MP 7,1 Waiting for Mac Pro 7,1 A1991 (no more)

[Zarniwoop]

How do you know the mMP is all China again ?

Oh, sorry. I was comparing iMac Pro deliveries now to tcMP at late 2013.
[doublepost=1514580858][/doublepost]

If Jony Ive designed a car it probably wouldn't have wheels, doors or windows - since that's what other cars have.

Not at least Windows.

Apple started their transition from regular, boring PC's (in their opinion at least) step by step after SJ returned. I'm sure (if Johy has been involved) there have been pretty wild sketches about Apple Car. But most propably they'll renew some of the old car concepts first. Because regulations in many countries wouldn't allow too different vehicle to enter their roads. (Man, it took years to get a permit for Segwey here, in the land of the lizards. But still, three years in France proofed me, that they got the crown of the land of Vogon's'. Imagine to try to open markets for a totally different vehicle concept there.)

 

[CWallace]

How do you (all) know the mMP is all China again ?

We don't know for sure, but there have been reports that Apple has been looking at current Mac assembly teams in China for the new Mac Pro.

Considering how low volume it is, I could see it being made in the US - like the Mac Pro and a fair number of US-bound iMacs are. Speaking of iMac Pros, what has been the Country of Assembly for them? Are they all China, or have some also been made in the US (and Ireland for EU customers)?

 

[Macintosh IIcx]

Speaking of iMac Pros, what has been the Country of Assembly for them? Are they all China, or have some also been made in the US (and Ireland for EU customers)?

I think everybody who pre-ordered could follow the shipment from China, so that is a save bet.

We don't know for sure, but there have been reports that Apple has been looking at current Mac assembly teams in China for the new Mac Pro.

Considering how low volume it is, I could see it being made in the US - like the Mac Pro and a fair number of US-bound iMacs are.

If Trump wants to subsidize production in the US, maybe, otherwise most will happen in China, I think.
[doublepost=1514582176][/doublepost]

I doubt it will Use Xeon-W, but if so, it should offer the same configurations as the iMac at about 1000-1200$ less.

What? Why not? Moving up to dual Xeon-SP would make the Mac Pro ridiculously expensive. That is not the vibe I’m getting at all. I guess dual socket could come back as an option, but not at the entry level model. At least I sure as heck don’t hope so when you can get a 18 core in a single CPU today.

 

[CWallace]

I doubt (the new Mac Pro) will Use Xeon-W, but if so, it should offer the same configurations as the iMac at about 1000-1200$ less.

Agreeing with Macintosh IIcx here in that I think it probably will use Xeon-W CPUs since Apple already has experience and drivers for them.

Purley SP series Xeons seems like overkill across the board (CPU cores, PCIe lanes, memory channels) for what even "Pro" Macs are used for. If Apple was planning to relaunch the XServe and make a play for the Datacenter then okay I could see that. But Apple doesn't have any Datacenter-level applications. So for something sitting on people's desktops running the current available macOS applications, Xeon-W is plenty. Xeon SP would also significantly increase the price of single-CPU solutions to say nothing of what a dual-CPU solution would run.

And speaking of price, I expect a Mac Pro configured the same as the baseline iMac Pro to only be around $500 cheaper (if that). Apple is not paying $1000 for the display even if that is what they are going for at retail and I expect there to be a cost to making it modular and upgradeable (I also expect it to have more ports).

I think everybody who pre-ordered could follow the shipment from China, so that is a save bet.

Okay. There should be no reason that the US and Irish production lines could not handle them, as well, so perhaps once production "ramps up" (so to speak) we might see units shipped from those locations, as well. It's also possible the volumes are low enough that it is easier for China to handle it (as they have the space to dedicate a special line for them in their iMac factories).

 

[the future]

I like modular systems better than AIO systems and am therefore very curious what a new-from-the-ground-up modular Mac from Apple in 2018 will look like; I have a feeling it will be very special (in a good way).

 

[Martyimac]

I like modular systems better than AIO systems and am therefore very curious what a new-from-the-ground-up modular Mac from Apple in 2018 will look like; I have a feeling it will be very special (in a good way).

Fingers crossed.

 

[Mago]

I guess dual socket could come back as an option, but not at the entry level model.

