Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
The costs for Apple doing a custom GPU:
- Apple has to do a special, limited run of the GPU. With the 2012 Mac Pro and earlier that wasn't awful, they were really just doing a slightly tweaked reference card. With the 2013 this has become much worse because the design is very custom..
No, actually the tcMP GPU was a Reference design with PCIe and DP lines re-routed to an custom propietary motherboard connector, it takes no time to recognize the W7000 GPU board in tcMP D700.

But if the Mac Pro doesn't have upgradable GPUs we're all wasting our time
Are you a GPU user or a Mac User, Apple will provide what Pro Mac users need (SOTA GPUs) with timed upgrades, maybe those upgrades will require you to visit Apple's service centers and/or buy a propietary GPU (with Apple's markup), if you are crying to self upgrade GPUs with Amazon or Fry's sourced cards,Respectfully I think you dont belong here.

If that's all the Mac Pro is I might even end up making my way over to the iMac Pro forums, cause really, what's the point. If I can't upgrade my GPU I might as well just get an iMac Pro. Or just build a PC.

I think the iMP notwhitstanding I think is a Single Season product, is ideal for 90%'s Software(Apple Ecosystem) developers, and most exigent Video producers, only those planning to go deep into ML/AR/VR/8K really needs more than that.

I love macs, but I admit I'm having good days with an DIY workstation running KDE-Neon, since I use Android phone it gives me an almost 1:1 experience than doing the same on a Mac with iPhones, only thing I miss is the Magic TPad, I hope the mMP will allow me to ditch that machine and the iMac 5K to run everything on a single workstation, but I'm not crying if Apple sells a proprietary modular system (I dont care on CPU vendor, but I'd like to see nVida Quadro GPUs as BTO), as long Apple foresees timely updates, despite if those updates means to visit an Apple store, its good for me as long I get the Hardware/Quality I want I pay Apple's bite w/o regret.
 
. . .Apple will provide what Pro Mac users need (SOTA GPUs) with timed upgrades, maybe those upgrades will require you to visit Apple's service centers and/or buy a propietary GPU (with Apple's markup). . .

Your response ignores the decades of context surrounding the situation. I'd agree with you if there were any reason to have confidence that Apple will actually provide timely and state-of-the-art GPU updates. But providing modern GPUs is something that Apple have abjectly failed to do in the past. Not with the tcMP which has gone nearly five years in with no upgrades ever offered. Also not with the cMP which only saw an anemic handful of upgrade options which lagged years behind the state of the art when compared to white box offerings for other platforms.

If Apple's track record in this area weren't so poor the clamor for alternatives wouldn't be nearly as strong and near-universal. It's not about being able to save money or buy cards from Microcenter. It's concerns about a machine which is otherwise performant but is saddled with an aging GPU which cannot be upgraded in any manner because Apple have once again been distracted by other product lines and failed to keep their hardware ecosystem current.

If there were "D900" cards which were competitive with PC alternatives and could be bought now and installed by Apple into existing tcMP machines the conversation would be very different. But there aren't, and many of us recall vividly the years and years of classic Mac Pro lifecycle where the GeForce 8800 was the "top of the line" Apple offering and was a bargain bin castoff in the rest of the computing universe. That's "Apple providing what Pro Mac users need" in reality.

I'd be totally happy with a platform that allowed upgrades only via Apple authorized service centers and custom, proprietary Apple GPUs if Apple hadn't dropped the ball every single time this has been their plan in the past. Fool me once, shame on you...

A modular Mac Pro refresh that promises to shield buyers from Apple's historical attitude towards GPU technology is attractive primarily due to this history. I'd love to buy your theoretical Mac Pro. What I don't buy is your optimism that this time it will be different.
 
but saddled with an aging GPU which cannot be upgraded in any manner because Apple have once again been distracted by other product lines and failed to keep their hardware ecosystem current.
This is a point, surely Apple is in consideration now, by some reason they didnt update the tcMP (admit until 2016, even AMD GPUs where the same in 2013 just tweaked and rebranded, rx480 just become available and not meant for WS, AMD seems has a lot to do with the tcMP debacle).

Apple has serious Management issues related to its R&D capital, even if they want to jump to All AMD system, they should never allow the tcMP to age w/o updates.
 
If Apple's track record in this area weren't so poor the clamor for alternatives wouldn't be nearly as strong and near-universal. It's not about being able to save money or buy cards from Microcenter. It's concerns about a machine which is otherwise performant but is saddled with an aging GPU which cannot be upgraded in any manner because Apple have once again been distracted by other product lines and failed to keep their hardware ecosystem current.

