Apple admits that 2013 Mac Pro had problems, Promises a Radical new Modular Mac Pro for next year

[EunSoo]

finally, I just need to get one, I don't care if its amazing I just need an up to date mac pro. I've been waiting too long for them...

[DocSwag]

1 hour ago, Valentyn said:

If it went back to the old MP chassis it would be perfectly fine for replacing everything bar the motherboard which would be Apple designed itself.

On my old 2009 Mac Pro I upgraded the CPU, added RAM, changed Wifi card, added Blu-Ray, and changed the GPU several times ( using normal nmon mac ones ).

 

NVIDIA still supply unified Quadro/GeForce drivers for their GPUs for OSX. Fantastic support really, if a few months behind the PC launch.

Probably too big for them lol. I can't imagine them backtracking that much.

[MrDynamicMan]

1 hour ago, DocSwag said:

Now I'm just curious if it'll be "modular" enough to put in different GPUs...

 

Probably not, but it'd be interesting if you could.

"We're so innovative that we have this new modular system where you can change which USB stick is plugged in on the fly"

[Valentyn]

18 minutes ago, DocSwag said:

Probably too big for them lol. I can't imagine them backtracking that much.

If only! That chassis was amazing, and design for the CPU cooling was brilliant!

 

[RedRound2]

2 hours ago, WereCat said:

Come on, I was just making a bit of fun. You don't have to take it seriously at all, I occasionally make fun and immediately get shut down... always... while other people go on complete OT rampage.

 

Except you give a wrong perceived idea. Try using emoji or /s tag and state your honest opinion afterward as this is after all a serious tech forum

2 hours ago, Starelementpoke said:

What I find hilarious is that a "radical" rework is probably putting actual hardware into the thing. Thermal constraints my arse, Vortex did it fine Apple. 

 

Thermal constraints also include fan acoustics. The Mac Pro was pretty silent for it's size, especially with the components packed inside

1 hour ago, ashypanda said:

i find their reasoning a load of bull, as the CPU TDP has been the same since 2013 so heat nor power constraints are the issue, for the GPUs they could have used custom SKUs like they done before, the only minor issue could be the height of DDR4 modules, but they could have stretched the tin can a few centimetres, to fit them in, but a lot of it sounds like they are too lazy to bother updating it.

 

So you're saying that instead of updating the current Mac Pro which cost say 'x' in R&D, they decided to spend 10-50 times more for a completely reworked version because they were 'lazy'.  That seems counterintuitive

[SeraphicWings]

I'd really really want a Macbook because I don't need any driver for my USB DAC to work, I really do

 

But their sheer stupidity at pricing and hardware choice prevented me, even at the base 13 inch model, like why the fuck do I need 3 Thunderbolt port which uses the same controller??? 

[AntonChigurh]

54 minutes ago, Coaxialgamer said:

New from apple , the Mac Pro 2017 . Now with innovative® cooling system .

 

 

[RedRound2]

2 minutes ago, SeraphicWings said:

Even at the base 13 inch model, like why the fuck do I need 3 Thunderbolt port which uses the same controller??? 

1

The base 13" has two TB3 ports and it is capable of 40 Gb/s individually if that's what you mean by same controller.

As fo the price, I suggest you wait till Q4 2017, where I'm pretty sure Apple will slash prices of the 2nd gen products as they typically always do

[Mira Yurizaki]

3 hours ago, ashypanda said:

i find their reasoning a load of bull, as the CPU TDP has been the same since 2013 so heat nor power constraints are the issue, for the GPUs they could have used custom SKUs like they done before, the only minor issue could be the height of DDR4 modules, but they could have stretched the tin can a few centimetres, to fit them in, but a lot of it sounds like they are too lazy to bother updating it.

If you take in consideration of the features the previous Mac Pros had and what the 2013 has, then TDP does become a problem. For example, a sore spot for many a reviewer (and possibly interested customer) was the lack of a second socket. And while I can't find official figures for the FirePro D700 (the most powerful GPU you can get for the Mac Pro) beyond the basics, it's supposed TDP is about 120W. This means you can't use something like a GTX Titan XP with its TDP of 250W, period.