Who needs more than 32 cores?(and have an app that can profit from that) a dual socket MP had sense when core count per socket was about 8, but most people used the second socket as loophole to put dual LCC Xeon instead a single HCC Xeon, with few exceptions (like supermicro) WS vendors only offers SP configurations, I doubt Apple to release a DP configuration (unless its an dual APU tcMP), Apple is focused on AI and VR/AR the most important component now is the GPU, a DP system will be expensive and appeal very few to justify its way to production line, will be much easier to see agan the 3.5mm jack in the iPhone than the DP in the MP.

Apple already has experience and drivers for them.

Same argument I read when Apple switched from PPC to Intel, its moot as there is a lot of money and convenience for apple on switching to AMD.

If Apple was planning to relaunch the XServe and make a play for the Datacenter then okay I could see that.

Who will invest on Xserves again?, I was on the idea Apple could launch an mac-mini based NAS to rival with synology, but latest changes in macOS definitively ruled out that possibility, even very likely macOS server has its days numbered.

Meanwhile AMD readies an very high-end APU likely capable to be offered in DP configurations, originally announced to target High Density Super Computer Market, it has 8 Zen Cores + 32 Vega Cores APU (could do excellent inside an iMac Pro or an Trash Can mMP), it may grew to 16 Zen Cores and 32 Vega20 Cores (fp64-compute optimized variant).

Of course I consider more plausible an Epyc Based mMP + Single/Dual vega/polaris GPUs (polaris20 on low-end, vega20 on the extreme).

 

[singhs.apps]

The issue with SS is that with high core counts you take a significant performance hit in ST processes.

A DS system can use the low core counts (6-10 per socket ) but high speeds per core x 2. You are effectively doubling the throughput of your system (~ 10-15% lower maybe ) in all tasks - single as well as multi core operations.

HP, DEll , Puget, Boxx ... all offer DS systems.

 

[CWallace]

The issue with SP is that with high core counts you take a significant performance hit in ST processes.

A DS system can use use the low core counts (6-10 per socket ) but high speeds per core x 2. You are effectively doubling the throughput of your system (~ 10-15% lower maybe ) in all tasks - single as well as multi core operations.

HP, DEll , Puget, Boxx ... all offer DS systems.

If someone is mostly interested in single-thread performance, they are buying a 5K iMac (especially when the Coffee Lake Hex-core models ship next year) not an iMac Pro / Mac Pro.

 

[JesterJJZ]

What? Why not? Moving up to dual Xeon-SP would make the Mac Pro ridiculously expensive. That is not the vibe I’m getting at all. I guess dual socket could come back as an option, but not at the entry level model. At least I sure as heck don’t hope so when you can get a 18 core in a single CPU today.

I'd rather a dual socket system with fewer cores per chip, higher clocked, and more pcie lanes.

 

[singhs.apps]

If you are mostly interested in single-thread performance, you're buying a 5K iMac (especially when the Coffee Lake Hex-core models ship next year) not an iMac Pro / Mac Pro.

I have already mentioned elsewhere that an iMac pro isn’t for me. Also it doesn’t have to be an either/or situation as you suggest.

If you read my post, it clearly establishes I am looking for solutions that offer high, single thread AND multi thread performance + multi GPU setups.

An iMac clearly doesn’t offer that.

If there was no space for systems that offer a great single+multicore+double ram and PCI-e capacity then you wouldn’t see Intel offering 6 core, high speed Xeon sp processors.

HP and others offer that solution. The current Mac line up doesn’t.

 

[CWallace]

If there was no space for systems that offer a great single+multicore+double ram and PCI-e capacity then you woldnt see Intel offering 6 core, high speed Xeon sp processors. HP and others offer that solution. The current Mac line up doesn’t.

There clearly is a space for that type of hardware, but that hardware runs Windows Server and Unix/Linux - not macOS (nor has it ever, really). So there is no reason to expect the new Mac Pro will offer an option in that space and it is far more likely the new Mac Pro will offer single-processor Xeon W series CPUs with a single high-performance GPU.

 

[singhs.apps]

There clearly is a space for that type of hardware, but that hardware runs Windows Server and Unix/Linux - not macOS (nor has it ever, really). So there is no reason to expect the new Mac Pro will offer an option in that space and it is far more likely the new Mac Pro will offer single-processor Xeon W series CPUs with a single high-performance GPU.

I must have bought those cheese graters from an alternate universe where Apple did make those kind of systems.

And oh windows pro does run fine on DS systems.

 

[Mago]

The issue with SP is that with high core counts you take a significant performance hit in ST processes.