If there were "D900" cards which were competitive with PC alternatives and could be bought now and installed by Apple into existing tcMP machines the conversation would be very different. But there aren't, and many of us recall vividly the years and years of classic Mac Pro lifecycle where the GeForce 8800 was the "top of the line" Apple offering and was a bargain bin castoff in the rest of the computing universe. That's "Apple providing what Pro Mac users need" in reality.

This.
 
*cough* shouldn’t that have been posted like before last April...

People leave jobs and openings are created. It doesn't prove either way if / when Apple started seriously working on a Mac Pro replacement.

I choose to believe that Apple has been working on one since last year. I find though that I wish for a lot of things and most don't happen :).
 
No, actually the tcMP GPU was a Reference design with PCIe and DP lines re-routed to an custom propietary motherboard connector, it takes no time to recognize the W7000 GPU board in tcMP D700.

I think you underestimate the work required. Yes, Apple can do it, but paying an engineer to do it, a QA engineer to test it, and running multiple boards is not cheap. And having a short manufacturing run (because Apple doesn't sell enough to justify a full time manufacturing line) is not cost effective compared to reference designs.

Are you a GPU user or a Mac User, Apple will provide what Pro Mac users need (SOTA GPUs) with timed upgrades, maybe those upgrades will require you to visit Apple's service centers and/or buy a propietary GPU (with Apple's markup), if you are crying to self upgrade GPUs with Amazon or Fry's sourced cards,Respectfully I think you dont belong here.

Then I'm telling you the Mac Pro will likely fail, because Apple has never had a strong interest in providing upgrade cards, and historically has done a bad job.

How many people here are still running Apple OEM cards in their Mac Pros? How many people here would still be using Mac Pros if they were forced to only run Apple cards?

Even when Apple did release their own upgrade cards, they only ever supported the next gen mid range card on the previous towers, and not the high end card (even though half the time it would work anyway.)

Yes, Apple could become the only supplier of Mac Pro GPUs, but they don't have a real interest in doing that and they're bad at it.

What you're describing was exactly the plan for the 2013 and it never materialized because Apple is really bad at that sort of thing.

(I dont care on CPU vendor, but I'd like to see nVida Quadro GPUs as BTO)

Hey look you're proving my point for me. (Cause you won't see a Quadro from Apple.)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: singhs.apps
Like this?:
https://www.hardocp.com/news/2018/03/27/nvidia_announces_quadro_gv100

NVIDIA Announces Quadro GV100
Today at the GTC NVIDIA announced the new, Volta-powered Quadro GV100. The new card features 32GB of HBM2 memory, 5120 CUDA cores, 640 Tensor cores, and 29.6 TFLOPS of FP16 performance in a 250w package. The Quadro GV100 is available now direct from NVIDIA for $8999.00.

Yeah, unless Apple and Nvidia have a North/South Korea moment in the next six months Apple isn't shipping that with a Mac Pro.

Just to be clear, I'm not saying that the Mac Pro will ship with standard PCIe slots. I'm saying if they don't it's either dead in the water, or Apple's going to have a heck of a lot of work to do.

If Apple intends to be the only vendor:
  • They'd have to promise X number of years of GPU upgrades every Y years out of the gate. Which is very un-Apple, but no one is going to want to buy one not sure what they'll be able to upgrade to in two years.
  • Then they actually have to ship those upgrades. And not exclude older computers from the high end cards like they did with the cMP.
  • And they can't ever change the slot design in a way that breaks backwards compatibility for upgrades.
  • They'd have to ship a wide range of cards, including I think a workstation card, which they also typically don't do.
  • Whatever proprietary thing they do is going to have to accommodate whatever they ship in the future, including if they make up with Nvidia. Which Apple is also not very good at.
If Apple intends to make the slot available to third parties:
  • Users have to be able to self install. They can't take it to a store. I think this might even be true if Apple is the only vendor as a company isn't going to take 30 Mac Pros to the Apple Store.
  • They're going to have to convince third parties to actually ship for the slot, otherwise it's all a waste of time.
  • They're going to have to support ports on the card. Part of upgrading a GPU is supporting higher resolution displays, and forcing routing through on board ports will restrict that. If the next Mac Pro doesn't support an 8k display, forcing everything to be on mobo ports means it never will do 8k. That's a problem. Or if it doesn't support HDMI 2.1, then it never will.
If these things don't happen, a Mac Pro without standard PCIe ports is in serious trouble. And this doesn't even get into non-GPU devices. You can say "Well Apple is going to do exactly what they did with the 2013" and my response will be "then the Mac Pro is dead."

