Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Do we believe Apple will eventually support NVIDIA cards in the PCIe 4.0 x16 slots?
NV? Nope, not a chance anytime soon, seems like Apple *really* holds grudges. AMD? outside possibility but I doubt it personally, Apple seems to want to shift to their own GPUs

That said you'll probably be able to use Asahi Linux with PCIe GPU support at some point and take advantage of the hardware that way :)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: gusmula and spaz8
I also own a 2019 MBP 16-inch, and use Windows 10 via Parallels Desktop. Why would you need to upgrade the OS, aside from security updates? There’s nothing forcing you to do so, and there is no “ticking clock” that suddenly appeared because Apple stopped releasing Intel models.

Just because Apple has phased out Intel chips doesn’t mean that they won’t support what you are using through the warranty and extended warranty (AppleCare) period. Apple computers generally have seven years of hardware availability before being classified as “obsolete” by Apple, so even if something goes wrong in the next three years with the hardware, you should be fine.
Let's say Apple decides that the next operating system after Sonoma doesn't support Intel. So I stick with Sonoma - in principle no problem, as you say, and Apple will keep producing security updates for that OS long after my laptop becomes so old in the tooth I no longer want to use it. So far, so good.

But one of my major Windows workloads is Visual Studio, and developing apps for both iOS and Android using the cross platform tools that it provides. I work with Windows hosted in VMware. This setup is really useful, because my iOS build host can be my host laptop, accessed from within the guest Windows OS by the build tools. Everything running on one machine. Highly convenient, cost effective, performant and mobile. The problem is that I know from past experience that the cross platform development tools tend to work best when the build host is running the latest OS.

So if I end up stuck on Sonoma on my Intel host, and the tools running in my guest move forward with Apple's OS releases, I'll likely eventually end up with problematic build cycles. So that's one reason for me to want to keep my MacBook up to date.

Also, being fully in the Apple ecosystem, I'll generally want to keep all my devices up to date if possible, to get the best interoperation.

There's nothing actually forcing me to upgrade OS. But generally things will work out better if I do, eventually.
 
eh, no one missed a thing. The Mac Studio Ultra interconnect was not optimized to take full advantage of the dual chips, I doubt that's been resolved.
 
Quite the wwdc. Much more then expected. I was NOT expecting Mac Pro…


I think is good. M3 is not ready and wont be till end of 2024. Better to have an update to Mac Studio and get the Mac Pro for pci expansion options.

But yeah, ill get the M2 Mac Studio Ultra. Or wait till next year.
 
Still surprised that they updated the Studio to the M2 chips as well. Bloomberg was certain they wouldn't do it (and then they reversed themselves.)

I'm guessing the user base for the Pro towers has shrunk considerably since the heady days of the cheese grater era (which ended with the Trashcan). Back then if you were a video editor or doing "Pro" stuff it was the best bang for the buck, but now the Studio (and even a fully-specced Mini) has so much power that only a fraction of that former user base even needs a tower. Hell, I only need one PCIe card for my work so a Thunderbolt chassis is still a cheaper option.

There were a few vocal folks who insisted that Apple would find a way to incorporate user-upgradable RAM or even allow for external GPUs; it's very clear that Apple has zero interest in making the type of Mac that can be easily upgraded. They don't even provide extra SSD slots on the motherboard. The Pro seems like it's going to become increasingly niche...and eventually irrelevant?
 
The Mac Pro with an M2 Ultra is a really weird device to me. The 192GB RAM limit is much lower than the 1.5TB of the previous machine. And can you actually pop an Nvidia or AMD card into this thing? If not then what's the point? Just get the Mac Studio for $3000 less at every spec level and have a lot smaller footprint.
There are a lot of uses for PCI slots other than graphics cards.

Captures cards, audio interfaces, PCI storage solutions, and according to the keynote, the machine can support cards to
capture up to 24 8K live streams processed in real time, no other single case machine on earth can do that and I’m sure that feature alone would be very useful to production houses.
The Mac Pro also includes 8 TB4 ports, 2X10GB Ethernet, 2 HDMI 2.1 - all more than the Mac Studio.

Also the bandwidth of RAM is just as, if not more important as the amount of RAM, the bandwidth on ram on the Ultra is the fastest there is anywhere in any single case computer, And that likely makes up being ’only’ 192GB.
 