A DS system can use use the low core counts (6-10 per socket ) but high speeds per core x 2. You are effectively doubling the throughput of your system (~ 10-15% lower maybe ) in all tasks - single as well as multi core operations.

HP, DEll , Puget, Boxx ... all offer DS systems.

You need get current, at least latest Intel Xeon-W, having more cores doesn't throttle the cores when running a single thread intensive application, the process is "jumped" among each core for few cycles thus balancing temperatures, this is how Intel Offers Single thread clock speeds upto 4.5ghz w/o throttling w/o regard on 8 or 18 cores, single thread performance is moreless the same .

So DP its just an loophole for cheapos.

(i'll do later a bit of research on this feature on amd zen.)

 

[Biped]

You need get current, at least latest Intel Xeon-W, having more cores doesn't throttle the cores when running a single thread intensive application, the process is "jumped" among each core for few cycles thus balancing temperatures, this is how Intel Offers Single thread clock speeds upto 4.5ghz w/o throttling w/o regard on 8 or 18 cores, single thread performance is moreless the same .

So DP its just an loophole for cheapos.

(i'll do later a bit of research on this feature on amd zen.)

"It is also worth noting that the Xeon-W processors only support Turbo Boost 2.0 rather than Turbo Boost Max 3.0 and its "favored core" underpinnings."

There is that other tech, which is for bouncing around 'transient' ( i _assume_ this means short lived and not 'intensive' ) single threaded applications, I don't recall the name, but I _assume_ that is not the one you are referring to.

 

[AidenShaw]

The issue with SP is that with high core counts you take a significant performance hit in ST processes.

A DS system can use use the low core counts (6-10 per socket ) but high speeds per core x 2. You are effectively doubling the throughput of your system (~ 10-15% lower maybe ) in all tasks - single as well as multi core operations.

HP, DEll , Puget, Boxx ... all offer DS systems.

[doublepost=1514599884][/doublepost]

And oh windows pro does run fine on DS systems.

[doublepost=1514599918][/doublepost]

So DP its just an loophole for cheapos.

Please, people, use your keyboard.

SP? ST? DS? Why SP but not DP (or why SP instead of SS)?

Please don't make us try to guess what you mean by inventing TLAs and TLAs on the fly, or using inconsistent and ambiguous TLAs.

 

[singhs.apps]

You need get current, at least latest Intel Xeon-W, having more cores doesn't throttle the cores when running a single thread intensive application, the process is "jumped" among each core for few cycles thus balancing temperatures, this is how Intel Offers Single thread clock speeds upto 4.5ghz w/o throttling w/o regard on 8 or 18 cores, single thread performance is moreless the same .

So DP its just an loophole for cheapos.

(i'll do later a bit of research on this feature on amd zen.)

[doublepost=1514604383][/doublepost]A Xeon gold running at 3 GHz ( the only speed guarantee you can get when running all cores ) x 12 cores x 2 will outperform (by a wide margin) an 18 core Xeon w processor running at 2.2 GHz.

How is that ‘cheapo’ ?

 

[beaker7]

My new Win 10 Pro workstation runs dual Xeon Gold 6154 and 3 GPU. All major workstation manufacturers offer this. Pretty standard stuff at the high end. Hopefully Apple will join the party some day.

 

[barmann]

If you get this computer, you'll see moderate to dramatic speed improvements depending on your workflow; whether or not that's worth the cash is always going to be a individual question. I'm sure a lot of those photographers plunk down waaaay more cash for their bodies and glass than I'd consider worthwhile given the price differential between "very good" and "excellent", but that's their personal calculus.

And right there is a very common misunderstanding .
Professionals users who depend on the performance of their equipment usually don't make choices based on personal preferences, that's what only amateurs do .

There are very few pros in photography, video, audio, etc. who will spend one buck more than they absolutely have to . Not to mention the guys in accounting, if it's a big-ish company .

However, no software or computer in the world will save you if you went for the lens, mike , sensor , digital back or body that was 500 or 5000 bucks less, and didn't get the job done .
The best camera and lenses mean nothing if you can't get a replacement or rentals in Mongolia, asap .
Horses for courses, and all that .
It's not subjective . Pro gear is a surprisingly small market .

The fact that Apple seeded the review units to videographers and photographers I think speaks to the kind of pros they are targeting, but really any pro who needs horsepower and treats their computers along the lines of an appliance will probably be well-served by these. If you're going to use these sans upgrades for four to six years I'm sure you can find the price palatable unless you are a total hobbyist, or that crazy guy in the other forum who just wants the space grey color while he uses Facebook

Pricing is not the issue .
Performance and usability in relation to cost very much is .
How much are TB externals again, the ones that add no noise and let you plug in other stuff too ?