I at least am pretty sure Apple is aware of the same thing internally, especially after the Mac Pro 2013 blew up in their face.
 
Are you a GPU user or a Mac User, Apple will provide what Pro Mac users need (SOTA GPUs) with timed upgrades, maybe those upgrades will require you to visit Apple's service centers and/or buy a propietary GPU (with Apple's markup), if you are crying to self upgrade GPUs with Amazon or Fry's sourced cards,Respectfully I think you dont belong here.

There are two markets for the Mac Pro - people who buy a machine, and never upgrade it, and people who buy a machine and upgrade it themselves.

The first is evidenced by the large number of cheesegraters that were never upgraded, largely because they are never taken out of service, and just do the same thing, especially in print design where requirements have been largely static for a decade, day in day out. Also, most of the tasks they did, are now capable of being done with cheaper hardware. The 2013 Mac Pro possibly suited these people, but was probably overkill for their needs.

There are not enough of them on their own, to sustain a dedicated machine. The iMac Pro is a design that was IMHO committed to manufacture before this became apparent.

The second group wanted a mac that was user-servicable, and user upgradable, and despite claims of there not being many GPU upgrades etc, during the time the cheesegrater was current, there were 3rd party cards for it - right up until 2012 Nvidia had current "mac edition" Quadros for them. This market is freelancers who do their own tech, or small shops that have an inhouse tech / sysadmin (speaking from experience as sysadmin for a <20 employee movie / tv commercial company that did shoots all around the world, for markets all around the world, I maintained an edit & design suite with a pair of g5 powermacs + xserve, plus the company's fleet of powerbooks, tape backups etc). An hour downtime for a hardware upgrade was something that had to be scheduled. There was no hope in hell of ever getting the OK to take a machine offsite for however many days it would take Apple to upgrade it (anyone thinking this will be a while-you-wait service is reality-challenged - you'll have to accept whatever appointment they give you from opening to closing, 2 weeks in advance).

There are not enough of those people, on their own, to sustain a dedicated machine.

A machine that suits the second group, left alone and not upgraded, also suits the first with no downsides for anyone, aside from being a bit larger than a machine dedicated to the first group. It has a hope of being a self-sustaining market.

This mythical market you're suggesting - people who want to upgrade a "pro" machine, will happily have days of downtime or put up with the genius bar appointment schedule, but don't want to do it themselves, does not exist. I can't for the life of my figure out if you're actually in favour of this idea, or just trying to be a devil's advocate.

And respectfully, given the Mac Pro has had 5 generations of user-upgradable slotbox, and only one generation of locked-down sealed appliance, it's that viewpoint which is the odd one out / minority / "doesn't belong here".
 
Last edited:
Yeah, unless Apple and Nvidia have a North/South Korea moment in the next six months Apple isn't shipping that with a Mac Pro.

It's not really like nVidia & Apple are "at war" against each other, or something.
Don't several iMac models still use nVidia GPU's for graphics?
Let's just advocate that nVidia CEO Jen-Hsun Huang & Apple's CEO Tim Cook, Phil Schiller, & etc., schedule a "summit meeting" together somewhere, and let them figure out a logical way forward, no?
Without a viable nVidia GPU option, the 2018/2019 mMP won't be nearly the success it could be.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Synchro3
The last new-build iMac with nVidia GPUs was the Late 2009 base model. All other 2009 models had ATI/AMD and AMD has been standard ever since.

AMD graphics have only been the only option since 2013/2014, though. Before that you could still get Nvidia GPUs in the iMacs and MBP.
 
It's not really like nVidia & Apple are "at war" against each other, or something.

Apple wants custom designs (not talking Mac Pro specifically) these days and nVidia won't supply them. Until then they're not doing business.

Don't several iMac models still use nVidia GPU's for graphics?

Nope, not for a very long time.

Let's just advocate that nVidia CEO Jen-Hsun Huang & Apple's CEO Tim Cook, Phil Schiller, & etc., schedule a "summit meeting" together somewhere, and let them figure out a logical way forward, no?

I haven't heard of anything that would solve the basic problem that is keeping them from doing business. I'm pretty sure they've already been talking at either a VP or CEO level and have not been able to come up with a fix.

In the mean time nVidia sits on the sidelines quietly swatting at Apple with the downloadable GPU and CUDA drivers just to throw some extra pressure on Apple.

Without a viable nVidia GPU option, the 2018/2019 mMP won't be nearly the success it could be.

