OneStopSystems offer external TB3 boxes with up to three PCIe slots or two PCIe slots and 4 2.5" SATA bays.
That could very well be their answer for "standard" GPUs too, if someone wanted something like a 1080 Ti. They'll produce upgrades for the internal slot, and license third parties as well. But if no third party makes the card you want in their form factor, then use eGPU.
Again, all speculation. I don't have any information verifying that they won't be doing PCIe slots.
With PCI-e 4.0 coming up, maybe AMD will make dual chips on a single board ( like Titan z ). Stick two such
Vega 20 based cards in 2 x PCI-e slot and there you have your 4 x GPU setup in a Mac Pro. And save lots of space.
Vega 20 based cards in 2 x PCI-e slot and there you have your 4 x GPU setup in a Mac Pro. And save lots of space.
as long I know Vega 20 will not support PCIe4.0 yet, neither nVidia Volta... (consider even nVidia Pascal barely need more than half PCIe3 bandwidth, PCIe4 need wont hurry)
Pcie is an interesting one. I've never tested it but talking to people who have. They found negligible performance difference with big Pascal gpu's between pcie 3x16 and 3x8. Which is interesting as if you look up the bandwidths pcie 3x8 is about the same as pcie 2x16. Yet people talk often on here about how limited we are having only pcie 2.0 in our cMP's.
Sli chucks that out the window though as that will show a difference between x16 and x8 for whatever reason
Sli chucks that out the window though as that will show a difference between x16 and x8 for whatever reason
Last edited:
In GPU rendering, PCI-E x8 vs x16 makes virtually little difference. So maybe Apple will stick with PCI-e 3.0. Or maybe not. It's Apple. They might push the envelope.
But Apple may consider Dual GPU chips on a single board to shrink the mac pro footprint.
Not after what they said during the past media meeting over the mMP. However, I think that surely it will have the option of adding more GPUs for VR, ML and GPGPU improvements, otherwise I don't see the point of calling it modular, as well as placing it beyond the iMP.
The only reason i stay with my cMP and didn't buy the 2013 MP is the lack of PCIe slots.. a UAD Octo card full of plugins is more expensive than a mac pro and there are still many PCIe cards in use for audio/video.
If a TB>PCIe chassis cost about 300-500$ i'de rather pay the extra for a MP with PCIe slots than pay for external box with more cables, more fans, ON/OFF switch etc.. it's always nicer (and better) to have everything installed inside a computer than bunch of adapters/converters
I really hope Apple will make the "perfect" Mac Pro this time.
If a TB>PCIe chassis cost about 300-500$ i'de rather pay the extra for a MP with PCIe slots than pay for external box with more cables, more fans, ON/OFF switch etc.. it's always nicer (and better) to have everything installed inside a computer than bunch of adapters/converters
I really hope Apple will make the "perfect" Mac Pro this time.
That's actually won't save footprint neither power, Dual GPU Cards are just two gpu cards sharing the pcie-slot f you see AMD Radeon Pro Duo it the card itself its almost exactly the size of two Fury Nano in tandem.
Apple may consider either Mezzanine form factor (all the gpu components mounted on a interposer and then plugged into the motherboard like an big CPU) or a minimal custom card much like the ones on the tcMP, or MXM (but MXM are TDP constrained, so you can discard it definitively).
The tcMP lacs TDP flexibility it was its main defect that prevented MP updates, Apple suddenly had to put two 350W GPU and a 180W cpu in something which barely handles 450W, while there are technology to fit two 350W GPU and a 180W pu plus a 1000W PSU in the TC Form Factor (passive phase change cooling), seems Apple consider it too risky and/or too expensive, also consider 1000W heat coming from the tcMP fan... Woo Hooo
If Apple decides to follow the tcMP concept, they will make the thermal core independent and coupled to its respective GPU or CPU, maybe a trash can design just twice the volume and power. options of course to save R&D are just install slightly modified GPU reference design into the MP chassis, this is just the same GPU you purchase but with its PCIe interface and display connectors re-routed into a proprietary connector, it prevents DIY upgrades and still allow Apple to offer a predictable product with no delays, I bet you this will be the 'miraculous' 'groundbreaking' new technology enabling the new MP... of course this solution implies a modifies case design since it wont fit well in a tcMP-like design, maybe something more like some hybrid tcMP-cheesegrater design imagined by 3-D artist but instead std GPUs will carry a modified stdGPU enough different to be incompatible with aftermarket gpus and enough similar to be thermally and electrically predictable so Apple wont run on long term surprises.