The Mac Pro with an M2 Ultra is a really weird device to me. The 192GB RAM limit is much lower than the 1.5TB of the previous machine. And can you actually pop an Nvidia or AMD card into this thing? If not then what's the point?
No you absolutely can not. There is no point really.

Do we believe Apple will eventually support NVIDIA cards in the PCIe 4.0 x16 slots?
Nope, it's not even possible.

That said you'll probably be able to use Asahi Linux with PCIe GPU support at some point and take advantage of the hardware that way :)
No, you won't be able to do that either.

This new Mac Pro is one of the dumbest products Apple has ever made. They should have just released their own external PCIe card cage for the Mac Studio with a new expansion connector to go beyond the capability of thunderbolt for the interface. It's honestly laughable that they bothered to make a whole new Mac Pro just for some non-GPU PCIe cards that almost no one needs.
 
this took that many years with zero design change? why does Mac Pro need the same giant heatsink? sounds like they messed up with a new design and just said "screw it, we'll just reuse the same old design"
I think you have it backwards. They wanted to develop a more scaleable AS chip (upgradeable RAM?) but they failed. So they had to bail out and use the SOC M2 Ultra (the AS transition delay was becoming unacceptable). There's no way the case design justifies an SOC.
It shouldn't have taken so long to release an M2 Ultra Mac Pro.
Also, this proves the only reason the Mac Studio SSD is not upgradeable is because Apple doesn't want it to be.
 
$20,000 AUD for the high end configuration of the tower Mac Pro. Mamma Mia that's a spicy meatball. Imagine buying this and then next year Apple updates their Mac lineup with some zero latency wireless feature for Vision Pro, meaning you'd need to spend another $20,000 on a new Mac Pro just to take full advantage of Vision Pro.
People who buy the 20k$ apple
Computer don’t pay for it. Their job pay for it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Captain Trips
this took that many years with zero design change? why does Mac Pro need the same giant heatsink? sounds like they messed up with a new design and just said "screw it, we'll just reuse the same old design"
You clearly have zero idea about software, CPU architecture and hardware development in general. The fact they went from just the original M1 to this in under three years is an absolute feat.
 
I purchased an Intel MacPro so that I could upgrade ALL of my internal hardware. With the NEW MacPro coming out, I wonder if there will be an upgrade kit (Motherboard + CPU) for the old Intel MacPro. If not, that's really aggravating ... what's the purpose of even having a MacPro if I can ONLY swap out hard drives and video cards ... nothing else?
 
No idea why anyone would think that. Apple aggressively updates iPhone chips yearly because its a 200 billions dollar per year business. Not even remotely comparable to the Mac. Apple updates the Mac according to their own product schedule. Not anyone elses. Not before Intel, during Intel, or after Intel.
Not to mention the days of tech advancing so fast that a system is obsolete in six months are long past.

I definitely don't think we can look at the transition as being indicative of Apple's optimal strategy for its releases, but hoping for on-the-dot yearly releases for each and every product is also wildly optimistic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Captain Trips
this took that many years with zero design change? why does Mac Pro need the same giant heatsink? sounds like they messed up with a new design and just said "screw it, we'll just reuse the same old design"
I really thought they would let the Ultra rip as it would have so much airflow, and watts to draw on that they would make it scream. Seems like its just the same thing you can get in a Studio just in a different box.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dysamoria
Do we believe Apple will eventually support NVIDIA cards in the PCIe 4.0 x16 slots?
Do you why there are no NVIDIA cards? The two companies have been at an impasse for years. NVIDIA demands access to the kernel before it will produce cards for the Mac. Apple absolutely refuses to allow that kind of access by a third party hardware maker. So no, there will likely never be NVIDIA cards for Mac unless both companies change their tune.
 
I would not be surprised if this was the last Mac Pro. They may upgrade the processors for a short time in the future but it's evident Apple put the absolute minimum time and resources into this new version. It's basically just a Studio with a PCIe chassis and extra ports. And seriously, $7k with only 64gb RAM and 1 TB of storage is insulting. This should be maxed-out (with wheels...) for $7k.

OK, Apple, you kept your promise and released it...now drop it because you're just pissing me off.


( For the record, I'm not an Apple hater...I love my Macs but this Mac Pro is just below expectations of what Apple is known for. Steve would've killed it and explained why.)
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.