I think Apple is aware of the demand, but they won't ever sell them themselves. It's a business problem, not an engineering one.

COULD be solvable if Apple... I dunno... Used standard PCIe slots so they could avoid doing direct hardware business with Nvidia while still allowing for Mac Pros with Nvidia cards.
[doublepost=1522381887][/doublepost]
There are two Mac Pro Apple considers to Sell: The One they will sell, and the one some people wants to buy and will never see.

No, they won't sell, that's the point.

2013 Mac Pro already proved that to everyone. This is not a theory. It's already been rejected by the market. Apple can repeat the same mistake again if they want. But it won't change the outcome this time.

The thing is Tim Cook has already said Apple recognizes that they need to ship something more upgradable than the iMac Pro. The last time he was talking about the iMac Pro and the Mac Pro to the press he said exactly that. So I'm pretty sure Apple is aware of these issues too. And they've been pretty clear they're not going to do the exact same thing all over again. So I'm not sure I'd even use the 2013 Mac Pro as a guide for what they're going to do next.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: singhs.apps
AMD graphics have only been the only option since 2013/2014, though. Before that you could still get Nvidia GPUs in the iMacs and MBP.

According to Wikipedia when the Unibody iMac launched in Late 2009, the only model in the range to offer nVidia was the base 21.5" model because nVidia was the iGPU. All models with discrete GPUs were ATI. I had the Late 2009 27" and it had an ATI GPU, my Mid-2011 27" had AMD GPUs as did my Late 2014 5K, my Late 2015 5K and my current Mid-2017 5K.

The 2009 MacBook Pro did have nVidia discrete GPUs, but the 2011 models went with AMD and all MBPs since have had AMD discrete GPUs.
 
Apple wants custom designs (not talking Mac Pro specifically) these days and nVidia won't supply them. Until then they're not doing business.

"Custom (hardware) design" was only video cards for the tcMP, no?
Which of course, is soon to be a discontinued product line.
Other than Apple's (post Steve Jobs) seemingly faulty determination to limit future video related software support for AMD GPU's only, there's no practical reason to not return to offering a choice of either nVidia or AMD GPU's in any future Mac machines, whether mobile or desktop.
"You want a MacBook Pro with an nVidia GTX 1080 mobile GPU? You got it."

I think Apple is aware of the demand, but they won't ever sell them themselves. It's a business problem, not an engineering one.

COULD be solvable if Apple... I dunno... Used standard PCIe slots so they could avoid doing direct hardware business with Nvidia while still allowing for Mac Pros with Nvidia cards.

But: there's nothing preventing them from altering their current philosophy, re: "AMD GPU's only", going forward, if they simply were to choose to do so.
A lot of software re-writing/re-shuffling would of course be required.
 
Last edited:
The 2009 MacBook Pro did have nVidia discrete GPUs, but the 2011 models went with AMD and all MBPs since have had AMD discrete GPUs.

That's not entirely accurate. 15" MBPs from 2012 to 2014 used the nVidia 650m or 750m, paired with Intel Iris Pro.

AMD showed up in the 2015 and subsequent MBPs.
 
"Custom (hardware) design" was only video cards for the tcMP, no?

Almost everything Apple sells uses a custom design. The MacBook Pro uses a custom chip (The Radeon Mobility "Pro".) Vega in the iMac Pro is custom. The standard iMac is the closest thing to standard, and I'm not even sure that's in a typical form factor right now.

I'm not even talking Mac Pro right now. The tcMP actually has the closest thing to a not custom design out of all the Macs.

Other than Apple's (post Steve Jobs) seemingly faulty determination to limit future video related software support for AMD GPU's only

Steve Jobs had nothing to do with it. This decision was made after Steve Jobs was dead. All Tim Cook.

I think Steve Jobs probably actually got along better with nVidia.

there's no practical reason to not return to offering a choice of either nVidia or AMD GPU's in any future Mac machines, whether mobile or desktop.
"You want a MacBook Pro with an nVidia GTX 1080 mobile GPU? You got it."

Yeah. Not that simple. It's a business/legal problem.

I think I've heard something about Apple also refusing to do business with nVidia because nVidia won't promise not to sue them over Apple A series processors. So it's really not simple. I'm pretty sure Apple and AMD have some sort of patent sharing arrangement, and Apple won't do business with people these days who could end up suing them.

But it seems like custom designs are also part of it.

It's important to remember nVidia and Apple are actually competitors right now. nVidia has the Tegra CPU/GPU and Apple has the A series. Apple has already been hiring people from nVidia, and nVidia doesn't want to tell Apple anything about their architecture on the Mac because that could be used against them on the cell phone side. AMD doesn't have that conflict of interest.