Good heavens ! No trash cans please.
As regards to the idea of a dual GPU card, AMD might be amiable to make a custom one for Apple's Mac Pro. If Apple can stick two of those into a new MP then we get 4x GPU ( with about 10-15%~ performance hit ) snuck into the space of two dual slot Single die GPUs.
I might consider a size shrink ( compared to cMPs ) as acceptable provided they do offer empty PCI-e slots as well ( maybe two of them )
Whatever the form factor, I am hoping for space for 4x GPUs in the new design. Anything else doesn't make sense for my use
Last edited:
And that's the thing, really. I re-read John Gruber's Daring Fireball coverage of Apple's info meeting in April the other day, and Apple clearly stated two main reasons to re-think the Mac Pro: 1) The (all-too-common) use case where you need a single powerhouse GPU that's supposed to keep chugging for hours without throttling down, and 2) The (admittedly relatively few) users who really just need loads and loads of raw, parallelized power, whether CPU- or GPU bound.
My small needs definitely come closer to (1) than (2) when it comes to the GPU - as long as it's upgradable. When it comes to the CPU I would most likely be well covered already by the parallelism available through the 2013 Mac Pro.
This is why I think the next MP will be 1P and not 2P, about GPU, If Apple decides to go with Intel C422 (Xeon-W) only has enough PCIe lines for 2 16x GPUs same AMDs X399, but on AMD Epyc a 1P MacPro may accomodate 4 16x GPUs.
I dont buy the dual gpu card Idea, I've had those cards and its the same thing as to plug 2 cards on 8X buses, but you need an even more powerful PSO/Coolers, it is only a gain for system with restricted PCIe Lines (as mini-ITX or Blade Server), but if you have enoug PCIe lines and you can decide the system form factor its much better to provide 4 PCIe x8 sockets for 4 GPU, than 2 PCIe x16 sockets for 2 dual-GPU cards, also consider cost savings when a card fails you only need to replace a card that costs less than half.
Apple mentioned the single powerful GPU as most users actually what need its a single powerful GPU, given that the tcMP seemed impossible to re-arrange for a single powerful GPU and given they still need to provide support for future multi-gpu applications (as core-ML's training, AR/VR 360 Videos), so I think the mp should be modular in the way users can BTO as single-GPU or multi-GPU solutions along the right CPU for their workloads, on Intel I presume most MP-iMacP will chose the 10 core xeon as its the fastest single threaded CPU and still provides 10 cores enough to lift 99% of the multi-threaded applications (very few apps are efficient on multi core cpus), I'm not too familiar with AMD zen but seems the single-threaded execution its almost the same across the core-count options.
My favorite mMP concept still has a single cpu and dual gpu (1st gpu mandatory 2nd optional or BTO), its modular as in assembly line but not modular as in DIY sorry but I knew Apple and its steep up to consider they will allow easy GPU ugrades with commodity components not honoring Apple's premiun.
Intel Xeon-W and AMD Threadripper alllows upto 2 GPU on expected mMP configurations (4-6 tb3, 1-2 10G eth, 1-2 NVMe), while AMD Epyc allows upto 4 GPUs, (1P xeon scalable solution only provides 48 PCIe+20 as Xeon W, so you can discard it for a 4X GPU McPro).
I believe soon at iMac Pro launch we will see at least a sneak peek on the mMP
I am unclear why apple mentions users looking for a single GPU for computing purposes. The very nature of GPU computing is their massive parallelization - lots of simpler cores (Cuda, Stream ) performing in parallel.
So two GPUs would work better than a single one, 4 would work even better.