Horsepower is not that much of an issue either .
Ultimate performance for the most demanding tasks has not been available for Mac users in years .
How many nMP render farms are there ?

For any demands below that, technology didn't get that much further ahead since Apple went Intel in 2006 .
The 4.1/5.1 cMPs can still compete today after a few affordable upgrades, and arguably best any iMac Pimpmobile in most tasks . At half the price including display, worst case .

As for targeting, does Apple still do that ?
After the nMP, killing OS backwards compatibiltiy, no MagSafe, touch bar, and now the iMac Pimp, I really don't know what they are thinking .

 

[Martyimac]

If even half of what has been posted on this forum come true, then i better start pinning my hopes on a new mini. Sigh.

 

[Mago]

I'm leaving until next year guys, Happy new year to everyone!

Never forget, its coming, its coming the modular Macintosh Pro is coming...

(rounded, squared, small, big, whatever, she's coming 2018 is the year. o/ )​

 

[singhs.apps]

And right there is a very common misunderstanding .
Professionals users who depend on the performance of their equipment usually don't make choices based on personal preferences, that's what only amateurs do .

There are very few pros in photography, video, audio, etc. who will spend one buck more than they absolutely have to . Not to mention the guys in accounting, if it's a big-ish company .

However, no software or computer in the world will save you if you went for the lens, mike , sensor , digital back or body that was 500 or 5000 bucks less, and didn't get the job done .
The best camera and lenses mean nothing if you can't get a replacement or rentals in Mongolia, asap .
Horses for courses, and all that .
It's not subjective . Pro gear is a surprisingly small market .



Pricing is not the issue .
Performance and usability in relation to cost very much is .
How much are TB externals again, the ones that add no noise and let you plug in other stuff too ?

Horsepower is not that much of an issue either .
Ultimate performance for the most demanding tasks has not been available for Mac users in years .
How many nMP render farms are there ?

For any demands below that, technology didn't get that much further ahead since Apple went Intel in 2006 .
The 4.1/5.1 cMPs can still compete today after a few affordable upgrades, and arguably best any iMac Pimpmobile in most tasks . At half the price including display, worst case .

As for targeting, does Apple still do that ?
After the nMP, killing OS backwards compatibiltiy, no MagSafe, touch bar, and now the iMac Pimp, I really don't know what they are thinking .

Yes, Yes and yes !

Also happy new year in advance, good people .

 

[ManuelGomes]

This could be in the new TBD, but 5K and looking better of course:
https://www.anandtech.com/show/12187/lg-develops-nano-ips-lcd-announces-32uk950-4k-display
Or OLED but unlikely though.

Great new year everyone, and hopefully the year of the all new 2018 mMP

 

[fuchsdh]

And right there is a very common misunderstanding .
Professionals users who depend on the performance of their equipment usually don't make choices based on personal preferences, that's what only amateurs do .

It's not subjective . Pro gear is a surprisingly small market .

I don't think you know what that word means... and considering I'm a professional user, maybe you don't actually speak for all professional users, hence proving my point that it's subjective. Figuring out the economics of upgrading your tech is always going to be a subjective proposition, especially when you're the sole proprietor and aren't answering to a bean counter's idea of what's "worth" spending on. The person doing graphics on an iMac and the person doing graphics on a 8-year-old Mac Pro are both professionals. Their gear doesn't make or break that classification.

According to Jason Snell at best the iMac Pro does tasks in half the time as his 5K iMac, for $5000 more. Is that worth the money to upgrade every 3-4 years? There is no objective answer here.

The entire Nikon v. Canon v. Sony debate is entirely down to personal preferences, considering there's next to nothing that's only in one model of cameras and/or is crucial to taking photos. The pro who says they only pick based on the performance of the gear is the pro who is ignorant of his own subjectivity.

 

[CWallace]

According to Jason Snell at best the iMac Pro does tasks in half the time as his 5K iMac, for $5000 more. Is that worth the money to upgrade every 3-4 years? There is no objective answer here.

He bought the $5000 base iMac Pro model so it's about $1200 more than a top-spec 5K iMac. So twice as fast for a quarter more cost. Probably not a bad trade-off for him considering what he bought it for (audio manipulation).