It's not like Apple engineers don't know that there is demand for nVidia GPUs. But unless something has changed recently everyone's hands have been tied.

When Apple wasn't making their own iPhone CPUs it was probably less of a problem. nVidia maybe even thought Apple could end up using Tegra in the iPhone. But now that Apple makes their own CPUs and GPUs it's just all worse.

But: there's nothing preventing them from altering their current philosophy, re: "AMD GPU's only", going forward, if they simply were to choose to do so.
A lot of software re-writing/re-shuffling would of course be required.

It's not happening.
 
Last edited:
The thing is Tim Cook has already said Apple recognizes that they need to ship something more upgradable than the iMac Pro. The last time he was talking about the iMac Pro and the Mac Pro to the press he said exactly that.
I don't remember him saying anything about "upgradable". He only said "modular", and it was pretty clear that modularity referred to the external monitor.
[doublepost=1522394475][/doublepost]
According to Wikipedia when the Unibody iMac launched in Late 2009, the only model in the range to offer nVidia was the base 21.5" model because nVidia was the iGPU. All models with discrete GPUs were ATI. I had the Late 2009 27" and it had an ATI GPU, my Mid-2011 27" had AMD GPUs as did my Late 2014 5K, my Late 2015 5K and my current Mid-2017 5K.
I'm typing this on a 2013 iMac equipped with an nVidia 775M.
 
According to Wikipedia when the Unibody iMac launched in Late 2009, the only model in the range to offer nVidia was the base 21.5" model because nVidia was the iGPU. All models with discrete GPUs were ATI. I had the Late 2009 27" and it had an ATI GPU, my Mid-2011 27" had AMD GPUs as did my Late 2014 5K, my Late 2015 5K and my current Mid-2017 5K.

The 2009 MacBook Pro did have nVidia discrete GPUs, but the 2011 models went with AMD and all MBPs since have had AMD discrete GPUs.

Nope.

MBP:
2012: NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M
2013-2014: GeForce GT 750M

Imac:
2012: NVIDIA GeForce GT 640M or 650M, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660M, 675MX, or 680MX
2013: NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M, NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M, GeForce GTX 775M, or GeForce GTX 780M

It was only the 2014 models when everything started switching solely to AMD.
 
Nope.
.....

It was only the 2014 models when everything started switching solely to AMD.


2014 ... about the time Nvidia thought it was a really good idea to go out and sue the major mobile phone makers .... (in part because their ARM SoC was never going to get traction in the market so this is the indirect pay day to where all the money was going. ).

"This is an important day for NVIDIA. For the first time since starting this company 21 years ago, we have initiated a patent lawsuit. ... " (i.e., we have a new plan to make major money.... )
https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2014/09/04/nvidia-launches-patent-suits/

and those major mobile phone makers didn't like it ....

https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2014/11/11/nvidia-responds-to-samsung/

So Nvidia is/was out to sue the major mobile GPU makers and around 2014 Apple is launching a major (mega bucks) strategic initiative to be a mobile GPU maker ( Apple starts to take over implementation of 'back end' GPU from Imagination Tech). How could that possibly go "sideways" for Nvidia with that idea and timing? *cough*

2014 is also about the time AMD 'doubled down' on developing their embedded/custom GPU business.

There are several players that contributed to the decline in Nvidia GPUs in Macs.... it is not just solely an Apple only move.
 
2014 ... about the time Nvidia thought it was a really good idea to go out and sue the major mobile phone makers .... (in part because their ARM SoC was never going to get traction in the market so this is the indirect pay day to where all the money was going. ).

"This is an important day for NVIDIA. For the first time since starting this company 21 years ago, we have initiated a patent lawsuit. ... " (i.e., we have a new plan to make major money.... )
https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2014/09/04/nvidia-launches-patent-suits/

and those major mobile phone makers didn't like it ....

https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2014/11/11/nvidia-responds-to-samsung/

So Nvidia is/was out to sue the major mobile GPU makers and around 2014 Apple is launching a major (mega bucks) strategic initiative to be a mobile GPU maker ( Apple starts to take over implementation of 'back end' GPU from Imagination Tech). How could that possibly go "sideways" for Nvidia with that idea and timing? *cough*

2014 is also about the time AMD 'doubled down' on developing their embedded/custom GPU business.

There are several players that contributed to the decline in Nvidia GPUs in Macs.... it is not just solely an Apple only move.
Thank you, very interesting post, the background is not always noticed.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.