 

So yes, taking consideration of the entire TDP of the hardware on the top end, the Thermal Core is only good for about 400W, which is limiting if you want more powerful GPUs or another socket that people still wanted on a Mac Pro.

 

EDIT: Before anyone goes "why would anyone want two sockets when you can drop in a Xeon with double the cores?"

1. It's cheaper. Fore example, the 12-core Xeon E5-2670 v3 goes for $1600 on NewEgg. The 6-core E5-2620 v3 goes for $420 on NewEgg. Even though you'd have to double up your RAM, it's certainly not going to make up the cost difference.
2. You can run more cores faster. The fastest Haswell 12-core Xeon, the E5-2690 v3, is up to 2.6 Ghz (the E5-2670 v3 is at 2.3GHz). Whereas the E5-1650 I posted is at 3.5GHz. Though of course, how much this really matters depends on what your workload is sensitive to.

[ashypanda]

8 minutes ago, M.Yurizaki said:

If you take in consideration of the features the previous Mac Pros had and what the 2013 has, then TDP does become a problem. For example, a sore spot for many a reviewer (and possibly interested customer) was the lack of a second socket. And while I can't find official figures for the FirePro D700 (the most powerful GPU you can get for the Mac Pro) beyond the basics, it's supposed TDP is about 120W. This means you can't use something like a GTX Titan XP with its TDP of 250W, period.

 

So yes, taking consideration of the entire TDP of the hardware on the top end, the Thermal Core is only good for about 400W, which is limiting if you want more powerful GPUs or another socket that people still wanted on a Mac Pro.

okay while you might not be able to use a titan XP, but you could use a GTX1080 or quadro P5000, as the mac pro has 2 GPUs, but i'm completely with you on the lack of a second socket, as that was a big plus of the older mac pro, and really held the trash can back, heck apple would be better off, resurrecting the older one as it's got the expandability people want and need.
 

[Mira Yurizaki]

Just now, ashypanda said:

okay while you might not be able to use a titan XP, but you could use a GTX1080 or quadro P5000, as the mac pro has 2 GPUs, but i'm completely with you on the lack of a second socket, as that was a big plus of the older mac pro, and really held the trash can back, heck apple would be better off, resurrecting the older one as it's got the expandability people want and need.
 

The GTX 1080 and P5000 are 180W TDP, which means you're stuck with one. That would irk some people. Basically the Mac Pro if one wanted to make use of all its internals would be stuck with midrange GPUs.

[Valentyn]

13 minutes ago, ashypanda said:

okay while you might not be able to use a titan XP, but you could use a GTX1080 or quadro P5000, as the mac pro has 2 GPUs, but i'm completely with you on the lack of a second socket, as that was a big plus of the older mac pro, and really held the trash can back, heck apple would be better off, resurrecting the older one as it's got the expandability people want and need.
 

 

10 minutes ago, M.Yurizaki said:

The GTX 1080 and P5000 are 180W TDP, which means you're stuck with one. That would irk some people. Basically the Mac Pro if one wanted to make use of all its internals would be stuck with midrange GPUs.

Let's not forget that Apple has dropped NVIDIA entirely, after some mass solder defects and lacklustre OpenCL performance.

So at the time the only GPUs Apple had to use were  Hawaii, or Fiji, both far far too hot to fit in the Mac Pro.

 

[Mira Yurizaki]

1 minute ago, Valentyn said:

Let's not forget that Apple has dropped NVIDIA entirely, after some mass solder defects and lacklustre OpenCL performance.

So at the time the only GPUs Apple had to use were  Hawaii, or Fiji, both far far too hot to fit in the Mac Pro

NVIDIA still supports Apple though: http://www.nvidia.com/object/macosx-cuda-8.0.63-driver.html

[Valentyn]

3 minutes ago, M.Yurizaki said:

NVIDIA still supports Apple though: http://www.nvidia.com/object/macosx-cuda-8.0.63-driver.html

They certainly do, and that's entirely for the older Mac Pros, and now for external caddies.

[BuckGup]

Knowing apple it won't be the old cheese grater again. It's going to be a plug and play box where you upgrade each proprietary box like graphics box or storage box.

