Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Power hungry cards: like gfx cards which you can't use. What internal card setup will result in 1280W usage? AJA cards use <50W. DSP accelerators I've seen don't have any mentions of power requirements (not to mention that doesn't even have heatsinks on the chips) so I can only assume they use <50W as well. Fibre cards? 30W.

I don't see what setup will need 1280W.

Apple reused the same PSU for the same reason it didn't change the design. Rack mount doesn't need this design especially the lattice enclosure.
BlackMagic's Decklink Cards need Aux PCIe Power

Higher bandwidth multi-nvme boards can need Aux PCIe Power

Plenty of USB expansion cards (including, soon, USB4 cards) to add more ports need auxiliary power if you want them to supply full power from their ports

And that's not getting into rarer or more esoteric or proprietary workflows with custom cards. Or future proofing for further need.

Worth noting also that even forgetting about the extra 6 and 8 pin connections around each PCIe slot provides up to 75w, and a lot of cards that dont need aux power do eat that (including a lot of DSP cards). 7x75=525w that *needs* to be budgeted just for the slots alone. The machine also has more has twice as many thunderbolt ports, which also need to be powered, etc.

*And* we dont have a full number on how much wattage the SoC can actually burn at full utilization, it's a good bet it'll be able to run at higher clocks longer than a studio, and probably have a higher TDP as a result.

And what DSP boards are you looking at? Avid's HDX doesnt just have a heatsink, it has a fan, as an example.... Raid controllers and higher speed, dense, NICs, can also draw a fair percentage of a slot's allocated power and need heatsinks as other common things to stick in a mac pro

Rackmount doesnt need the lattice, but neither does the tower, it does need decent airflow. I've spent plenty of my life racking and stacking. I don't do much anymore but I can tell you a dense rack runs hot and somehow I don't think that's changed (and yes, the Mac Pro is *not* a dense machine on a rack, but it will often be mounted in places with denser compute, or in media racks for video/audio work with cruddy airflow)

tldr just because *you* don't need the power for anything other than GOUs doesnt mean a large chunk of the target market doesnt.
 
Last edited:
BlackMagic's Decklink Cards need Aux PCIe Power

Higher bandwidth multi-nvme boards can need Aux PCIe Power

Plenty of USB expansion cards (including, soon, USB4 cards) to add more ports need auxiliary power if you want them to supply full power from their ports

And that's not getting into rarer or more esoteric or proprietary workflows with custom cards. Or future proofing for further need.

Worth noting also that even forgetting about the extra 6 and 8 pin connections around each PCIe slot provides up to 75w, and a lot of cards that dont need aux power do eat that (including a lot of DSP cards). 7x75=525w that *needs* to be budgeted just for the slots alone. The machine also has more has twice as many thunderbolt ports, which also need to be powered, etc.

*And* we dont have a full number on how much wattage the SoC can actually burn at full utilization, it's a good bet it'll be able to run at higher clocks longer than a studio, and probably have a higher TDP as a result.

And what DSP boards are you looking at? Avid's HDX doesnt just have a heatsink, it has a fan, as an example.... Raid controllers and higher speed, dense, NICs, can also draw a fair percentage of a slot's allocated power and need heatsinks as other common things to stick in a mac pro

Rackmount doesnt need the lattice, but neither does the tower, it does need decent airflow. I've spent plenty of my life racking and stacking. I don't do much anymore but I can tell you a dense rack runs hot and somehow I don't think that's changed (and yes, the Mac Pro is *not* a dense machine on a rack, but it will often be mounted in places with denser compute, or in media racks for video/audio work with cruddy airflow)

tldr just because *you* don't need the power for anything other than GOUs doesnt mean a large chunk of the target market doesnt.
4k Extreme 12G consumes 30 watts https://www.soundpro.com/content/product-documents/decklink-4k-extreme-12g-techspecs.pdf

The reason why aux is provided is for older PCIe slots that cannot provide the full 75W.

NVME drives use about 10 watts each https://ssdsphere.com/ssd-power-consumption-comparison/

Upcoming USB expansion card provides up to 100W total for a card using an AUX. https://www.anandtech.com/show/18883/msi-unveils-usb4-expansion-card-with-100w-power-delivery

Mac pro has 2x6-pins and 1x8-pin for a total of 300W aux. Imagine you have 3 USB expansion cards, that's 75 x 3 + 300 = 525Watts from USB expansion max. And it doesn't even require a fan which I assume plenty of heat is generated on the device it's charging, away from the Mac Pro internals.

Mac studio with M2 ultra has 370W maximum continuous power for the entire system. Checking the M2 Max power usage, seems to be 114W max. So ~230W for fully loaded Ultra.

so M2 Ultra with 3xUSB 100W expansion cards + deck link + DSP + all 8 TB4 ports charging at 15W each = ~935W. Plenty of standard PC cases have no trouble cooling 935W of components with pure fans.

Your Avid DSP card seems to require 2 AUX cables? Which would take away from your USB cards that need the AUX cables...?

Also the extra MPX slots are no longer there that provided each MPX module with 500W of power.
 
Last edited:
4k Extreme 12G consumes 30 watts https://www.soundpro.com/content/product-documents/decklink-4k-extreme-12g-techspecs.pdf

The reason why aux is provided is for older PCIe slots that cannot provide the full 75W.

NVME drives use about 10 watts each https://ssdsphere.com/ssd-power-consumption-comparison/

Upcoming USB expansion card provides up to 100W total for a card using an AUX. https://www.anandtech.com/show/18883/msi-unveils-usb4-expansion-card-with-100w-power-delivery

Mac pro has 2x6-pins and 1x8-pin for a total of 300W aux. Imagine you have 3 USB expansion cards, that's 75 x 3 + 300 = 525Watts from USB expansion max. And it doesn't even require a fan which I assume plenty of heat is generated on the device it's charging, away from the Mac Pro internals.

Mac studio with M2 ultra has 370W maximum continuous power for the entire system. Checking the M2 Max power usage, seems to be 114W max. So ~230W for fully loaded Ultra.

so M2 Ultra with 3xUSB 100W expansion cards + deck link + DSP + all 8 TB4 ports charging at 15W each = ~935W. Plenty of standard PC cases have no trouble cooling 935W of components with pure fans.

Your Avid DSP card seems to require 2 AUX cables? Which would take away from your USB cards that need the AUX cables...?

Also the extra MPX slots are no longer there that provided each MPX module with 500W of power.
I legitimately dont think you got the point at all….
 
I legitimately dont think you got the point at all….

I countered your points...you're failing to understand that those cards you pointed out work perfectly fine in a standard air cooled PC enclosure.

The 2 MPX modules in combination with the power hungry Intel chips is what needed the crazy cooling architecture. Throw that out, the design is no longer necessary.

You mentioned "it does need decent airflow". And? Where do I disagree with that statement? No where did I say it didn't need decent airflow. But the current architecture is way more than decent airflow. It was designed for practically 4x AMD powerhouse GPUs.

Go ahead, build me a single Mac Pro setup with all the compatible cards you can think of. Show me why 2023 Mac Pro still needs this architecture. My argument is that it is absolutely unnecessary for most, if not, all setups now that the GFX compatibility and Intel chips are gone.
 
Last edited:
My argument is that it is absolutely unnecessary for most, if not, all setups now that the GFX compatibility and Intel chips are gone.
My dude, the entire machine is unnecessary for most people, for the people who do need it they appreciate the headroom

Seems like you want a studio, so buy a studio. I absolutely promise you the breaking point in the $7k price tag on the MP is not a big PSU and nice ventilation. You’re not the target market for the mac pro.
 
My dude, the entire machine is unnecessary for most people, for the people who do need it they appreciate the headroom

Seems like you want a studio, so buy a studio. I absolutely promise you the breaking point in the $7k price tag on the MP is not a big PSU and nice ventilation. You’re not the target market for the mac pro.

I'm not talking about what's good for me. I'm talking about what I think is considered design overkill for all 2023 Mac Pro users. You completely missed the point and are moving so far away from your original assertions for some reason.

We're done, have a good one.
 
Last edited:
I'm not talking about what's good for me. I'm talking about what I think is considered design overkill for all 2023 Mac Pro users. You completely missed the point and are moving so far away from your original assertions for some reason.

We're done, have a good one.
and I'm saying you are having a hard time imagining why this machine is useful for folks because *you are not the target market*.
 
  • Like
Reactions: freqrider
I think the question here is, that does new MP need that PSU or was it just easier for Apple to not design a new one.
What would Apple had gained from dropping 300 watts from new PSU?

All in all, they are going to sell VERY few of these new MPs.

Would be nice to know how many trashcans and last intel MPs they sold.
The first models of MP had to sell a lot, since the price was so low, that just for a "regular" workstation, there were (and still aren't) anything significantly cheaper. Trashcan was expensive, because of non-standard parts and last intel MP just for the starting price.
But then Apple was competing with other companies.
Now that competition was lost many years ago, MP is competing with Apple's own model, Studio.

Those who needed a mac workstation, had no choice before, now they have.

I wonder why there has not been a lot of comparisons running pci cards in external TB cases vs. internally in MP.
Maybe they are still coming?

Is it worth to save $3000 (almost 50%) with Studio and external TB case?
 