[suicidalfranco]

1) called it

2) am i stil an apple hater now that they have confirmed what i've said for the past 4 years on all of their products (minus the 5k imac)?

3) where are those who gave me of the apple hater now? who's the one full with bull huh? come it bro! COME. AT. ME! I DARE YOU MODAFUKA! I DOUBLE DARE YA!

4) now to wait for a proper replacement to my 2012 non retina macbook pro

[dexT]

54 minutes ago, M.Yurizaki said:

EDIT: Before anyone goes "why would anyone want two sockets when you can drop in a Xeon with double the cores?"

1. It's cheaper. Fore example, the 12-core Xeon E5-2670 v3 goes for $1600 on NewEgg. The 6-core E5-1650 v3 goes for $600 on NewEgg. Even though you'd have to double up your RAM, it's certainly not going to make up the cost difference.
2. You can run more cores faster. The fastest Haswell 12-core Xeon, the E5-2690 v3, is up to 2.6 Ghz (the E5-2670 v3 is at 2.3GHz). Whereas the E5-1650 I posted is at 3.5GHz. Though of course, how much this really matters depends on what your workload is sensitive to.

E5-16xx Xeons don't work in multi-CPU. 26xx is to use 2 processors, 4xxx for 4, 8xxx for 8 CPUs.

[Mira Yurizaki]

2 minutes ago, dexT said:

E5-16xx Xeons don't work in multi-CPU. 26xx is to use 2 processors, 4xxx for 4, 8xxx for 8 CPUs.

Updated to reflect that. Thanks for pointing it out

 

Still cheaper to get two 6-core processors though

[dexT]

18 minutes ago, M.Yurizaki said:

Updated to reflect that. Thanks for pointing it out

 

Still cheaper to get two 6-core processors though

I'd buy used. These went up $100 recently but it's still a good deal http://www.ebay.com/itm/SR1XH-INTEL-XEON-E5-2683V3-2-00GHz-35M-14-CORES-9-6-GT-s-120W-PROCESSOR-/352016767015?hash=item51f5d59827:g:lhsAAOSwsW9Y2t~6

[Mira Yurizaki]

3 minutes ago, dexT said:

I'd buy used. These went up $100 recently but it's still a good deal http://www.ebay.com/itm/SR1XH-INTEL-XEON-E5-2683V3-2-00GHz-35M-14-CORES-9-6-GT-s-120W-PROCESSOR-/352016767015?hash=item51f5d59827:g:lhsAAOSwsW9Y2t~6

Well, for price point comparisons, I don't use the used market because of its volatility and the argument "I can wait as long as I want for the price I want"

[Techstorm970]

It's about damn time they did something, much less said anything, about the Mac Pro.  Heck, they've even given MSI enough time to make their own trash can computer.  On top of that, MSI's trash can is a LOT better at just about everything.

 

As far as this "substantial upgrade" to both their iMacs and Mac Pro computers, I wonder if they'll be using Nvidia Pascal GPUs due to their low power and therefore low heat output.  However, Apple has been pretty loyal to ATi / AMD, meaning that they'll probably just go with Vega 11.  Either way, it would be a massive upgrade.  Also, this gives me hope that they'll finally, FINALLY, be moving on from DDR3 memory.  Seriously, it's getting ridiculous.  Their top-end iMacs are using i7-6700k processors with DDR3L. 

[Energycore]

I hate to be like this, but we've already lived with "modular" Mac Pros since the late 90s, they're called (Desktop) Personal Computers and are something everyone at Apple should look into.

[Techstorm970]

1 minute ago, Energycore said:

I hate to be like this, but we've already lived with "modular" Mac Pros since the late 90s, they're called (Desktop) Personal Computers and are something everyone at Apple should look into.

This was your 11,000th post.  

#ProfoundStatement

[dexT]

Just now, M.Yurizaki said:

Well, for price point comparisons, I don't use the used market because of its volatility and the argument "I can wait as long as I want for the price I want"

True.

 

If its for something mission critical it's best to go new anyway.

[Energycore]

Just now, techstorm970 said:

This was your 11,000th post.  

#ProfoundStatement

I already wasted my 10,000th helping someone with a parts list so I may as well continue that trend