I think the question here is, that does new MP need that PSU or was it just easier for Apple to not design a new one.

Seems safe to say the 2023 MP's PSU and thermals are a bit overengineered, but, sure, why not. It does mean that even if you max out the PCIe cards and some of them produce a lot of heat, you're good.

Is it worth to save $3000 (almost 50%) with Studio and external TB case?

Aside from æsthetic reasons like "I like my components to be inside the case", I would say the main benefit of the Mac Pro over a Thunderbolt box is "I need PCIe to have as high bandwidth and as low latency as possible".
 
I think the question here is, that does new MP need that PSU or was it just easier for Apple to not design a new one.
What would Apple had gained from dropping 300 watts from new PSU?

All in all, they are going to sell VERY few of these new MPs.
My guess is that the anticipated low volume of sales made Apple decide that it simply wasn't worth it to redesign the Mac Pro enclosure from scratch.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KPOM
That fact that the SOC Ram is shared between the CPU and GPU is actually massive advantage. It’s really efficient and show me an AMD or nVidia GPU that can address 192GB ram. I know the AS GPU’s are not as powerful as the top line discreet GPU cards but the AS SOC does have other ‘less obvious’ advantages. The 1.5TB of ram that could be specced for the Intel Mac Pro really is a non-issue. Literally no one needs that amount or could afford it. OK maybe 0.0001% of very niche users might have a genuine use case for anywhere remotely near that amount of Ram 🤭
🤷🏽‍♂️ I’ve given up on Mac Pro ever being a thing for me. I’ll probably get the current Mac Studio and a display and just live with it.

At this point, I want to play “No Man’s Sky” at high quality. The performance on my 27” 2017 iMac is tolerable for a while, but is ugly (aliasing) and eventually the frame-rate turns to sludge. Sadly, that means I’ll have to stick with my obsolete iMac for Windows games (a very limited selection of games, but they’re new to me as this is my newest machine now), as that can’t be done on the Apple Silicon Macs.

I just hope Apple doesn’t screw us with more subscription requirements for stuff like Mac OS and Logic Studio.
 
Tb is not needed to connect a display to a computer.
With any fidelity, and reasonable frame-rate, at THAT resolution (higher res than a retina iMac, times 2, because it’s stereoscopic), you can’t rely on wireless’ bandwidth. Compressed to death, maybe…
 
They literally showed it using Airplay (or whatever it’s called), wirelessly, not with a cable. Stereoscopic gaming via Airplay? Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha…
The thing has its own M2 SoC, if you’re gaming the processing is going to happen on the VP itself where it has a computer *and* its dedicated spacial coprocessors.

The use of it with a mac is to replace a workspace. It’s for people like me with 3 monitors (I can totally see using this when traveling for work to replicate my home office desktop setup).
 
  • Like
Reactions: KPOM
With any fidelity, and reasonable frame-rate, at THAT resolution (higher res than a retina iMac, times 2, because it’s stereoscopic), you can’t rely on wireless’ bandwidth. Compressed to death, maybe…
Let me try again: TB is not the only wired connection from computer to display.
Do we know anything else about "mystery adaptor" than it is "not TB"?

Btw, if there's close uninterrupted wireless feed, then ~1Gbps speed is not "rocket science".
Do you know the datarates of 3D-4k-imax?

23Mpix means roughly 2 X 4k X 3k display. Which is equivalent to a single 6k monitor. Nothing groundbraking here, can be handled with displayport 1.3 introduced in 2014 (32.40 Gbit/s). But faster framerates need dp1.4a (2018) and dp2.1 (2022) is probably too new for the development of this "gen 0".
 
Last edited:
Let me try again: TB is not the only wired connection from computer to display.
Do we know anything else about "mystery adaptor" than it is "not TB"?

Btw, if there's close uninterrupted wireless feed, then ~1Gbps speed is not "rocket science".
Do you know the datarates of 3D-4k-imax?

23Mpix means roughly 2 X 4k X 3k display. Which is equivalent to a single 6k monitor. Nothing groundbraking here, can be handled with displayport 1.3 introduced in 2014 (32.40 Gbit/s). But faster framerates need dp1.4a (2018) and dp2.1 (2022) is probably too new for the development of this "gen 0".
Unless it actually ships with the M3 as a few folks on MR have been suggesting. I doubt it personally, but it's possible
 
Let me try again: TB is not the only wired connection from computer to display.
Do we know anything else about "mystery adaptor" than it is "not TB"?

That mystery adapter is probably developer-only in terms of intended use case, and may not even make it to the consumer-purchaseable Vision Pro.

But yes, it could be TB. It's an M2, after all.

 
  • Like
Reactions: dysamoria
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.